Chain of Command - Tilted Forum Project Discussion Community

HarmlessRabbit · 05-09-2004, 10:41 AM

Really interesting, long, and sad story in the New Yorker about the Iraqi torture scandal. Much more detail than I have seen before:

http://www.newyorker.com/fact/content/?040517fa_fact2

A couple of excerpts:

Quote:

When I asked retired Major General Charles Hines, who was commandant of the Army’s military-police school during a twenty-eight-year career in military law enforcement, about these reports, he reacted with dismay. “Turning a dog loose in a room of people? Loosing dogs on prisoners of war? I’ve never heard of it, and it would never have been tolerated,” Hines said. He added that trained police dogs have long been a presence in Army prisons, where they are used for sniffing out narcotics and other contraband among the prisoners, and, occasionally, for riot control. But, he said, “I would never have authorized it for interrogating or coercing prisoners. If I had, I’d have been put in jail or kicked out of the Army.”

Quote:

One lingering mystery is how Ryder could have conducted his review last fall, in the midst of the prisoner abuse at Abu Ghraib, without managing to catch it. (Ryder told a Pentagon press briefing last week that his trip to Iraq “was not an inspection or an investigation. . . . It was an assessment.”) In his report to Sanchez, Ryder flatly declared that “there were no military police units purposely applying inappropriate confinement practices.” Willie J. Rowell, who served for thirty-six years as an agent of the C.I.D., told me that Ryder was in a bureaucratic bind. The Army had revised its command structure last fall, and Ryder, as provost marshal, was now the commanding general of all military-police units as well as of the C.I.D. He was, in essence, being asked to investigate himself. “What Ryder should have done was set up a C.I.D. task force headed by an 0-6”—full colonel—“with fifteen agents, and begin interviewing everybody and taking sworn statements,” Rowell said. “He had to answer questions about the prisons in September, when Sanchez asked for an assessment.” At the time, Rowell added, the Army prison system was unprepared for the demands the insurgency placed on it. “Ryder was a man in a no-win situation,” Rowell said. “As provost marshal, if he’d turned a C.I.D. task force loose, he could be in harm’s way—because he’s also boss of the military police. He was being eaten alive.”

Anyway, really interesting stuff. I'll let the article speak for itself.

tricks · 05-09-2004, 11:02 AM

I heard an interview on the radio this week, probably NPR, with a memeber of the Red Cross who also knew what was happeing in the prison and had reported it in January to the Pentagon. He mentioned some prisoners were "hidden" by constantly moving them around the prison. The Red Cross inspectors found out about that by talking to the prisoners. They know what goes on when officials aren't around.

So, it is possible that those at the top could possibly be left in the dark, although, it seems that it was pretty obvious.

analog · 05-09-2004, 11:48 AM

Please post comments to accompany articles.

HarmlessRabbit · 05-09-2004, 11:53 AM

Well, as I said, I think the article is sad. It's very informative about the problems with the "chain of command" in Iraq. As the excerpts that I picked show, there appear to be some serious problems with how people were supervised. Also, ex-armed forces personnel seem surprised at the lack of punishment of the higher ranks so far.

So, I think the article gives a lot more information about additional abuses in Iraq, including new revelations about dogs used to attack prisoners. It appears that the "small, isolated group of misbehavers" that the administration keeps talking about is becoming bigger and bigger.

(Hey analog, when you bold using yellow, it's nearly impossible to read in my theme, any fix for that in vbulletin?)

hammer4all · 05-09-2004, 05:55 PM

For those interested, Democracy Now! interviewed the author of that piece here.

OFKU0 · 05-09-2004, 07:48 PM

Little late in the day,... along the same lines though.

http://www.canoe.ca/NewsStand/Column...09/452554.html

gondath · 05-09-2004, 10:28 PM

I think what we have here is representative more of what the relationship between guards and prisoners descends into. The only reason it played out worse than in a standard prison is the hatred and contempt the soldiers had for their prisoners, an emotion played on since before the war even began. It's a pity these events only come to light when so many leaders are presented with the facts that they can no longer turn a blind eye to what is going on. I imagine a lot of the low ranking soldiers over there even knew what was going on, but I can imagine they'd rather have said nothing than be reprimanded by their superiors or be viewed as a traitor to the rest of the army.

Superbelt · 05-10-2004, 03:43 AM

Quote:

Originally posted by HarmlessRabbit
(Hey analog, when you bold using yellow, it's nearly impossible to read in my theme, any fix for that in vbulletin?)

