[Hawkmoon]

http://cnn.netscape.cnn.com/ns/news/story.jsp?idq=/ff/story/0001%2F20050423%2F0526387328.htm&sc=1152&photoid=20041007NY123&ewp=ewp_news_prison_abuse&floc=NW_1-T

Whitewash.

Once again, the "boots on the ground" take a boot up the rear, and the senior officers who had the authority and who either gave or approved the orders skate. My Lai all over again.

[dloken]

Maybe so, but the Abu Gharib soldiers had a duty to ignore illegal or unlawful as outlined by the USMJ and the oath they took, right?

In my opinion everyone who had more than an insignificant part in this should rot in Leavenworth for 10 years.

[Rebar]

My Lai all over again.
A rediculous comparison and exaggeration.

[ACORN]

10 years for a little more than a frat house hazing, you've got to be joking. JMO but I don't have a whole lot a sympathy for the prisoners that were "abused". Look at what our guys had to suffer through in WWII. Those were atrocities. Naked Twister hardly warrants 10 years. If it worked to save 1 GI I'm all for it!

[dloken]

:rolleyes:

If anything it got more of our soldiers killed by enraging the insurgents even more. Torture no matter how mild is INDEFENSIBLE. I'd like to think that we as a Nation are beyond stuff like this but we're not. Hell the CIA or other government organizations sends prisoners to other countries to have them tortured.

[Blackburn]

What about shoving stuff in prisoner's asses and forcing them to perform sex acts on each other? If I encountered someone doing that to a prisoner I would execute them without even thinking twice about it.

[shermacman]

dloken
You have got to be kidding. I suffered far more abuse as a Tenderfoot Boy Scout than those prisoners did. That was not torture. Stupid prank? Yup. Punishable? Yup. Ten years in Leavenworth? Ridiculous.

And where did you get the information that the CIA sends prisoners off to other countries for torture? You got a special line of information into the CIA?

[ACORN]

Yeah, we wouldn't want to make them mad at us. They might behead(contractors), rape (female GIs), execute our guys that they are holding prisoner. Oh wait, they already do that.
If anything it got more of our soldiers killed by enraging the insurgents even more.

Prove it.
Torture no matter how mild is INDEFENSIBLE. I'd like to think that we as a Nation are beyond stuff like this but we're not. Hell the CIA or other government organizations sends prisoners to other countries to have them tortured. Today 05:22 PM

I'd wager if your family or loved one was being held prisoner and threatened with execution, and a guy wouildn't talk. You'd change your mind. If it were my son or daughter, I'd do it personally. Even that great conservative Alan Dershowitz admitted the same.

[Blackburn]

That's a nice example. It's unfortunate that most of the people getting into Abu Gahraib are just pulled off the street on tips. Someone else wrote an excellent explanation of who is going in there, how they're being chosen, and why it isn't a good idea.

The chances of anyone being tortured because they know the location of a hostage and won't tell are slim to none. Your argument is much like an antigunner talking about the chances for an innocent person to be hit by stray gunfire from a ccwer defending their person.

[Iain]

And where did you get the information that the CIA sends prisoners off to other countries for torture? You got a special line of information into the CIA?

Don't know if the torture goes on, but the official term is 'renditions'.

U.S. authorities have flown at least 100 foreigners to countries including Egypt and Saudi Arabia. The Bush administration has said it seeks assurances that the subject will not be tortured, but critics say the practice simply allows the United States to outsource the dirty work. - http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,150748,00.html

[ACORN]

My arguement was to counter a statement that any amount of "torture" is
indefensiible.
Shooting a fellow GI is indefensible. An action you seem to approve of.
I'll shed no tears for the Abu Ghraib prisoners.

[RevDisk]

Once again, the "boots on the ground" take a boot up the rear, and the senior officers who had the authority and who either gave or approved the orders skate. My Lai all over again.

From what I've heard from buddies, intelligence folks were the ones calling the shots. When the story broke, the intelligence folks disappeared and left the Army holding the hot spud. Note, it is illegal for intelligence agencies to give orders to MP's guarding prisoners. The military has been similiarly burned by scandals in the past caused by certain intelligence folks, and hardly surprisingly is not happy about being blamed for it.

It's impossible for systematic abuse to occur in a prison without the brass hearing about it. Word passes around, quickly. Officers are responsible for the actions of their soldiers.


