Iraqi Prisoners Abused, Humiliated, Tortured.

[hardheadjarhead]

Well, its documented.

American soldiers have abused Iraqi POW's with electric shock and other horrific methods...and they were idiotic enough to pose for pictures and video while doing it.

Its been on the evening news. Even the conservative "Drudge Report" is playing it up. The Arab stations, of course, have jumped on it.

This is going to:

Hurt the war effort.

Ruin troop morale.

Ruin the morale on the home front.

Get American hostages/prisoners killed at worst, abused at best.

Be one of the greatest recruiting incentives for future anti-American terrorists.

Do irreparable damage to Arab/US relations...which are rotten to begin with.

Make us look terrible in the eyes of our allies and the rest of the world.

Give our critics abroad and at home justification for saying "I told you so," in their efforts at demonizing us as a nation.


Geeeeezzzzzzz, whadda mess.

Regards,


Steve

[Touch Of Death]

A picture is worth a thousand words, and there are quite a few pictures. The President will be quite busy over the next few months.
Sean

[Makalakumu]

The Arab World is on fire because of this. It has been blazing on Al-jazeera all day today. Iraqis are claiming that Bush is no better then Saddam. Hopefully, this is an isolated incident. Hopefully the good soldiers attempting to secure "democracy" for Iraq can overcome this negative incident. That is my optimistic side speaking. My cynical side is waiting for more information...

Is this going to become a new Mai Lae?

upnorthkyosa

[Touch Of Death]

The Arab World is on fire because of this. It has been blazing on Al-jazeera all day today. Iraqis are claiming that Bush is no better then Saddam. Hopefully, this is an isolated incident. Hopefully the good soldiers attempting to secure "democracy" for Iraq can overcome this negative incident. That is my optimistic side speaking. My cynical side is waiting for more information...

Is this going to become a new Mai Lae?

upnorthkyosaThose soldiers did more to undermine the war effort than Kerry and Kusinich combined.
Sean (www.iemat.com)

[Tgace]

http://story.news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=story&cid=514&e=1&u=/ap/20040430/ap_on_re_mi_ea/mideast_prisoner_abuse_12


While wrong, illegal and worthy of punishment....there was no "electrocution" and no physical injury (attributed to US troops. Aparently the Brits have an accusation). There should be, and looks like will be court martials all the way up the chain of command to include the General in charge of the camp. Mai Lai? Hardly.

[Makalakumu]

http://story.news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=story&cid=514&e=1&u=/ap/20040430/ap_on_re_mi_ea/mideast_prisoner_abuse_12


While wrong, illegal and worthy of punishment....there was no "electrocution" and no physical injury (attributed to US troops. Aparently the Brits have an accusation). There should be, and looks like will be court martials all the way up the chain of command to include the General in charge of the camp. Mai Lai? Hardly.

What happens in a court martial?

[theletch1]

What happens in a court martial?
It's very much like a civilian trial but without all those silly rights of the accused things. The result can be anything from loss of rank/pay, incarceration, forced retirement, dishonorable discharge or (although not in this case) execution.

[Ping898]

What happens in a court martial?
Basically, they hold a military trial, and decide whether to discharge a soldier, dishonorably or otherwise. If found guilty they can get get kicked out, have to pay punitive damages, be demoted, get jail time, loose their pension...things like that....depends how serious the crime and what charges are being brought. Least this is my understanding of them.

Got to love JAG :)

[loki09789]

The Arab World is on fire because of this. It has been blazing on Al-jazeera all day today. Iraqis are claiming that Bush is no better then Saddam. Hopefully, this is an isolated incident. Hopefully the good soldiers attempting to secure "democracy" for Iraq can overcome this negative incident. That is my optimistic side speaking. My cynical side is waiting for more information...

Is this going to become a new Mai Lae?

upnorthkyosa

I believe that in each case, Me Lai, Kosovo, and others that the troops were held accountable and punitive actions were taken. Time in Leavenworth was issued and served. These incidences are horrible, but the fact that they will be tried and punished for it, that there are things like the Geneva Code, and Laws of Land warfare would indicate that the US military reaction to such behavior is intolerance and disapproval - not cheering and joining the street dance around the corpses.

THese guys have really messed up, will be held accountable. Unfortunately, one of these incidents wipes out the thousands of little acts of humanity from our troops that never seem to make into the media.

[Makalakumu]

I believe that in each case, Me Lai, Kosovo, and others that the troops were held accountable and punitive actions were taken. Time in Leavenworth was issued and served. These incidences are horrible, but the fact that they will be tried and punished for it, that there are things like the Geneva Code, and Laws of Land warfare would indicate that the US military reaction to such behavior is intolerance and disapproval - not cheering and joining the street dance around the corpses.

THese guys have really messed up, will be held accountable. Unfortunately, one of these incidents wipes out the thousands of little acts of humanity from our troops that never seem to make into the media.

War in of itself is such a negative and inhumane thing. I think that examples of people acting brutally toward each other are what people what to see when it comes to war. There is a level of hatred that rides just beneath the surface of any war. How else can you justify killing someone because someone ordered you too? Every once and a while this hatred spews out in various ways...this is one example.

[loki09789]

War in of itself is such a negative and inhumane thing. I think that examples of people acting brutally toward each other are what people what to see when it comes to war. There is a level of hatred that rides just beneath the surface of any war. How else can you justify killing someone because someone ordered you too? Every once and a while this hatred spews out in various ways...this is one example.

I was trained to take those orders and never really hated the individual I might have to shoot, in conventional warfare the pace is too hectic for hatred or emotions to be registered in general.

I can justify such actions as swearing to an oath, to living by a code that doesn't make me the center of the universe and being willing to be part of something larger than myself, based on ideals that I agree with and am willing to stand up for.

This is not an indicator of universal US military hatred for another as much as it is misdirected power usage/abuse, the surfacing of personal issues that these individuals brought with them to their training and service from their DNA/Nurture pre-military, and possibly a lack of adequate supervision to monitor troop morale, welfare and mission readiness.

As a teacher, you should know that trainees are not empty vessels that we or in this case the military machine fills with stuff. They bring personality, experience and character (for good or bad) with them. Contrary to the popular belief that you loose your 'self' through the service and have no sense of free will left, you are REQUIRED to adhere to the basic Corps/Army values even to the point of disobeying orders if they are in violation of those values, the Geneva convention and the laws of land warfare.

[rmcrobertson]

"Silly rights of the accused things?"

Uh...seems to me that if there were one thread on which such a comment would be best avoided....

[theletch1]

"Silly rights of the accused things?"

Uh...seems to me that if there were one thread on which such a comment would be best avoided....
Yes, Robert, you have a good point. My response was targeted solely at the court martial question and not at the thread as a whole. I apologize for my insensitive remarks. :asian:

[marshallbd]

What happens in a court martial?Acourt martial is very similar to civilian trials but they use the Uniform Code of Military Justice that is written in the form of articles covering things such as dereliction of duty, indecent acts with another person, Conduct unbecoming and many other categories. ( I mentioned those because an article I read stated those would be some of the charges).... They (the accused) would be judge by a "Courts Martial" which is similar to a jury trial with members of the military acting as the jury. (The Jury is usually even officer to enlisted for an enlisted persons trial but usuall all officers for an officers trial) The TV show JAG (though highly exagerated and dramatized) pretty accurately depicts a "Courts Martial" trial almost every episode.... :asian:

[marshallbd]

you are REQUIRED to adhere to the basic Corps/Army values even to the point of disobeying orders if they are in violation of those values, the Geneva convention and the laws of land warfare.Hence the term "LAWFUL ORDER" is used as in....
"I do hereby solemly swear to obey the lawful orders of the President of the United States and those appointed over me" :asian:

[Cobra]

Well, its documented.

American soldiers have abused Iraqi POW's with electric shock and other horrific methods...and they were idiotic enough to pose for pictures and video while doing it.

Its been on the evening news. Even the conservative "Drudge Report" is playing it up. The Arab stations, of course, have jumped on it.

This is going to:

Hurt the war effort.

Ruin troop morale.

Ruin the morale on the home front.

Get American hostages/prisoners killed at worst, abused at best.

Be one of the greatest recruiting incentives for future anti-American terrorists.

Do irreparable damage to Arab/US relations...which are rotten to begin with.

Make us look terrible in the eyes of our allies and the rest of the world.

Give our critics abroad and at home justification for saying "I told you so," in their efforts at demonizing us as a nation.


Geeeeezzzzzzz, whadda mess.

Regards,


Steve
Hardheadjarhead, abused? Look bad to the rest of the world? Hah! Those Siddom Husein supporters deserved it. They have done much more worse things to the Iraqis that not even Hitler would imagine.

[rmcrobertson]

Dear "cobra:"

I see that the considerabel majority of posters on this theread get the concept. As for your post---vell, nothink to say but, "Javohl, mein herr."

Practicality uber alles. Hey, let's open kampfs. That'll learn 'em.

Last time I checked, we're supposed to be better than them. Not the same, not worse, not eye-for-an-eye--better, in terms of morality and action.

Never fails to amaze me, that some folks can't come up to the moral standards laid out in, say, "X-Men."

We're supposed to be better than those murderous, hating thugs. Do keep that in mind, eh?

[Tgace]

We are "better than them" because our military does things like this (suspensions/investigations/court martials)...instead of rewarding the wrong doers like Sadams Regime probably would have done...the military I experienced would never tolerate stuff like this once it was discovered.



By DAVID DISHNEAU, Associated Press Writer

CRESAPTOWN, Md. - The chief of the U.S. Army Reserve condemned the abusive treatment of Iraqi war prisoners Saturday and said he has ordered a study of whether reservists are sufficiently trained in ethical conduct and how to treat prisoners.

Following a meeting with families of the reserve unit at the center of the investigation, Lt. Gen. James R. Helmly said photographs of naked inmates forced to assume humiliating positions beside grinning military police reservists "go against the grain of everything America's Army stands for."

Helmly, commander of 1.1 million reservists, said that if the allegations against six reservists are true, "it undermines our values of respect, dignity and honor, and we hold those values deeply."

The reservists, members of the 372nd Military Police Company of Cresaptown, have been charged with crimes including dereliction of duty, cruelty, assault and indecent acts.

Their boss, Brig. Gen. Janis Karpinski, commander of the 800th Military Police Brigade, and at least seven others have been suspended from their duties at the Abu Ghraib prison near Baghdad, according to the U.S. military.

The New Yorker magazine obtained an Army report that said Iraqi detainees at the prison were subject to "sadistic, blatant and wanton criminal abuses."

Some of the family members said after the closed meeting with Helmly that they worried about their loved ones' safety because the outrage that the pictures, which first aired Wednesday on the CBS program "60 Minutes II," have provoked in the Arab world.

"We were notified that the same pictures that were used on "60 Minutes" now are being displayed on all Iraqi television programs, which probably puts our soldiers at greater risk," said Lora Maddas, whose cousin, Russell Gibbs, is a unit member but was not charged.

Jennifer Bird, 23, said her husband, Spc. Rodney Bird, told her about the investigation months ago. He is not among those charged.

"I think it's awful," she said. "I think it makes them all look bad."

Army Reserve spokesman Al Schilf said questions from the approximately 90 family members at the meeting mainly concerned the unit's extended deployment through early September. About 130 soldiers in the unit had already left Iraq (news - web sites) and were preparing to return home last month when their active duty was extended.

Earlier Saturday, the father of one accused reservist, Staff Sgt. Ivan L. "Chip" Frederick II, told NBC's "Today" show that he didn't believe the allegations.

"None of the photos that I've seen has shown my son abusing anybody, which I don't think he ever would," said Ivan L. "Red" Frederick.

President Bush (news - web sites) has condemned the mistreatment, saying he shared "a deep disgust that those prisoners were treated the way they were treated."

[Cobra]

Dear "cobra:"

I see that the considerabel majority of posters on this theread get the concept. As for your post---vell, nothink to say but, "Javohl, mein herr."

Practicality uber alles. Hey, let's open kampfs. That'll learn 'em.

Last time I checked, we're supposed to be better than them. Not the same, not worse, not eye-for-an-eye--better, in terms of morality and action.

Never fails to amaze me, that some folks can't come up to the moral standards laid out in, say, "X-Men."

We're supposed to be better than those murderous, hating thugs. Do keep that in mind, eh?
It is not the case of abusing, just bringing up the topic is pointless. Should we punish torture prisoner unhumanly? No. But if something like that happens, it isn't worth bringing up considering the rotten things thay did. It is like going to war. If you go to war, innocent people will get killed even on the opposing side (like Afganistan for example). But compared to the people they attaked, it isn't worth saying cause lives has already been los on the attackers side. Call it casualties of war. These arn't even casualties. These are low life scum who tortures their own people for fun.

[theletch1]

Cobra, you are correct in that civilians are killed in combat. It's called collateral damage. It's also one of the reasons that smart munitions have been created and improved upon. Torturing prisoners is NOT collateral damage. What these reservist did is inexcusable for a member of the U.S. military. If a police officer in this country were to toruture someone who had been arrested in this country for a violent crime it would (and has) cause such an outrage that the entire country would be up in arms. This situation is not much different. We are not in this fight to "teach someone a lesson" and military police are not there to punish anyone. The mission of the military policeman is much the same as the civilian policeman. They are there to guard prisoners from escape and from harm while in custody. By not only failing in their duty to protect the prisoners but harming them they have pushed the level of animosity against the coalition forces in the region beyond the breaking point. Any humanitrian services that the islamic people have seen from us will now be replaced or at least tempered with the visions of tortured prisoners.

[Matt Stone]

I am a military paralegal NCO working in the Judge Advocate General's Corps of the US Army. The collective take here on what constitutes a trial by court-martial (which just means "military court") is entirely incorrect.

The Uniform Code of Military Justice (UCMJ) provides the accused with all the same rights that civilian law does, and is more efficient in that we don't wait years to go to trial. We don't stand around wasting valuable docket time with endless delays by both Government and Defense. Certainly, delays are allowed for good cause, but continual delays that do nothing more than delay (they serve no actual purpose other than keep the accused from trial) are absent.

The UCMJ's punitive articles (section IV of the Code) outline offenses under the code that are unique to military service - absence without leave, failure to repair (meaning, essentially, failing to go to work on time and showing up late), going from your appointed place of duty (leaving work early), insubordination, striking a superior, et cetera. If these were civilian offenses, how many of you would be guilty? Probably more than the civilian sector has time to prosecute. But these offenses have specific military bearing - not being where you are needed, when you are needed there; running from conflict; disrupting the good order and discipline of the unit, etc.

A court-martial works just like a civilian trial. First there may be an Article 32 hearing (a grand jury hearing) to determine the facts of the case and to determine, if it needs to be tried, what level of court it needs to be tried at (different courts-martial have different limitations on sentencing). Then there is voir dire and challenge for cause, then providence on the pleas, then the Government presents their case, then Defense, etc. again.

After trial, appellate matters are submitted to the Army Court of Criminal Appeals, and the record is reviewed at that level. Depending on the caseload and the nature of the record being reviewed, within a few months or even up to a year or more later, the appellate findings will be announced. Then the trial is complete.

Sentences can be very minor (even at high level courts-martial), or very severe. As punishment runs consecutively, not concurrently, multiple offenses net you more time in prison. Confinement automatically gets you the maximum reduction (demotion), and your pay and allowances may be forfeited in their entirety.

If anyone has any questions, please feel free to ask away...

And JAG, though it does depict some aspects of courts-martial properly, is a crap show. Its hard enough to get attorneys to make their own photocopies, so I really doubt they fly F-15s and fight hand to hand to apprehend suspects... :shrug:

[Cobra]

Cobra, you are correct in that civilians are killed in combat. It's called collateral damage. It's also one of the reasons that smart munitions have been created and improved upon. Torturing prisoners is NOT collateral damage. What these reservist did is inexcusable for a member of the U.S. military. If a police officer in this country were to toruture someone who had been arrested in this country for a violent crime it would (and has) cause such an outrage that the entire country would be up in arms. This situation is not much different. We are not in this fight to "teach someone a lesson" and military police are not there to punish anyone. The mission of the military policeman is much the same as the civilian policeman. They are there to guard prisoners from escape and from harm while in custody. By not only failing in their duty to protect the prisoners but harming them they have pushed the level of animosity against the coalition forces in the region beyond the breaking point. Any humanitrian services that the islamic people have seen from us will now be replaced or at least tempered with the visions of tortured prisoners.
It is not a case of punishing or the torture. It happens, it is war. Emotions are flying everywhere. It is understandable for the officers to that. We can't imagine what he is going through. But to bring it up as a crime against the United States and saying that the US is a bad country like those like the French is not good. It happens, it is war. And to feel bad for those tortured prisoners is bad itself, it is like being sorry for Joseph Stalin, despite the millions he has killed. Huesain and his men are no different than Stalin. If Iraq had the amount of people Russia did, there would be similar numbers of death.

[Makalakumu]

I was trained to take those orders and never really hated the individual I might have to shoot, in conventional warfare the pace is too hectic for hatred or emotions to be registered in general.

I can justify such actions as swearing to an oath, to living by a code that doesn't make me the center of the universe and being willing to be part of something larger than myself, based on ideals that I agree with and am willing to stand up for.

This is not an indicator of universal US military hatred for another as much as it is misdirected power usage/abuse, the surfacing of personal issues that these individuals brought with them to their training and service from their DNA/Nurture pre-military, and possibly a lack of adequate supervision to monitor troop morale, welfare and mission readiness.

As a teacher, you should know that trainees are not empty vessels that we or in this case the military machine fills with stuff. They bring personality, experience and character (for good or bad) with them. Contrary to the popular belief that you loose your 'self' through the service and have no sense of free will left, you are REQUIRED to adhere to the basic Corps/Army values even to the point of disobeying orders if they are in violation of those values, the Geneva convention and the laws of land warfare.

Your sense of self is subverted by your Oath. You said it yourself in your statements above. Ask any good soldier over their what he/she is doing and why they are doing it and they will phrase an answer that looks something like..."Saddam Hussain's regime was an "evil" regime that raped and tortured and terrorized the people of Iraq. We are giving our lives to help free this people from this horror."

This statement isn't "wrong" in a historical sense. In fact, from a moral point of view, the statement provides a moral justification for the brutality of war...It is a blanket statement that they hold in their minds everytime they pull the trigger. The stereotype justifies the violence. This is the same type of mentality that hate groups use to justify violence. And I'm not saying that the US military is a hate group. I am saying that hate (moral justification) makes brutality easier.

We sure do hate those things that Saddam Huissain and his followers did. Yet we cannot forget that these people are also human. They have families and lives just as the German, Japanese, and American people who committed war atrocities also did. War, is by its very nature brutal. Hatred makes brutality possible.

Paul, as a teacher, you have to have seen how the effects of a "culture" have over ridden good sense and morality...

upnorthkyosa

[rmcrobertson]

I honestly don't know which repells me more: these loonbox statements that, "they deserve it," or these, "hey, I'M not in the slightest way responsible for what my government/my society does, because even if I profit by the exploitation of others I don't pay any attention to that, I just assume a position of moral superiority," viewpoints.

[loki09789]

Paul, as a teacher, you have to have seen how the effects of a "culture" have over ridden good sense and morality...

upnorthkyosa

And as a teacher, the fact that Nazi Germany was based on a regime of racial purity to justify itself and sanctioned atrocities is clear to me. The fact that Imperial Japan followed a dogmatic idea that the Emperor was akin to a god and they were also a superior race is clear to me as justification for treating their enemies as vermin. SHussein was a criminal who found his way to power and used wmd on his own people based on a mentallity of tribal/racial superiority.

I think the race issue is hard to apply here when the servicemen and women fighting because they swore the oath, in a mission to establish stability and the opportunity for democratic representation of all Iraqis (we will see if this really comes to fruition, but that is the goal) come from a variety of 'races' and backgrounds.

Again, I come back to the point that the societal reaction to these atrocities is the indicator to the difference. Ours: horrified (except in the case of Cobra - who I don't agree with at all on this one).

Thiers: applause.

The common soldier doesn't quote political rhetoric like a mantra with each round, like I said there is no real time for such thought.

I find this whole idea that there is a possibility of no cultural influence, that there is no moral justification for violence/war except hatred and that such things are inherently 'wrong' regardless of the charter or base values that we use to govern our choices.... from the practitioner and teacher of a militaristic martial art with 'cultural' overtones all over it.....

Upnorth, the concept of good sense and morallity is a product of culture -as a teacher/scientist are you claiming that there is an inherently natural 'good' and 'moral' quality of man that has been over ruled by cultural indoctrinization?

These acts of torture and abuse are immoral, war is brutal but in any natural process something has to die in order for something else to live. Humans are the only ones who really spend so much time debating the reality of that as we devour dead plants, animals and natural resources to keep ourselves alive.

Do we sit back and ooze so much empathetic grooviness that we don't stand for anything? I doubt that you would be empathizing with someone attacking your wife or children or yourself in the process of a third party involvement. You didn't speak too empathetically when you were peeling that guy off your wife and child during the aforementioned tour. You actually were insulted that he didn't seem to empathize with you and your family.

Do we sit back and let the humanity of the wife/child abuser next door keep us from intervening when he is choking them in front of us? No. We live in a real world where philosophical realizations do not exist in a vacuum and they clash and we have to decide how we are going to balance them in the reality of the time.

I think that those men and women squeezing the trigger for real, dealing with the aftermath of watching friends and enemies die have a better sense of the humanity of all people. Otherwise, why would some who have been activated to go back be refusing?

[MisterMike]

Link to details on the Humiliation:

http://www.newyorker.com/fact/content/?040510fa_fact

[michaeledward]

Link to details on the Humiliation:

http://www.newyorker.com/fact/content/?040510fa_fact
Several of the images are available on this site by following the links on the right side of the page.

[Makalakumu]

And as a teacher, the fact that Nazi Germany was based on a regime of racial purity to justify itself and sanctioned atrocities is clear to me. The fact that Imperial Japan followed a dogmatic idea that the Emperor was akin to a god and they were also a superior race is clear to me as justification for treating their enemies as vermin. SHussein was a criminal who found his way to power and used wmd on his own people based on a mentallity of tribal/racial superiority.

Please note the boldfaced statement.


I think the race issue is hard to apply here when the servicemen and women fighting because they swore the oath, in a mission to establish stability and the opportunity for democratic representation of all Iraqis (we will see if this really comes to fruition, but that is the goal) come from a variety of 'races' and backgrounds.

Hate has many flavors. It doesn't always have to do with race. Or even religion. "SHussein was a criminal who found his way to power and used wmd on his own people based on a mentallity of tribal/racial superiority" (I will extend this by inserting "and all who followed him") Now you have a moral justification to kill massive amounts of people.


Again, I come back to the point that the societal reaction to these atrocities is the indicator to the difference. Ours: horrified (except in the case of Cobra - who I don't agree with at all on this one).

Thiers: applause..

Acts like the ones in the photos are atypical of what is going on in Iraq (as far as we know). As far as brutality is concerned, it is just a brick in the pyramid of war. People will take the stereotype too far. They will say, "SHussein was a criminal who found his way to power and used wmd on his own people based on a mentallity of tribal/racial superiority" (I will extend this by inserting "and all who followed him") and then do something like what we have seen because "they deserved it". This is the essence of the hatred I'm talking about boiling to the surface.

Now comes the dangerous part. If you agree that they didn't deserve it, then you agree that their is a limit to the amount of brutality you would accept. My question is this, why would you accept any?