Probrably not, but what you can do is a quick click and drag to highlight a moderators post space. That will give the words contrast.

hammer4all · 05-10-2004, 02:54 PM

Another interview with Seymour Hersh, today, about his latest article (the one above):

http://www.democracynow.org/article..../05/10/1417253

This was no isolated incident.

jcookc6 · 05-11-2004, 11:28 AM

The whole thing on this scandal is that the ones who caused most of the trouble were in a National Guard unit from Apalacia. In the unit were hardened prison guards from a Pennsylvania maxium security prison, and a bunch of kids. There was no supervison. What did you expect? Room service.
Also, let me point out another thing! There is a war going on, what do you expect, the interagators to ask please?

Kadath · 05-11-2004, 12:55 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by jcookc6
Also, let me point out another thing! There is a war going on, what do you expect, the interagators to ask please?

I expect this.

nanofever · 05-11-2004, 01:19 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by Kadath
I expect this.

Nicely done, short but with a good sting.

gondath · 05-11-2004, 10:09 PM

I think it's funny that they boiled down the debate to a simple question over how far they strayed from the Geneva Convention. Apparently, the US military has no code of honor or ethics towards the treatment of other humans unless they can look it up.

Wax_off · 05-11-2004, 10:16 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by Kadath
I expect this.

Please... Those Iraqis were not prisoners of war. They were enemy combatants or detainees and as such they have no Geneva Convention rights, only those granted to them by the US military. Apparently the miilitary didn't think they needed the right to not be tortured. [/devils advocate]

But please take my point. These Iraqis were not members of an organized national military force and the Geneva Conventions may or may not apply.

nanofever · 05-12-2004, 06:17 AM

Quote:

Originally posted by Wax_off
Please... Those Iraqis were not prisoners of war. They were enemy combatants or detainees and as such they have no Geneva Convention rights, only those granted to them by the US military. Apparently the miilitary didn't think they needed the right to not be tortured. [/devils advocate]

But please take my point. These Iraqis were not members of an organized national military force and the Geneva Conventions may or may not apply.

1. The enemy combatant definition is absolute absurdity considering its current application of putting American Citizens in solitary for years ,and I'm willing to bet money that the supreme court will issue a stern condemination of it this Summer.

2. The Iraqi's in Abu Garib(?) were infact Prisoners of War. I guess that means the abuse by our troops was wrong.

Kinda reminds me of the statement Senator Inholf (OK-R) made at the Taguba hearing yesterday which ammounted to "These were bad people who were being tortured, they deserved it".

http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2004/...in614063.shtml
http://www.usatoday.com/news/world/i...-scandal_x.htm

Sparhawk · 05-12-2004, 06:55 AM

The testimony I heard said that all prisoners in Iraqi prisons were to be treated in accordance with the Geneva Conventions.

Regardless of that assertion*, we Americans, especially our men and women in uniform, are supposed to be above this sort of thing.

*removed the word "fact" as that was Mr Cambone's assertion, which has earlier been disputed by Mr Rumsfeld, as well as the International Red Cross.

Sparhawk · 05-12-2004, 10:10 AM

Alright, the best column I've read so far about these events:

Quote:

Not Just Following Orders
I'm ashamed of the unit I once commanded.
By James D. Villa
Wednesday, May 12, 2004; Page A23

From 1989 to 1992 I commanded the 372nd MP Company, the Army Reserve unit from Cumberland, Md., that is at the center of the Abu Ghraib prison scandal. In the years since then, I've had an enduring affection for the unit and those who serve in it. Today what I feel is a sort of sickness, and shame at having been affiliated with the 372nd.

With congressional, military and independent investigations in the offing, there are many things about the incidents at Abu Ghraib that we do not know. Given the involvement of military intelligence issues, there are many critical things that we may never know. But there are a few conclusions we can certainly draw.

These actions were the result of huge command failures. The senior person charged thus far is Ivan L. Frederick, a staff sergeant. In an MP company, a person of his rank is normally placed in charge of a squad of 11 soldiers. I refuse to believe that no leader above Frederick was aware of or complicit in the abuses that were apparently widespread throughout the prison. While certain officers were relieved of their commands and other leaders were given letters of reprimand, the failure of unit leaders, from company to brigade, is stunning.

The 372nd has approximately 150 soldiers and is divided into five platoons, four of which consist of MPs. The company commander is directly responsible for all actions taken by his soldiers, or those that they fail to take. The 372nd's commander and the relevant platoon leader either knew or should have known of the actions of their subordinates, as should have their noncommissioned officers. All these leaders failed in their most basic responsibilities of supervising their soldiers in the performance of their duties.

Brig. Gen. Janis L. Karpinski, commander of the 800th MP Brigade, which ran the prison, has spent most of the past week on television telling the same story: that she never knew about this, that her MPs were working for military intelligence people, that she was not to blame. Had she spent as much time leading her troops as she apparently has preparing for appearances on MSNBC (with her lawyer in tow), the Army might have stemmed these incidents early on. I was taught in ROTC that a leader is responsible for what his or her unit does or fails to do. I was also taught that a leader takes responsibility for his or her soldiers. Either by commission or omission, Karpinski and her chain of command have failed those soldiers in her brigade and, ultimately, this country.