You have got to be kidding. I suffered far more abuse as a Tenderfoot Boy Scout than those prisoners did. That was not torture. Stupid prank? Yup. Punishable? Yup. Ten years in Leavenworth? Ridiculous.


Rape and sexual abuse is not a "stupid prank." It is a crime, and my personal belief is that rapists should be shot. Ten years in Leavenworth is indeed ridiculous. It should be longer.

There is no possible defense for a guard raping a prisoner.

[Bigjake]

blackburn said:

What about shoving stuff in prisoner's asses and forcing them to perform sex acts on each other? If I encountered someone doing that to a prisoner I would execute them without even thinking twice about it.

glad to know our boys on the ground don't have to worry about your kind over there, they have enough problems without some vigilante jackass braying in a forum that he'd shoot em on sight just to protect some poor, misunderstood insurgent scum. :cuss:

[RevDisk]

glad to know our boys on the ground don't have to worry about your kind over there, they have enough problems without some vigilante jackass braying in a forum that he'd shoot em on sight just to protect some poor, misunderstood insurgent scum.

Question. If you were walking through the park, and saw a rapist in the commission of a crime, what would you do?


I'd like to think I'd do the right thing. Disarm them if they are armed and hold them for the proper authorities. In this case, it'd be the MP's or CID. Any soldier that knows of a rape and let's it slide does not deserve to wear a uniform. Yes, it would be satisfying to execute a rapist on the spot, but we're supposed to do the right thing and trust the justice system.


RevDisk
US Army 1999-Present

[Bigjake]

exactly. but that wasn't some park full of innocents, which alone is enough reason not to "execute" people on site

[shermacman]

I get it now. The oh-so-sophisticated can preen about how evil the United States is. We had the will and the desire to toss out a malevolent dictator. Democracy has found a place to grow in the Middle East because of our efforts and the lives of 1500 of the best and brightest in our country. Yet you take a tiny hand full of idiots in a prison and that is the scandal?

I must have missed your enraged condemnation of Saddam's rape rooms, your fury at the Europeans pigging out at the Oil for Food trough, your scorn for the intellectual purity of overly simplistic morality.

Nope, you sit safe and sound with you internet connection and computer, all of the world's information at your finger tips and post your Liberal media obsession with Abu Ghraib.

[Iain]

Who was that directed at then?

[shermacman]

You, for one, Iain. You posted an piece of drivel about the CIA sending prisoners off to other countries from a Fox news link that leads to a completely nebulous article. As a British "subject" I think you of all people should be aware that there have been forces in this world that would seek to destroy you and everything you have. And that whilst Chamberlain et al sat around sucking their thumbs, we Americans actually did something about it. That gets messy sometimes.

And RevDisk, exactly what rape are you talking about? There has been no such charge made at Abu Ghraib. Well, no such charge other than the barking moonbats at DU. Are you aware of any such charge?

[Iain]

I didn't really need that question answered.

Someone asked a question, I answered it. Renditions happen, that is fact. I specifically stated that I would not attempt to back up claims of torture. Further to those claims, an MSNBC link I found had a statement from a Whitehouse official in which he said of renditions that 'abuses have happened, but no-one has died.' That's good news eh?

(You might want to read up on WWII history with regards to the dates that the various powers got involved. Very grateful for your intervention, but we were not sitting on our appeasing bottoms when the cavalry rode into town.)

Think RevDisk can handle himself if he wants to deal with specific issues surrounding Abu Ghraib, I doubt that my nationality will allow any comments I might make to be heard.

[Supreme Leader]

exactly. but that wasn't some park full of innocents, which alone is enough reason not to "execute" people on site
Innocents? Considering about 80% of the prisoners were released because they hadn't done anything? Probably...

[RevDisk]

I get it now. The oh-so-sophisticated can preen about how evil the United States is. We had the will and the desire to toss out a malevolent dictator. Democracy has found a place to grow in the Middle East because of our efforts and the lives of 1500 of the best and brightest in our country. Yet you take a tiny hand full of idiots in a prison and that is the scandal?

I must have missed your enraged condemnation of Saddam's rape rooms, your fury at the Europeans pigging out at the Oil for Food trough, your scorn for the intellectual purity of overly simplistic morality.

Nope, you sit safe and sound with you internet connection and computer, all of the world's information at your finger tips and post your Liberal media obsession with Abu Ghraib.