The common soldier doesn't quote political rhetoric like a mantra with each round, like I said there is no real time for such thought...

Not with every round. That is instinct. You train your instincts with your mantra though.


I find this whole idea that there is a possibility of no cultural influence, that there is no moral justification for violence/war except hatred and that such things are inherently 'wrong' regardless of the charter or base values that we use to govern our choices.... from the practitioner and teacher of a militaristic martial art with 'cultural' overtones all over it.

There are three types of violence, each with different motivations. Violence in war is one type of violence and it is motivated by hate. Hate is an evolutionary tool that allows one to commit brutal acts. It is, in its essence, a throwback to xenophobia and tribalism. I believe that their is a genetic prediliction among humans to hate each other - especially when resources are scarce. Scarce times create war as groups of people compete and all sorts of insane justifications of war are rammed down the tribes throats. The easier it is for a tribe to accept those justifications, the more successful that tribe will be at war.


Upnorth, the concept of good sense and morallity is a product of culture -as a teacher/scientist are you claiming that there is an inherently natural 'good' and 'moral' quality of man that has been over ruled by cultural indoctrinization?

I am very wary of absolutes. I don't know if I could make such a claim. As far as indoctrination is concerned. We are the products of our environment. From a very young age we are taught the basics of fighting and dying.


These acts of torture and abuse are immoral, war is brutal but in any natural process something has to die in order for something else to live. Humans are the only ones who really spend so much time debating the reality of that as we devour dead plants, animals and natural resources to keep ourselves alive.

True.


Do we sit back and ooze so much empathetic grooviness that we don't stand for anything? I doubt that you would be empathizing with someone attacking your wife or children or yourself in the process of a third party involvement. You didn't speak too empathetically when you were peeling that guy off your wife and child during the aforementioned tour. You actually were insulted that he didn't seem to empathize with you and your family.

Do we sit back and let the humanity of the wife/child abuser next door keep us from intervening when he is choking them in front of us? No. We live in a real world where philosophical realizations do not exist in a vacuum and they clash and we have to decide how we are going to balance them in the reality of the time.

When someone attacks me or my family, I need no one to tell me who the enemy is. And they might not even be the "enemy" you think they are. Don't confuse the issue. Self defense is not about hatred. Self defense is about a natural need to protect oneself and ones family from direct danger.

This can transform into something else entirely when the danger becomes "percieved", though. Now it is fear and fear leads to hate and hate leads to suffering (war)...didn't someone famous say something like this.


I think that those men and women squeezing the trigger for real, dealing with the aftermath of watching friends and enemies die have a better sense of the humanity of all people. Otherwise, why would some who have been activated to go back be refusing?

As long as one can convince enough to people to accept at least a modicum of brutality, then the killing goes on. I think that some people learned that their tolerance levels were a lot lower then they though. They were naturally selected out of the population (their own brains and perhaps their genes being the tool for this).

In closing, my personal philosophy concerning war is as follows "The moment you abrogate your right to decide who the enemy is, you turn yourself into an instrument of hate. I will never do this. I will always be responsible for my ability to do violence to another human being."

[loki09789]

As long as one can convince enough to people to accept at least a modicum of brutality, then the killing goes on. I think that some people learned that their tolerance levels were a lot lower then they though. They were naturally selected out of the population (their own brains and perhaps their genes being the tool for this).

In closing, my personal philosophy concerning war is as follows "The moment you abrogate your right to decide who the enemy is, you turn yourself into an instrument of hate. I will never do this. I will always be responsible for my ability to do violence to another human being."

Aren't you, by virtue of your role as teacher of martial arts, convincing people to accept a modicum of brutality? Aren't you indoctrinating others into what ever cultural values/criteria for what is morally acceptable levels of violence?

We have differed on these issues before. Your view from the outside is loaded with assumptions: some of which are that soldiers 'subvert' themselves and any morallity, that soldiers are motivated by hate, that they don't continue to think for themselves.... not true on any of them.

When I get the chance I have to paste in a sample of the laws of land warfare and elements of leadership training that is practiced in the services. If anything the military, at least here in the USA, promotes a certain amount of individualism to foster innovation. During WWII the hedge trimmer that was mounted on the front of tanks was the idea of a lower enlisted man who had the opportunity to contribute his idea. German soldiers of the day, because they were really the model of compartmentalized extreme discipline wouldn't even dream of fixing their own vehicles if they broke down - that was someone elses job. How many military coups have we had in our own country in modern history? None. One of the contributing factors is the morallity and encouragement to evaluate the lawfulness and morallity of orders.

I do concede that there are militaries and nations that have motivated troops with open hatred and have given examples of them. I do not think, based on my personal experience, that the US military values/doctrine is to encourage hatred first, that is the point of the professionalism and discipline in military training. Professionals act like professionals, according to the modern military image of soldier/sailor/Marine/airman/coast guard that means that you are motivated by loyalty to your fellows, your country and the values that they present.

We will go round and round about this Upnorth, I am done.

[Tgace]

Sound like a good rationalization for never standing up for anything...or a rationalization for never having to serve (i.e. put your life on the line) your country. I happen to like the nation I live in and (by and large) the people I call "countrymen". And I was proud to serve for them.

IMHO...I believe that the people who yell the loudest about the military being nothing but hatemongering bloodthirsty killers are sublimating some sort of inadequacy issues.

Im with you too bud...unsubscribed.

[Gentle Fist]

AOL had a link on the welcome page that advertised these photos as a hoax...or did I imagine this???

[arnisador]

Well, its documented.

American soldiers have abused Iraqi POW's with electric shock and other horrific methods...and they were idiotic enough to pose for pictures and video while doing it.

Its been on the evening news. Even the conservative "Drudge Report" is playing it up. The Arab stations, of course, have jumped on it.

This is going to:

Hurt the war effort.

Ruin troop morale.

Ruin the morale on the home front.

Get American hostages/prisoners killed at worst, abused at best.

Be one of the greatest recruiting incentives for future anti-American terrorists.

Do irreparable damage to Arab/US relations...which are rotten to begin with.

Make us look terrible in the eyes of our allies and the rest of the world.

Give our critics abroad and at home justification for saying "I told you so," in their efforts at demonizing us as a nation.
I hate to quote a whole post, but this bears repeating.

I am embarrassed.

Blame will be defused--"The interrogators asked us to keep them edgy, etc."--but I hope people are severely punished for it.

When I taught at West Point, the My Lai documentary ran on every TV in a classroom all the time, it seemed. I assume enlisted personnel also are taught about this? How is the message not sinking in?

I'm disgusted. I'm not surprised, as things like this always happen in war--but I'm sickened and sad nonetheless.

[michaeledward]

AOL had a link on the welcome page that advertised these photos as a hoax...or did I imagine this???

There are two issues in the news right now. The photos that have been called a hoax concern an image of British Soldiers and were published in a British newspaper. The photos in question also have soldiers treating prisoners in an inhumane manner. The photos have been reported as a hoax based on the style of uniform and weapon the soldiers had in the photos; currently, they are not standard issue for soldiers serving in Iraq.

The issue concerning Iraqi prisoners in Baghdad is not a hoax. At minimum 6 soldiers in Iraq are being disciplined. One additional soldier was transferred between the time of the photos and the news story breaking. (She is the brunette woman with a cigarette, pointing at a hooded prisoner's genitals - apparently, she got pregnant and was transferred back to Fort Bragg).

[Makalakumu]

Aren't you, by virtue of your role as teacher of martial arts, convincing people to accept a modicum of brutality? Aren't you indoctrinating others into what ever cultural values/criteria for what is morally acceptable levels of violence?

I think that my view of violence is a paradox. It is something I keep in mind...this idea that "peace is the only perfect self defense" and when I break that peace it is truly a dark day. Part of this philosophy means being reflective about your actions. When the peace is broken, you know you have failed somehow. Examine how this happened and try not to let it happen again. This constant struggle is what I teach my martial arts students. A struggle for peace and a fall into brutality as an absolute last resort and that resort is only to deal with the brutality that others thrust upon you. This is my definition of violence self defense.

It differs when it comes to war. War is about groups of people acting in brutal ways toward one another. This violence is motivated by an emotion that I cannot find any other word but "hate" to describe. I think that you are seeing hatred only through the eyes of race/religion. Hate can encompass ideas. We do not like the way that SHussien and his people treated the majority of citizens in Iraq. So we use those feelings to justify our actions. Is there a better word to describe this? Perhaps I have mislabled this emotional justification? Perhaps hate is too stong of a word for someone who has served and has had to justify their actions in a similar manner? What would you call this process?

TGace

My insistance on peace does not mean that I can't serve my country. I serve my country better then a cruise missile. Every year, hundreds of students come through my classes prepared with the scientific knowledge to help them become successful citizens. A cruise missile, on the other hand, can kill hundreds with a single use. Those people are gone forever. Did you know that a cruise missile makes 10 times as much as I do? What would happen if we reversed this priority? If we valued life over death at a rate of 10 to 1? Is my insistance for this somehow inadequate? I think not.

[MisterMike]

I'm just amazed at the level of disgust over pictures, while there wasn't a sliver of concern (relatively) over the burnt bodies hanging from a bridge.

Good to see which side people are on.

Like that cafe over in Seattle...

[someguy]

There dead jim
so there is less reason to be concerned about helping them right now. Also the people who did it aren't our people. We can't control them well sort of but I don't feel like going to indepth into anything right now.

[loki09789]

I think that my view of violence is a paradox. It is something I keep in mind...this idea that "peace is the only perfect self defense" and when I break that peace it is truly a dark day. Part of this philosophy means being reflective about your actions. When the peace is broken, you know you have failed somehow. Examine how this happened and try not to let it happen again. This constant struggle is what I teach my martial arts students. A struggle for peace and a fall into brutality as an absolute last resort and that resort is only to deal with the brutality that others thrust upon you. This is my definition of violence self defense.

It differs when it comes to war. War is about groups of people acting in brutal ways toward one another. This violence is motivated by an emotion that I cannot find any other word but "hate" to describe. I think that you are seeing hatred only through the eyes of race/religion. Hate can encompass ideas. We do not like the way that SHussien and his people treated the majority of citizens in Iraq. So we use those feelings to justify our actions. Is there a better word to describe this? Perhaps I have mislabled this emotional justification? Perhaps hate is too stong of a word for someone who has served and has had to justify their actions in a similar manner? What would you call this process?
.

No justification for my action needed, at least not to anyone but myself.

But it is interesting that on one level (the level of violence that you are training in) you can justify it's practice with philosophy. At a level that you can't control you focus on the act as inherently brutal with an assumed 'emotion' that you term hatred. Violence, at any level and at any scale is a choice that you have to justify as morally sound.

At a personal level, that is the state penal laws that cover force and deadly force, personal ethos and social morals.

At a national level, it is based on the values and morals that the charter for said country and the current policies that are in place have identified.

On a personal level, you might say that we 'hate' the idea of losing your life and that of your loved ones so much that you would pre-meditate and rehearse violent behavior to be prepared for just such an occasion.

Or, the way I see it, you could say that at every level there is a moral responsibility to be versed in the necessary skills of interaction with the other entities you will be dealing with (whether a person or a nation) from humanitarian behaviors (personal level: charity work, volunteerism, education... National level: relief support, education, social services) at one end of the spectrum all the way to violent behaviors (personal level: self defense, third party involvement, stopping a drunken friend from driving, corporal punishment... National level: military defensive/offensive military forces in a state of readiness). The choice to engage any or all of the possible responses within the range is always 'justification' whether it is humanitarian or violent. It is no more 'justifiable' to fail to act if the situation warrants than it is 'justifiable' to act when the situation doesn't warrant it.

The adeptness to do any/all of these things well so that you either maximize the results of humanitarian acts or minimize the damage of violent acts is responsibility. Why else is martial arts philosophy loaded with moral quandries that usually boil down to responsibility and commitment to training your mind as well as your body?

These individuals acted unprofessionally, outside of their sworn oaths and accepted duties. They will be held accountable.

[Makalakumu]

I'm just amazed at the level of disgust over pictures, while there wasn't a sliver of concern (relatively) over the burnt bodies hanging from a bridge.

Good to see which side people are on.

Like that cafe over in Seattle...

Imagine a world where people are outraged and disgusted by both...

[Makalakumu]

No justification for my action needed, at least not to anyone but myself.

But it is interesting that on one level (the level of violence that you are training in) you can justify it's practice with philosophy. At a level that you can't control you focus on the act as inherently brutal with an assumed 'emotion' that you term hatred. Violence, at any level and at any scale is a choice that you have to justify as morally sound.

At a personal level, that is the state penal laws that cover force and deadly force, personal ethos and social morals.

At a national level, it is based on the values and morals that the charter for said country and the current policies that are in place have identified.

On a personal level, you might say that we 'hate' the idea of losing your life and that of your loved ones so much that you would pre-meditate and rehearse violent behavior to be prepared for just such an occasion.

Or, the way I see it, you could say that at every level there is a moral responsibility to be versed in the necessary skills of interaction with the other entities you will be dealing with (whether a person or a nation) from humanitarian behaviors (personal level: charity work, volunteerism, education... National level: relief support, education, social services) at one end of the spectrum all the way to violent behaviors (personal level: self defense, third party involvement, stopping a drunken friend from driving, corporal punishment... National level: military defensive/offensive military forces in a state of readiness). The choice to engage any or all of the possible responses within the range is always 'justification' whether it is humanitarian or violent. It is no more 'justifiable' to fail to act if the situation warrants than it is 'justifiable' to act when the situation doesn't warrant it.

The adeptness to do any/all of these things well so that you either maximize the results of humanitarian acts or minimize the damage of violent acts is responsibility. Why else is martial arts philosophy loaded with moral quandries that usually boil down to responsibility and commitment to training your mind as well as your body?

These individuals acted unprofessionally, outside of their sworn oaths and accepted duties. They will be held accountable.

I am glad that they will be held accountable. Those deeds were henious indeed. Where do we draw the line though? What is too brutal in war? Its kind of a dangerous question.

Also, one of the best things we can do as martial artists is think about the violence that we train for. We need to come to understand the concept just as much as the act. I believe that its misuse/overuse comes from the lack of understanding in both areas.

[loki09789]

I am glad that they will be held accountable. Those deeds were henious indeed. Where do we draw the line though? What is too brutal in war? Its kind of a dangerous question.

Also, one of the best things we can do as martial artists is think about the violence that we train for. We need to come to understand the concept just as much as the act. I believe that its misuse/overuse comes from the lack of understanding in both areas.

Agreed, that is my point about philosophy applied leads to personal choices and clashes between what 'is' because of the circumstance and what we would like things to be like. The cyclical struggle to try and exemplify the training (mind/body) in reality is a challenge whether you apply it to actual physical skills or more symbollic stuff like relationships and communication.

[loki09789]

Imagine a world where people are outraged and disgusted by both...

Based on the number of open criticisms to the war, outrage and protest to the number of dead and the comments on the attrocities by both sides.... I would say that we do, it just isn't perfect.

[arnisador]

Speaking of criticisms of the war, have people seen the outrage over this:
http://www.ucomics.com/tedrall/

[MA-Caver]

I was too young to know Vietnam at the time it was happening. But learned of the war and various events through various sources (friends who are veterans and others). Mai Lai was horrific in it's day (still is).
The thought of american soldiers doing these types of acts makes me think we're no better than the communist russians and chinese and WWII Germans and Japanese.
I hate having this "we're the good guys" bubble bursted but it would be stupid to deny even these pics.http://members.iinet.net.au/~sauterp/iraq/

Real question is... what do we the average american citizen do about it?
What can we do about it?

awfully damn sad IMO

[MisterMike]

Speaking of criticisms of the war, have people seen the outrage over this:
http://www.ucomics.com/tedrall/

Heard about that on the radio. Of course Tillman died protecting the right of people to print this type of thing.

[Cruentus]

I have nothing much to say about the torture stuff. You KNOW this stuff happends, but it's still hard to believe none the less when it is right in your face. The whole thing disgusts me. I don't know what the answer is, but I think a good start would be to stop making excuses for their behavior (not pointing fingers, just speaking generally).

[loki09789]

I have nothing much to say about the torture stuff. You KNOW this stuff happends, but it's still hard to believe none the less when it is right in your face. The whole thing disgusts me. I don't know what the answer is, but I think a good start would be to stop making excuses for their behavior (not pointing fingers, just speaking generally).
I haven't heard anything but outrage over this stuff, rightfully so as far as I am concerned. Where have you heard excuses being made? The closest I know of is one mother in an interview was quoted as saying that "her boy wouldn't do anything like that".... How many times I have heard that in school.

[MisterMike]

All the headlines are now reading that Rumsfeld is not apologetic. Wouldn't apologizing be an admission of guilt on his behalf? Certainly the resposibility goes up the chain, but to say it came from the Secretary of Defense or the President....it's just ludicrous.

[loki09789]

All the headlines are now reading that Rumsfeld is not apologetic. Wouldn't apologizing be an admission of guilt on his behalf? Certainly the resposibility goes up the chain, but to say it came from the Secretary of Defense or the President....it's just ludicrous.I haven't read this stuff as much as stories about the incident themselves.

It is stupid and a bit inflammatory, possibly anti Bush Administration again too.

If he is not apologetic, is he upset or outraged or having some other emotional reaction that would seem 'sympathetic' to the moral reaction and the violation of every professional military code/law - not to mention the humanitarian issues, without apologizing. Apologies should come from those who swore an oath to be professional and weren't.

So much for fixing the problem and not the blame.

[Cruentus]

I haven't heard anything but outrage over this stuff, rightfully so as far as I am concerned. Where have you heard excuses being made? The closest I know of is one mother in an interview was quoted as saying that "her boy wouldn't do anything like that".... How many times I have heard that in school.

Well, "Cobra" made a few excuses here on this thread; basically saying "Oh Well" to the whole thing because of the way Saddam treated his own people. I wish I could say he was alone in his mentality, but there are a too many people out their who basically feel the same way. The media has expressed outrage, but what people say and what people do are different. The media will move on to the next sensation over the next few weeks, and all will be forgotten. But...what about those who are guilty? How seriously will this be taken by the military?

It seems that it will be taken very seriously, yet, attrocities like this and worse have been commited by both sides in almost every conflict. Sure, when caught, people are punished. But, we don't seem to treat this problem in a preventative way; we use the excuses like, "Well...they are criminals," or "We can't really DO anything to prevent this sort of thing other then punish afterwords." There seems to be a major paradox here. In order to enable soldiers to "Kill," the military not only allows, but propigates a level of dehumanization of the enemy to occur. In Vietnam, we killed "Gooks" not people. My friends over there right now aren't killing men with families either, they are killing "rag heads." Yet, when you have effectively dehumanized, things can go to far. So, there has got to be some different preventative solutions, as it would appear that our current solutions aren't working.

My suggestion would be that men should be ordered to to stop the offenders on the spot through use of force, and by any means nessicary, otherwise they could be charged along with the offenders. I am sure that my answer is not the right one, though.

I really don't know what the answer is here. :idunno:

[loki09789]

Well, "Cobra" made a few excuses here on this thread; basically saying "Oh Well" to the whole thing because of the way Saddam treated his own people. I wish I could say he was alone in his mentality, but there are a too many people out their who basically feel the same way. The media has expressed outrage, but what people say and what people do are different. The media will move on to the next sensation over the next few weeks, and all will be forgotten. But...what about those who are guilty? How seriously will this be taken by the military?

It seems that it will be taken very seriously, yet, attrocities like this and worse have been commited by both sides in almost every conflict. Sure, when caught, people are punished. But, we don't seem to treat this problem in a preventative way; we use the excuses like, "Well...they are criminals," or "We can't really DO anything to prevent this sort of thing other then punish afterwords." There seems to be a major paradox here. In order to enable soldiers to "Kill," the military not only allows, but propigates a level of dehumanization of the enemy to occur. In Vietnam, we killed "Gooks" not people. My friends over there right now aren't killing men with families either, they are killing "rag heads." Yet, when you have effectively dehumanized, things can go to far. So, there has got to be some different preventative solutions, as it would appear that our current solutions aren't working.

My suggestion would be that men should be ordered to to stop the offenders on the spot through use of force, and by any means nessicary, otherwise they could be charged along with the offenders. I am sure that my answer is not the right one, though.

I really don't know what the answer is here. :idunno:
The military has and will uphold the professionalism in this case. Like any institution with people in it, the military has been described as a "microcosm of the culture" how this is handled, how the military is structured is all a reflection of the society of the time (or at least the powers of the time).

The suggestion you made is already in place because every serviceman or woman has the obligation, according to the values and such along with UCMJ regulations depending on rank, to uphold those values - even to the point of reporting, detaining or restraining those conducting themselves outside of said conduct. It is even justified for a leader to shoot subordinates if they are not compliant to the lawful order to stop such action and continue to pose a deadly threat to a POW entrusted in his/her care.... does it happen often - thank god no. But the guidelines are clearly written and clearly communicated in Professional training. The preventative measures are the professional training, focus on values and the reflection of your conduct on the country, military, branch and unit you are with.

The term "gook" was never used professional military training documents/programs because it was a slang term adopted from Korea and such that the troops used. It is derogatory and it is disrespectful. It has been suggested that such language has been used - not just to dehumanize the 'enemy' - but also to avoid inflating the enemy to mythical/unbeatable status in the mind of the fighting man (fear coping).

As far as the 'they deserved it' mentallity presented here and elsewhere. I can tell you from experience that the majority of servicemen and women saw this kind of stuff as unjust because it was a demonstration of the lack of self discipline, professionalism and would impact the overall campaign support and military image negatively - as much as they thought it was unjust because of sympathetic feelings ("I would hope that I would be treated decently as a POW, so I treat others decently").

[Cruentus]

As it pertains to this discussion, by Vietnam the U.S. Military raised its rate of fire by infantry men from around 20% in WWII to over 95%. This means that in WWII, around 80% weren't firing their weapons at all.

This increase in firing rate was enabled through a variety of training methods, and factors that were put in place to enable soldiers to fire on their fellow man. Some of these were pressence of a higher authority, psychological desensitization, responsability towards fellow soldiers, etc. One of these factors that determines the ability for a soldier to fire is distance from the enemy.

Distance from the enemy can be both physical as well as emotional and psychological. A way to distance yourself psychologically and emotionally from your enemy is through dehumanization. Your not killing a person, your killing a "rag head." Now, the men will dehumanize on their own to emotionally be able to handle the fact that they may have to kill these people, but from day one in basic training, the military helps this along.

This information can be found in a wealth of different places, but a good book to read on the subject is "On Killing" by Lt. Col. David Grossman

This "Dehumanization" is a psychological method of coping; I have 5 friends/aquaintances active right now in Iraq, and I don't find it offensive that they refer to their enemy as "rag heads," because they haven't (yet) projected their stereotypes to other middle eastern people who they aren't fighting. I understand it is their way of coping for what they may have to do, and the military encourages this so that they can do their jobs. This is something I accept.

Yet, this dehumanization is not without consequence, as we can see from these photo's. Some simply brainwash themselves into believing that these people aren't human, so all becomes fair game. When authorities break down and combat stress kicks in, they are enabled to commit attrocities that they would never commit under different circumstances.

Hey...war is hell. Attrocities occur due to this "dehumanization of the enemy" factor, added with combat stress, on both sides. However, this is no excuse, just an explaination. So, the real question is, what do we do?

We are experts at enabling our men to kill, but not so good at preventing attrocities. This is just something that needs to be worked on, IMHO.

[Tgace]

Ive read Grossman too ;).... just be aware that not everybody buys into his theory.