The soldiers in question are nonetheless culpable for their own actions. The 372nd is a combat support company. That is to say, it is a unit designed to provide area security, law enforcement and battlefield circulation control operations. It is highly mobile and has a significant amount of indigenous firepower. Like all MPs, the soldiers in the 372nd have received basic instruction on handling enemy prisoners of war. The most essential instruction regarding prisoners is the "Five S's": search, segregate, silence, safeguard and speed to the rear. These simple directions clearly state that an MP must ensure that a prisoner is disarmed and, once rendered harmless, protected as a noncombatant and moved back for processing. While serving in Kuwait in the 1991 Gulf War, my soldiers took Iraqi prisoners, and our responsibility was to safely transport them to camps in Saudi Arabia and protect them from vengeful Kuwaitis. This is a basic function of an MP unit on the battlefield.

Various people, including the families of some of the soldiers in question, have said that the soldiers were not given appropriate training to run a detention facility and had inadequate support to do their jobs. While these statements may be true, in what Army field manual can one locate the section about stacking naked prisoners like cordwood, or affixing collars to their necks? Is special training needed to show a soldier that this sort of thing is contemptible and contrary to any standards of decency?

Further, it is no defense for MPs to claim that they were only following orders, that they were instructed to "soften up" prisoners to enhance subsequent interrogations. While battlefield intelligence gleaned from interrogations may prove invaluable and can save American lives, no officer, no sergeant, has the authority to direct a soldier to commit an atrocity or to violate the Geneva Conventions. While soldiers in a combat environment may face split-second decisions involving difficult moral choices, such was not the case here. We are confronted with picture after picture, story upon story, detailing systematic abuse and degradation by American MPs. We have a right to expect more from our military.

Those serving in Iraq, including the many reservists and National Guardsmen, deserve our respect and admiration. The men and women of our military who are serving in Iraq do so under terrible circumstances. They live each day with fear and danger, far from their families, deprived of the basic comforts of life. Their families suffer for their absence every day and each milestone missed -- a child's graduation, an anniversary, a loved one's birthday -- can never be reclaimed.

To minimize the egregious conduct of some members of the 372nd (and their superiors) dishonors those men and women who honorably serve their country. We must not, as some commentators have said, deem this to be soldiers "blowing off steam" and equate it to a fraternity initiation. To me, that sort of response dishonors those who strive each day to serve their fellow soldiers and complete their missions -- and who risk their lives to do so. A failure to condemn what is wrong is also a failure to recognize what is right -- and what our committed military men and women do around the world each day. Further, minimizing the conduct of these MPs by comparing it to the reckless and violent acts of the Iraqi insurgents is wholly beside the point. We must compare our actions to those of the men and women who have honorably served this country as soldiers, sailors, Marines and airmen. We must look to them, and to our own standards of conduct, and not to people who would wantonly kill and terrorize innocents. If our claim is merely that we are better than the terrorists, we leave a tenuous legacy for a budding democracy in Iraq.

The 372nd has a distinguished record, having been in both the Gulf War and in Bosnia. The soldiers with whom I served were some of the most dedicated and talented military people I know. Though they came from various backgrounds, they shared the common values of service to their country, community and fellow soldiers. I have always been proud to have served with them. The acts committed at Abu Ghraib have disgraced all of us. I hope that corrective action by the Army and appropriate punishment for those guilty will help restore the pride that the 372nd and the MP Corps have earned.

jcookc6 · 05-12-2004, 01:43 PM

When they capture Nick Berg's killer, I guess they should be accorded the rights described in the Geneva Convention.

Does anyone think, for one minute any country at war has followed those rules?

if you do, then you still believe in Santa Claus, the easter bunny and the tooth fairy.

nanofever · 05-12-2004, 02:26 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by jcookc6
When they capture Nick Berg's killer, I guess they should be accorded the rights described in the Geneva Convention.

Does anyone think, for one minute any country at war has followed those rules?

if you do, then you still believe in Santa Claus, the easter bunny and the tooth fairy.

With an attitude like that why not just turn every country we don't like into radioactive wastelands...

Kadath · 05-12-2004, 02:51 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by jcookc6
When they capture Nick Berg's killer, I guess they should be accorded the rights described in the Geneva Convention.

Does anyone think, for one minute any country at war has followed those rules?

if you do, then you still believe in Santa Claus, the easter bunny and the tooth fairy.

Wrong + Wrong = Right. It's the new math, people!

ubertuber · 05-12-2004, 04:23 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by jcookc6
When they capture Nick Berg's killer, I guess they should be accorded the rights described in the Geneva Convention.