If that last paragraph was directed at me in an any way, you are vastly mistaken. After 9/11, I was guarding a nuclear storage facility. Then my happy rear end did my part against the bad guys in the freezing snow up in some very tall mountains. I hate being frozen, wet, hungry, tired and cranky. Oh yea, I REALLY hate mountains. After that, I helped train host country natives (ie, locals) how to kill terrorists.

I don't claim to be GI Joe. I'm no hero, I don't think I deserve most of the medals I got. I'm a soldier, I went where I was told to go and I did my job. I did my part for this "War on Terrorism" and I like to think I earned the right to have an opinion. Maybe this shiny little "War on Terrorism" medal counts for something?

Do YOU have a pretty little "War on Terrorism Service Medal" or "War on Terrorism Expeditionary Medal"? Or are you merely an armchair commando? You're entitled to an opinion either way.



And RevDisk, exactly what rape are you talking about? There has been no such charge made at Abu Ghraib. Well, no such charge other than the barking moonbats at DU. Are you aware of any such charge?

Check your PM box. I'm choosing to take it to PM due to the nature of the material.

[dloken]

Nope, you sit safe and sound with you internet connection and computer, all of the world's information at your finger tips and post your Liberal media obsession with Abu Ghraib.

Excuse me? They (The Abu Gharib guards) destroyed some of the little honor and integrity this nation has left. If I were a soldier i'd be even more angry at them since their extremely poor actions reflect very badly on the US Military as a whole.

Renditions:


http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A8008-2005Apr21.html

http://www.latimes.com/news/politics/la-na-negroponte13apr13,1,6310141.story?coll=la-headlines-politics&ctrack=2&cset=true

"The human rights issue has resurfaced in part because Negroponte, if confirmed, would be leading U.S. spy agencies when they are facing criticism for their handling of detainees. Several detainees have died in CIA custody. The agency has also carried out so-called renditions, in which terrorism suspects are transferred to the custody of countries known to engage in torture or abuse"

http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=4563352

http://www.csmonitor.com/2005/0330/p02s01-usju.html

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/uk_news/4414491.stm

http://www.janes.com/security/law_enforcement/news/rusi/rjhm050404_1_n.shtml

http://msnbc.msn.com/id/7331080/

http://www.expatica.com/source/site_article.asp?subchannel_id=52&story_id=18715&name=CIA+'rendition'+planes+landed+at+German+airports

http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=4617291 (this one takes the cake, U.S. Admits German Was Detained in Error)

Is this enough info the prove that the renditions can and do happen?


The bulletin software isn't displaying parts of my post, uh splitting into second post...

[dloken]

And that whilst Chamberlain et al sat around sucking their thumbs, we Americans actually did something about it. That gets messy sometimes.


Perhaps this timeline will help you:

http://www.historyplace.com/worldwar2/timeline/ww2time.htm#1939

Sept 1, 1939 - Nazis invade Poland. <--- This is pretty much the offical start of WWII.

Sept 3, 1939 - Britain, France, Australia and New Zealand declare war on Germany.

Sept 5, 1939 - United States proclaims neutrality; German troops cross the Vistula River in Poland.

Sept 10, 1939 - Canada declares war on Germany; Battle of the Atlantic begins.

Forward a few years...

Dec 7, 1941 - Japanese bomb Pearl Harbor; Hitler issues the Night and Fog decree.

Dec 8, 1941 - United States and Britain declare war on Japan.

Dec 11, 1941 - Germany declares war on the United States.

So here we have, Britain and the Commonwealth nations were involved in WWII two full years before the United States even declared war, let alone sent troops to Europe. It took an act of war on the part of the Japanese to get us involved in the first place. Please think before you post.


So while Chamberlain was sitting on his ass, some of our most famous Americans were helping the Nazi party. Hitler had fans in America:

http://www.rotten.com/library/bio/business/henry-ford/

"In 1922, the New York Times reported that Henry Ford had made large financial donations to Adolf Hitler's political campaign in Bavaria. Upton Sinclair, in his book The Flivver King, stated that Ford's contributions had amounted to no less than ($724600 or so in today's dollar) $70,000. Hitler openly praised Ford and had a large portrait of him hanging in his office."

"In 1938, after the Nazis rose to power, Ford received a special birthday present from Hitler. The Grand Cross of the Order of the German Eagle (Grosskreuz des Deutschen Adlerordens) was the highest honor the Reich could bestow on a foreigner. On Henry's 75th birthday, two representatives of the German government came to his office in Dearborn, Michigan and presented him the medal. It was accompanied by a personal greeting from Hitler himself."