The 20% firing rate in WWII comes from SLA Marshalls "Men Against Fire", which has experienced some criticism regarding its sources. And that 95% rate in Vietnam... its also been stated that very few of those rounds were aimed. The % could just as easily be attributed to every trooper carrying a select fire weapon with a ton of ammo as it could be to any "desensitization program". Not to say that there is nothing valid in Grossmans work, just like everything else though....nothing is so simple or "cut and dry".

What do we do? The only thing we can. Fight and win quickly...and stop the killing as soon as possible. Whats going on is War....always been this way. We do the best we can and abide by a system of (military) law. Hell..look what our own countrymen do to each other every day. What do we do about that? The best we can. And live by a system of law.

That being said, what these soldiers did was wrong. Not to mention stupid....take photos of what you are doing??? There should be a punishment just for the stupidity.

[Makalakumu]

As it pertains to this discussion, by Vietnam the U.S. Military raised its rate of fire by infantry men from around 20% in WWII to over 95%. This means that in WWII, around 80% weren't firing their weapons at all.

This increase in firing rate was enabled through a variety of training methods, and factors that were put in place to enable soldiers to fire on their fellow man. Some of these were pressence of a higher authority, psychological desensitization, responsability towards fellow soldiers, etc. One of these factors that determines the ability for a soldier to fire is distance from the enemy.

Distance from the enemy can be both physical as well as emotional and psychological. A way to distance yourself psychologically and emotionally from your enemy is through dehumanization. Your not killing a person, your killing a "rag head." Now, the men will dehumanize on their own to emotionally be able to handle the fact that they may have to kill these people, but from day one in basic training, the military helps this along.

This information can be found in a wealth of different places, but a good book to read on the subject is "On Killing" by Lt. Col. David Grossman

This "Dehumanization" is a psychological method of coping; I have 5 friends/aquaintances active right now in Iraq, and I don't find it offensive that they refer to their enemy as "rag heads," because they haven't (yet) projected their stereotypes to other middle eastern people who they aren't fighting. I understand it is their way of coping for what they may have to do, and the military encourages this so that they can do their jobs. This is something I accept.

Yet, this dehumanization is not without consequence, as we can see from these photo's. Some simply brainwash themselves into believing that these people aren't human, so all becomes fair game. When authorities break down and combat stress kicks in, they are enabled to commit attrocities that they would never commit under different circumstances.

Hey...war is hell. Attrocities occur due to this "dehumanization of the enemy" factor, added with combat stress, on both sides. However, this is no excuse, just an explaination. So, the real question is, what do we do?

We are experts at enabling our men to kill, but not so good at preventing attrocities. This is just something that needs to be worked on, IMHO.

Thanks Paul, for backing up the point I was trying to make earlier. I think your word choice "dehumanization" works better then mine "hate". Are these two words so different though?

[loki09789]

Thanks Paul, for backing up the point I was trying to make earlier. I think your word choice "dehumanization" works better then mine "hate". Are these two words so different though?
Paul and UpNorth:

I have a copy of "On Killing" and the interview, survey info that Grossman cites has as much to do with the difference in reaction training because of technology (WWII: smaller magazines of ammo, single shot, greater distances because of more open battle fields = more selective, lower rates of fire COMPARED TO Vietnam: Full auto weapon, less marksmanship training time relative to WWII soldiers, Closer contact distances and differences in tactical SOP's.... = more general, suppression and higher rates of fire).

The number of rounds thrown down range equating to more troops firing because of dehumanization training being more 'effective' is an assumption - supported with other data to prove a thesis. This means that the point is presented in a one sided manor. There are some valid things in Grossman's book, but I have a problem with the majority of data being from interview sources years after the events (time and distance adding color and nostalgia to the interviewee's interpretation - so some of the assumptions are that what the interviewee is saying he/she was going experiencing 'then' could really be what he/she is going through now in relation to the memories).

Technology has been attributed to the amount of Post Traumatic Stress/Shell Shock... because the speed with which the individual is reintroduced into the mainstream after combat service. WWII the transition was slower because of ship travel, slower planes.... the pace of travel alone, also units from Basic to dibanding moved together (Better espirit de Corps which aids in coping). Korea/Vietnam and after, the individuals could be leaving combat and dropped off within a very short period of time. That means that all those decompression things that you are going to go through will happen in the company of civilians and family who don't understand instead of fellow soldiers/Marines... Personally, we came back from Bosnia and I still don't like crowd all that much (just as an example), and my tour was nothing like what WWII, Korea, Vietnam or any of the more modern conflict were/are like.

As far as us, meaning the USA being not so good at stopping these attrocities: It is aweful, but I think it is to be expected - not tolerated - but expected. That is why I emphasize the importance of professional training of individuals and leaders as the preventative measure in place. They should (there will be some NCO's and Officers tagged on this stuff for not staying at the switch) be aware and adjust duties and assignments based on the signs that individuals are getting too wound up.

I think that, since it is going to happen, comparing our track record as a modern military force to that of other countries is the only realistic way to decide 'good at it' and based on that I would say that we are. Also, I think the punitive actions taken when an incident occurs sets a tone of intolerance of unprofessional, inhumane behavior.

Remember too, that these detention guards aren't in 'combat stress' conditions as much as they are the equivelant of Corrections Officers. The Stress syndrome excuse, the fatigue excuse and all that is BS as far as I am concerned. My old MP unit had the EPW/POW mission before it was redesignated to general/combat support missions. POW camp mission is almost like a regular job at times.

These individuals got too high on the amount of control they have over these prisoners and basically were the same as a predator playing with their food. This is different in nature to battlefield attrocities because the stress and fatigue and the environment is very different. That is not to say that any of these actions are to be tolerated.

What do we do? We, as in you and I, very little. They, as in the powers that be, review the training, the leadership and the schedule.... and make sure that the system you have set in place isn't the problem. If it is, fix it. If it isn't, did the NCO's / Officer's follow said procedures. If they did, and they can prove it, did the troops responsible KNOW what they were doing was wrong, if so nail them to the wall within the UCMJ.

[Cruentus]

Thanks Paul, for backing up the point I was trying to make earlier. I think your word choice "dehumanization" works better then mine "hate". Are these two words so different though?

Kind of, I think.

If someone were to kill a loved one, I would hate them. I would want to see that person dead. I would recognize that the person who took the life of someone I love is a human being, even though I would hate that person. I may be able to kill that person, but I would have to muster up a lot of energy to torture that person, or sexually abuse that person. Even if I was able to muster up that energy, I wouldn't be able to derrive enjoyment from it.

Dehumanizing is different. If you see someone as lower then a human being, you could do a lot of things to them, and possibly derive enjoyment from it. When I was a kid, I had a friend who was the pull the legs off spiders kind of kid. He derived enjoyment from torturing small animals, yet he showed remorse if another kid was hurt while we played. A kid that was hurt was human to him, animals were not.

You have Iraqi soldiers in a prison. They are probably unbathed, they probably don't smell good, they are unshaven, they speak a different language, and they glare at the american soldiers in hate. It would be very easy to see them as less then human. Add this to the dehumanization of the enemy that occurs in the military, and it is clear that the prisonors are seen as animals. Now, most people don't torture animals. But, if you throw in the factor of combat stress, you now have a recipe for disaster. There is a factor in Combat stress (forgot the term for it) where basically you see humor in extreme violence or attrocity; it's the minds way of coping with the violence that is around you every day. Put someone who is under combat stress who is at the point where their way of coping is by finding gross violence and attrocity humorious in charge of prisoners who are seen as "less then human" and you have a recipe for attrocities like what we have seen in those photos.

This is much different then "hate." Dehumanization is "hateful", and hate can be involved, but you don't really have to "hate" someone to commit violent acts towards them. I think that dehumanization is far more dangerous then hate. In our history, it has been what allowed mass genocides like in WWII, the near extermination of Native Americans, and things like slavery.

[loki09789]

On the point of professionalism and personal responsibility as the source of such attrocities and not the big bad military machine, there are more than one account of SF forces during the first gulf war who were comprimised on missions by children and old men out herding goats or what not. These SF forces could have simply shot these people and would have been justified by military technicallity, but they didn't. They either detained them, refused to shoot even in light of the consequences, or simply left.

I think imposing your will whether through violence or in general, regardless of war, is dehumanizing to a degree. We 'dehumanize' children in order to punish them or justify creating stress and discomfort in their lives as consequence to inappropriate behavior. If we over empathized, we would never take any corrective actions.

In war, the act of dehumanization is stock and trade, just as it is in martial arts training for reality.

[Cruentus]

Side Note here: I am not rebuking the military at all by talking about "dehumanization." This is just a product of both training and war. I do believe that soldiers certianly intend to do more good then harm.

Not that anyone said I was rebuking the military, but I just wanted to clear that up.

Attrocity is a bi-product of combat stress and "dehumanization." Combat Stress and "Dehumanization" are both bi-products of war.

My question still is, what can we actually DO about it?

:asian:

[loki09789]

Remember too, that these detention guards aren't in 'combat stress' conditions as much as they are the equivelant of Corrections Officers. The Stress syndrome excuse, the fatigue excuse and all that is BS as far as I am concerned. My old MP unit had the EPW/POW mission before it was redesignated to general/combat support missions. POW camp mission is almost like a regular job at times.

These individuals got too high on the amount of control they have over these prisoners and basically were the same as a predator playing with their food. This is different in nature to battlefield attrocities because the stress and fatigue and the environment is very different. That is not to say that any of these actions are to be tolerated.

What do we do? We, as in you and I, very little. They, as in the powers that be, review the training, the leadership and the schedule.... and make sure that the system you have set in place isn't the problem. If it is, fix it. If it isn't, did the NCO's / Officer's follow said procedures. If they did, and they can prove it, did the troops responsible KNOW what they were doing was wrong, if so nail them to the wall within the UCMJ.
This part of my last post addresses my view of what was going on in these cases and my answer to the what can we do question.

[Cruentus]

This part of my last post addresses my view of what was going on in these cases and my answer to the what can we do question.

Those solutions sound like a good start. :)

[Makalakumu]

Well, I listened to the Senate hearing with Secratary Rumsfeld. It looks like military intelligence ordered the MP brigade to do the things they did. The purpose was for interrogation. Now what? What if this is systemic? How far does this go up the chain of command? Mr. Rumsfeld himself dodged mightily when Senator McCain questioned him directly, "Who was in charge of these soldiers?"

[Makalakumu]

More Information...

It looks like intelligence agencies were in charge of the interrogations and that these soldiers were ordered to commit these acts. The interviews from the actual soldiers involved state that the pictures were taken to provide documentation of these orders. (of course this does not explain why some of the soldiers are smiling and posing)

Starting in WWII the CIA began a program called Mind Kontrolle Ultra. This program was reputedly discontinued and declassified a while ago. If you look at this document...

http://www.michael-robinett.com/declass/c000.htm

The treatment of Iraqi prisoners for information purposes is neatly spelled out as MKU dogma. Perhaps this program has not dissappeared entirely.

What does this mean for us?

[MJS]

I'm a little late to this thread, and I didnt read everybodies post, so if this was something that was already touched on, forgive me.

It just amazes me how this entire thing gets blown up. You have American workers there, that get killed, mutilated, dragged through the streets, and hung from a bridge, with a nice pic. of the happy Iraqi killers laughing, but something happens to them, and oh my God...they protest, etc. Is there a difference here? Dont get me wrong, I'm not saying what we did, if its true, is right, I'm simply saying that these people have some nerve to make such a mountain out of this.

Mike

[Cruentus]

MJS,

First of all, "if it's true," is kind of a crazy thing to say, IMHO, considering we have the photo's to prove it. Plus, attrocities happened in war...go back and read my previous posts that explained why. Yes, they happened on both sides, but 2 wrongs don't make a right.

I think the wrong thing to do would be to make up excuses like, "They do bad things to us to!" The wrong thing, also, would be to demonize out entire military because of the wrong doings of a few. The right thing to do would be to try to think of some solutions to the problem.

[Makalakumu]

As more and more evidence becomes apparent, the saying "It was only the wrong doings of a few bad apples" sounds more like wishful thinking. As of this moment, International Red Cross reports from last year are surfacing that bespoke of widespread prisoner abuse. Many of these reports including the Pentagon's own investigations have been circulating the Defense Department since January. And everyone accused so far has been pointing up the chain of command. I think this could become something truly scandalous. Secratary Rumsfeld himself hinted at such, "There will be more pictures, more perpetrators and you can expect this to get much much worse..." in his hearing before Congress.

[MA-Caver]

:-partyon:
Hey! Just wondering... has anybody noticed how quickly and quietly the 9/11 investigation got buried in light of all the "horrible" abuse those poor iraqi's are getting ??? :idunno:

[MJS]

MJS,

First of all, "if it's true," is kind of a crazy thing to say, IMHO, considering we have the photo's to prove it. Plus, attrocities happened in war...go back and read my previous posts that explained why. Yes, they happened on both sides, but 2 wrongs don't make a right.

I think the wrong thing to do would be to make up excuses like, "They do bad things to us to!" The wrong thing, also, would be to demonize out entire military because of the wrong doings of a few. The right thing to do would be to try to think of some solutions to the problem.

Just seems odd that the photos have just surfaced now, and how long has this war been going on??? Where were all these photos before?? Dont misundertand what I'm saying here. I am NOT saying what happened is right, or that they treated us badly so why not do it to them. What I am saying is, I didnt see all of this coverage and investigation going on when our guys were dragged through the street.

Mike

[MJS]

:-partyon:
Hey! Just wondering... has anybody noticed how quickly and quietly the 9/11 investigation got buried in light of all the "horrible" abuse those poor iraqi's are getting ??? :idunno:

Of course. A new 'flavor of the week' was just put out in the open!!!

Mike

[Makalakumu]

:-partyon:
Hey! Just wondering... has anybody noticed how quickly and quietly the 9/11 investigation got buried in light of all the "horrible" abuse those poor iraqi's are getting ??? :idunno:

Ooooo...you are a dangerous man who sees to clearly.

:jedi1:

[Rick Wade]

First and formost I don't condone the actions our servicemen did!

However with that being said we should have handeled it on a level inside of the Army. I still think the Solders should be courts martialed. However (and this is the part were I will get in trouble) it kills me to see how liberal the American people are I am not condoning what we did to those prisoners. But that isn't half as bad as what other countries do to our prisoners. We don't cry out rage or demand justice. Much less do we get to sit in on their punishment hearings (like the guards would ever go to a hearing).
Since this all public now why are the commanding Officers or Commanding Generals being held to the same code that the Soldiers are being held to? I know this probably doesn't make sense to civilians but in the military even if you didn't perform the action you are still held responsible for your subordinates actions.

Here lies the problem with embeded reporters.

This all leaked out because a Soldier got to be friends with a reporter and showed him the photos.

While we are at it why doen't we just embed McDonalds to at least our Soldiers could be happy.

Respectfully
RWE

[marshallbd]

First and formost I don't condone the actions our servicemen did!

However with that being said we should have handeled it on a level inside of the Army. I still think the Solders should be courts martialed. However (and this is the part were I will get in trouble) it kills me to see how liberal the American people are I am not condoning what we did to those prisoners. But that isn't half as bad as what other countries do to our prisoners. We don't cry out rage or demand justice. Much less do we get to sit in on their punishment hearings (like the guards would ever go to a hearing).
Since this all public now why are the commanding Officers or Commanding Generals being held to the same code that the Soldiers are being held to? I know this probably doesn't make sense to civilians but in the military even if you didn't perform the action you are still held responsible for your subordinates actions.

Here lies the problem with embeded reporters.

This all leaked out because a Soldier got to be friends with a reporter and showed him the photos.

While we are at it why doen't we just embed McDonalds to at least our Soldiers could be happy.

Respectfully
RWEAre you saying that the MP who turned the abuse of these prisoners in did the "WRONG THING"? We as a nation cannot condone such reprehensible acts as these and then expect our enemies to treat our POW's in a humane manner as the Geneva Convention stipulates. These Soldiers who perpetrated these acts should be punished publicly and swiftly. It shows the resolve of the US to keep this conflict/war/police action conducted in the manner prescribed by the Geneva Convention and international law governing war and conflict. Public or not, do you think this treatment would remain a secret? It would get out to enemy combatants, exagerated, and then our people who get captured would be treated worse than they already are....it would snowball..... :asian: Just my humble opinion..... :asian:

[michaeledward]

First and formost I don't condone the actions our servicemen did!

However with that being said we should have handeled it on a level inside of the Army. I still think the Solders should be courts martialed. However (and this is the part were I will get in trouble) it kills me to see how liberal the American people are I am not condoning what we did to those prisoners. But that isn't half as bad as what other countries do to our prisoners. We don't cry out rage or demand justice. Much less do we get to sit in on their punishment hearings (like the guards would ever go to a hearing).
Since this all public now why are the commanding Officers or Commanding Generals being held to the same code that the Soldiers are being held to? I know this probably doesn't make sense to civilians but in the military even if you didn't perform the action you are still held responsible for your subordinates actions.

Here lies the problem with embeded reporters.

This all leaked out because a Soldier got to be friends with a reporter and showed him the photos.

While we are at it why doen't we just embed McDonalds to at least our Soldiers could be happy.

Respectfully
RWE
You're kidding right ... "it kills me to see how liberal the American people are" ... what does this have to do with 'liberal' or anything else?

The Bush administration have been claiming for months now that conquering of the nation of Iraq took place because of the human rights abuses of Saddam Hussein (they are trying so hard to have the invasion not be about Weapons of Mass Destruction) ... and now WE get caught abusing human rights. How do you expect anyone to react ... 'Do as we say, not as we do' ?

This has nothing to do with embedded journalists. There was an extrememly courageous whistle-blower - and he was a soldier, not a reporter.

Activities of this type were to be expected. War is a messy business. The specific details were unknowable, but bad behavior is not unanticipated.

Mike

[Touch Of Death]

Are you saying that the MP who turned the abuse of these prisoners in did the "WRONG THING"? We as a nation cannot condone such reprehensible acts as these and then expect our enemies to treat our POW's in a humane manner as the Geneva Convention stipulates. These Soldiers who perpetrated these acts should be punished publicly and swiftly. It shows the resolve of the US to keep this conflict/war/police action conducted in the manner prescribed by the Geneva Convention and international law governing war and conflict. Public or not, do you think this treatment would remain a secret? It would get out to enemy combatants, exagerated, and then our people who get captured would be treated worse than they already are....it would snowball..... :asian: Just my humble opinion..... :asian:I would say he did the wrong thing. If anyone should be court martialed, it should be the soldier leaking info to the press! As for the woman, she posed for a couple of shots at the urging of her boyfreind. A quick smile and a thumbs up is not systematic abuse. Her mere presence was by design; so, lay off that one. This has been under investigation since january and the military would have dealt with it. I don't see the good in having the whole world condem the US because of this. Don't get me wrong I enjoy watching the republicans squirm, but the damge the leak caused may cost more American lives than you can stomach, and you can weigh that against some guy with a pair of panties on his head.
Sean

[marshallbd]

I would say he did the wrong thing. If anyone should be court martialed, it should be the soldier leaking info to the press! As for the woman, she posed for a couple of shots at the urging of her boyfreind. A quick smile and a thumbs up is not systematic abuse. Her mere presence was by design; so, lay off that one. This has been under investigation since january and the military would have dealt with it. I don't see the good in having the whole world condem the US because of this. Don't get me wrong I enjoy watching the republicans squirm, but the damge the leak caused may cost more American lives than you can stomach, and you can weigh that against some guy with a pair of panties on his head.
Sean
Have you been in that particular region of the world? What we are dealing with is a large population of people who are fanatical when they believe they are wronged and NO JUSTICE is given. The MP who blew the whistle is a hero in my book for doing what he believed to be THE RIGHT THING TO DO! I agree that this could be/will be damaging to the troops that are there, but when punishments are meted out and that is made public it will help to regain the trust that this incident has lost us as a nation. THE GENEVA CONVENTION MUST BE ADHERED TO!!! I dont care if you like or dislike these people in Iraq, they are human beings and must be treated as such..... :asian:

[MisterMike]

I think there is a difference because the president of Iraq ordered human rights violations and the president of the U.S. did not. People seem to equate the actions of a few soldiers to mean the U.S. intended it.

Second, most of these guys would not have been in jail if they simply'd thrown down their weapons after Saddam was caught. Obviously they still suported him and his type of leadership. I don't think they are going to like/hate us any more than they do already - and I don't really care. Let's just get the oil flowing to pay for this mess...

[marshallbd]

I think there is a difference because the president of Iraq ordered human rights violations and the president of the U.S. did not. People seem to equate the actions of a few soldiers to mean the U.S. intended it....But if you were not here in this country and you saw this on the news what would you think? What do you think the Iraqi people thought when they saw the things we had to say about Saddam? Did they believe it or was it just propaganda to them?


Second, most of these guys would not have been in jail if they simply'd thrown down their weapons after Saddam was caught....True....
Obviously they still suported him and his type of leadership. I don't think they are going to like/hate us any more than they do already - and I don't really care. Let's just get the oil flowing to pay for this mess...See my first point.....this could be why....or maybe they are all just fried from the desert heat? :asian:

[Touch Of Death]

Have you been in that particular region of the world? What we are dealing with is a large population of people who are fanatical when they believe they are wronged and NO JUSTICE is given. The MP who blew the whistle is a hero in my book for doing what he believed to be THE RIGHT THING TO DO! I agree that this could be/will be damaging to the troops that are there, but when punishments are meted out and that is made public it will help to regain the trust that this incident has lost us as a nation. THE GENEVA CONVENTION MUST BE ADHERED TO!!! I dont care if you like or dislike these people in Iraq, they are human beings and must be treated as such..... :asian:Remind the US never to give you a security clearance. There will be no damage control now. Soldiers do not leak even the worst military secrets to the press. I say the interogations were bad and the wing of the military involved will remain untouched. The real issue is the MP and his freindship with the reporter.
Sean

[MisterMike]

But if you were not here in this country and you saw this on the news what would you think? What do you think the Iraqi people thought when they saw the things we had to say about Saddam? Did they believe it or was it just propaganda to them?

True.... See my first point.....this could be why....or maybe they are all just fried from the desert heat? :asian:

True, if they saw this on the news they may think ALL Americans are this way, but the thing is, people are saying it here from within this country. :rolleyes:

[michaeledward]

I think there is a difference because the president of Iraq ordered human rights violations and the president of the U.S. did not. People seem to equate the actions of a few soldiers to mean the U.S. intended it.

Second, most of these guys would not have been in jail if they simply'd thrown down their weapons after Saddam was caught. Obviously they still suported him and his type of leadership. I don't think they are going to like/hate us any more than they do already - and I don't really care. Let's just get the oil flowing to pay for this mess...
Unfortuneately, I think you are not correct. According to the Red Cross, as many as 90 % of the imprisoned are there for no reason, other than being in the wrong place at the wrong time.



The Associated Press says (http://www.suntimes.com/output/iraq/cst-nws-abuse11.html) the Red Cross contradicts President George W. Bush's claims that abuses were "the wrongdoing of a few." Instead, abuse of prisoners by American soldiers -- at Abu Ghraib and at more than ten other facilities [!] observed -- was widespread and routine. Among other horrors, this included having some mauled (http://www.abc.net.au/news/newsitems/s1104580.htm) by military dogs. And all of this was visited upon people who, the Red Cross says, shouldn't have been in jail in the first place, because the majority of them had been arrested apparently at random.

