News commentary

Those who have been in combat will testify to the catastrophic insults to the body that modern weapons can inflict. War is horrifying, and nothing can prepare the novice for the destruction that it can cause. Nor do we easily get used to the images of it, and they stay with us forever.

Recently released by the Los Angeles Times, the grisly photos of soldiers posing with the remains of dead Taliban fighters  have raised a variety of observations: From the notion that they are similar to the harmless pranks of adolescents to the assessment that their publication will be a catastrophe for the American mission in Afghanistan.

As with most extremes, neither is the case. We should also reject the argument that this incident, the burning of Korans and the deliberate murder of women and children, such as those allegedly carried out by Staff Sgt. Robert Bales, are all the same. 

No excuses
Here are the facts: The pictures are about two years old and were of Taliban fighters killed when a bomb they were putting into position detonated prematurely. The photos were sent to the Times by someone who said he wanted to highlight the threat to our troops caused by the poor leadership of the unit, a part of the 82nd Airborne Division.

But, although the Times suggested that the concern was merely inadequate physical security rather than a climate of generally weak discipline, it is the latter issue that is the most striking.

When the Times notified the Defense Department that it had the photos, the Pentagon asked the paper not to publish them, arguing that they would incite the enemy to attack Americans. The Times responded that it had an obligation to publish them, citing their readers' right to be informed.

In my view, both the Defense Department and the newspaper are full of baloney: The Taliban don't need any encouragement to attack us, and a big part of the motivation of the Los Angeles Times is to sell newspapers.

More nuanced has been comment from some quarters that the troops, who were mugging for the camera, were letting off the steam that accumulates under the duress of war; that their actions were in response to having lost buddies to the mindless ferocity of the Taliban.

While these are understandable reasons, they are not excuses, of course, and the paratroopers' actions were publicly decried by government officials. Many cited long-standing rules, promulgated after similarly embarrassing episodes, stating that such antics are impermissible.

Lack of leadership
But the truth is that you can't merely legislate against dumb behavior. In and out of combat, good units get that way because they are well led.

Poor leadership can create poor units in a very short period of time, particularly under stress. While good leadership can bring any organization through the most horrendous circumstances with only physical scars.

The leadership of the brigade in the 82nd that is at the center of this photo controversy was evidently already known as weak by the chain-of-command above it. There are many military organizations that have endured more harrowing circumstances with less damage to discipline.

It is not easy being a leader in uniform, but there is a responsibility attached to it that is found nowhere else in society. Military service is a sacrifice and those who volunteer for it are our patriots. But service is no game, and because so much is at stake, standards of deportment must be extremely high.

We are frequently reminded of it, but it bears repeating nonetheless: a commander is responsible for everything that happens or fails to happen in his unit, and it is he who sets the standards in his organization. Accepting less than professional behavior will minimize the service and sacrifice of those who have taken seriously their responsibilities as the guardians of our freedom.

Col. Jack Jacobs was awarded the Medal of Honor for “conspicuous gallantry and intrepidity in action at the risk of his life above and beyond the call of duty” in the battle he describes above. His first assignment in the Army, in 1966-1967, was in Company C, 2nd Battalion (Airborne) 505th Infantry of the 82nd Airborne Division, the same division as the troops in this incident.

Click here to read the complete Medal of Honor citation. 

He is the author of a memoir: “If Not Now, When? Duty and Sacrifice in America’s Time of Need”

NEWS ANALYSIS 
At the moment, we know only that a 38-year-old U.S. Army Staff Sergeant left his post and shot to death 16 civilians in Afghanistan, including nine children and three women, and surrendered soon after the incident. Others were wounded and may not survive. The sergeant's wife and children in the United States have been relocated and are under the protection of the American government. 

News of the attacks has spread slowly across the country, but thousands of people took to the streets in the eastern Afghanistan Tuesday to demonstrate against the killings, burning an effigy of President Barack Obama and chanting “Death to American.” 

There have been NATO casualties in the area in the wake of the incident, but most of the American activity is not daily active combat with the enemy, but instead public works projects and the training of Afghans. In this regard, it is telling that the sergeant was able to walk unaccompanied and unmolested to the sites where the civilians were killed.

Protests break out over Afghan shootings

He is in American custody and, pursuant to the agreement between the United States and Afghanistan, will be prosecuted under the Uniform Code of Military Justice. This means that a General Officer, probably John Allen, who commands U.S. forces in Afghanistan, will appoint an officer, almost certainly a military lawyer, to investigate the incident. The investigator will interview witnesses and
then make a recommendation to the commander about how to deal with the case.

This process, called an Article 32 Investigation, is the military equivalent of a grand jury, but unlike in a civilian procedure, the accused can be represented by counsel and cross-examine witnesses. The commander can follow the investigator's recommendation or not, as he sees fit, but in this case if the investigating officer recommends a trial by court-martial, you can bet the sergeant will be tried.

There has been much discussion about the fact that the non-commissioned officer was on his fourth trip to Southwest Asia, implying that the stress of repeated deployments may have been the proximate cause of a breakdown that resulted in this tragic violence. While we should not be sanguine about the huge demands we place on our undermanned and overtaxed forces, specious arguments justifying the outburst are easy but dangerous to construct.

Most murderers have not served in the armed forces, and there are many thousands of American troops who have murdered nobody, but have more deployments than this suspect. Coincidence is not causation.

NYT: An Afghan elder comes home to find a massacre

Breakdown in the chain-of-command
What seems most striking about the incident is the failure of this sergeant's chain-of-command. The camp is guarded all the time, and particular attention is always given to security at night, when this soldier departed. There is a sergeant of the relief, supervised by a sergeant of the guard, supervised by an officer of the guard, supervised by an officer of the day and a field officer of the day.

Furthermore, troops live together continuously, often in close quarters, and it is impossible to envision a situation in which nobody had any inkling of his propensity for violence. He worked for another sergeant who worked for a lieutenant or a captain, all of whom lived with him. The investigation will include interviews of his comrades, his leaders and his family. His snail mail, email and social sites will be scoured, and all of it is likely to reveal that his commander either did know, or should have known, that this violence was possible, or even probable, and that this man should have been removed from the unit.

If this sounds familiar, it is because the situation is similar to that of Maj. Nidal Hasan. His supervisors knew that he was unstable and did nothing about it, and in 2009 Hasan killed 13 people at Fort Hood, Texas.

For the moment, the National Command Authority has reiterated its commitment to the mission in Afghanistan, with some withdrawal of conventional troops slated to begin in 2014. But with an increasing number of influential people, including prominent Republicans, convinced that we should withdraw sooner rather than later, it's certain that there is already a plan for an accelerated pull-out beginning in 2013, soon after our national election.

Nevertheless, whether troops are in Afghanistan or the United States or anywhere else, the stringent and vital requirement of good leadership is the same. Being in the uniform of the U.S. Armed Forces is not just another job and indeed is like no other endeavor in the world.

Yes, we ask far too much of brave people who are willing to sacrifice for us, but when their leaders forget or ignore their awesome responsibilities, the result is often tragedy.

Read more from Col. Jack Jacobs

More content from msnbc.com and NBC News

• Soldier accused in Afghan massacre could get death penalty
• Ex-porn actor fired from school allowed to seek teaching certificate
• Illinois officials upset with FEMA denial of disaster aid
• Hurt on the stairs: Child treated every 6 minutes
• New claims about Saudi who left US before 9/11
• Bison from Canada help repopulate 'Wild West'

US News on msnbc.com on Twitter and Facebook