"Ford proudly accepted the honor, and never relinquished it. Not after Germany started World War II, not after America was attacked by Japan, not even after the depravities of the Holocaust were revealed." Emphasis mine.

There are other corporate and political connections as well if you're into reading. Look up the America First movement.


This ends my history lesson. Good day, sir.

[shermacman]

Your Liberal education has worked perfectly! You have summed up the essence of the Left:
1) America is wrong,
2) Whenever America is right, see above.

While at the same time, you have referenced rotten.com as an historical source! Perfect!

[Sean Smith]

Once again, the "boots on the ground" take a boot up the rear, and the senior officers who had the authority and who either gave or approved the orders skate. My Lai all over again.

The lack of, um, mass innocent civilian murders makes the comparison of Abu Graib to My Lai seem kind of... stupid?

As for the rest... well, it is on the face of it illegal to follow an illegal order. If somebody, regardless of rank, tells you to break the law, you are legally obligated to not do it. Given that soldiers all get training on the laws of land warfare, this is a no brainer, before you even get to the "common sense" of "not sticking things in foreigners' butts." So the perpetrators need to get crushed into fine paste, regardless of if they were ordered to do it or not.

The curious thing is that all the people alleged to have ordered the soldiers to do this stuff obviously didn't have the legal authority to do so, and even an MP right out of basic training would have known that. Intelligence agencies simply have no authority over military personnel at all. The Army's own intelligence personnel are outside the MP's chain of command, and so can't give them orders to do jack squat, either. As a captain who was a 35E (counter-intelligence officer), I couldn't order the private working at the battalion's dining facility to give me extra hash browns at breakfast; I sure as hell couldn't tell some MPs to go torture some foreigners in their free time.

The other curious thing is that, while I know lots of borderline-illegal things to do to people to make them more cooperative, none of them involve the crimes alleged at Abu Graib, because said crimes, while pretty bad in their own right, were both ridiculously obvious and juvenile as hell. HINT: When spooks are torturing people, they don't allow Polaroids to be taken by some dildo MP along for the ride. And their isn't any forced ass-play, either.

I think there are two possible explanations:

1) The chain of command ordered blanket cooperation with some agency or another, and that agency gave vague and stupid guidance to the MPs to treat certain prisoners crappy, and the MPs came up with moronic yet sadistic things to do, and took pictures of it because they were idiots. In this case the chain of command, the spooks, and the MPs are all responsible in their own way for what happened..

2) The chain of command was just a bunch of retards, the intel folks had nothing to do with it at all, and the MPs in question were just moronically sadistic on their own. In this case, the chain of command is responsible for being retarded, and the MPs are mostly responsible for their actions.

Torture no matter how mild is INDEFENSIBLE.

Um, if it is mild, it is by definition not torture.

Main Entry: 1tor·ture
Pronunciation: 'tor-ch&r
Function: noun
Etymology: French, from Late Latin tortura, from Latin tortus, past participle of torquEre to twist; probably akin to Old High German drAhsil turner, Greek atraktos spindle
1 a : anguish of body or mind : AGONY b : something that causes agony or pain
2 : the infliction of intense pain (as from burning, crushing, or wounding) to punish, coerce, or afford sadistic pleasure

International law is in line with this, e.g.:

The "United Nations Convention against Torture and Other Cruel, Inhuman or Degrading Treatment or Punishment"(UNCAT) June 1987:

Article 1
1. Any act by which severe pain or suffering, whether physical or mental, is intentionally inflicted on a person for such purposes as obtaining from him or a third person information or a confession, punishing him for an act he or a third person has committed or is suspected of having committed, or intimidating or coercing him or a third person, or for any reason based on discrimination of any kind, when such pain or suffering is inflicted by or at the instigation of or with the consent or acquiescence of a public official or other person acting in an official capacity. It does not include pain or suffering arising only from, inherent in or incidental to lawful sanctions.

[shermacman]

Ditto that, Sean Smith,
And we have the Courts Martials that have taken down those who performed these stunts. It is a bad affair, but hardly worthy of the intense media coverage it has received, especially since the justice system here has been fairly successful in weeding out the rats.

[Blackburn]

I'd be pretty uncomfortable if someone started sticking things in MY rear. "Anal play"? It's Anal play if it's consensual, and if I ever encounter someone who is doing that to an unwilling recipient, they are not going to like what happens to them, and I'm not being found at the scene either.

So, shermac, you post something which is incorrect, and someone schools you on it, and the only thing you can do is change the subject?

