Scipio

The thing that strikes me now is that I'm achieving a greater understanding of how horrific Saddam was through the actions of our own soldiers.

I sure as hell hope this was an isolated incident, but it seems that some British soldiers have been accused of similar acts.

edit: i can't spell

__________________
"Erections lasting more than 4 hours, though rare, require immediate medical attention."

stingc

Not that this excuses it in any way, but has there ever been a modern war where this hasn't happened? It seems to me like an inevitable consequence of the mental state that soldiers are required to have. You strip away someone's normal sensibilities to the point that they think the other person is death-deserving scum, and then expect that idea to go away as soon as they raise a white flag. Its not hard to guess that many people would have trouble with the transition.

pocon1

Ok, let's get some perspective here. What these soldiers did was reprehensible and undeniably wrong. However, most of the prisoners were unharmed and only humiliated. These are the same Iraqis who strung up our troops from a bridge and dance on our helicopters when they shoot them down. As in all wars, people fuck up. During the first Iraqi war, the only female captured was in a helicopter crash where both of her arms were broken. In the truck, she was raped by an Iraqi. The male soldier who was with her could do nothing but watch. However, she pointed out that every other Iraqi was polite to her, they gave her medical treatment for her arms, and she had no other issues until she was released. Are we going to condemn everyone for the actions of a few?
Also, we will handle the punishment. Do you think that the Iraqis will have a fair trial and a reasonable punishment for the crimes committed? Hell no. They have no justice system.
Whoever suggested that the Americans get shot stabbed, beaten, burned, and executed, please rethink your statements. That was a childish and dumb thing to say. America does not do everything right, but at least we try to make a difference in the world.

Psivage

I personally don't care how they are treated. I'm sure our prisoners were tortured. I can't must any sympathy for the Iraq prisoners at all.

seretogis

You personally had better start caring, if you plan to expect humane treatment for troops of ours that are captured.

__________________
seretogis - sieg heil
perfect little dream the kind that hurts the most, forgot how it feels well almost
no one to blame always the same, open my eyes wake up in flames

matthew330

Fucking horrific/embarrasing/etc etc, what else is there to say.

Dragonlich

Not to sound harsh or anything, but if you really believe captured US troops would be treated better if the US treats Iraqi captives well, I'd say you're pretty naive.

Terrorists/insurgents/freedom fighters generally don't care one bit about human rights, *especially* if they happen to be Muslims, and their opponents happen to be evil Americans (or worse: Jews)...

HarmlessRabbit

I don't understand what you're trying to say here. Are you saying our opponents will torture our troops anyway, so we may as well torture them? I think that's a horrible attitude. One reason, supposedly, that we invaded Iraq was to prevent the abuses of Saddam Hussein. Now, in one of his prisons, we are conducting the same abuses.

Your statement about Muslims is racist and xenophobic. There is nothing about the Islamic faith that says "you must torture your enemy" any more than there is in the Christian bible.

The USA is violating international law with this torture. I believe Seretogis meant that if we expect other countries, Muslim or non-Muslim, to respect international law, then we should do it too.

Remember when Rumsfeld complained about Geneva convention violations when Saddam put pictures of captured troops on television? If he made those same complaints today, do you think the people would respect his statements?

Mojo_PeiPei

Perhaps Dragonlich was merely calling mention to the fact that the people kidnapping and taking our boys' prisoners are illegal combatants, and Islamic militants at that. And he's right they are not bound by international laws or treaties, nor have they even conducted themselves with semblence of human decency.

Still we are bound by laws, and as a whole we are better then that.

__________________
To win a war you must serve no master but your ambition.

Dragonlich

HarmlessRabbit... I did not say anything about the actions of the US soldiers. I merely stated that the insurgents in Iraq aren't suddenly going to mistreat US captives because of these pictures - they were mistreating captives *before* this news broke.