[marshallbd]

Remind the US never to give you a security clearance. There will be no damage control now. Soldiers do not leak even the worst military secrets to the press. I say the interogations were bad and the wing of the military involved will remain untouched. The real issue is the MP and his freindship with the reporter.
Sean
First of all, I am a Master Sergeant in the USAF reserve, I served 9 years on active duty before transfering to the reserves to pursue a career in Law Enforcement. I served proudly in Somalia, Desert Storm, Turkey (Operation Provide Comfort) and Bosnia as part of the United Nations Peace Keeping Force.

Secondly, I hold and have held for the last 17 years a Top Secret Security clearance, and have served as a Department of Defense Courier transporting Two Person Control Material of a Sensitive Compartmental nature.

From what I read, and I could be wrong, the MP did not leak it to the press, but instead reported the abuse to his superiors. Unfortunately there was an embedded reporter there who ran with it and here we are. If the MP who blew the whistle gave the info directly to the press then he too should be court martialed. However if he reported to his superiors the abuse he saw (as I have to believe he did) then he IS a HERO for stopping this un-necessary abuse. Please do not question my patriotism or sense of duty again.... :asian:

[Rick Wade]

As far as my liberal comment those Iraqi prisoners were not tortured! They were humiliated. When Jessica Lynch said she was taken advantage of everyone said that’s not true you were in a lot of pain and on heavy drugs your memory isn't right. When the Air Force General (Female I can't remember her name) was shot down She was raped repeatedly you never heard that in the mainstream media. Does anyone remember Scott Spiker? We didn't cry outrage when he was taken in the first war. He wasn't even returned to us same country different war. I was there January 19 2001 when the war started. It wasn't pretty. We as Americans have a much better society than Iraq lets remember that lets not cry outrage and keep dragging this out. Lets punish those Soldiers and get on with it.

Second no I am not saying what the solider did (the one that leaked it) was wrong I'm just saying that their lies the problems with embedded reporters. We as American think we want to know everything that goes on but we really don't. I am here to tell you that war isn't pretty. It is sticky, smelly mess. Do you want to see one of our Seals sneak up behind a guard and kill him quietly so that he won't make any noise?

Yes I do feel like what our Soldiers did was conduct unbecoming in the face of the enemy and they should be prosecuted. However why aren't their Commanding Officers and Generals also being held responsible?


In closing This will be my last entry on this topic because I know my view isn't a popular one. I won't even return to this thread as it brings back some really bad memories. If anyone wants to discuss this any more PM me I can talk about this one on one.

Very Respectfully

[Touch Of Death]

First of all, I am a Master Sergeant in the USAF reserve, I served 9 years on active duty before transfering to the reserves to pursue a career in Law Enforcement. I served proudly in Somalia, Desert Storm, Turkey (Operation Provide Comfort) and Bosnia as part of the United Nations Peace Keeping Force.

Secondly, I hold and have held for the last 17 years a Top Secret Security clearance, and have served as a Department of Defense Courier transporting Two Person Control Material of a Sensitive Compartmental nature.

From what I read, and I could be wrong, the MP did not leak it to the press, but instead reported the abuse to his superiors. Unfortunately there was an embedded reporter there who ran with it and here we are. If the MP who blew the whistle gave the info directly to the press then he too should be court martialed. However if he reported to his superiors the abuse he saw (as I have to believe he did) then he IS a HERO for stopping this un-necessary abuse. Please do not question my patriotism or sense of duty again.... :asian:well as I have stated the military was dealing with the issue just fine until that reporter turned it into a circus. The individual responible for handing that reporter the photos is a traitor.
Sean

[marshallbd]

Yes I do feel like what our Soldiers did was conduct unbecoming in the face of the enemy and they should be prosecuted. However why aren't their Commanding Officers and Generals also being held responsible?

I too feel that punishment in this case should flow up as well as down.... :asian:

[Ceicei]

well as I have stated the military was dealing with the issue just fine until that reporter turned it into a circus. The individual responible for handing that reporter the photos is a traitor.
SeanA traitor? To whom? Media does have a way of forcing the hand to be revealed at the card table and ending the game.

Since the military superiors did get the information about the abuse earlier, they were working on trying to resolve the issue (but probably not fast enough). Sooner or later, the information (including the pictures) would have got out somehow to the media. Better it be done sooner than later, as the damage would be much worse had the problem dragged on longer. Even then, it would have been a circus either way.

Now suppose the military did take care of the problem and cleaned it up *before* all this leaked to the media, would it have made any difference? Perhaps a bit, but the media would have run with the story anyway and trust would still have been damaged in the process--and I can hear people yell "conspiracy" and "cover up". Remember what happened when the reality of certain war time events popped up years later long after wars have ended?

- Ceicei

[Ceicei]

I too feel that punishment in this case should flow up as well as down.... :asian:
Yes, I agree.

- Ceicei

[marshallbd]

well as I have stated the military was dealing with the issue just fine until that reporter turned it into a circus. The individual responible for handing that reporter the photos is a traitor.
SeanBesides, the pictures would have surfaced any way....Can you say Freedom of Information Act? :asian:

[Touch Of Death]

Besides, the pictures would have surfaced any way....Can you say Freedom of Information Act? :asian:well, the first American was just beheaded, you guys decide if it was better now than later.
Sean

[Rick Wade]

Besides, the pictures would have surfaced any way....Can you say Freedom of Information Act? :asian:


OK I lied. I'm back sorry shoot me I got an email and couldn't resist.

Those pictures that surfaced were PERSONAL pictures. The Freedom of information act does not apply. Freedom of information act only applies to offical government documents. You are still watching to much mainstream media.

Respectfully
Richard English
Chief Petty Officer, USN (active)

[marshallbd]

well, the first American was just beheaded, you guys decide if it was better now than later.
Sean
Either way it's not a good situation.....First let me say my prayers go out to the family of the American that was just killed in that video....Secondly, I think that the FANATICS would have found another reason to kill him, this one was just convenient and at the right time for thier agenda.....

All I am trying to say is that the abuse needed to be brought to light and now that it has been it needs to be dealt with, swiftly, and harshly.... :asian:

[marshallbd]

OK I lied. I'm back sorry shoot me I got an email and couldn't resist.

Those pictures that surfaced were PERSONAL pictures. The Freedom of information act does not apply. Freedom of information act only applies to offical government documents. You are still watching to much mainstream media.

Respectfully
Richard English
Chief Petty Officer, USN (active)Chief, you are partially correct, those pictures WERE personal property until they became the property of the US Government in the course of the investigation. Once that occured they became subject to the FOIA.... The only thing that could have kept them safe from the FOIA would have been to make them classified.... :asian:

[Rick Wade]

Chief, you are partially correct, those pictures WERE personal property until they became the property of the US Government in the course of the investigation. Once that occured they became subject to the FOIA.... The only thing that could have kept them safe from the FOIA would have been to make them classified.... :asian:

We are starting to see eye to eye. The problem is we couldn't make them classified because. They went from the Soldiers hands to the media, published and then to the government. Then the investigation started. Then they found more evidence and found more photos and the second group of photos was classified and will not be shown. If you listen to the news they said that President Bush would not release more photos because they were to graphic.

[MisterMike]

Unfortuneately, I think you are not correct. According to the Red Cross, as many as 90 % of the imprisoned are there for no reason, other than being in the wrong place at the wrong time.

So the Red Cross was there when they were arrested or captured eh? After what I have seen from them, their numbers couldn't be trusted at all at this point.

[rmcrobertson]

Astonishing.

I am glad to see that folks have so quickly picked up on the Secretary of Defense's lunatic claim that the problem is the PICTURES, the problem is the REPORTERS.

It's remarkable that some have so weak a notion of the role of a free press in a democracy. It's remarkable that some would actually claim that the media should keep silent about TORTURE (I am capitalizing because, apparently, the fact of TORTURE doesn't seem to garner quite the attention that I was brought up to believe it should) in some phony, "national interest."

I had this wacky idea that part of the reason for a free press--learned this in public schools in rural Maryland, 1958 to about 1964, hardly any radical hotbed--was that, in a DEMOCRACY, it is in the national interest to bring the abuses of the government to the light as quickly as possible. Beyond that, I had this wacky idea that TORTURE was wrong--learned that in Bible class, about the same time.

It is depressing to see people with so little knowledge of the history of their institutions, so little awareness of the reasons for a free press, and so little faith in their own country and its citizens, that they cheerfully throw out core ideas and principles that people have died for. Now that is un-American.

And the assertions that the AMERICAN RED CROSS is just making this stuff up--to quote Twain, "Oh, carry me home to die, mother."

[Touch Of Death]

Astonishing.

I am glad to see that folks have so quickly picked up on the Secretary of Defense's lunatic claim that the problem is the PICTURES, the problem is the REPORTERS.

It's remarkable that some have so weak a notion of the role of a free press in a democracy. It's remarkable that some would actually claim that the media should keep silent about TORTURE (I am capitalizing because, apparently, the fact of TORTURE doesn't seem to garner quite the attention that I was brought up to believe it should) in some phony, "national interest."

I had this wacky idea that part of the reason for a free press--learned this in public schools in rural Maryland, 1958 to about 1964, hardly any radical hotbed--was that, in a DEMOCRACY, it is in the national interest to bring the abuses of the government to the light as quickly as possible. Beyond that, I had this wacky idea that TORTURE was wrong--learned that in Bible class, about the same time.

It is depressing to see people with so little knowledge of the history of their institutions, so little awareness of the reasons for a free press, and so little faith in their own country and its citizens, that they cheerfully throw out core ideas and principles that people have died for. Now that is un-American.

And the assertions that the AMERICAN RED CROSS is just making this stuff up--to quote Twain, "Oh, carry me home to die, mother."Well I don't know Robert the "Military" I was in didn't allow soldiers to free flow info to the press, and how dare you call stripping people naked and putting a dog collar or panties on someones head torture. The rapes were carried out by Iraqis and any American involvment is then torture. This is frathouse stuff. If you want to see "real" torture, just watch some vids the Iraqis are going to release over the next few months.
Sean

[Rick Wade]

Well I don't know Robert the "Military" I was in didn't allow soldiers to free flow info to the press, and how dare you call stripping people naked and putting a dog collar or panties on someones head torture. The rapes were carried out by Iraqis and any American involvment is then torture. This is frathouse stuff. If you want to see "real" torture, just watch some vids the Iraqis are going to release over the next few months.
Sean

What have these time come to TOD and I actually agree.

Torture would be bamboo shoot under the fingernails snipping off a digit of each finger until you told them what they wanted to hear. Real torture isn't something that most american can stomach to hear about much less be able to watch. Those prisoners of war were humiliated not tortured. I have had more torture in a Kenpo Technique line than what those prinoners went through.

[Cruentus]

I am glad to see that folks have so quickly picked up on the Secretary of Defense's lunatic claim that the problem is the PICTURES, the problem is the REPORTERS.

And that's what I ment about making excuses. The world is expected to except our attrocities because they are somehow more humane then identical attrocities of the third world. Also, too many people think along the lines of, "Attrocities happened in war on both sides, but we don't need the media reporting on attrocities that we commit!" We're so used to the media being used as a tool to manufacture our idea's that when they report outside our little idyllectic box, then we object.

I know it's hard, but I am waiting for people to climb outside the box to start thinking critically here. Yea, I know attrocities are committed by both sides. But, we can't make someone else stop their attrocities while they are in power, however we can do something about the way we handle things so that attrocities don't occur from our end. I believe that the U.S. is highly effecient in training it's soldiers; I believe that we have the capeabilities to train our soldiers in such a way that will reduce the attrocities from our side.

If anything, it is important for us to treat our prisoners humanely for strategic purposes. It has been proven that when the enemy believes that he will get humane treatment from his captors, then he is more likely to surrendor, meaning less casualties for both sides. This is a human condition, regardless of race or creed. When the enemy believes that they will be killed or tortured upon capture, they are far more likely to fight til the death, causing more inevitable casualties on themselves and their captors. Knowing this, how many of YOU would like to argue with me on my conjecture that most Fundamentalist Muslims would rather die then be treated like those men were treated in those photos? How many of you would bet against the probability that the photos (all over the same news that they get as well) will be used as propiganda to convince Muslim Men that this is what will happened if your captured by the americans?

So, for those of you who want to blow this off, yet claim to be "patriots," should really re-think the damage this has done to our own national security and credability, not to mention the moral and ethical problems.

As to blaming the reporters and whistleblowers....please. You gotta wonder why someone in the military would feel compelled to whistle blow his own buddies, considering that you can develop more comradary on active military duty then you could any where else. I think it's a bit hasty and illogical to think that the whistleblower is the one who is the traitor here, and is the one who is at fault; if the inhumane treatment was as bad as the pictures and accounts depict and nothing was being done about it, then what was he supposed to do? What was he supposed to do if his superiors weren't taking care of the problem? This man may very well be a bigger patriot then you might think.

Instead of blaming the reporters and the whistleblower, lets put blame where it belongs. Those men involved in that kind of torture are the real "traitors," when you consider the multitude of problems this causes us as a nation.

PAUL

[Cruentus]

Well I don't know Robert the "Military" I was in didn't allow soldiers to free flow info to the press, and how dare you call stripping people naked and putting a dog collar or panties on someones head torture. The rapes were carried out by Iraqis and any American involvment is then torture. This is frathouse stuff. If you want to see "real" torture, just watch some vids the Iraqis are going to release over the next few months.
Sean

Sorry...I gotta disagree with you and Rick.

Do you think those men piled up on each other nude, and posed for phalatio pics because the U.S. soldiers politely asked them too? Sorry...these men were beaten and tortured into submission. There are many accounts of beatings and physical damage far beyond what you see in the photo's.

How would you feel if someone came over your house, made you strip down, get on your knee's, and give some guy Falatio...but "just for the picture"? I doubt any of you guys would be writing "frathouse prank" to describe the event on the police report.

The Iraqi soldiers went through physical abuse.... or TORTURE...plain and simple. To say it isn't torture because we don't have pictures of what the vietcong did to our U.S. soldiers is the same logic as, "Well...sure he took your $30K honda...but that's not stealing! I heard about another guy who took a mercades that was worth $75K!" Sorry...stealing is stealing and torture is torture.

My momma always told me that 2 wrongs don't make a right, anyways.

[Touch Of Death]

And that's what I ment about making excuses. The world is expected to except our attrocities because they are somehow more humane then identical attrocities of the third world. Also, too many people think along the lines of, "Attrocities happened in war on both sides, but we don't need the media reporting on attrocities that we commit!" We're so used to the media being used as a tool to manufacture our idea's that when they report outside our little idyllectic box, then we object.

I know it's hard, but I am waiting for people to climb outside the box to start thinking critically here. Yea, I know attrocities are committed by both sides. But, we can't make someone else stop their attrocities while they are in power, however we can do something about the way we handle things so that attrocities don't occur from our end. I believe that the U.S. is highly effecient in training it's soldiers; I believe that we have the capeabilities to train our soldiers in such a way that will reduce the attrocities from our side.

If anything, it is important for us to treat our prisoners humanely for strategic purposes. It has been proven that when the enemy believes that he will get humane treatment from his captors, then he is more likely to surrendor, meaning less casualties for both sides. This is a human condition, regardless of race or creed. When the enemy believes that they will be killed or tortured upon capture, they are far more likely to fight til the death, causing more inevitable casualties on themselves and their captors. Knowing this, how many of YOU would like to argue with me on my conjecture that most Fundamentalist Muslims would rather die then be treated like those men were treated in those photos? How many of you would bet against the probability that the photos (all over the same news that they get as well) will be used as propiganda to convince Muslim Men that this is what will happened if your captured by the americans?

So, for those of you who want to blow this off, yet claim to be "patriots," should really re-think the damage this has done to our own national security and credability, not to mention the moral and ethical problems.

As to blaming the reporters and whistleblowers....please. You gotta wonder why someone in the military would feel compelled to whistle blow his own buddies, considering that you can develop more comradary on active military duty then you could any where else. I think it's a bit hasty and illogical to think that the whistleblower is the one who is the traitor here, and is the one who is at fault; if the inhumane treatment was as bad as the pictures and accounts depict and nothing was being done about it, then what was he supposed to do? What was he supposed to do if his superiors weren't taking care of the problem? This man may very well be a bigger patriot then you might think.

Instead of blaming the reporters and the whistleblower, lets put blame where it belongs. Those men involved in that kind of torture are the real "traitors," when you consider the multitude of problems this causes us as a nation.

PAULWell, did he go to the Chaplain? Did he refuse to participate until he felt something was being done? or did he just hand the photos to his "freind". We will find out those answers someday, but I will lean toward, "no". A hero would have thought about American lives at stake, and waited until a safer time. Your argument for combatants surrendering more easily is the same argument for not having the death penalty. (nothing to lose mentality) Just for my own info do you believe in the death penalty?
Sean

[Touch Of Death]

Sorry...I gotta disagree with you and Rick.

Do you think those men piled up on each other nude, and posed for phalatio pics because the U.S. soldiers politely asked them too? Sorry...these men were beaten and tortured into submission. There are many accounts of beatings and physical damage far beyond what you see in the photo's.

How would you feel if someone came over your house, made you strip down, get on your knee's, and give some guy Falatio...but "just for the picture"? I doubt any of you guys would be writing "frathouse prank" to describe the event on the police report.

The Iraqi soldiers went through physical abuse.... or TORTURE...plain and simple. To say it isn't torture because we don't have pictures of what the vietcong did to our U.S. soldiers is the same logic as, "Well...sure he took your $30K honda...but that's not stealing! I heard about another guy who took a mercades that was worth $75K!" Sorry...stealing is stealing and torture is torture.

My momma always told me that 2 wrongs don't make a right, anyways.watch the news over the next couple of months. Your about to be shown the difference.
Sean

[Kembudo-Kai Kempoka]

Humiliation not torture? Tell that to a kid who has gone through much the same thing, and is FUBARED for life because of it. Let's say it is, somehow, not torture....

WE ARE SUPPOSED TO BE THE GOOD GUYS!!!

I was taught Good Guys don't pull this kinda crap. It is not a humane, decent way for members of civilized society to treat another human being. And if we are there in a war on terror, then why are we acting like the dictator we deposed? I offer this, based on shyte that happened in Gulf 1 that got minimal play: What we get caught doing is only a fraction of what has actually been gettin'done. If we do not take a stance against mans inhumanity to man with our own nations troops, how can we justify using them to stop anothers' inhumanity towards man?

Marines & Navy guys reading this who've been to the Phillipines...do you remember Shiyt (Shi@t) River? Those acts of indecent behavior by our troops were on the children of allies. What kind of heinous crap do you suppose the yahoo's from the appalachians, pumped up by the intra-military propaganda machine to hate all things Arab, have dreamt up to do to captives under their care?

I would like to imagine that, at some point in time, the U.S. will be able to actually behave in a manner consistent with its professed values.

Dave

[Kembudo-Kai Kempoka]

watch the news over the next couple of months. Your about to be shown the difference.
Sean
TOD --

So we take the gloves off the SEAL'S & Delta guys, give the CIA back a dirty tricks department, and hunt down the perps who drag our soldiers through the streets to hack off their heads and bury them with bacon. That is a problem-focused solution, consistent with the conduct of war.

Tormenting naked Iraqi prisoners is not.

[Matt Stone]

I'm a soldier, have been for the better part of the last decade and a half. I've been infantry, cavalry, and now I ride a desk in the Army JAG Corps.

I've seen both sides of the issue - wanting to do horrible things to the enemy in retaliation for wrongs committed against our troops, and defending the actions of an enemy against our troops.

I understand fully why the Iraqis are upset. They have every right. What upsets me are the Americans that are so upset at the "atrocities" they allege our troops have committed... Genocide is an atrocity. Killing innocent civilians is an atrocity. Taking embarassing and humiliating pictures isn't an atrocity any more than PVT Lynch was a hero...

Notice how this "news story" has had nearly 2 weeks of headline coverage? How many days were devoted to the 4 contractors who were killed, burned, and hung from a bridge? About 2. How many of you that protest the "atrocities" at this prison were aware of the murder of an American civilian, the beheading of whom was videotaped and then posted on the Al Jazeera network's website?

Yeah, not much newsworthy about that in an election year...

We haven't been attacked again on our soil since 9/11. We have lost hundreds of soldiers in this war, and the Iraqis have lost even more. But let's try really, really hard not to forget the several thousand that lost their lives when this whole party got started... Maybe the Iraqis weren't responsible for 9/11, but they sure didn't go out of their way to keep themselves out of our crosshairs (note that Khadafy made darn sure we knew he was bending over backwards to help our cause, and he used to be one of our main enemies). I'm glad, personally, that at least one of our leaders got off his duff and drew a line in the sand instead of across someone's blouse. There are certainly far more complex reasons for our presence in Iraq, I'm sure at least some of them deal with the oil in Iraq - I'm not naive. But there is still good in this fight, still a righteousness for toppling a real tyrant whose documented legitimate atrocities against his own people that can't be denied...

There is a guy from E-budo that is on the ground in Iraq... Hearing what he says from the front line kind of conflicts with a lot of the propaganda the liberal media would like to put into the ears of the American public... The folks he deals with daily are very happy that Sadaam is out of power, that his reign of terror is over. They are looking forward to having a say in their own country's government. Not exactly what CNN or Fox shows every night, is it? Of course not, because that'd make Kerry look like an a$$ and lend credence to Bush's cause.

There is always an extreme to every situation, an extreme to either side's opinion. What I've found, though, is when you weigh both sides, the Truth is found somewhere in the middle...

Survivor of a poorly led convoy does not equal hero.

Actions by a few individuals do not equal the behavior of many.

Keep it in perspective people, whether you agree with the war or not.

[Kembudo-Kai Kempoka]

Proposal: Take the SOG lifers, the ones who are too unstable to release into the mainstream, so are left to operate in the brush in places we supposedly are not militarily active... give them their own battalion, with orders to hunt down and behead all who pull terrorist killings against Americans. Give them a huge pocket book, and all the social support they need, and make them the feared sword of U.S. vengeance.

Conversely, make a similar group whose job it is to route out the egits from US military, and deal them a swift end, too. How many of these bozo's, over there and over here, do you think would continue if the evening news was filled with images of heads on stakes? Ever been to the gold markets of Saudi Arabia during prayer? The absolute conviction of consequences does, whether in a good way or not, shape and effect behavior.

Let the terroristas know...no trials, no forums or pulpits from which to be heard...just a head on a stake. Let our troops know, maybe not the head on a stake, but certain punishment with definite and pre-determined prison time. Watch the crap halt.

[Touch Of Death]

I'm a soldier, have been for the better part of the last decade and a half. I've been infantry, cavalry, and now I ride a desk in the Army JAG Corps.

I've seen both sides of the issue - wanting to do horrible things to the enemy in retaliation for wrongs committed against our troops, and defending the actions of an enemy against our troops.

I understand fully why the Iraqis are upset. They have every right. What upsets me are the Americans that are so upset at the "atrocities" they allege our troops have committed... Genocide is an atrocity. Killing innocent civilians is an atrocity. Taking embarassing and humiliating pictures isn't an atrocity any more than PVT Lynch was a hero...

Notice how this "news story" has had nearly 2 weeks of headline coverage? How many days were devoted to the 4 contractors who were killed, burned, and hung from a bridge? About 2. How many of you that protest the "atrocities" at this prison were aware of the murder of an American civilian, the beheading of whom was videotaped and then posted on the Al Jazeera network's website?

Yeah, not much newsworthy about that in an election year...