And that whilst Chamberlain et al sat around sucking their thumbs, we Americans actually did something about it. That gets messy sometimes.

Insert owning of said comment here.

Your Liberal education has worked perfectly! You have summed up the essence of the Left:
1) America is wrong,
2) Whenever America is right, see above.

While at the same time, you have referenced rotten.com as an historical source! Perfect!

Hm, what's missing? That's a leftist tactic to reply to someone bodyslamming your incorrect statement, to change the subject and reply with an attack and ad-hominems.

I call troll.

[Rebar]

I find it amazing how much media attention this is getting. Do you think that this abberation in Abu Ghraib is worse then the business-as-usual in any Middle Eastern jail? Do you think prisoners are treated any better in Eygpt, Syria, or Iran?

No, they are treated considerably worse. Why isn't that a story, why aren't those abuses front-page news, why is it ok for moslem countrys to torture and execute prisoners but not ok for some renegade American soldiers to make them play naked twister?

No need to answer, we all know it already, don't we.

[Hawkmoon]

The lack of, um, mass innocent civilian murders makes the comparison of Abu Graib to My Lai seem kind of... stupid?
The comparison is not one of the events, it is a comparison of the consequences.

You gentlemen are all so wrapped up in your "America is all wrong" vs. "America can do no wrong" rhetoric that you're all missing the point. Which is, that just as with Lt. William Calley and My Lai, the senior officers who gave the orders and established the policy are skating, while the underlings (who should have disobeyed illegal orders, but for those who have not been in the military, it's not that easy to disobey an order you *think* *might* be illegal) take the heat.

That was the point I was trying to establish -- nothing more, nothing less. Just that the enlisted personnel are being prosecuted and the people responsible for the mess are not.

[RevDisk]

I find it amazing how much media attention this is getting. Do you think that this abberation in Abu Ghraib is worse then the business-as-usual in any Middle Eastern jail? Do you think prisoners are treated any better in Eygpt, Syria, or Iran?

No, they are treated considerably worse. Why isn't that a story, why aren't those abuses front-page news, why is it ok for moslem countrys to torture and execute prisoners but not ok for some renegade American soldiers to make them play naked twister?

Indeed, prisoners are generally treated fairly badly in a lot of third world countries. This does not excuse US soldiers from disobeying the UCMJ as well as American law, international law, etc. Rape and sexual abuse of prisoners is a violation of the UCMJ, which binds American soldiers everywhere in the world.

I'm not exactly happy with the human rights abuses world wide. However, I have no desire to serve with any US soldier that finds it amusing to sexually abuse prisoners.



I think there are two possible explanations:

1) The chain of command ordered blanket cooperation with some agency or another, and that agency gave vague and stupid guidance to the MPs to treat certain prisoners crappy, and the MPs came up with moronic yet sadistic things to do, and took pictures of it because they were idiots. In this case the chain of command, the spooks, and the MPs are all responsible in their own way for what happened..

2) The chain of command was just a bunch of retards, the intel folks had nothing to do with it at all, and the MPs in question were just moronically sadistic on their own. In this case, the chain of command is responsible for being retarded, and the MPs are mostly responsible for their actions.

I'd have to agree with you, Sean Smith. Even in the second possibility, the chain of command has responsibility for the actions of their soldiers to some degree.

[Spiphel Rike]

As an Australian, and a supporter of the Iraq war, I was extremely disappointed in the behaviour of the individuals involved in the Abu Ghraib scandal. Those who say things like "I was treated worse than that in boy scouts" should shut up, having dogs set on you, being forced to perform sex acts and other abuses are severe, and should be severely punished, both the MP's who did it and the officers that gave the orders.

I don't care if it happens in third world countries, the USA is apparently championing human rights and freedom, but these things cause a huge loss of credibility. Vietnam was not lost because of combat action, it was lost because of politics and anti-war protestors. Why give them ammunition?

[dloken]

Your Liberal education has worked perfectly! You have summed up the essence of the Left:

Actually i'd say my education worked and your education did not as evidenced my schooling of your hugely incorrect statement.

And how does this have anything to do with being an evil liberal? I support my country when it is right and I criticize it when it is wrong. I'm not an ignorant jingoist who supports my country no matter if it's right or wrong.


Um, if it is mild, it is by definition not torture.