As for my comments about Muslims: I am not racist, nor xenophobic, and am rather insulted by such a label. I was pointing out that Muslim militants tend to hate Americans and Jews, and will generally not treat them well. I certainly do not want to expand this comment to include *all* Muslims, as you seem to think I do.

However, I would ask you to take a look at prison conditions in most Muslim countries worldwide; I expect you to see treatment of detainees that is much worse than anything these "evil" Americans did. (And no, I'm not saying that this somehow makes their actions acceptable.)

Here's something to think about: do you believe that the common Muslim will suddenly start hating the US because of these actions? I'd say there's two groups: 1) those who hate the US anyway, who will see these actions as just another example of the US being evil; 2) those who do not hate the US, who will see this as terrible, but as a small incident, which (if investigated properly) won't matter in the long run.

Another thought: if people do see these actions as indicative of the actions of *all* Americans, what's the difference between that, and Westerners seeing Al-Qaida's actions as indicative of the actions of *all* Muslims? Or is generalization only allowed if it's your side doing it?

Zeld2.0

yawn i still find it funny how suddenly one can make a political issue out of this

some people argue just to argue

Boo

I heard on CNN that the troops claimed that they weren't trained on the Geneva Convention Rules. To this I say BULLSHIT. They had Geneva pounded in their heads. They just chose to ignore it. We even recieved briefings before exercises.

Unfortunately their acts will cost lives (ours and theirs).

They don't even deserve to be called "asshats". Years of "hard labor" and dishonorable discharges with no benefits seems like the minimum sentence IMO.

__________________
Back button again, I must be getting old.

HarmlessRabbit

You said:
Now, maybe you didn't say what you meant to say, but in my mind there is only one way to interpret that statement: that you think Muslims have a special disregard for human rights.

hunnychile

This is (1) example of what's wrong with this multi-corporate oil war! It IS a Corporate War! The real followers of Islam aren't the ones doing these things to our troops and contractors & it makes me wonder who, in our armed forces is commiting these atrocities to these soldiers. We have met the enemy and he is now us. Perfect - just what Al JAZEERA wanted to see us doing!!! It'S playing into 'their hands' how corrupt our forces are becoming while there. Our best soldiers are dealing daily with a fight that wages war on a soul level (MINDFUL of PRISONERS RIGHTS via The Geneva Conference). The real good soldiers need & want to come home.

I met a few young men & women in battle there - as medics & translators who were told they'd be home by now and it's not happening....they (we) are ALL being played for pawns for the This 3rd World Oil War....whenever we buy into this game war they've devised for our mass consumption - then we are wrong. too. Torture is wrong. Humiliation is wrong - no matter who's doing it.

__________________
"I need compassion, understanding and chocolate." - NJB

Scipio

http://www.drudgereport.com/flash5.htm

Key graph:

It seems that this story is not yet done unfolding. At least Bush is "digusted." Too bad he hasn't come out more strongly, and promised to find the perps and hold them responsible.

__________________
"Erections lasting more than 4 hours, though rare, require immediate medical attention."

irateplatypus

uhh... that is about as strong a language as you'll hear out of a president. they really don't have the privilege of saying something like "i'd kill those f**ing bastards if i got my hands on them."

the man can do no right it seems.

__________________
If you will not fight when your victory will be sure and not too costly, you may come to the moment when you will have to fight with all the odds against you and only a precarious chance for survival. There may even be a worse case. You may have to fight when there is no hope of victory, because it is better to perish than to live as slaves.

~ Winston Churchill

irateplatypus

i'm glad you said that. i'm sick of so many people trying to convince me otherwise. fascists...

__________________
If you will not fight when your victory will be sure and not too costly, you may come to the moment when you will have to fight with all the odds against you and only a precarious chance for survival. There may even be a worse case. You may have to fight when there is no hope of victory, because it is better to perish than to live as slaves.