We haven't been attacked again on our soil since 9/11. We have lost hundreds of soldiers in this war, and the Iraqis have lost even more. But let's try really, really hard not to forget the several thousand that lost their lives when this whole party got started... Maybe the Iraqis weren't responsible for 9/11, but they sure didn't go out of their way to keep themselves out of our crosshairs (note that Khadafy made darn sure we knew he was bending over backwards to help our cause, and he used to be one of our main enemies). I'm glad, personally, that at least one of our leaders got off his duff and drew a line in the sand instead of across someone's blouse. There are certainly far more complex reasons for our presence in Iraq, I'm sure at least some of them deal with the oil in Iraq - I'm not naive. But there is still good in this fight, still a righteousness for toppling a real tyrant whose documented legitimate atrocities against his own people that can't be denied...

There is a guy from E-budo that is on the ground in Iraq... Hearing what he says from the front line kind of conflicts with a lot of the propaganda the liberal media would like to put into the ears of the American public... The folks he deals with daily are very happy that Sadaam is out of power, that his reign of terror is over. They are looking forward to having a say in their own country's government. Not exactly what CNN or Fox shows every night, is it? Of course not, because that'd make Kerry look like an a$$ and lend credence to Bush's cause.

There is always an extreme to every situation, an extreme to either side's opinion. What I've found, though, is when you weigh both sides, the Truth is found somewhere in the middle...

Survivor of a poorly led convoy does not equal hero.

Actions by a few individuals do not equal the behavior of many.

Keep it in perspective people, whether you agree with the war or not.I was with you all the way up to you suggeting FOX news was a tool for the left. The FOX news I watch seems to celebrate everytime Bush looks even remotely good. Since when do they not want to make Kerry look bad??????????????????????????????????????????????? ?????
Sean

[Kembudo-Kai Kempoka]

Actions by a few individuals do not equal the behavior of many.
I get PM'd and EM'd daily from friends over there who are being brought flowers, treats, etc., out of sheer joy by the locals that Hussein has been ousted. Please don't misunderstand: I'm extremely aware that we have done a good thing, even if some of the agenda leading to it was mixed. I'm not, by any stretch, a peacenik; some objectives may only be met by force. (after all, ain't this an MA forum?)

I do believe, however, that members of the American military should conduct themselves as ambassadors to the world, representing the higher road to which we should ascribe. This, and similar behavior, does not represent well.

Reading my own post, it looks like I'm saying "behead american soldiers". Nope. far from it. Just let them know, for certain, these actions are not OK, and will not be tolerated. As for the boneheads dragging our guys through the streets or planning car bombs, THOSE are the ones to be hunted and eliminated. Use Old World tactics against Old World foes...they understand "certainty of death", and know Americans are too civilized/soft to mede out the same severity of action as they are. Dig up some crazies, let them loose, and let the Old World foes have a taste of New World applications to an old idea.

Dave

Dave

[Makalakumu]

I think there is a difference because the president of Iraq ordered human rights violations and the president of the U.S. did not. People seem to equate the actions of a few soldiers to mean the U.S. intended it.

Second, most of these guys would not have been in jail if they simply'd thrown down their weapons after Saddam was caught. Obviously they still suported him and his type of leadership. I don't think they are going to like/hate us any more than they do already - and I don't really care. Let's just get the oil flowing to pay for this mess...

Mike - you're missing the point. The toture was US policy. These soldiers were ordered to do this. It may not go up to the President or even the Secratery of Defense, but it goes way higher then a few miscreant privates.

And you better believe that the Oil is flowing out of Iraq. It is not going to pay for this war though. We will do that. You and I. The Taxpayers, again, just like every war.

[Makalakumu]

Well I don't know Robert the "Military" I was in didn't allow soldiers to free flow info to the press, and how dare you call stripping people naked and putting a dog collar or panties on someones head torture. The rapes were carried out by Iraqis and any American involvment is then torture. This is frathouse stuff. If you want to see "real" torture, just watch some vids the Iraqis are going to release over the next few months.
Sean

Right. And the picture of the naked Iraqi chained to the bed with the attack dog growling and then the picture of the same Iraqi man writhing on the ground with blood streaming from his legs...sure that's not torture.

[rmcrobertson]

First off, a silly question--would you guys generally agree that John McCain knows a thing or two about the abuse of prisoners in wartime? HE seems pretty indignant about this crap--and that's good enough for me.

Not TORTURE, my ass. Tell you what...when the Communist dictatorship that y'all fantasize about takes over this country, I'll bring the cops to YOUR house. We'll strip you naked, threaten you with dogs, sleep deprive you, have you pose in sexual poositions with other men, take lotsa pictures. Then, we'll ask again: is this OK? And don't worry: we'll have all sorts of pious things to say about, "national security," and the like. And don't worry: we too will blame the reporters, and whoever else sticks up for you.

Also, I must say that I loved the, "I know: let's just have death squads!" argument. Beyond the moral implications of that horror--learn about your history, a least a LITTLE, willya? We supported death squads, let the CIA loose, all the nonsense that was called for by some of you guys...check up on the history of a) the overthrow of the democratically elected Mossadegh government in Iran, b) our support for the Shah, c) our support for SAVAK.

But hey, that worked! We've built democracies throughout the region, brought peace to the Middle East, established an absolutely-stable and unproblematic set of trading partners....oops, no, I forgot.

If you can't be moral, willya at least for pity's sake try to at least consider being pragmatic?

[Matt Stone]

I was with you all the way up to you suggeting FOX news was a tool for the left. The FOX news I watch seems to celebrate everytime Bush looks even remotely good. Since when do they not want to make Kerry look bad??????????????????????????????????????????????? ?????
Sean

It was, like other things in my post, a dichotomous comparison...

I think neither Kerry nor Bush is the best for the country. It just happens that, in light of current events, Kerry stands to do more damage than any benefit his propagandists would like to say he'll provide. At another time, in another place, maybe Kerry would be alright. His brother, Bob (I think), was state senator for Nebraska for a while. I always thought he was an okay guy. This wannabe president, though, does precious little to quell the growing distrust I feel everytime I even see his picture.

Lastly, the media exists, like religious institutions, to propagate itself, not provide Truth. Truth is free, and the media sells itself to whoever wants to advertise during the available time slots. Therefore, the media does what it can to ensure lots and lots of viewers... That includes yellow journalism, spin, and distortion of facts to play to the political climate. I'm not saying one side is better or worse than the other - it's the nature of the Beast, in the same way that all politicians lie to their constituents. It's a given. So what I hear on CNN I try to balance against what I hear on Fox or local news. Like I said, Truth is usually somewhere in between...

[Rick Wade]

I get PM'd and EM'd daily from friends over there who are being brought flowers, treats, etc., out of sheer joy by the locals that Hussein has been ousted. Please don't misunderstand: I'm extremely aware that we have done a good thing, even if some of the agenda leading to it was mixed. I'm not, by any stretch, a peacenik; some objectives may only be met by force. (after all, ain't this an MA forum?)

I do believe, however, that members of the American military should conduct themselves as ambassadors to the world, representing the higher road to which we should ascribe. This, and similar behavior, does not represent well.

Reading my own post, it looks like I'm saying "behead american soldiers". Nope. far from it. Just let them know, for certain, these actions are not OK, and will not be tolerated. As for the boneheads dragging our guys through the streets or planning car bombs, THOSE are the ones to be hunted and eliminated. Use Old World tactics against Old World foes...they understand "certainty of death", and know Americans are too civilized/soft to mede out the same severity of action as they are. Dig up some crazies, let them loose, and let the Old World foes have a taste of New World applications to an old idea.

Dave

Dave

I with ya brother I can almost feel your rage through the screen.

[Kembudo-Kai Kempoka]

First off, a silly question--would you guys generally agree that John McCain knows a thing or two about the abuse of prisoners in wartime? HE seems pretty indignant about this crap--and that's good enough for me.

Not TORTURE, my ass. Tell you what...when the Communist dictatorship that y'all fantasize about takes over this country, I'll bring the cops to YOUR house. We'll strip you naked, threaten you with dogs, sleep deprive you, have you pose in sexual poositions with other men, take lotsa pictures. Then, we'll ask again: is this OK? And don't worry: we'll have all sorts of pious things to say about, "national security," and the like. And don't worry: we too will blame the reporters, and whoever else sticks up for you.

Also, I must say that I loved the, "I know: let's just have death squads!" argument. Beyond the moral implications of that horror--learn about your history, a least a LITTLE, willya? We supported death squads, let the CIA loose, all the nonsense that was called for by some of you guys...check up on the history of a) the overthrow of the democratically elected Mossadegh government in Iran, b) our support for the Shah, c) our support for SAVAK.

But hey, that worked! We've built democracies throughout the region, brought peace to the Middle East, established an absolutely-stable and unproblematic set of trading partners....oops, no, I forgot.

If you can't be moral, willya at least for pity's sake try to at least consider being pragmatic?
Touche'

I still think there's something to be said about the pragmatism of meeting force with force, particularly where the enemy will understand little else then the type of force they deliver.

[Touch Of Death]

It was, like other things in my post, a dichotomous comparison...

I think neither Kerry nor Bush is the best for the country. It just happens that, in light of current events, Kerry stands to do more damage than any benefit his propagandists would like to say he'll provide. At another time, in another place, maybe Kerry would be alright. His brother, Bob (I think), was state senator for Nebraska for a while. I always thought he was an okay guy. This wannabe president, though, does precious little to quell the growing distrust I feel everytime I even see his picture.

Lastly, the media exists, like religious institutions, to propagate itself, not provide Truth. Truth is free, and the media sells itself to whoever wants to advertise during the available time slots. Therefore, the media does what it can to ensure lots and lots of viewers... That includes yellow journalism, spin, and distortion of facts to play to the political climate. I'm not saying one side is better or worse than the other - it's the nature of the Beast, in the same way that all politicians lie to their constituents. It's a given. So what I hear on CNN I try to balance against what I hear on Fox or local news. Like I said, Truth is usually somewhere in between...if Kerry is elected it will be because he is not Bush.

[Matt Stone]

if Kerry is elected it will be because he is not Bush.

Amen. Personally, though, I'll be voting for Dubya. Kerry gives me the willies, and will get my keister in tight spots without the cash money I'll need to get back out again. With Dubya I know my annual raise (to offset inflation) will actually do what it is supposed to (our raises under the Dems barely kept pace with inflation, if not lagged behind), and I know that things will continue to keep making staying in worth it.

[Touch Of Death]

Amen. Personally, though, I'll be voting for Dubya. Kerry gives me the willies, and will get my keister in tight spots without the cash money I'll need to get back out again. With Dubya I know my annual raise (to offset inflation) will actually do what it is supposed to (our raises under the Dems barely kept pace with inflation, if not lagged behind), and I know that things will continue to keep making staying in worth it.You have given up a lot for those cost of living raises under Bush. Robert can list what you have given up off the top of his head; just ask him.
Sean

[michaeledward]

Astonishing.

And the assertions that the AMERICAN RED CROSS is just making this stuff up--to quote Twain, "Oh, carry me home to die, mother."

Thank you Robert! Thank you.

[michaeledward]

What have these time come to TOD and I actually agree.

Torture would be bamboo shoot under the fingernails snipping off a digit of each finger until you told them what they wanted to hear. Real torture isn't something that most american can stomach to hear about much less be able to watch. Those prisoners of war were humiliated not tortured. I have had more torture in a Kenpo Technique line than what those prinoners went through.
Perhaps you guys have heard that as many as 12 Iraqi's have died at the hands of US Soldiers ... those investigations are on going. (Currently, there are something like 3 dozen investigations going on).

If the choice is bamboo shoots under the fingernails or death at the hands of US Prison Guards, I'll choose bamboo shoots every time.

It is Torture.

mike

[michaeledward]

At another time, in another place, maybe Kerry would be alright. His brother, Bob (I think), was state senator for Nebraska for a while. I always thought he was an okay guy. This wannabe president, though, does precious little to quell the growing distrust I feel everytime I even see his picture.
Bob Kerrey and John Kerry are not now, nor ever have been related.

[marshallbd]

We are starting to see eye to eye. The problem is we couldn't make them classified because. They went from the Soldiers hands to the media, published and then to the government. Then the investigation started. Then they found more evidence and found more photos and the second group of photos was classified and will not be shown. If you listen to the news they said that President Bush would not release more photos because they were to graphic.
Yes, it looks as though we are beginning to. I just don't believe that they went directly to the media then the investigation began. I believe, based on what I heard in a clip of an interview of the General in charge (Don't recall his name), that the investigation began back in January.....based on that statement, it leads me to believe the military was investigating this and then the press got ahold of it and broke the story..... :asian:

[marshallbd]

What have these time come to TOD and I actually agree.

Torture would be bamboo shoot under the fingernails snipping off a digit of each finger until you told them what they wanted to hear. Real torture isn't something that most american can stomach to hear about much less be able to watch. Those prisoners of war were humiliated not tortured. I have had more torture in a Kenpo Technique line than what those prinoners went through.
How sad.....I too actually agree here.....While the treatment recieved by these folks is wrong, it does not constitute physical torture....But it is still a violation of thier basic human rights, and a form of psychological torture....They are still human beings..... :asian:

[marshallbd]

Instead of blaming the reporters and the whistleblower, lets put blame where it belongs. Those men involved in that kind of torture are the real "traitors," when you consider the multitude of problems this causes us as a nation.

PAULAmen! :asian:

[marshallbd]

I do believe, however, that members of the American military should conduct themselves as ambassadors to the world, representing the higher road to which we should ascribe. This, and similar behavior, does not represent well.


Yes I agree that we need to conduct ourselves in the manner that displays the values of this country as a whole, and not as a bunch of lunatics. :asian:

[MJS]

Ok, so what does everyone think of the guy that got his head taken off??? In the paper, it said that this was retaliation for what we did. Well, IMO, I dont believe that we killed anyone while in custody. I might be wrong. Anyway, seems like they took it to the extreme with doing that. This looks like its just gonna keep going back and forth, back and forth. Everyday, it seems like we're getting picked off, one by one. Drop some bombs on them and end it!!!

Mike

[MisterMike]

Unfortuneately, I think you are not correct. According to the Red Cross, as many as 90 % of the imprisoned are there for no reason, other than being in the wrong place at the wrong time.


Astonishing.
And the assertions that the AMERICAN RED CROSS is just making this stuff up--to quote Twain, "Oh, carry me home to die, mother."

No reason??? Put 2 guns on front of any of these guys and they will take one for themselves and give the other to their 7 yr old son to kill Americans.

No reason...You gotta invite me to your world some time. On second thought, never mind. I'll choose reality.

Have you seen the latest video? Maybe they could at least carry your head ...

[michaeledward]

No reason??? Put 2 guns on front of any of these guys and they will take one for themselves and give the other to their 7 yr old son to kill Americans.

No reason...You gotta invite me to your world some time. On second thought, never mind. I'll choose reality.

Have you seen the latest video? Maybe they could at least carry your head ...
So now, the International Red Cross and Red Crescent Societies are conspiring against the United States? Next someone will be claiming they have Weapons of Mass Destruction or trying to buy Uranium from Niger.

[michaeledward]

Ok, so what does everyone think of the guy that got his head taken off??? In the paper, it said that this was retaliation for what we did. Well, IMO, I dont believe that we killed anyone while in custody. I might be wrong. Anyway, seems like they took it to the extreme with doing that. This looks like its just gonna keep going back and forth, back and forth. Everyday, it seems like we're getting picked off, one by one. Drop some bombs on them and end it!!!
I think it is disgusting that anyone is beheaded.

However, as I recall, the native North Americans used to 'scalp' the Europeans when my ancestors were conquering their land.

Yes, violence breed violence. And no doubt it is going to escalate. Which is why I was against the war before it began.

[Matt Stone]

I think it is disgusting that anyone is beheaded.

So what do you think we should do about it? Should we allow this to happen out of a deep sense of regret at the abuse of the Iraqi prisoners? Was his life payment for the transgressions of a very small and isolated few? What if that was your son, brother, or friend? Would your blood be screaming for vengeance? Or would you say "well, he shouldn't have been there," or perhaps "now the score is even, and we should all hold hands and sing kumbaya?"


Yes, violence breed violence. And no doubt it is going to escalate. Which is why I was against the war before it began.

Nobody was "for" the war. Even the people giving the orders to go want to avoid war and the bloodshed that goes with it. But, just like killing someone with the martial arts that we all practice, it may eventually become inevitable... And so it was with Afghanistan and the Taliban, Iraq and Sadaam, Osama and the Al Qaeda punks...

I don't want any more people that I know getting injured or killed. Have you had any personal losses yet? I have... So far three people I know have been killed as a result of enemy action, and another friend is in harm's way daily. But they believe in what they are doing, I believe in what they are doing, and I (nor they) won't forget what kicked this party off in the first place...

All the bleeding hearts are worked up over a few Iraqis being killed in captivity and a few others being abused. Pearl was murdered. Berg was murdered. Several thousand innocent civilians and children were murdered. Where is the outrage over those actions??? Everyone cries so loudly for justice for the poor, innocent Iraqis who are wrongly detained... Why is there no outcry for justice on behalf of Berg and Pearl? Are American lives so worthless and cheap that our own countrymen view the lives of others who are engaged in actions against us, killing us, bombing us, as worth more???

Forget being called a traitor for not believing in the decisions of the Government... But for the people who aren't hungry for justice on behalf of the innocents killed by the "peaceful Iraqi people," you should be ashamed of your misuse of the rights provided for you by the ones you criticize so readily...

I'm disgusted by this thread, I'm disgusted by the reactions of some of the people here... We serve so you don't have to. But don't take it for granted and cheapen the contributions and sacrifices that paid for your ability to be an a$$ in public...

:rpo: :bird: :flammad: :cuss:

[michaeledward]

Well then Matt, please don't do me any favors.

I'm sorry you are frustrated by my beliefs, but if you review the record, you will see that there were many people in this administration (the leaders of the country) who were for this war. They put forth many arguments as to why Iraq needed to be invaded; why Saddam Hussein needed to be removed from power. Unfortuneatly, none of those accusations seemed to have any facts to support them, now that we have 20/20 hindsight. There are no weapons of mass destruction. There is no nuclear weapons program. Iraq was not involved with Al Qaeda's attacks against the United States.

If these things do not exist ... and never did exist ... why then are the US military in this country? Yes, I am disgusted by Americans being killed (citizens and soldiers). I am more disgusted by the appearance that this is happening because of false pretenses.

[Cruentus]

How sad.....I too actually agree here.....While the treatment recieved by these folks is wrong, it does not constitute physical torture....But it is still a violation of thier basic human rights, and a form of psychological torture....They are still human beings..... :asian:
Sorry to single your post out, marshall, but what you are saying here seems to be a trend, yet I believe it is a misconception.

Do you want to know why the "liberal media" has been showing these pics over the past 2 weeks? There are many agenda's on all sides, and the media is just feeding into these agendas, and satisfying their urge to chase sensationalism. We know that the anti-war crowd will try to use this as justification for their cause, but did you ever think that their might be a pro-war agenda here as well? It's not good for the pro-war side that these attrocities were whistleblown, but since they have been, there is now becomes a need for them to "spin" the issue. Since the cat is out of the bag, it actually becomes good for the pro-war people that these photos have been pasted on every news station for the past 2 weeks, because this DESENSITIZES the public. The photo's are unreal and shocking at first, but they lose their "omf" after you've seen them for the 10th, 20th, or 50th time. If they tried to cover it up, it would only lead to more outrage, so instead we are saturated with the issue so that any "outrage" would be desensitized and short lived, which is exactly what is occuring. Now, well after the photos were first presented, and now after desensitization has taken its effects, I have heard the arguement on Fox News, as well as on most other "liberal" news outlets that these photo's don't depict torture...and that they could be compared to a "frathouse" or "childhood" prank. This is the very arguement that many of you are bringing to the conversation today....that this wasn't torture, and that it was only the equivelent of a "prank."

Show the photo's over and over again, then when the public is desensitized and no longer emotional over them, make the arguement that this was no more wrong then a frathouse prank. Damn liberal media....and you guys are falling for it.

Now, the "anti-war" crowd will continue to use these photos as examples to support their cause, which will backfire on them horribly. Now we have pictures and video of even worse attrocities; the film of the contractor who had his head cut off was just released yesterday. I am waiting for the full footage to be on the internet; as unfortunate as it is, you know that is what is going to happened. As horrible as it is, there are other accounts of assasinations on americans that haven't been published by that "liberal media" until after the treatment of Iraqi prisoners was whistleblown. Hmmm...why's that? Let's just say that I can see the arguements already: "These damn liberals want to slam on our soldiers for "frathouse pranks," when look at what "the terrorists" are doing to our prisoners!"(thrown in with a couple of "hoorahs" and "support our troops" and "go Bush 2004!" for good measure :rolleyes: )

So...in the long run, who did it really benefit from the pasting of the photos of Iraqi prisoners all over the news over the last 2 weeks....hmm? It ain't the anti-war crowd, the "Kerry" crowd, the contractor who was just killed, OR our soldiers who benefited...that's for sure. Damn liberal media.

Look...nobody is saying that "terrorists" aren't commiting attrocities on U.S. people, and everyone would agree that having your head cut off is worse then being humiliated (well, everyone except a muslim man, who believes that it is better to die then to go through that sort of humiliation and torture. But, who the heck are they, right? :rolleyes: ). All I am asking for you to do is think critically.

Those Iraqi prisoners were tortured. That "liberal media" that equates these photo's with "childhood pranks" forgot to focus on stuff like this that was in the reports:

"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."

http://www.newyorker.com/fact/content/?040510fa_fact

Hmmm....childhood prank, huh?

What about these rape seen photo's:

Links Removed Due to Depiction of Brutal Sexual Acts.
Seig
MT ADMIN

Apparently rape is no big deal either, huh. Just fraternity stuff right? Well, maybe it is fraternity stuff....the kind that should end you up in jail.

But...hey, we haven't wrongfully killed any prisoners or anyone else, right?

http://members.iinet.net.au/~sauterp/iraq/iraqis_tortured_60min2-i.jpg

Opps...I forgot, about the investigation on at least 12 murdered Iraqi prisoners also.

Well, at least our government didn't "order" these military men to do these things right...

"Davis also stated that he had heard MI [military intelligence] insinuate to the guards to abuse the inmates. When asked what MI said he stated: ‘Loosen this guy up for us.’‘Make sure he has a bad night.’‘Make sure he gets the treatment.’” Military intelligence made these comments to Graner and Frederick, Davis said. “The MI staffs to my understanding have been giving Graner compliments . . . statements like, ‘Good job, they’re breaking down real fast. They answer every question. They’re giving out good information.’” "

"Gary Myers, Frederick’s civilian attorney, told me that he would argue at the court-martial that culpability in the case extended far beyond his client. “I’m going to drag every involved intelligence officer and civilian contractor I can find into court,” he said. “Do you really believe the Army relieved a general officer because of six soldiers? Not a chance.” "


Full account here: http://www.newyorker.com/fact/content/?040510fa_fact

Errr....never mind. :xtrmshock

Face it folks, our land of the brave is just as guilty of attrocities and torture as anyone else, today in as much as in our past. We just happened to handle it a little more "first world-like" today instead of "third-world" like. To add insult to injury, the "pro-war" folks are going to spin this, with the use of the "liberal media," to fit their agenda.

The sooner we face the fact that we have a major problem with the way we handle our propiganda and foriegn policy, the sooner we can start solving these problems. To sweep it under the rug is disgraceful to our soldiers who are actually trying to fight a good fight, and it is disgraceful to our beliefs of freedom and liberty.