I think you misunderstood what I meant. People earlier in the thread were trying to defend it because it wasn't torture causing extreme physical pain in the traditional sense. What I was trying to say whether physical or mental, torture is torture and it is horrible any way you slice it. Those who try and defend the MP's actions are just as bad as they are.

I find it amazing how much media attention this is getting. Do you think that this abberation in Abu Ghraib is worse then the business-as-usual in any Middle Eastern jail? Do you think prisoners are treated any better in Eygpt, Syria, or Iran?

Did you ever attend kindergarten? Two wrongs don't make a right.

[Rebar]

Did you ever attend kindergarten? Two wrongs don't make a right.
Yes, indeed I did attend kindergarden, thanks for inquiring. I also attended High School and Rutgers College where I majored in History and Political Science, and got my BA, in case you have any further educational questions.

As for two "wrongs", I'll state that one wrong has been corrected, the other wrong is still ongoing. Why are you still hammering away at the wrong that's been corrected, yet fail to even mention the wrongs (very much more "wrong" then Abu Ghaib) going on right at this moment?

[dloken]

Our wrong may have been corrected but that still doesn't mean other horrible events are anywhere close to justification for Abu Gharib. This is what we call a red herring argument.

Stop trying to justify our mistakes by comparing them to "worse" things in third world countries.

[MikeIsaj]

Shermacman,

After reading this thread I'm curious, were you there, where you anywhere near there? I ask because you are full of sharp condemnation for others who in your opinion shouldn't have an opinion because they are not there. I've been there, done that and have the paperwork and scars to show for it. In my opinion based on ten years in the Marines and fifteen in corrections, what those soldiers did was wrong. In their defense they were poorly trained and poorly supervised and heads should roll quite a way up the chain of command. Anyone who's been in combat knows that it is not a no holds barred free for all. Yes, it is violence taken to an extreme level but there are limits. These people were not in combat, the prisoners were at their mercy and they went way over the line that any reasonable person should have questioned as wrong. It's not about what the prisoners deserved. hat's not how a prison is run. It's about what your actions reflect about you and your society. We just overthrew a government that we said was inhumane. What does it make us when we stoop to the same level.

Bottom line, hey were wrong. Why? Because we are better than that!

Please respond with sane, calm counter-argument. Leave the ideological name calling and labeling in some other forum.

Semper Fi!

[dolanp]

It is one thing to take a prisoner alone into a room and sweat information out of him using methods necessary. It is an entirely different thing to group a bunch of prisoners together and haze them and sexually assault them just for the 'fun' of it. The few soldiers who do this make our armed forces look like a bunch of stupid children. The idiocy of taking pictures of this stuff baffles me as well.

[Rebar]

Stop trying to justify our mistakes by comparing them to "worse" things in third world countries
There's a world of difference between "justify" and "perspective".

I'm not justifying anything, but to make such a big deal out of a few rogue soldiers, who have been or will be punished, yet nothing out of the truly horrific prisoner treatment in many other countries, only shows you're using the incident to beat up on America.

You really don't care about prisoner treatment, only how you can use it to smear the US military and the Bush administration. China, North Korea, Cuba, any of the Middle Eastern countries, Russia, all are vastly worse than Abu Ghraib. And this mistreatment is a matter of government policy, unlike in this instance where it was a handful of stupid bored soldiers got out of hand.

The soldiers should be, and will be, punished. But using some perspective, did this incident really, objectively, needed to be made into a years long propaganda coup for the Isamofacists? The only reason it's been news for so long, is that the MSM needed something to embarrass the Bush administration with. We are at war, and the left-wing media is giving them propaganda for free, and that's the bottom line.

[dloken]

You really don't care about prisoner treatment, only how you can use it to smear the US military and the Bush administration. China, North Korea, Cuba, any of the Middle Eastern countries, Russia, all are vastly worse than Abu Ghraib. And this mistreatment is a matter of government policy, unlike in this instance where it was a handful of stupid bored soldiers got out of hand.


Ok, i'm done arguing with you since you have the comprehension skills of a potato. It isn't about smearing the US. China, North Korea, Cuba, middle eastern nations, Russia; What do those nations have in common? They're all second and third world nations or have huge crime and corruption problems. The United States as the supposed land of freedom and democracy should BE ABOVE that sort of bull????.

But using some perspective, did this incident really, objectively, needed to be made into a years long propaganda coup for the Isamofacists?

Being in the media had nothing to do with it. I'm sure word of mouth did more than enough in getting it into the hearts and minds of the Iraqi people that we're trying so hard to win. This will be remembered for years.