~ Winston Churchill

Scipio

And here is what Bush said:

Talk about a passive reaction. His resolve in putting an end to these practices, however isolated, is lacking. The Iraqi reaction to this story is very real, and Bush could have directed something to them, to let them know that such practices won't be tolerated. The sexual nature of the crimes is particularly revolting to the Iraqi muslims. The idea would be to distance the larger mission of peace from the short term problem of tortue and humiliation. I think that stronger rhetoric might make a difference.

__________________
"Erections lasting more than 4 hours, though rare, require immediate medical attention."

sonikeko

And we're there to liberate these people?

__________________
"Adolescence is short, maturity is forever"

Psycho Dad

Very good points. The worst thing about it is, this is just the kind of fuel that it takes to make the resistance to the occupation stronger. When these assmonkeys decided to do this, and take pictures no less, they put the lives of those out on patrol at even greater risk. As the old saying goes, a picture is worth a thousand words. These "words" by a handful paint those that are trying to do a good job in Iraq in a poor light.

dy156

Thank you. There have been some statements about pictures showing a body after a prisoner was alleged to have been beaten to death. I have not heard about this on the news, and if true, that would be a different situation than what I have heard and read about these humiliating photographs. I know that these actions will make it more difficult for the U.S. to complete its mission there, and I really wish they had not done those things, but I had a different reaction to this than most other people it seems. I hate to sound cold and insensitive, but taking humiliating pictures of them is a far cry from celebrating by dragging bodies through streets, or raping female prisoners, or the torture common in Iraqi prisons under Saddam, or the torture of American prisoners at the hands of other nations. The Iraqi prisoner's identities were even concealed. (humane humiliation?) To the outraged Arabs and Islamic peoples of the world, I want to say, "Wah! Cry me a damn river!"
Though it was still wrong, the fact that these military guards' actions are being investigated and dealt with, it seems to me, is a sign of the difference between a civilized society and one that is, well, not.

Superbelt

First, those men strung up on the bridge were mercenaries, not "our troops"

But anyway. There are additional reports of men who were beaten to death and then dumped in the desert. Men forced to simulate fellatio on each other. Men sodomized with broom handles, men pissed on and men forced to parade around naked with each other.
That last one may not seem like a big deal to us but in the islamic culture that is a huge humiliation.

We are supposed to be better than this, and by and large, we are. But this is just so reprehensible that an entire company could be so accepting or complacent with these actions.
This will get our troops and contractors over there tortured and killed with regularity. Why treat the americans with respect when you actually have proof now that they aren't treating the Iraqi's with any?
And the worst part is, we can't complain about it when they do anymore.

Remember that Halliburton trucker who was kidnapped several weeks ago and just escaped? He wasn't tortured. But you can bet he would have been after his captors heard about this attrocity.
It would have been a lot harder for him to escape if his knees were smashed or his eyes gouged out.

Pacifier

I begin to wonder for how long the situation was known:

(full article: http://www.newyorker.com/fact/content/?040510fa_fact)

__________________
"It seems to me that the idea of a personal God is an anthropological concept which I cannot take seriously. I also cannot imagine some will or goal outside the human sphere. Science has been charged with undermining morality, but the charge is unjust. A man's ethical behavior should be based effectually on sympathy, education, and social ties and needs; no religious basis is necessary. Man would indeed be in a poor way if he had to be restrained by fear of punishment and hope of reward after death
— Albert Einstein

Dragonlich

That's your interpretation, and hardly what it says. I suggest you re-read what I said, and add the pretty important last part of my statement

Now, IF people are terrorists/insurgents/freedom fighters, AND they happen to be muslim AND you happen to be an american, then the terrorists in question will generally act in a rather harsh way, given the history of Islamic terrorism. That observation is not racist, but simply the truth. However, this whole specification is rather silly, given the fact that terrorists in general aren't nice, and aren't going to care about human rights; otherwise, they wouldn't be called terrorists...

M'kay?