Don't let "them" manufacture your ideas...

PAUL
:asian:

[Matt Stone]

Well then Matt, please don't do me any favors.

I'll be sure not to. Do me a favor and point yourself out the next time you find your soft tushy dropped into a combat zone... I'll make sure no soldier to your left or right goes out of his or her way to lend you a hand.


Yes, I am disgusted by Americans being killed (citizens and soldiers). I am more disgusted by the appearance that this is happening because of false pretenses.

You are disgusted by the murder of an innocent, but still more disgusted by the political spin from both sides? I certainly hope you maintain your beliefs in the event that someone in your immediate family faces some tragedy... If they are killed by a drunk driver, be sure to hold that driver blameless and focus on the evils of the alcohol industry. If they are injured or killed by a stray bullet, be sure to tout the innocence of the shooter, but feel free to sue the gun industry for their negligence. If they are the helpless victims of terrorism, be sure not to call for justice nor vengeance, as the terrorists are obviously just misunderstood... :rolleyes:

I'm done here. It is obvious the media has a stronger hold on some folks than I thought. Believe what you want. I never said there weren't discrepancies with the actions of the Government, but we are still head and shoulders better than "back in the day." And ultimately, after 9/11, you'll notice nothing else has been bombed (as threatened repeatedly), you'll notice Osama doesn't show up much on the news (because he is either no longer news, or no longer a threat?), you'll notice that most Iraqis are glad Sadaam is gone. Whatever got us there, we did the right thing, are doing the right thing, and will continue doing the right thing until the threat of terrorism, the threat of murder by psychopaths with a political agenda, is ended.

Hard for me to understand why some folks don't see this as a good thing.

So long, MT. Enjoy your freedom. Hope you appreciate it, especially when you haven't paid for it...

:asian:

[Cruentus]

So what do you think we should do about it?

Good question, Matt Stone.

I think the answer is that we should create policies that coincide with what we propose is our moral and ethical beliefs, AND STICK TO THEM. Don't let their actions make us waiver from our resolve.

That being said, I personally am not a "bleeding heart" about the whole thing. Personally, I am for the death penalty for anyone who commits an attrocity that results in another persons death, just as long as we can prove who is guilty. Those guys who cut off that contractors head in the name of religion should be killed. In fact, I'd go a step further then that. If you commit an attrocity resulting in the death of another in the name of your religion, then we get to kill and bury you in a manner that is against your religion. In other words, those men that killed that contracter should be killed by firing squad with a shoe taped to their face (considered disgraceful), and buried in pigs blood (which I have heard that many believe that being buried in such a defiling manner can prevent you from going to heaven). Film it, and send it to their media. Send the message that if you commit an attrocity resulting in death of another, this is what will happened to you.

But...if we are willing to that, then we'd better be willing to send our men if they commit murderous attrocity to their people to be tried and punished by their standards. Can't have a double standard here, can we?

Or, how about we just set our policy that coincides with our ethical standards as americans, and we STICK to that policy, regardless of what attrocities occur on the other side?

As much as I'd like to kill some of those bastards myself, this is unfortunatily the only way.

PAUL

[Cruentus]

So long, MT. Enjoy your freedom. Hope you appreciate it, especially when you haven't paid for it...

Last time I checked, a third of my paycheck pays for it every 2 weeks. If any of your aren't paying for it, please give me the number to your tax advisor. :)

[Touch Of Death]

Sorry to single your post out, marshall, but what you are saying here seems to be a trend, yet I believe it is a misconception.

Do you want to know why the "liberal media" has been showing these pics over the past 2 weeks? There are many agenda's on all sides, and the media is just feeding into these agendas, and satisfying their urge to chase sensationalism. We know that the anti-war crowd will try to use this as justification for their cause, but did you ever think that their might be a pro-war agenda here as well? It's not good for the pro-war side that these attrocities were whistleblown, but since they have been, there is now becomes a need for them to "spin" the issue. Since the cat is out of the bag, it actually becomes good for the pro-war people that these photos have been pasted on every news station for the past 2 weeks, because this DESENSITIZES the public. The photo's are unreal and shocking at first, but they lose their "omf" after you've seen them for the 10th, 20th, or 50th time. If they tried to cover it up, it would only lead to more outrage, so instead we are saturated with the issue so that any "outrage" would be desensitized and short lived, which is exactly what is occuring. Now, well after the photos were first presented, and now after desensitization has taken its effects, I have heard the arguement on Fox News, as well as on most other "liberal" news outlets that these photo's don't depict torture...and that they could be compared to a "frathouse" or "childhood" prank. This is the very arguement that many of you are bringing to the conversation today....that this wasn't torture, and that it was only the equivelent of a "prank."

Show the photo's over and over again, then when the public is desensitized and no longer emotional over them, make the arguement that this was no more wrong then a frathouse prank. Damn liberal media....and you guys are falling for it.

Now, the "anti-war" crowd will continue to use these photos as examples to support their cause, which will backfire on them horribly. Now we have pictures and video of even worse attrocities; the film of the contractor who had his head cut off was just released yesterday. I am waiting for the full footage to be on the internet; as unfortunate as it is, you know that is what is going to happened. As horrible as it is, there are other accounts of assasinations on americans that haven't been published by that "liberal media" until after the treatment of Iraqi prisoners was whistleblown. Hmmm...why's that? Let's just say that I can see the arguements already: "These damn liberals want to slam on our soldiers for "frathouse pranks," when look at what "the terrorists" are doing to our prisoners!"(thrown in with a couple of "hoorahs" and "support our troops" and "go Bush 2004!" for good measure :rolleyes: )

So...in the long run, who did it really benefit from the pasting of the photos of Iraqi prisoners all over the news over the last 2 weeks....hmm? It ain't the anti-war crowd, the "Kerry" crowd, the contractor who was just killed, OR our soldiers who benefited...that's for sure. Damn liberal media.

Look...nobody is saying that "terrorists" aren't commiting attrocities on U.S. people, and everyone would agree that having your head cut off is worse then being humiliated (well, everyone except a muslim man, who believes that it is better to die then to go through that sort of humiliation and torture. But, who the heck are they, right? :rolleyes: ). All I am asking for you to do is think critically.

Those Iraqi prisoners were tortured. That "liberal media" that equates these photo's with "childhood pranks" forgot to focus on stuff like this that was in the reports:

"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."

http://www.newyorker.com/fact/content/?040510fa_fact

Hmmm....childhood prank, huh?

What about these rape seen photo's:

Links REMOVED DUE TO DEPICTIONS OF BRUTAL SEXUAL ACTS

Apparently rape is no big deal either, huh. Just fraternity stuff right? Well, maybe it is fraternity stuff....the kind that should end you up in jail.

But...hey, we haven't wrongfully killed any prisoners or anyone else, right?

http://members.iinet.net.au/~sauterp/iraq/iraqis_tortured_60min2-i.jpg

Opps...I forgot, about the investigation on at least 12 murdered Iraqi prisoners also.

Well, at least our government didn't "order" these military men to do these things right...

"Davis also stated that he had heard MI [military intelligence] insinuate to the guards to abuse the inmates. When asked what MI said he stated: ‘Loosen this guy up for us.’‘Make sure he has a bad night.’‘Make sure he gets the treatment.’” Military intelligence made these comments to Graner and Frederick, Davis said. “The MI staffs to my understanding have been giving Graner compliments . . . statements like, ‘Good job, they’re breaking down real fast. They answer every question. They’re giving out good information.’” "

"Gary Myers, Frederick’s civilian attorney, told me that he would argue at the court-martial that culpability in the case extended far beyond his client. “I’m going to drag every involved intelligence officer and civilian contractor I can find into court,” he said. “Do you really believe the Army relieved a general officer because of six soldiers? Not a chance.” "


Full account here: http://www.newyorker.com/fact/content/?040510fa_fact

Errr....never mind. :xtrmshock

Face it folks, our land of the brave is just as guilty of attrocities and torture as anyone else, today in as much as in our past. We just happened to handle it a little more "first world-like" today instead of "third-world" like. To add insult to injury, the "pro-war" folks are going to spin this, with the use of the "liberal media," to fit their agenda.

The sooner we face the fact that we have a major problem with the way we handle our propiganda and foriegn policy, the sooner we can start solving these problems. To sweep it under the rug is disgraceful to our soldiers who are actually trying to fight a good fight, and it is disgraceful to our beliefs of freedom and liberty.

Don't let "them" manufacture your ideas...

PAUL
:asian:Liberal media is a myth.

[michaeledward]

I certainly hope you maintain your beliefs in the event that someone in your immediate family faces some tragedy... If they are killed by a drunk driver, be sure to hold that driver blameless and focus on the evils of the alcohol industry. I am an alcoholic practicing my 12th year of sobriety. You need not lecture me on where the responsibility lies. Perhaps someday you may discover alcoholism is a disease, not a choice; we don't blame those with cancer for their disease.


If they are the helpless victims of terrorism, be sure not to call for justice nor vengeance,...Justice and Vengeance are not the same thing.


And ultimately, after 9/11, you'll notice nothing else has been bombed Please be aware that more terrorist activities have occurred since 9/11/2001 than occurred in the same time period prior to September 11, 2001. Maybe not on U.S. soil, but the Marriott in Bali is pwned by a U.S. company. Al Qaeda's war is a world wide war.


(as threatened repeatedly), you'll notice Osama doesn't show up much on the news (because he is either no longer news, or no longer a threat?)Or because the Bush Administration had to beat the drums to launch his 'Private Little War' against the 'Tyrrant' that tried to kill "his daddy".


, you'll notice that most Iraqis are glad Sadaam is gone. . . . I'm not sure that the Iraqis are 'glad' about anything.


Whatever got us there, we did the right thing, are doing the right thing, and will continue doing the right thing until the threat of terrorism, the threat of murder by psychopaths with a political agenda, is ended.You are again arguing that 'Saddam' was part of the 'threat of terrorism'. This is just not true ... no matter how much some want to believe it. Of course, it is required that you believe this fallacy is true, in order to justify that we are 'doing the right thing'. If Saddam was not part of the 'threat of terrorism', then what we are doing is wrong, regardless of the outcome.

[Tgace]

"I am an alcoholic practicing my 12th year of sobriety. You need not lecture me on where the responsibility lies. Perhaps someday you may discover alcoholism is a disease, not a choice; we don't blame those with cancer for their disease."

Cancer dosent make somebody get a bottle, pour a drink and lift it to their mouth. Dont take offense, but I know a few psychologists who dont believe in the "disease model" of alcoholism.

[rmcrobertson]

"Drop some bombs on them and end it!!"

"All the bleeding hearts are worked up over a few Iraqis being killed in captivity and a few others being abused."

It may not bother some of you folks that such words match up with remarks by Nazis and Stalinists all over the world, but it sure as hell bothers me.

Silly me. I thought Christianity demanded something else from us. I thought America stood for something better than those other bastards. And I thought that martial arts meant learning an ethical code that would forbid killing even, "a few...in captivity," or abusing, "a few others," or merely leaning how to, "bomb them and end it." Silly me.

Blame, "the media," a much as you like. It's certainly a convenient excuse.

[michaeledward]

Cancer dosent make somebody get a bottle, pour a drink and lift it to their mouth. Dont take offense, but I know a few psychologists who dont believe in the "disease model" of alcoholism.
No offense taken. Nor, am I absolving myself from any responsibilities for my actions while I was under the influence. But that is part of the treatment of my disease. ;)

[Cruentus]

"Drop some bombs on them and end it!!"

"All the bleeding hearts are worked up over a few Iraqis being killed in captivity and a few others being abused."

It may not bother some of you folks that such words match up with remarks by Nazis and Stalinists all over the world, but it sure as hell bothers me.

Bothers me too...



Silly me. I thought Christianity demanded something else from us. I thought America stood for something better than those other bastards. And I thought that martial arts meant learning an ethical code that would forbid killing even, "a few...in captivity," or abusing, "a few others," or merely leaning how to, "bomb them and end it." Silly me.

Blame, "the media," a much as you like. It's certainly a convenient excuse.

:idea:

[MJS]

"Drop some bombs on them and end it!!"

"All the bleeding hearts are worked up over a few Iraqis being killed in captivity and a few others being abused."

It may not bother some of you folks that such words match up with remarks by Nazis and Stalinists all over the world, but it sure as hell bothers me.

Silly me. I thought Christianity demanded something else from us. I thought America stood for something better than those other bastards. And I thought that martial arts meant learning an ethical code that would forbid killing even, "a few...in captivity," or abusing, "a few others," or merely leaning how to, "bomb them and end it." Silly me.

Blame, "the media," a much as you like. It's certainly a convenient excuse.

I'm not blaming the media for anything. When I said drop some bombs and end it, I was serious!! When we first invaded Iraq and Afghanistan, we overwhelmed them, took them by surprise and dominated the entire thing. Now that Bush has cut back on the amount of troops there and everything else, we're getting picked off more everyday!

Granted, not every Iraqi person is bad. They looked at us when we first got there as saving them. Due to the fact that we were tricked by many of them, it was pretty hard to tell who was the bad guy and who was the supposed 'good guy' even though they had a bomb strapped to them. We're forced to do what we do, IE- doing a house to house search, to find the bad ones. This unfortunately causes some anger with the good people of Iraq.

Mike

[OUMoose]

I'm sorry. I was really trying to stay out of this discussion until now.

I finally saw the video that everyone is talking about here (http://www.salon.com/tech/feature/2004/05/12/beheading_video/index.html) (just minimize the browser for the 30 second commercial to get access to the "premium" site), and frankly it makes me sick. Not the atrocity itself, but the fact it's plastered on the web everywhere by news organizations. You CAN'T tell me that they aren't using this to put a spin on the war, or even the massive propaganda machine that some call the Bush Administration.

You thought that Christianity demanded something better? I'm not a good christian by any stretch of the word, but I thought christianity taught compassion above all else? unconditional love. You're telling me that it's compassionate to paste the face of a son that someone gruesomely killed and pictures of the family weeping for it? That's insanity! Leave them the hell alone and let the grieve. Don't use their horrific occurance to fuel the pyre of hate that is the world now.

Martial arts has taught me discression and discipline. It has taught me to avoid a confrontation by any means necessary. THIS is not avoiding anything.


Blame, "the media," a much as you like. It's certainly a convenient excuse. Yes, I will blame the media on this one. They're the ones spreading this crap, beating it into our skulls that muslims are bad people. What do we do? Sit and watch it in awe, to quote the movie Canadian Bacon, "Because joe public is afraid the world is going to end before the next commercial". All that said, I do support our troops. They're doing a thankless job that they shouldn't even be doing. The "independent contractors" are in it for the money, but are still doing what they think is right. The government who sends those people over there however...

[Rick Wade]

Ok, so what does everyone think of the guy that got his head taken off??? In the paper, it said that this was retaliation for what we did. Well, IMO, I dont believe that we killed anyone while in custody. I might be wrong. Anyway, seems like they took it to the extreme with doing that. This looks like its just gonna keep going back and forth, back and forth. Everyday, it seems like we're getting picked off, one by one. Drop some bombs on them and end it!!!

Mike

What people don't realize is that guy was going to beheaded anyway. My heart goes out to his family. However these fanatical extreemist would have come up with another reason (i.e. the Americans still there in their country) to do something like this. We have to remember that these people do not think like we do. They don't have the same compasion that we do as a hole.

[Cruentus]

What people don't realize is that guy was going to beheaded anyway. My heart goes out to his family. However these fanatical extreemist would have come up with another reason (i.e. the Americans still there in their country) to do something like this. We have to remember that these people do not think like we do. They don't have the same compasion that we do as a hole.

I do agree with you there.

[michaeledward]

We have to remember that these people do not think like we do. They don't have the same compasion that we do as a hole.
What do you mean, 'They do not think like we do'? .. Do they think with their liver?
Statements like these tend to be part of the 'dehumanization' process that allows people to kill someone else with enduring difficulties.

[MJS]

What people don't realize is that guy was going to beheaded anyway. My heart goes out to his family. However these fanatical extreemist would have come up with another reason (i.e. the Americans still there in their country) to do something like this. We have to remember that these people do not think like we do. They don't have the same compasion that we do as a hole.

You're right. All the more reason to step up the force and end this. Either that, or just pull everyone the hell out of there, and who cares about helping them rebuild. I didnt see anyone from over there, coming to NYC to help with 9/11!

Mike

[MJS]

What do you mean, 'They do not think like we do'? .. Do they think with their liver?
Statements like these tend to be part of the 'dehumanization' process that allows people to kill someone else with enduring difficulties.

I think he's saying here that we wouldnt have cut someones head off.

Mike

[Cruentus]

What do you mean, 'They do not think like we do'? .. Do they think with their liver?
Statements like these tend to be part of the 'dehumanization' process that allows people to kill someone else with enduring difficulties.

I took it to mean that fundamentalist Muslims have different values and way of thinking then Americans do. For instance, the Koran advocates that it is better to kill then disfigure or torture. This is where we often fail to realize how serious those pics are to the Fundamentalist Muslim.

There are certian values and thinking that are "human" (universal) and others that are specific to moral/ethical beliefs of the different communities. If that's what he ment, then I agree.

[michaeledward]

I think he's saying here that we wouldnt have cut someones head off.

Mike
No .. we would just shoot them ... http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/4955074/ ... either way, dead.

[michaeledward]

I took it to mean that fundamentalist Muslims have different values and way of thinking then Americans do. For instance, the Koran advocates that it is better to kill then disfigure or torture. This is where we often fail to realize how serious those pics are to the Fundamentalist Muslim.

There are certian values and thinking that are "human" (universal) and others that are specific to moral/ethical beliefs of the different communities. If that's what he ment, then I agree.
These thoughts reminded me of this great song from the 80's .... although, maybe the lyrics need to be tweeked a bit for the current situation.




Sting - Russians lyrics

In Europe and America, there's a growing feeling of hysteria
Conditioned to respond to all the threats
In the rhetorical speeches of the Soviets
Mr. Krushchev said we will bury you
I don't subscribe to this point of view
It would be such an ignorant thing to do
If the Russians love their children too

How can I save my little boy from Oppenheimer's deadly toy
There is no monopoly in common sense
On either side of the political fence
We share the same biology
Regardless of ideology
Believe me when I say to you
I hope the Russians love their children too

There is no historical precedent
To put the words in the mouth of the President
There's no such thing as a winnable war
It's a lie that we don't believe anymore
Mr. Reagan says we will protect you
I don't subscribe to this point of view
Believe me when I say to you
I hope the Russians love their children too

We share the same biology
Regardless of ideology
What might save us, me, and you
Is that the Russians love their children too

[MJS]

No .. we would just shoot them ... http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/4955074/ ... either way, dead.

Well, ya know...thats part of war!!! Personally, I think that we (the US) stick our nose into WAY too much stuff to begin with. We went to Iraq to look for WMD. Seeing as how we didnt find what we thought, we should have left. Over, done with. As much as I want to see our people come home, we need to realize that it was them who singed up for the service. To enlist and just go on the assumption that they could skate by, getting an education, etc. without the possibility of ever having to go to war, is poor thinking. I know it sounds harsh and like I dont care, but thats not the case. Its no different than someone becoming a firefighter and never dreaming in a million years that they'd ever have to walk into a burning building.

Mike

[Cruentus]

No .. we would just shoot them ... http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/4955074/ ... either way, dead.

I think that is why people are so appalled by the photo's (as they should be). The american dialectic is dependent on "us" thinking that we are "better" then "them." When we hear of the wrongs that we do, it destroys that idealect. There are distinct differences at times. Other times, there are not. We are not always as "better" as we would like to think.

[Rick Wade]

What do you mean, 'They do not think like we do'? .. Do they think with their liver?
Statements like these tend to be part of the 'dehumanization' process that allows people to kill someone else with enduring difficulties.

No don't be sarcastic. Don't argue, lets debate. What I was saying is that the way they have been brought up, as a society isn't as compassionate and sheltered as our way of living in the United States. I have been all around the world several times now and I can tell you first hand WE GOT IT GOOD real good. Just the fact that we can talk intelligently about this says allot for your country. In most third world countries most of you would have been turned in for talking bad about the government and you would have been sought out and imprisoned. Things like that make you think differently. Remember these people haven't had freedom of speech and expression for several decades if not centuries.

Respectfully

[Matt Stone]

I am an alcoholic practicing my 12th year of sobriety. You need not lecture me on where the responsibility lies. Perhaps someday you may discover alcoholism is a disease, not a choice; we don't blame those with cancer for their disease.

Well, actually, no I don't believe alcoholism is a disease... A disease happens to you, alcoholism (and drug abuse, spouse abuse, child abuse) is a choice. Made under a degree of duress, perhaps, but it doesn't just "happen." Alcoholics don't choose to be alcoholics, but they sure do choose to drink... But congratulations on your sobriety nonetheless. It's a long, hard road.


Justice and Vengeance are not the same thing.

No, they aren't, which is why I included them both in my admonishment to you to be sure that, in the situations I outlined, you call for neither.


Please be aware that more terrorist activities have occurred since 9/11/2001 than occurred in the same time period prior to September 11, 2001. Maybe not on U.S. soil, but the Marriott in Bali is pwned by a U.S. company. Al Qaeda's war is a world wide war.

And when, precisely, did I start giving two sh|ts about other countries? I care that my family is safe, first and foremost. All others come after that. Is it sad and terrible that other countries have had such a rough go since 9/11? You bet. But you'll notice that after we froze Osammy's accounts, bombed the bejeezus out of his training camps, arrested as many of his operatives as we could, and made getting into this country a tad bit tougher, things haven't been quite so noisy here at home, have they? Mission accomplished...


Or because the Bush Administration had to beat the drums to launch his 'Private Little War' against the 'Tyrrant' that tried to kill "his daddy".

Nice side benefit, don't you think? Be able to secure the country against outside attack and settle a grudge? I'm not seeing a problem there...


. . . I'm not sure that the Iraqis are 'glad' about anything.

Of course you aren't, dear. That's because your information comes from the media. I have at least a half dozen people on the ground that I speak with now and again, and they are saying that the word on the street, the word from the Everyday Joe, is that they are dead happy that Saddam is out of the picture. But then, that'd go against your arguments aimed at Dubya's head, so why would you admit that they might be happy about what has happened...


You are again arguing that 'Saddam' was part of the 'threat of terrorism'. This is just not true ... no matter how much some want to believe it.

No, I didn't say that. I said that he has a history of atrocities against his own people. I said that he was a tyrant. I never said he was necessarily a part of the "threat of terrorism." However, the friend of my enemy is my enemy. If he was going to allow Osammy to reside within his borders, he becomes part of the problem in one fashion or another. Again, Khaddafy made real sure that we knew he wasn't going to harbor anyone... A few well placed bombs back in the Reagan administration saw to it that the Colonel knows with whom he *****s when the US is concerned...


Of course, it is required that you believe this fallacy is true, in order to justify that we are 'doing the right thing'. If Saddam was not part of the 'threat of terrorism', then what we are doing is wrong, regardless of the outcome.

No, I am not "required" to believe anything. Thanks for painting me with the same brush you accuse everyone else of using - making broad generalizations about a person's motives based on a few statements.