[Rebar]

Ok, i'm done arguing with you since you have the comprehension skills of a potato.
I called you out, you have no real answer to my points, so you resort to name calling. Typical leftist.
What do those nations have in common?
So, in your opinion, these barbaric countries aren't advanced enough to comprehend or adhere to decent conduct? You, sir, are a bigot.

[dloken]

Ooh, i'm a typical leftist... I never mentioned anything about your political ideology. With all the hate for differing view points it's no wonder i'm one of the only "leftist" gun owners here. While this forum has a lot of good information on firearms I am now loathe to send new shooters here as some of the comments I see here might just discourage them from pursuing shooting as a hobby altogether.

So, in your opinion, these barbaric countries aren't advanced enough to comprehend or adhere to decent conduct? You, sir, are a bigot.

I'm not really sure how that makes me a bigot?. Torture and barbaric treatment are common in second and third world countries. We were in a similar boat conduct wise 100-200 years ago. Hell it's been less than 150 years since we had ????ing slaves in our country.

Really, this isn't about any other country. You're just trying to weaken position by bringing up unrelated ancedotal evidence from unrelated places. Let them police their people and we'll police ours. Those involved should be and are receiving harsh penalties.

[Rebar]

With all the hate for differing view points it's no wonder i'm one of the only "leftist" gun owners here.
A) You're far from the only leftist here. Plenty of other DU trolls post here too.
B) No one's "hating" your view point, they are only challenging it, if you can't take the heat, go back to DU.
I'm not really sure how that makes me a bigot?
It makes you a bigot because you think that they are somehow incapable of civilized behavior. I for one think they are all fully capable of civilized treatment of their prisoners, they just choose not to as a matter of policy. Which you don't care about.
Really, this isn't about any other country
It is, but lets for the sake of argument, I'll say that the same or worse stuff happens every day in American prisons and jails. But that doesn't smear the US military or the Bush administration, so that's not a headline for one day, never mind the years that this one incident has been kept alive.

[Headless Thompson Gunner]

Take a step back, people. Most of you are making valid points, but you're getting lost in heat of the arguement.

Sexual abuse is wrong. Anyone perpetratig it should be strung up by the toenails. By all acounts, the prison guards who commited the acts are in the process of being duely punished. This is as it should be.

Simple common sense is enough to conclude that the commanders had no part of the "scandal". Do you really think some general or major gave the order to have prisoners stripped naked and stacked in a pyramid? Do you reallt think some colonel gave the order to have prisononers sodomized? Do you really think such orders can be passed down the chain of command without being questioned?

The intellegence people had nothing to do with this. If they wanted to coerce prisoners into giving up information they would have used much more appropriate techniques. Juvenile pranks that got out of hand (indefensible though they are) are NOT the kind of tools the CIA relies upon. See Sean Smith's post.

Politics is the only reason this "scandal" is anything more than a minor event. The media and the leftists have an anti-war/anti-Bush/anti-military agenda, and they're doing anything they can to advance it.

Objectively, Abu Ghraib has no bearing upon the war overall, nor upon the policies Bush advocates, nor upon the military at large. Objectively, Abu Ghraib warranted nothing more than a second page newspaper story about a few soldiers who acted inappropriately. Anything more than that is a poorly concealed attack on the war or the President or the military.

[Rebar]

HTG has stated my point far more clearly then I have to this point, many thanks.

[dloken]

It makes you a bigot because you think that they are somehow incapable of civilized behavior. I for one think they are all fully capable of civilized treatment of their prisoners, they just choose not to as a matter of policy. Which you don't care about.

I really don't see how you can imply this from my statements. You're just too stupid to put forth a competent argument so you resort to calling me a bigot.

The media and the leftists have an anti-war/anti-Bush/anti-military agenda, and they're doing anything they can to advance it.

:rolleyes:

Yeah, the damage it did to the Iraqi perception of us as invaders instead of liberators was a second rate story.

[Headless Thompson Gunner]

Yeah, the damage it did to the Iraqi perception of us as invaders instead of liberators was a second rate story. I'm notinterested in debating this issue. But please take a moment to consider this:

Which was it, exactly, that made us look bad?
A few miscreant soldiers who were brought to justice
OR
A frenzied media blowing the story out of proportions in a hell-bent effort to make us look bad?

[White Horseradish]

A frenzied media blowing the story out of proportions in a hell-bent effort to make us look bad?Do Iraquis watch US news networks a lot? How would media here affect opinions there more than word of mouth?