Kurant

Beaten to death? I doubt it. Do you have any idea of the amount of manufactured anti-war propaganda there is running around? I'm sure you do. Hell, there is a video in this thread. Could have been a picture someone found of a dead man from a shooting, or run over, or whatever, and the tag "beaten to death" stuck on it.

As far as the reaction from Bush, well, he's a liar, and just an idiot in general, and yes, I voted for him. Gee, aren't I proud.

Seaver

Beaten to dead? doubtful.

Is this acceptable in any way? no.

These soldiers will enjoy Lebonworth (sp?) and the Brigadire General that went on air claiming she knew nothing about it will either be fired or be quietly retired. No she probably didnt know but you cant delegate responsibility.

Sparhawk

This, along with Bush's embrace of Sharon (not literal), has set back our Middle East diplomacy 10 years. One of the talking heads was talking about how this war in Iraq will be won or lost by the Lance Corporals and the PFC's. How sad to "lose" it in this way.

In an earlier discussion I was having with ARTelevision, I mentioned the two fronts in the War on Terror, the military and the diplomatic (winning the hearts and minds of the muslim world), AKA the hard and soft fronts, and how they are equally important. This latest incident was a major defeat on the soft front.

__________________
"In Iraq, no doubt about it, it's tough. It's hard work. It's incredibly hard. It's - and it's hard work. I understand how hard it is. I get the casualty reports every day. I see on the TV screens how hard it is. But it's necessary work. We're making progress. It is hard work."

Mojo_PeiPei

If diplomacy is to get any better the Muslims have to let go of their hate, sadly this only re-enforces it.

__________________
To win a war you must serve no master but your ambition.

OFKU0

Muslims are not the only culture in the world that have a monopoly on 'hate.' Every culture is proportionately equal in those terms, that being, the individuals who choose to hate rather than those who don't.


The only difference between a change up and a curve ball is the direct amount of spin attached. Could be one factor of many as to why people hate and, while some people don't.

__________________
" In Canada, you can tell the most blatant lie in a calm voice, and people will believe you over someone who's a little passionate about the truth." David Warren, Western Standard.

Kurant

If you think diplomacy is only going to get better based on one group of peoples "hate" for others, you've got a long time coming for any improvement.

Mojo_PeiPei

Yeah well I say fuck them. You guys can make all the concessions you want to those clowns, but the fact of the matter is change starts in the mosque, and aslong as the whole MidEast is being indoctrinated with hate against the west and more specifically America, the burden isn't on our shoulders.

__________________
To win a war you must serve no master but your ambition.

Zeld2.0

Yeah well fuck them is a great attitude why our soldiers are dying for another country's ass.

The "fuck em" attitude people have at home tells me that people just don't give a shit and shouldn't claim a moral responsibility if they don't care about that country. This is the same attitude that causes people to "hate" our country so why not be the first to step up and help them stop "hating" our country by wiping the "fuck it" attitude out.

Mojo_PeiPei

I don't have a fuck it attitude, as stated I have a fuck them attitude, big difference.

__________________
To win a war you must serve no master but your ambition.

nanofever

The Newshour with Jim Lehear had a big segment about this topic and one of the photographs clearly showed a man beaten to death packed in ice. The three-man panel discussing the issue with the moderator included a retied Lt. Coln who teaches "War Justice", an Arab newspaper editor and Seymour Hersh, an investigative reported for the "New Yorker". None of them contested the evidence in the photo's or the statements in Taguba's report. Of particular interest is this segment of the "New Yorker" article speaking about Taguba's report:


"...A month later, General Karpinski was formally admonished and quietly suspended, and a major investigation into the Army’s prison system, authorized by Lieutenant General Ricardo S. Sanchez, the senior commander in Iraq, was under way. A fifty-three-page report, obtained by The New Yorker, written by Major General Antonio M. Taguba and not meant for public release, was completed in late February. Its conclusions about the institutional failures of the Army prison system were devastating. Specifically, Taguba found that between October and December of 2003 there were numerous instances of “sadistic, blatant, and wanton criminal abuses” at Abu Ghraib. This systematic and illegal abuse of detainees, Taguba reported, was perpetrated by soldiers of the 372nd Military Police Company, and also by members of the American intelligence community. (The 372nd was attached to the 320th M.P. Battalion, which reported to Karpinski’s brigade headquarters.) Taguba’s report listed some of the wrongdoing:

Breaking chemical lights and pouring the phosphoric liquid on detainees; pouring cold water on naked detainees; beating detainees with a broom handle and a chair; threatening male detainees with rape; allowing a military police guard to stitch the wound of a detainee who was injured after being slammed against the wall in his cell; sodomizing a detainee with a chemical light and perhaps a broom stick, and using military working dogs to frighten and intimidate detainees with threats of attack, and in one instance actually biting a detainee.

There was stunning evidence to support the allegations, Taguba added—“detailed witness statements and the discovery of extremely graphic photographic evidence.” Photographs and videos taken by the soldiers as the abuses were happening were not included in his report, Taguba said, because of their “extremely sensitive nature.”

The photographs—several of which were broadcast on CBS’s “60 Minutes 2” last week—show leering G.I.s taunting naked Iraqi prisoners who are forced to assume humiliating poses. Six suspects—Staff Sergeant Ivan L. Frederick II, known as Chip, who was the senior enlisted man; Specialist Charles A. Graner; Sergeant Javal Davis; Specialist Megan Ambuhl; Specialist Sabrina Harman; and Private Jeremy Sivits—are now facing prosecution in Iraq, on charges that include conspiracy, dereliction of duty, cruelty toward prisoners, maltreatment, assault, and indecent acts. A seventh suspect, Private Lynndie England, was reassigned to Fort Bragg, North Carolina, after becoming pregnant.

The photographs tell it all. In one, Private England, a cigarette dangling from her mouth, is giving a jaunty thumbs-up sign and pointing at the genitals of a young Iraqi, who is naked except for a sandbag over his head, as he masturbates. Three other hooded and naked Iraqi prisoners are shown, hands reflexively crossed over their genitals. A fifth prisoner has his hands at his sides. In another, England stands arm in arm with Specialist Graner; both are grinning and giving the thumbs-up behind a cluster of perhaps seven naked Iraqis, knees bent, piled clumsily on top of each other in a pyramid. There is another photograph of a cluster of naked prisoners, again piled in a pyramid. Near them stands Graner, smiling, his arms crossed; a woman soldier stands in front of him, bending over, and she, too, is smiling. Then, there is another cluster of hooded bodies, with a female soldier standing in front, taking photographs. Yet another photograph shows a kneeling, naked, unhooded male prisoner, head momentarily turned away from the camera, posed to make it appear that he is performing oral sex on another male prisoner, who is naked and hooded.

Such dehumanization is unacceptable in any culture, but it is especially so in the Arab world. Homosexual acts are against Islamic law and it is humiliating for men to be naked in front of other men, Bernard Haykel, a professor of Middle Eastern studies at New York University, explained. “Being put on top of each other and forced to masturbate, being naked in front of each other—it’s all a form of torture,” Haykel said.

Two Iraqi faces that do appear in the photographs are those of dead men. There is the battered face of prisoner No. 153399, and the bloodied body of another prisoner, wrapped in cellophane and packed in ice. There is a photograph of an empty room, splattered with blood.