I am reminded of a saying I heard a long time ago: "Who must do the harsh thing? He who can..." In this instance, and so many others, the rest of the world bellyaches to the US "Oooh, bail me out of my financial quagmire," or "oooh, please feed my starving people," or "oooh, please give us free medical care to save us from the diseases plaguing us." How about "oooh, please save my bacon from this other pissant third-world nobody that is rattling sabers at my borders?" We're good enough for these things, right? So we took the ball and ran with it. We finished a mission that should have been wrapped up over a decade ago. Some very few individuals have done reprehensible things on both sides. But I stand by the fact that what we have done pales in comparison, if for no other fact than because it is my people that are being affected...

Is that different from the Iraqis? Absolutely not. Which brings me to this gem:


What do you mean, 'They do not think like we do'? .. Do they think with their liver?
Statements like these tend to be part of the 'dehumanization' process that allows people to kill someone else with enduring difficulties.

No, they think based on their cultural background, which states that acts like the beheading are perfectly acceptable in retaliation to the US for the photos and abuse of the Iraqi prisoners. We don't think the same. They think death is preferable to humiliation. It is hard to get an American to feel strongly about anything to believe death is preferable, so the killing of an individual in place of anything else is abhorrent to us.

It is statements like yours that help to fuel the fires of those whose direct experience in any of these situations is lacking...

[Cryozombie]

Bear with me here... I might just be a little idealistic in this...

The way I perceive that the thinking differs is that OVERALL

(And I say overall, understanding that there are exceptions to this, such as the events we are discussing)

The "Western" Ideal is that we capture prisoners, we interrogate them, but we feed them, provide them medical attention, and for the most part do not kill them.

Our thinking has changed a bit over the years, and now We TRY as a group not to intentionally target civilian targets, yes, it happens, but its not our overall plan to say, "Lets Just Nuke Iraq and be done with it... to hell with the civilian population."

"Their" ideal is to Kill as many people as they can, regardless of their military or political affiliation... Bombing civilian buildings, trains, etc etc... it's all about the body count, not WHO the bodies belong to.

They capture, torture and rape on a regular basis. When it comes out that we have done that, the majority of our people scream foul, and look to punish those who did it. The majority of their people celebrate in the streets...

That's what *I* see the difference in our thinking as.
I agree that *we* are not always better, as certain circumstances have demonstrated, but in my opinion, *they* are worse more often.

[Matt Stone]

We share the same biology
Regardless of ideology
What might save us, me, and you
Is that the Russians love their children too

The problem is that, though we share biology, we do not necessarily share religion nor culture. This is the gulf that separates us. We believe in individual action, individual freedom, separation of church and state. They do not, and to suggest that church and state be separate is simply incomprehensible. This isn't necessarily their monopoly, either, as Mother Church felt quite the same for several hundred years...

The point is, we moved past that. We being "the West." For good or ill, we separated from the authority of religion and made politics and religion two distinct domains... They have not. This is what keeps us from finding a common ground, as much of what we propose is simply alien to their culture and way of thinking...

But you knew that, right?

[MJS]

Remember these people haven't had freedom of speech and expression for several decades if not centuries.

Thats very true. The sad thing is, is that any of them fail to see that that is what we're trying to give them. Unfortunately, it can't happen overnight.

Mike

[Cruentus]

Briefly...

The attitude that "I don't care about other countries" needs to go away too. Because we are a unilateral power, we can't possibly live in a vacuum. If other countries are in danger, so are we, and vice versa. Also, if we mistreat another country or play unfairly (as we often do with trade laws), it threatens our security directly because of our power. This needs to be understood.

Anyways....continue....

[Rick Wade]

Briefly...

The attitude that "I don't care about other countries" needs to go away too. Because we are a unilateral power, we can't possibly live in a vacuum. If other countries are in danger, so are we, and vice versa. Also, if we mistreat another country or play unfairly (as we often do with trade laws), it threatens our security directly because of our power. This needs to be understood.

Anyways....continue....

Good Point

I will clarify whether those people that did the beheading were Iraqi or not is null in void the fact that they belong to Al Queda is a huge point. I have absolutely no ill will to Iraqis or Muslims; my beef is with the Al Queda. A transfer in power will take place on 30 June and they will learn to stand on their own. For that I congratulate the Iraqi Nation.

P.S. the next hot bed that most of you probably haven't heard about the PI they are training terrorist over there also. This isn't our father's world anymore.

[Matt Stone]

Briefly...

The attitude that "I don't care about other countries" needs to go away too. Because we are a unilateral power, we can't possibly live in a vacuum. If other countries are in danger, so are we, and vice versa. Also, if we mistreat another country or play unfairly (as we often do with trade laws), it threatens our security directly because of our power. This needs to be understood.

Anyways....continue....

Agreed, however our Government's primary responsibility is to the people of the US, not the rest of the world. Confucius said that if everyone took care of their own backyard, the whole world would be just fine (I'm paraphrasing). We spend too much time worrying about other countries, and far too little worrying about our own. I applaud the fact that Dubya bolstered the security of our borders. It should have happened long ago.

I agree, though, that being the biggest, richest, fattest country makes us also the biggest, richest, fattest target for everyone on the block...

[MJS]

We spend too much time worrying about other countries, and far too little worrying about our own.

Yes, I agree!!! If some country wants to run around with guns and shoot people, then fine. As long as its not effecting us, let 'em kill each other.

Mike

[Makalakumu]

Nice side benefit, don't you think? Be able to secure the country against outside attack and settle a grudge? I'm not seeing a problem there...

Sure, that elation will last until you receive your first bill for said grudge settling. I hope you'll enjoy watching your kids be taxed to death for this, terrorist - no wait, wmd - no wait, humanitarian - no wait...what the hell is this war about anyway?

[Makalakumu]

The problem is that, though we share biology, we do not necessarily share religion nor culture. This is the gulf that separates us. We believe in individual action, individual freedom, separation of church and state. They do not, and to suggest that church and state be separate is simply incomprehensible. This isn't necessarily their monopoly, either, as Mother Church felt quite the same for several hundred years...

The point is, we moved past that. We being "the West." For good or ill, we separated from the authority of religion and made politics and religion two distinct domains... They have not. This is what keeps us from finding a common ground, as much of what we propose is simply alien to their culture and way of thinking...

But you knew that, right?

We have the same fanatical desires in our culture and religion. Genetic prediliction toward lebensraum anyone? Perhaps we have more in common then you think?

[MisterMike]

Iraqi sex, lies and videotape...

..on no, wait, it's just the Boston Globe:

http://www.worldnetdaily.com/news/article.asp?ARTICLE_ID=38464

But this isn't anti-American. I'm sure someone will speak to that effect.

[Cryozombie]

We have the same fanatical desires in our culture and religion. Genetic prediliction toward lebensraum anyone? Perhaps we have more in common then you think?

I'm sorry, I'm confused... I did not know what was, so I looked it up in Merriam-webster and found this:

territory believed especially by Nazis to be necessary for national existence or economic self-sufficiency

space required for life, growth, or activity

So, do you mean that we as a culture are pre-disposed to feel a need for land to survive? I'm not sure how you meant that last statement, can you "dumb it down" for me? Thanks.

[Rick Wade]

Iraqi sex, lies and videotape...

..on no, wait, it's just the Boston Globe:

http://www.worldnetdaily.com/news/article.asp?ARTICLE_ID=38464

But this isn't anti-American. I'm sure someone will speak to that effect.

I don't look at as anti American I just look at it as someone trying to stir the pot mainstream media, and they got caught.

They are right down there with the New York Times and making up stories to sell papers.

[michaeledward]

No don't be sarcastic. Don't argue, lets debate. What I was saying is that the way they have been brought up, as a society isn't as compassionate and sheltered as our way of living in the United States. I have been all around the world several times now and I can tell you first hand WE GOT IT GOOD real good. Just the fact that we can talk intelligently about this says allot for your country. In most third world countries most of you would have been turned in for talking bad about the government and you would have been sought out and imprisoned. Things like that make you think differently. Remember these people haven't had freedom of speech and expression for several decades if not centuries.

Respectfully
I was not being sarcastic. I was being damned serious. To say that a member of the same species thinks in a different way is to accuse them of being something 'other' than what we are. In context, this usually means something 'less' than we are. This arguement has been made for hundreds or thousands of years to justify invasions and murder. I am certain that Iraqi husbands love their wives in just the same manner that I love my wife. I am certain that Afghanistan mothers love their children in just the same way I love my children.

Most third world countries have strong religous societies, because it allows concentration of power and authority; it prevents revolt. Anyone familiar with Islam knows that it is a loving gentle religion. The roots of Islam are in the same Old Testament read by Christains around the world. The roots of Islam are the same as the Tora used as a guide for millions of Jews. Muslems believe in Abraham, Isaac and Jesus.

Those in this country who say that their religion teaches hate know nothing of the religion, and are practicing the same behavior that Eugenics believers practiced throughout the 20th century, and used to justify killing of millions.

[michaeledward]

... the friend of my enemy is my enemy. If he was going to allow Osammy to reside within his borders, he becomes part of the problem in one fashion or another.
Saddam Hussein and Osama bin Laden were not friends. All of the experts agree it would be a cold day in hell before Hussein allowed bin Laden into his country.



No, I am not "required" to believe anything. Thanks for painting me with the same brush you accuse everyone else of using - making broad generalizations about a person's motives based on a few statements.In order to follow the logic of your argument, and accept it as valid, belief in the underlying principle is required. Your argument was, as I read it "We did the right thing in deposing Saddam Hussein because of 9/11" ... now, that is paraphrased a bit ... but let's recap your argument;




And ultimately, after 9/11, you'll notice nothing else has been bombed (as threatened repeatedly), you'll notice Osama doesn't show up much on the news (because he is either no longer news, or no longer a threat?), you'll notice that most Iraqis are glad Sadaam is gone. Whatever got us there, we did the right thing, are doing the right thing, and will continue doing the right thing until the threat of terrorism, the threat of murder by psychopaths with a political agenda, is ended.You clearly state that we are doing the right thing until the 'threat of terrorism is ended'. --- IRAQ was not a terrorist threat! And unless you believe that it was, the invasion of Iraq can not be justified.



No, they think based on their cultural background, which states that acts like the beheading are perfectly acceptable in retaliation to the US for the photos and abuse of the Iraqi prisoners.
Which states are acting that the execution of Mr. Berg was 'perfectly acceptable'?

[michaeledward]

Iraqi sex, lies and videotape...
..on no, wait, it's just the Boston Globe:
http://www.worldnetdaily.com/news/article.asp?ARTICLE_ID=38464
But this isn't anti-American. I'm sure someone will speak to that effect.Mike, you're right ... this is repugnant. But, it will soon desensitize the American public, so that when the real photos emerge, the masses will not revolt.

Hell, the right wing talk radio are playing the activities in Abu Ghraib as 'Fraternaty Pranks' and 'Pornography'. I'm sure that's exactly what was going on over there; just like a good hazing at Alpha Alpha Beta Zeta Thong.

I'm more interested in hearing what Senate Majority Leader Frist had to say about his private screening today.

Mike

OK all, sorry for the repeated posts ... I'll try to contain myself in the future ...

[Ender]

Well I've been gone a few days and am just now getting caught up with this "event". From what I've gathered from some articles is that Iraqi prisoners were tortured and humiliated. From some accounts there was forced sodomy, homosexual sex acts, beatings, and humiliation. While many of theses abuses are repugnant, much of it is psychological. I personally don't see a problem using mind games on prisoners as a way to gather information or intelligence. Forcing them to stand naked, having them stand on a box and telling them they will be electrocuted if they get off the box, or excercizing them strenously I don't consider abuse. But beatings and abhorrent sex acts I do. But I am proud of this country, proud because WE found these abuses and are working to resolve them. WE put this out and let the world know about it. Our own military was working on this well before it became public. And WE will fix it and take care of it. I haven't read all the posts on this subject, but I'm sure many will try to use this as a politcal ploy against Bush. This I find just as abhorrent. Some will say he should take responsibility and resign. Well ,taking responsibility means to fix the problem and find a way so it doesn't happen again. Not to quit, or run away from the problem. Those that did these acts will be court martialed and punished.

Now, onto the recent beheading of Nick Berg. If you haven't looked at the video, you should. It is one of the most horrifying things I have seen. If you look at it you will see how these monsters grab him by the hair. Dragged him to the ground. Take a knife and started hacking away at his throat. you will hear his screams of pain and anguish. Then the silence of him no longer screaming because he is dead. And you will see how they continue to hack away at his neck, cutting away his head and holding it up as some trophy. And do you think we will get an apology for this? Where is the Arab outrage over this incident? Thats the difference between us and them. We find the abuses in our system and are repulsed by them. But these..these extremists are nothing but dogs, and this is what we are fighting against. this is why we are taking the fight to them. These extremists have no conscience. They don't care if you are a Republican or a Democrat, they will kill you anyway. And if we catch them, I would like to see the abuses done to these swine tenfold. But thats just me.

[marshallbd]

I was not being sarcastic. I was being damned serious. To say that a member of the same species thinks in a different way is to accuse them of being something 'other' than what we are. In context, this usually means something 'less' than we are. This arguement has been made for hundreds or thousands of years to justify invasions and murder. I am certain that Iraqi husbands love their wives in just the same manner that I love my wife. I am certain that Afghanistan mothers love their children in just the same way I love my children.
I dont think anyone is saying that they are a different species, I think that they are saying that your environment, be it poitical or social, does influence your thoughts and feelings and BEHAVIORS (in caps for emphasis not to yell). :asian:

[michaeledward]

Well I've been gone a few days and am just now getting caught up with this "event". From what I've gathered from some articles is that Iraqi prisoners were tortured and humiliated. From some accounts there was forced sodomy, homosexual sex acts, beatings, and humiliation. While many of theses abuses are repugnant, much of it is psychological. I personally don't see a problem using mind games on prisoners as a way to gather information or intelligence. Forcing them to stand naked, having them stand on a box and telling them they will be electrocuted if they get off the box, or excercizing them strenously I don't consider abuse. But beatings and abhorrent sex acts I do. But I am proud of this country, proud because WE found these abuses and are working to resolve them. WE put this out and let the world know about it. Our own military was working on this well before it became public. And WE will fix it and take care of it. I haven't read all the posts on this subject, but I'm sure many will try to use this as a politcal ploy against Bush. This I find just as abhorrent. Some will say he should take responsibility and resign. Well ,taking responsibility means to fix the problem and find a way so it doesn't happen again. Not to quit, or run away from the problem. Those that did these acts will be court martialed and punished.

Now, onto the recent beheading of Nick Berg. If you haven't looked at the video, you should. It is one of the most horrifying things I have seen. If you look at it you will see how these monsters grab him by the hair. Dragged him to the ground. Take a knife and started hacking away at his throat. you will hear his screams of pain and anguish. Then the silence of him no longer screaming because he is dead. And you will see how they continue to hack away at his neck, cutting away his head and holding it up as some trophy. And do you think we will get an apology for this? Where is the Arab outrage over this incident? Thats the difference between us and them. We find the abuses in our system and are repulsed by them. But these..these extremists are nothing but dogs, and this is what we are fighting against. this is why we are taking the fight to them. These extremists have no conscience. They don't care if you are a Republican or a Democrat, they will kill you anyway. And if we catch them, I would like to see the abuses done to these swine tenfold. But thats just me.
Spoken like someone with no knowledge of the facts.
* The abuse of prisoners in the US Prisons in Iraq was first discovered and reported by the International Red Cross.
* Activities to report the abuse were slow and / or non existant from the US Military
* The outrage about the Berg killing can be heard loud and clear in the streets of Baghdad, if one chooses to listen to the reports.

Regards - Mike

[michaeledward]

I dont think anyone is saying that they are a different species, I think that they are saying that your environment, be it poitical or social, does influence your thoughts and feelings and BEHAVIORS (in caps for emphasis not to yell). :asian:
What if, for example, you look at statement 166 in this thread, by Ender, through the lens of 'dehumanizing' the enemy. That WE think and act in a noble and honorable way; that THEY are a brutal, animal people that are not like us, and therefore deserve what they have coming to them; and WE are justified in reigning our justice down on them, because THEY are not like us; those EXTREMISTS.

I think it is very clear that many on this thread are saying exactly that those 'Arabs' are a different species; obviously not understanding the term. They are putting forth a Eugenics argument.

[marshallbd]

What if, for example, you look at statement 166 in this thread, by Ender, through the lens of 'dehumanizing' the enemy. That WE think and act in a noble and honorable way; that THEY are a brutal, animal people that are not like us, and therefore deserve what they have coming to them; and WE are justified in reigning our justice down on them, because THEY are not like us; those EXTREMISTS.

I think it is very clear that many on this thread are saying exactly that those 'Arabs' are a different species; obviously not understanding the term. They are putting forth a Eugenics argument.
I understand what you are saying and I do not agree with people looking at someone as a person or a race and saying they are not worth anything. Being a person of Arabic descent does not make you an animal....the ideology that SOME, not all, Arabic people embrace is what creates the problem....

By the way for those who do not know the word as I didn't...

from dictionary.com...

Eugenics

n : the study of methods of improving genetic qualities by selective breeding (especially as applied to human mating) :asian:

[MJS]

Iraqi sex, lies and videotape...

..on no, wait, it's just the Boston Globe:

http://www.worldnetdaily.com/news/article.asp?ARTICLE_ID=38464

But this isn't anti-American. I'm sure someone will speak to that effect.

Ahh...Very interesting. I'm glad you found that link, because in my first post on this thread I made the comment "If its true", referring to the pics. and I got this response from another poster here. This is what he said.


First of all, "if it's true," is kind of a crazy thing to say, IMHO, considering we have the photo's to prove it. Plus, attrocities happened in war...go back and read my previous posts that explained why. Yes, they happened on both sides, but 2 wrongs don't make a right.

Just goes to show that you shouldnt believe everything that you see.

Mike

[MJS]

I don't look at as anti American I just look at it as someone trying to stir the pot mainstream media, and they got caught.

They are right down there with the New York Times and making up stories to sell papers.

Whats interesting, and maybe someone already brought this point up, I dont know, but why are these photos just surfacing now???? Considering that the war has been going on for a while now, is this so called 'abuse' just being discovered now or was it happening for a while??

Mike

[MJS]

Spoken like someone with no knowledge of the facts.
* The abuse of prisoners in the US Prisons in Iraq was first discovered and reported by the International Red Cross.
* Activities to report the abuse were slow and / or non existant from the US Military
* The outrage about the Berg killing can be heard loud and clear in the streets of Baghdad, if one chooses to listen to the reports.

Regards - Mike

Well, ya know what...it amazes me how people like the Red Cross, and all of the other groups who are so concerned with how the prisoners are being treated, are the first ones to cause the problem. Some of these prisoners there, if not tied up, would not think twice about attacking a soldier. Many of these people are violent and need to be restrained. A prison is not a country club, therefore why provide them with all of the amenities of one??? Do you honestly think that if they had an American hostage, they would treat them good?? I dont think so!

Its funny though..I havent heard anything about the expression of outrage against Berg from the 'people in the streets'. Why isnt that published in the paper?? Maybe it is, I dont know, but I havent seen or heard about it.

Mike

[marshallbd]

Its funny though..I havent heard anything about the expression of outrage against Berg from the 'people in the streets'. Why isnt that published in the paper?? Maybe it is, I dont know, but I havent seen or heard about it.

MikeI too, have not seen or heard of the reaction on the streets in Iraq concerning the beheading that took place. Again, I would like to offer my prayers for Mr Berg and his Family....

On a side note, One of the 4 people whose bodies were mutilated and dragged through the streets last month was a martial artist and actor. You might remeber him from the movie GI Jane...he was the seal instructor during the training sequences of that movie (According to BlackBelt Magazine) :asian:

[MJS]

What if, for example, you look at statement 166 in this thread, by Ender, through the lens of 'dehumanizing' the enemy. That WE think and act in a noble and honorable way; that THEY are a brutal, animal people that are not like us, and therefore deserve what they have coming to them; and WE are justified in reigning our justice down on them, because THEY are not like us; those EXTREMISTS.

I think it is very clear that many on this thread are saying exactly that those 'Arabs' are a different species; obviously not understanding the term. They are putting forth a Eugenics argument.

I gotta agree with Ender on this one. One thing to keep in mind here, is that these people would rather die than cooperate with the US. If you think back, we've used these sorts of tactics before and they've had good results. Blasting music for hours on end, in addition to other techs. used to mentally wear them down have been used for a long time. Granted, and I'll say it again, IF these pics of prisoners in sexual positions are real, then no, that is not right. But making them stand on a box, telling them if they fall they'll get zapped....why not??

Mike

[MJS]

I too, have not seen or heard of the reaction on the streets in Iraq concerning the beheading that took place. Again, I would like to offer my prayers for Mr Berg and his Family....

On a side note, One of the 4 people whose bodies were mutilated and dragged through the streets last month was a martial artist and actor. You might remeber him from the movie GI Jane...he was the seal instructor during the training sequences of that movie (According to BlackBelt Magazine) :asian:

I gotta wonder if there was outrage at the dragging of the bodies through the streets as well??? I cant seem to recall if there was or not, but if I had to wager a bet, I'd say that there was none.

Mike

[michaeledward]

Its funny though..I havent heard anything about the expression of outrage against Berg from the 'people in the streets'. Why isnt that published in the paper?? Maybe it is, I dont know, but I havent seen or heard about it.

Mike
Follow this link to listen to a news report concerning Iraqi response to Berg's murder.
http://www.npr.org/features/feature.php?wfId=1894191

[MisterMike]

* The outrage about the Berg killing can be heard loud and clear in the streets of Baghdad, if one chooses to listen to the reports.

Regards - Mike

I would think this is probably true. I do not think the Iraqi people want al-Qaeda-types in there cutting off the heads of Americans just for the simple fact it draws an overwhelming response from the U.S. Military, in the same fashion of how we shelled Falluja and that other place when the cleric was hangin' out.

I look forward to our response to this one...

[rmcrobertson]

So, if I understand correctly, the logic is:

a) It was OK because it wasn't torture.

b) It's OK because here on the greatest country on earth, we took care of it already;

c) It's OK, because look at what, "those people," did to poor Nicholas Berg.

So, in other words, it didn't happen, we fixed it, and anyway it was their fault in the first place. Never seen a better illustration of Freud's bucket joke.

[marshallbd]

Follow this link to listen to a news report concerning Iraqi response to Berg's murder.
http://www.npr.org/features/feature.php?wfId=1894191"Un-Islamic"? Isn't 99% of what goes on over there "un-Islamic". I am not muslim or islamic, but from what I understand, the Islamic religion is a peaceful religion the same as christianity. So where in the Koran or the Bible does it talk about a holy war with terrorism as the principal means of fighting? :asian:

[MJS]

Follow this link to listen to a news report concerning Iraqi response to Berg's murder.
http://www.npr.org/features/feature.php?wfId=1894191

Thanks for the link. Its good that there was something said, but is a shame that people have to go online to hear the report rather than being able to read about it in the paper. Again, maybe it has been printed, I dont know, but I havent seen anything.

Mike

[michaeledward]

Thanks for the link. Its good that there was something said, but is a shame that people have to go online to hear the report rather than being able to read about it in the paper. Again, maybe it has been printed, I dont know, but I havent seen anything.

Mike
Do you know of any newspapers that have their own reporters on the ground in Iraq? Or are they dependent on Associate Press reports? Seems to me that most major news organizations have spent the last decade reducing their overseas staff. The BBC does a pretty good job internationally. And PRI recently introduced a program called 'The World' (co sponsored by WBUR in Boston), that reports stories from overseas.