Actually, that is exactly what I think should happen. And they ought to have a trial. At which they are innocent until proven guilty. And if they are proven guilty, then they should be punished - not tortured. And it should be wide open so that people can see that we know how to do this the right way.

I wouldn't claim that every (or maybe not even any) country follows the Geneva convention 10)% of that the time. But I would argue that they should. Always. To expect less of ourselves is a disservice to America, not to mention the prisoners we would be condemning to torture.

hammer4all · 05-13-2004, 12:57 AM

A simple principle applies here: Do not do unto others as you would not have them do unto you.

05-09-2004, 11:02 AM	#2 (permalink)
tricks Crazy	I heard an interview on the radio this week, probably NPR, with a memeber of the Red Cross who also knew what was happeing in the prison and had reported it in January to the Pentagon. He mentioned some prisoners were "hidden" by constantly moving them around the prison. The Red Cross inspectors found out about that by talking to the prisoners. They know what goes on when officials aren't around. So, it is possible that those at the top could possibly be left in the dark, although, it seems that it was pretty obvious. __________________ People Are Stupid. People can be made to believe any lie, either because they want it to be true or because they fear that it is.

05-09-2004, 07:48 PM	#6 (permalink)
OFKU0 Junk	Little late in the day,... along the same lines though. http://www.canoe.ca/NewsStand/Column...09/452554.html __________________ " 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.

05-12-2004, 06:55 AM	#16 (permalink)
Sparhawk Dubya Location: VA	The testimony I heard said that all prisoners in Iraqi prisons were to be treated in accordance with the Geneva Conventions. Regardless of that assertion, we Americans, especially our men and women in uniform, are supposed to be above this sort of thing. removed the word "fact" as that was Mr Cambone's assertion, which has earlier been disputed by Mr Rumsfeld, as well as the International Red Cross. __________________ "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." Last edited by Sparhawk; 05-12-2004 at 02:56 PM..

05-09-2004, 11:48 AM	#3 (permalink)
analog Banned	Please post comments to accompany articles.

05-09-2004, 11:53 AM	#4 (permalink)
HarmlessRabbit Junkie Location: San Jose, CA	Well, as I said, I think the article is sad. It's very informative about the problems with the "chain of command" in Iraq. As the excerpts that I picked show, there appear to be some serious problems with how people were supervised. Also, ex-armed forces personnel seem surprised at the lack of punishment of the higher ranks so far. So, I think the article gives a lot more information about additional abuses in Iraq, including new revelations about dogs used to attack prisoners. It appears that the "small, isolated group of misbehavers" that the administration keeps talking about is becoming bigger and bigger. (Hey analog, when you bold using yellow, it's nearly impossible to read in my theme, any fix for that in vbulletin?)

05-09-2004, 05:55 PM	#5 (permalink)
hammer4all Insane	For those interested, Democracy Now! interviewed the author of that piece here.

05-09-2004, 10:28 PM	#7 (permalink)
gondath Insane Location: Alton, IL	I think what we have here is representative more of what the relationship between guards and prisoners descends into. The only reason it played out worse than in a standard prison is the hatred and contempt the soldiers had for their prisoners, an emotion played on since before the war even began. It's a pity these events only come to light when so many leaders are presented with the facts that they can no longer turn a blind eye to what is going on. I imagine a lot of the low ranking soldiers over there even knew what was going on, but I can imagine they'd rather have said nothing than be reprimanded by their superiors or be viewed as a traitor to the rest of the army.

05-10-2004, 02:54 PM	#9 (permalink)
hammer4all Insane	Another interview with Seymour Hersh, today, about his latest article (the one above): http://www.democracynow.org/article..../05/10/1417253 This was no isolated incident.

05-11-2004, 11:28 AM	#10 (permalink)
jcookc6 Psycho Location: Venice, Florida	The whole thing on this scandal is that the ones who caused most of the trouble were in a National Guard unit from Apalacia. In the unit were hardened prison guards from a Pennsylvania maxium security prison, and a bunch of kids. There was no supervison. What did you expect? Room service. Also, let me point out another thing! There is a war going on, what do you expect, the interagators to ask please?

05-11-2004, 10:09 PM	#13 (permalink)
gondath Insane Location: Alton, IL	I think it's funny that they boiled down the debate to a simple question over how far they strayed from the Geneva Convention. Apparently, the US military has no code of honor or ethics towards the treatment of other humans unless they can look it up.

05-12-2004, 01:43 PM	#18 (permalink)
jcookc6 Psycho Location: Venice, Florida	When they capture Nick Berg's killer, I guess they should be accorded the rights described in the Geneva Convention. Does anyone think, for one minute any country at war has followed those rules? if you do, then you still believe in Santa Claus, the easter bunny and the tooth fairy.

05-13-2004, 12:57 AM	#22 (permalink)
hammer4all Insane	A simple principle applies here: Do not do unto others as you would not have them do unto you.