The 372nd’s abuse of prisoners seemed almost routine—a fact of Army life that the soldiers felt no need to hide. On April 9th, at an Article 32 hearing (the military equivalent of a grand jury) in the case against Sergeant Frederick, at Camp Victory, near Baghdad, one of the witnesses, Specialist Matthew Wisdom, an M.P., told the courtroom what happened when he and other soldiers delivered seven prisoners, hooded and bound, to the so-called “hard site” at Abu Ghraib—seven tiers of cells where the inmates who were considered the most dangerous were housed. The men had been accused of starting a riot in another section of the prison. Wisdom said:

SFC Snider grabbed my prisoner and threw him into a pile. . . . I do not think it was right to put them in a pile. I saw SSG Frederic, SGT Davis and CPL Graner walking around the pile hitting the prisoners. I remember SSG Frederick hitting one prisoner in the side of its [sic] ribcage. The prisoner was no danger to SSG Frederick. . . . I left after that.

When he returned later, Wisdom testified:

I saw two naked detainees, one masturbating to another kneeling with its mouth open. I thought I should just get out of there. I didn’t think it was right . . . I saw SSG Frederick walking towards me, and he said, “Look what these animals do when you leave them alone for two seconds.” I heard PFC England shout out, “He’s getting hard.”

Wisdom testified that he told his superiors what had happened, and assumed that “the issue was taken care of.” He said, “I just didn’t want to be part of anything that looked criminal.”..."

http://www.newyorker.com/fact/content/

__________________
I'm leaving for the University of California: Santa Barbara in 5 hours, give me your best college advice - things I need, good ideas, bad ideas, nooky, ect.

Originally Posted by Norseman on another forum:
"Yeah, the problem with the world is the stupid people are all cocksure of themselves and the intellectuals are full of doubt."

filtherton

Until you get off of your ass and join up, you're making just as many concessions as any one of those whom you would label appeasers. You scream for war as if you had the courage to fight it yourself.

Zeld2.0

Exactly what filtherton said

If you say "fuck em" you're going to have to do something

Appeasement isn't just defined as giving concessions, its letting em do what they are doing and saying "fuck em" let em rot because clearly whats going on isn't working

Mojo_PeiPei

Just because I am not in the armed forces doesn't mean I can't say fuck em'. I'm not going to romantize war or glorify it, I'm not even saying that war is the answer. Literally all I'm saying is fuck them. Tell the Arabs to piss off. If that means getting our oil from somewhere else until we can get a renewable source, cool. If it means pumping even more money into Israel, cool. Hell if it means knocking them upside the head and giving them a swift kick in the ass I'm down with that too.

Right now going to school, the only thing I'm able to do is vote for Bush in November, because I think he is best suited to handle this the way I want.

__________________
To win a war you must serve no master but your ambition.

clonmult

Dragonlich - you should probably qualify Muslim with "fundamentalist".

I'm intrigued by this though - what is gods name is a "fundamentalist"? Someone who takes the basics of a religion, then goes ahead and completely ignores all its teachings, and uses his (or her) beliefs as an excuse to kill people?

The whole situation out there is spirally out of control. Started with good intentions (well, kinda), badly planned, not particularly well carried out. Now the shit hits the fan. More poop coming the fans way soon, I'd expect.

Grimlok

Fuckin Rush Limbaugh is on the Radio trying to justify what happened. An overdose of pain killers would be too nice of a death for him.

Oh... and he claims there was no outrage when they showed the dead Americans on TV. Talk about revisionist history.

__________________
Your future looks very very grim!

filtherton

You can say fuck 'em. But in doing so without actually doing anything about it only makes you akin to one of those yappy little dogs who make a loud ruckus but consistently fail to throw down when the time comes to do so. I would suggest that you not endorse a cause that you yourself are unwilling to die for, all the while expecting your countrymen to sacrifice their lives. I would also suggest that you not criticise those who would oppose a war on the grounds that they don't not agree with it as appeasers. The difference between supporting a war from your lay-z-boy and opposing it all together is that the peaceniks don't want anyone to die for a given cause whilst the armchair commanders want other people to die for a given cause. Who's more committed?

How clintonesque, or was that cheney? "i would love to go to war and defend our freedoms, but i'm stuck going to school." Awwww, darn.