[Firethorn]

I also agree with HTG.

1. Abu Graib was bad. Maybe moreso for the publicity than what actually occured. I'm personally disappointed that I haven't heard of at least a Major or Colonel being Court Martialed.

2. Disobeying a direct order is ugly(Reason for wanting officer to be court martialed). Also, while we are trained on lawful conduct, at least for me, the training was pretty basic. I think that it's also interesting that several of those convicted were also prison guards for their civilian jobs.

3. While bad, people are being punished for it, and people are suffering worse in other areas, so why don't we spend some effort to clean our own civilian prisons up, where actual rapes occur, with the possibility of AIDS being spread?

[Rebar]

I really don't see how you can imply this from my statements.
That doesn't suprise me.
You're just too stupid to put forth a competent argument so you resort to calling me a bigot.
Yup, I'm a regular "potato", according to some folks.
Yeah, the damage it did to the Iraqi perception of us as invaders instead of liberators was a second rate story.
Compared to Saddam's prisons, yes.

[RevDisk]

Compared to Saddam's prisons, yes.

We are either an Army of occupation, or an Army of liberation.

If we are occupying their country, we own it. It's under our control, and we can do as we please. Thus we are free to dismiss illegal activities done by soldiers and chuckle at it.

If we are liberating their country, we're guests of the people of Iraq. We're merely there to help the Iraqi people get back on their feet. We must play according to the rules of our hosts. If they have traditions, social norms, etc, we must honor them. Thus we must come down hard on soldiers who break the law and abuse/rape persons under their charge.

If we are liberating their country, the ill behavior of the previous regime cannot be justification for the ill behavior of US forces. Foreign countries ill behavior also cannot be an excuse. If we want the moral high ground, we must take the good and the bad that comes with it.


Bush claims we are the second type of Army, not the first. Can't be both. Sorry, I don't make national policy, I just enforce it. If you dislike this fact, please take it up with Bush and Congress.

[Blackburn]

Revdisk, I think your well thought out post will go over people's heads here. The moment you catch them on something they are incorrect about they will immediately pretend that it never happened and call you a leftist :p

(Ironically that's a prized tactic of commie leftists. Le sigh.)

[Rebar]

Revdisk, I think your well thought out post will go over people's heads here.
That is not the case. Quite the opposite, what we've been saying has gone over your heads.

No one is saying that the soldiers involved shouldn't have been punished. They deserve it, and are getting it. What we are saying is that it's been overblown in the press, a classic "mountain over a molehill", and there was, and is, no need for this to have been front-page news for years now. All this coverage does is sap the will of our Iraqi allies, and gives comfort and encouragement to our enemies.

[White Horseradish]

All this coverage does is sap the will of our Iraqi allies, and gives comfort and encouragement to our enemies.Iraquis read our papers?

[Firethorn]

WH, actually, yes in many cases. Don't forget that the terrorist groups will also distribute stories that are to their benefit. Our trumpeting it only makes it easier for them.

I will also note that investegations were proceeding in military channels, and charges prepared before the story ever broke.

[Rebar]

Iraquis read our papers?
Maybe.

But they do get satellite TV, and watch CNN, and other news channels.

[Nehemiah Scudder]

Even if there were a media blackout.

(Which as far as TV is concerned there is.)

It'd still get out. Because we're forced to either kill our prisoners (I don't recommend that), or let them go eventually.

[Rebar]

or let them go eventually.
I think that the average Iraqi would just shrug their shoulders and say, Saddam was worse. It's the constant harping of the media, blowing it all out of proportion, that's causing the trouble. And drawing in foreign fighters.

[Nehemiah Scudder]

The foriegn fighters would be coming anyways, IMO. There's been a lot of anti-American sentiment in that region for whatever the reasons, and we gave them a short trip and a big excuse to get packing.

In my mind, you can't play to the fanatics, because there's no winning them over. You have to watch out that you don't start making people who wouldn't get involved, to start getting involved and supporting the insurgents.

The culture is different than ours, but not THAT different.

[dloken]

We are either an Army of occupation, or an Army of liberation.

This is what i've been trying to say.



Our actions at Abu Gharib pushed a lot of what we in the gun community like to call fence sitters into the wrong side.

[dasmi]

I really don't see how you can imply this from my statements. You're just too stupid to put forth a competent argument so you resort to calling me a bigot.
And you resort to calling him stupid. Pot calling the kettle black my friend.