[michaeledward]

"Un-Islamic"? Isn't 99% of what goes on over there "un-Islamic". I am not muslim or islamic, but from what I understand, the Islamic religion is a peaceful religion the same as christianity. So where in the Koran or the Bible does it talk about a holy war with terrorism as the principal means of fighting? :asian:


Deuteronomy 7
1 When the LORD thy God shall bring thee into the land whither thou goest to possess it, and hath cast out many nations before thee, the Hittites, and the Girgashites, and the Amorites, and the Canaanites, and the Perizzites, and the Hivites, and the Jebusites, seven nations greater and mightier than thou; 2 And when the LORD thy God shall deliver them before thee; thou shalt smite them, and utterly destroy them; thou shalt make no covenant with them, nor shew mercy unto them: 3 Neither shalt thou make marriages with them; thy daughter thou shalt not give unto his son, nor his daughter shalt thou take unto thy son. 4 For they will turn away thy son from following me, that they may serve other gods: so will the anger of the LORD be kindled against you, and destroy thee suddenly. 5 But thus shall ye deal with them; ye shall destroy their altars, and break down their images, and cut down their groves, and burn their graven images with fire. 6 For thou art an holy people unto the LORD thy God: the LORD thy God hath chosen thee to be a special people unto himself, above all people that are upon the face of the earth.

You can use the Bible to justify almost anything.

[MisterMike]

Deuteronomy 7
1 When the LORD thy God shall bring thee into the land whither thou goest to possess it, and hath cast out many nations before thee, the Hittites, and the Girgashites, and the Amorites, and the Canaanites, and the Perizzites, and the Hivites, and the Jebusites, seven nations greater and mightier than thou; 2 And when the LORD thy God shall deliver them before thee; thou shalt smite them, and utterly destroy them; thou shalt make no covenant with them, nor shew mercy unto them: 3 Neither shalt thou make marriages with them; thy daughter thou shalt not give unto his son, nor his daughter shalt thou take unto thy son. 4 For they will turn away thy son from following me, that they may serve other gods: so will the anger of the LORD be kindled against you, and destroy thee suddenly. 5 But thus shall ye deal with them; ye shall destroy their altars, and break down their images, and cut down their groves, and burn their graven images with fire. 6 For thou art an holy people unto the LORD thy God: the LORD thy God hath chosen thee to be a special people unto himself, above all people that are upon the face of the earth.

You can use the Bible to justify almost anything.

Just thought I'd put the NIV version for easier reading:

1 When the LORD your God brings you into the land you are entering to possess and drives out before you many nations-the Hittites, Girgashites, Amorites, Canaanites, Perizzites, Hivites and Jebusites, seven nations larger and stronger than you- 2 and when the LORD your God has delivered them over to you and you have defeated them, then you must destroy them totally. Make no treaty with them, and show them no mercy. 3 Do not intermarry with them. Do not give your daughters to their sons or take their daughters for your sons, 4 for they will turn your sons away from following me to serve other gods, and the LORD's anger will burn against you and will quickly destroy you. 5 This is what you are to do to them: Break down their altars, smash their sacred stones, cut down their Asherah poles and burn their idols in the fire. 6 For you are a people holy to the LORD your God. The LORD your God has chosen you out of all the peoples on the face of the earth to be his people, his treasured possession.

But what this has to do with Iraq I do not know.

[michaeledward]

But what this has to do with Iraq I do not know.Someone asked where in the Bible it talks about 'Holy War'. This is just one place. I am not arguing in favor of this behavior, or justifying anything with it. Just pointing out the reference.

[Tgace]

Alright..beside all the round and round ..what should be done that isnt being done right now.

[marshallbd]

Deuteronomy 7
1 When the LORD thy God shall bring thee into the land whither thou goest to possess it, and hath cast out many nations before thee, the Hittites, and the Girgashites, and the Amorites, and the Canaanites, and the Perizzites, and the Hivites, and the Jebusites, seven nations greater and mightier than thou; 2 And when the LORD thy God shall deliver them before thee; thou shalt smite them, and utterly destroy them; thou shalt make no covenant with them, nor shew mercy unto them: 3 Neither shalt thou make marriages with them; thy daughter thou shalt not give unto his son, nor his daughter shalt thou take unto thy son. 4 For they will turn away thy son from following me, that they may serve other gods: so will the anger of the LORD be kindled against you, and destroy thee suddenly. 5 But thus shall ye deal with them; ye shall destroy their altars, and break down their images, and cut down their groves, and burn their graven images with fire. 6 For thou art an holy people unto the LORD thy God: the LORD thy God hath chosen thee to be a special people unto himself, above all people that are upon the face of the earth.

You can use the Bible to justify almost anything.But that is an order for war not terrorism...in my eyes they are very different...

[marshallbd]

Deuteronomy 7
1 When the LORD thy God shall bring thee into the land whither thou goest to possess it, and hath cast out many nations before thee, the Hittites, and the Girgashites, and the Amorites, and the Canaanites, and the Perizzites, and the Hivites, and the Jebusites, seven nations greater and mightier than thou; 2 And when the LORD thy God shall deliver them before thee; thou shalt smite them, and utterly destroy them; thou shalt make no covenant with them, nor shew mercy unto them: 3 Neither shalt thou make marriages with them; thy daughter thou shalt not give unto his son, nor his daughter shalt thou take unto thy son. 4 For they will turn away thy son from following me, that they may serve other gods: so will the anger of the LORD be kindled against you, and destroy thee suddenly. 5 But thus shall ye deal with them; ye shall destroy their altars, and break down their images, and cut down their groves, and burn their graven images with fire. 6 For thou art an holy people unto the LORD thy God: the LORD thy God hath chosen thee to be a special people unto himself, above all people that are upon the face of the earth.

You can use the Bible to justify almost anything.
But your point was well made....

[MJS]

Do you know of any newspapers that have their own reporters on the ground in Iraq? Or are they dependent on Associate Press reports? Seems to me that most major news organizations have spent the last decade reducing their overseas staff. The BBC does a pretty good job internationally. And PRI recently introduced a program called 'The World' (co sponsored by WBUR in Boston), that reports stories from overseas.

Honestly, I couldnt tell you. But, I can say that seeing as how this war thing is such an important thing, I would think that every news paper, would get the info. somehow.

Mike

[Ender]

Spoken like someone with no knowledge of the facts.
* The abuse of prisoners in the US Prisons in Iraq was first discovered and reported by the International Red Cross.
* Activities to report the abuse were slow and / or non existant from the US Military
* The outrage about the Berg killing can be heard loud and clear in the streets of Baghdad, if one chooses to listen to the reports.

Regards - Mike

And you sound like someone who likes to select the facts he hears.

All accounts I have read have shown that the first identification of the problem came from within the military. Several weeks before the Red Cross became involved. These accounts came from CNN and MSNBC. Second, the military is a large government organization, and like any large government organization, action is not usually quick. Third, the outrage you claim has been minimal. I have not seen any official, govenment leader, or Islamic leader condemn the beheading....yet.

Best regards-Ender

[Cruentus]

2 things...

I don't know the answer as to whether it was the red cross or the military that found out first, but instead of speculating, lets post a source. If you have a source for Red Cross being first, Mike, please post it. Ender, if you have a source saying military was the first, please post that.

Second thing, are american news sites actually showing footage of the be-heading, or is this just something on the Islamic websites?

[michaeledward]

And you sound like someone who likes to select the facts he hears.

All accounts I have read have shown that the first identification of the problem came from within the military. Several weeks before the Red Cross became involved. These accounts came from CNN and MSNBC. Second, the military is a large government organization, and like any large government organization, action is not usually quick. Third, the outrage you claim has been minimal. I have not seen any official, govenment leader, or Islamic leader condemn the beheading....yet.

Best regards-Ender
The following is from the International Committee of the Red Cross, and can be read in more detail on their web site

http://www.icrc.org/Web/eng/siteeng0.nsf/html/5YRMYC?OpenDocument


A second point I would like to make is that this report includes observations and recommendations from visits that took place between March and November 2003. The report itself was handed over to the Coalition Forces (CF) in February of 2004.

This is important to understand in the sense that what appears in the report of February 2004 are observations consistent with those made earlier on several occasions orally and in writing throughout 2003. In that sense the ICRC has repeatedly made its concerns known to the Coalition Forces and requested corrective measures prior to the submission of this particular report.
And to the response of Berg's murder ... the Arab News web site posts the following
http://www.arabnews.com/?page=7&section=0&article=44854&d=13&m=5&y=2004&pix=opinion.jpg&category=Opinion


Now there are new pictures, taken this time not by American soldiers, but by Arab combatants — of an American civilian being beheaded by an alleged Iraqi Al-Qaeda group, of Palestinian militants holding high in triumph a bloody body part from an slain Israeli soldier alongside a copy of the Qur’an — a picture so revolting and outrageous that we could not, would not, publish it.

[Cruentus]

Thank you Mike.

So...who exactly is publishing this footage of the beheading on the web? Ender said that we should see this horrifying attrocity, but I don't see where anyone is actually showing the film.

[michaeledward]

Adult Content and Sensitivity Alert!!


I have not seen the video ...
I understand the video was removed from several servers on the web, particuarly in Indonesia. I am sure there are still mirror sites out there.

The following link does have still photos. The link has many violent images. The link is generally supportive of the 'Iraqi Resistance', and this is a position that I do not favor, so please don't yell at me just because I posted the link... thanks


Adult Content and Sensitivity Alert!!

URL DELETED DUE TO CONTENT OF ADULTS ENGAGED IN SEXUAL ACTS
SEIG
MT ADMIN

For the still photos of Berg's murder ... scroll down the page.

Please use with Caution ....

Adult Content and Sensitivity Alert!!

[Cruentus]

Adult Content and Sensitivity Alert!!


I have not seen the video ...
I understand the video was removed from several servers on the web, particuarly in Indonesia. I am sure there are still mirror sites out there.

The following link does have still photos. The link has many violent images. The link is generally supportive of the 'Iraqi Resistance', and this is a position that I do not favor, so please don't yell at me just because I posted the link... thanks


Adult Content and Sensitivity Alert!!

URL DELETED DUE TO SEXUAL ACTS

For the still photos of Berg's murder ... scroll down the page.

Please use with Caution ....

Adult Content and Sensitivity Alert!!
That was the most hateful website I have ever seen. So it is websites like these that are showing the footage, not credable news sites. That's just what I was wondering about.

[Kembudo-Kai Kempoka]

But that is an order for war not terrorism...in my eyes they are very different...Religious ideology can be spun for all kinds of whacky crap. Anybody remember Mr. Falwell asserting that 9/11 was Gods punishment for abortion and gays in America? Sound like the act of a God who loved mankind (ALL mankind) so much, that he incarnated into the flesh, and was tortured to death for the salvation of (let's see, perfect people? Nope. Oh yeah...) sinners?

As for the Deut. piece...Old Testament is filled with lines of this and similar ilk, including one that even mentions not letting the chickens or livestock live, calling for total annihilation. One step further? There are Hindi teachers who have explained the Holocaust as Kharma on the reincarned souls of the Israelites who committed acts of religious genocide, as per biblical history.

Praise God, and pass the ammunition?

Oxymoron: "Holy War". Joseph Campbell said in his taped video series that man seeing the divinity in another man is not capable of acts of war. As long as we see the Thou in another, we will greet them as part of the Sacred. We must, necessarily, demote the "Thou" to an "it" to be able to destroy.

Were the Iraqi prisoners being viewed as "Thou" by their captors? Are we viewed as "Thou" by those who seek to steer plane into our landmarks, or drive bombs into our embassies? Are they comparable acts? On scale, of course not. In principle, they all require ignoring the divine spark of life present in each of us...on and by both sides. Yet we all believe we are right.

The execution squad afficianado has spoken.

D.

[rmcrobertson]

I suspect that the quote from Deuteronomy has to do with the repeated suggestions and claims--on this thread and elsewhere--that the problem in Iraq isn't just a few bad apples, it's with a religion that is in its very nature perverse and violent. The quote simply points out that if we're gonna go to Qu'ran and pick out the ugly bits, then use those bits to bolster a claim that Islam is sick as a religion, well, we better fess up that there are things just as ugly and as sick in the Old Testament.

As for the claim that this was war, not terrorism, so it's OK...whew. I refer youto the Nuremberg Trials (hell, at least watch the movie...Spencer Tracy, Maximilian Schell, Marlene Dietrich, Ruchard Widmark, and BURT LANCASTER), as well asthe Geneva Accords, to which the US is a signatory nation.

"War," does not make this crap OK. Neither does Christ's message, last I checked.

[Touch Of Death]

Sorry to single out your post...

Apparently rape is no big deal either, huh. Just fraternity stuff right? Well, maybe it is fraternity stuff....the kind that should end you up in jail.



PAUL
:asian:hows that go again? these porn shots you have posted won't land frat boys in jail. Porn isn't illeagal ... yet :uhyeah:
Sean

[Ender]

WASHINGTON (CNN) -- The International Committee of the Red Cross began discussing allegations of prison abuse of Iraqi prisoners in February, at which point Secretary of State Colin Powell began raising the issue with other Cabinet members, State Department officials have said.

Powell "wanted to make sure the concerns of the [Red Cross] were addressed," and "the administration was open to the recommendations of the [Red Cross]," a senior official said Thursday.

Powell said he spoke Thursday with Red Cross President Jakob Kellenberger and assured him the U.S. government is dealing with the charges of abuse of the Iraqi prisoners.

"We will answer in a comprehensive way," Powell told reporters.

Antonella Notari, a Red Cross spokeswoman, said its employees had been visiting Abu Ghraib prison for some time and had been reporting on their findings and recommendations in writing to U.S. authorities.

One State Department official said Powell exerted pressure on the administration regarding the issue of releasing some of the Iraqi detainees.

"He said, 'We have to address this if we want to advance the political process.' He said we have to release the ones that can be released, and for those that can't, decide what to do with them," the official said, noting this was the same position Powell took regarding detainees at Guantanamo Bay, Cuba.

This official said that in recent months the United States began to hear charges of abuse of Iraqi prisoners from Lakhdar Brahimi, the United Nations envoy who has been working in Iraq on the political transition. Brahimi also engaged Robert Blackwell, the White House point man on Iraq.

Powell first became aware of the prison abuse allegations in January, when they were reported "internally" throughout the U.S. government, State Department spokesman Richard Boucher said

[OUMoose]

That was the most hateful website I have ever seen. So it is websites like these that are showing the footage, not credable news sites. That's just what I was wondering about.


Check this (http://www.salon.com/tech/feature/2004/05/12/beheading_video/index.html) site I put in my previous post if you REALLY want to see it... It is exceptionally graphic, however, so you have been warned. Just minimize the browser for a couple seconds during their little commercial to get access to the site.

[Cryozombie]

So, if I understand correctly, the logic is:


c) It's OK, because look at what, "those people," did to poor Nicholas Berg.
.

Right right right.

How about look at what, "those people," did to poor

http://www.september11victims.com/september11victims/victims_list.htm

Of course you in your University Fantasyland will find a way to discount that, and allow your heart to bleed for the poor Terrorists, Al-Queda supporters, Al-Zarqawi, and Al-Queda members we are killing/humiliating in return.



So, in other words, it didn't happen, we fixed it, and anyway it was their fault in the first place. Never seen a better illustration of Freud's bucket joke.

Oh, there is that fantasy world imposing itself on reality. Get off the LSD buddy and realize NO ONE here said it didn't happen, most people aren't even "for it" having happend. Even the ones who are "for it" condemmed MOST of the actions, but agreed with the "Pyschological Warfare" aspects of it... somthing we have been doing FOREVER... Mainly because A certain level of interrogation IS neccessary... and giving them a comfy chair, a prime rib dinner, and a thereputic massage wont cut it... but the line DOES need to be drawn somewhere... Personally I would say at "physical" abuse. But psychological... well... Hell, even our police do that to our citizens... depriving them of food/sleep durring "interviews", stripping them naked, body cavity searches, lies and intimidation... cry about that for a while to Robert. Oh wait, those are americans that is happening to, thats ok isn't it?

[michaeledward]

Right right right.

How about look at what, "those people," did to poor

http://www.september11victims.com/september11victims/victims_list.htm

Again, people weem to be mixing up the arguments. Technopunk ... you aren't saying that the people in prison in Iraq had something to do with the attacks on September 11th, are you? Even the President has stated publicly that Iraq was not involved in September 11th.

It seems that you are arguing that because 2948 were killed on September 11th, the United States can perpetrate any act on any person anywhere in the world. That doesn't seem right.

[Cryozombie]

Third, the outrage you claim has been minimal. I have not seen any official, govenment leader, or Islamic leader condemn the beheading....yet.

Best regards-Ender

Not that I think they are the most un-biased news service... but...



CIA official: Al-Zarqawi likely beheaded Berg
Thursday, May 13, 2004 Posted: 1:58 PM EDT (1758 GMT)

Three Arab states -- Saudi Arabia, Jordan and the United Arab Emirates --- have condemned Berg's murder. "There is no doubt that killing detainees and mutilating the remains of the dead are acts which are condemned by all religions and contrary to the morals of all nations and peoples," Saudi Ambassador Prince Bandar bin Sultan said in a statement released Wednesday.

[MJS]

I suspect that the quote from Deuteronomy has to do with the repeated suggestions and claims--on this thread and elsewhere--that the problem in Iraq isn't just a few bad apples, it's with a religion that is in its very nature perverse and violent. The quote simply points out that if we're gonna go to Qu'ran and pick out the ugly bits, then use those bits to bolster a claim that Islam is sick as a religion, well, we better fess up that there are things just as ugly and as sick in the Old Testament.

As for the claim that this was war, not terrorism, so it's OK...whew. I refer youto the Nuremberg Trials (hell, at least watch the movie...Spencer Tracy, Maximilian Schell, Marlene Dietrich, Ruchard Widmark, and BURT LANCASTER), as well asthe Geneva Accords, to which the US is a signatory nation.

"War," does not make this crap OK. Neither does Christ's message, last I checked.

Robert--Would you care to enlighten us to your solutions as how you think the situation should be solved??

Mike

[Cryozombie]

Again, people weem to be mixing up the arguments. Technopunk ... you aren't saying that the people in prison in Iraq had something to do with the attacks on September 11th, are you? Even the President has stated publicly that Iraq was not involved in September 11th.

It seems that you are arguing that because 2948 were killed on September 11th, the United States can perpetrate any act on any person anywhere in the world. That doesn't seem right.

No No, but it was stated that the Al-Queda was responsible for Bergs beheading, and Robert seems to be arguing that Berg was the "Only person" they killed. And actually, Thinking about it, I would say that Radical Terrorists who openly assassinate Americans as a RESULT of what we do to some prisoners SUGGESTS a connection somehow... even if its only a "brothers in arms" kind of connection.

Oh, and... I have openly stated many times that we went TOO far in what we did, if a lot of what they claim happend is true... so no, we cannot perpetrate ANY act on ANY person.

[MJS]

So, if I understand correctly, the logic is:

[quote]a) It was OK because it wasn't torture.

Umm..It wasnt torture!!!! That would be beating them with sticks or whips. 2 very different things here Rob. Shame that you dont see it. Mental abuse or hacking someones head off??? Gee, one looks more violent to me


b) It's OK because here on the greatest country on earth, we took care of it already;

Well, last time I checked, the good old USA looked like a damn good place to live to me!!!! And if this country wasnt so great Rob, then let me ask you, why do soooooooooooo many people from soooooooooooo many other countries imigrate to the USA??? Makes ya wonder.


c) It's OK, because look at what, "those people," did to poor Nicholas Berg.

What they did to Berg was SICK!!! PERIOD!!!! These people only understand 1 thing, and that 1 thing is violence!!! Every time you see a pic. of a burning vehicle, what else do you see?? A group of these sh**bags standing around, laughing, smiling, cheering, holding up a piece of the wreckage. We are there to get rid of the terrorists, and attempt to give these people a better life, and what do they do???

Mike

[Cryozombie]

Robert--Would you care to enlighten us to your solutions as how you think the situation should be solved??

Mike

He won't. He will go off on some wild tangent that has nothing to do with anything you ask him... as usual.

[Ender]

Not that I think they are the most un-biased news service... but...

Well finally!...they were slow to act don'tcha think?*L...*chuckles

[michaeledward]

Well finally!...they were slow to act don'tcha think?*L...*chucklesLet's see ... Quote from MSNBC article ...
"The videotape, posted on an al-Qaida-linked Web site Tuesday, drew revulsion around the world."







If the video was posted after the news cycle in the middle east (which it was - the world is round, you know)... how much time do you think it should take to react?



Video posted on the web Tuesday
Viewable and reportable in the Middle East on Wednesday
Thursday reports of condemnation reported in the US.


Curiously - Mike

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/4971314/


PS. - One last thought ... in reference to statements about how the middle east did not properly rebuke the attacks of September 11th. - This new article states that both Hezbollah & Hamas condemned the 9 11 terrorist attacks.

[Ender]

Let's see ... Quote from MSNBC article ...




"The videotape, posted on an al-Qaida-linked Web site Tuesday, drew revulsion around the world."




If the video was posted after the news cycle in the middle east (which it was - the world is round, you know)... how much time do you think it should take to react?


Video posted on the web Tuesday
Viewable and reportable in the Middle East on Wednesday
Thursday reports of condemnation reported in the US.


Curiously - Mike

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/4971314/

it was sarcasm...hellooo!!

But more to your point, revulsion IS NOT condemnation by Islamic Clerics or Arab Leaders... I do appreciate how you like to play those word games though. Keep up the good work.

[michaeledward]

it was sarcasm...hellooo!!

But more to your point, revulsion IS NOT condemnation by Islamic Clerics or Arab Leaders... I do appreciate how you like to play those word games though. Keep up the good work.
;)

OK ... sarcasm ... got it ...

You know, if you click with the little arrow on the blue words with the line underneath them, it brings you to a new web page ... on that page .. you do get to read more information.... like this ...


"Hezbollah condemns this grisly act which has caused great harm to Islam and to Muslims by this group which falsely claims to belong to the religion of mercy, compassion and genuine human values,” the statement said."and

"The English-language Jordan Times condemned the beheading in an editorial, calling it “a horrific act of the greatest magnitude.”

by the way ... thanks for the chuckle ... this thread needed it a bit, and certainly I did ... ;)

[Cryozombie]

And come to think of it...

While there is no way for us to know for SURE...

I believe that the "Terrorists" responsible would have killed Nicholas Berg, or someone else.. regardless of how we treated those prisoners... It sure makes a convienient excuse for them tho doesnt it?

I seem to recall american people being raped, tortured, burned, kidnapped, flown into buildings, etc...

Well before we ever tortured those Iraqis.

[rmcrobertson]

Where was it I read: "two wrongs don't make a right, but three do?"

Personally, I feel that if John McCain describes this stuff as torture, well, that's a good enough definition from an expert for me.

But hey, tell ya what: why don't we just go through all the photographs and statements, and arrange to do EXACTLY to some of those on this forum what American soldiers did to helpless prisoners? Seems that'd settle the question of, "Gee, was that torture?" right quick. Any volunteers?

Apparently the latest thing in the pictures is that these guys and gals--in addition to following what look to have been their orders--were running a sweet little S&M ring down in the basement of that prison. And seems to me there's no way in hell that none of the higher-ups knew it.

But hey, if you're comfortable with that, neat-o. Why should we be upset with our troops mixing business with pleasure?

I continue to be stunned by the amount of rationalizing on this thread. Guess moral HAVE declined since I grew up--back in the day, American soldiers were NEVER supposed to behave like this. We're a democracy, I was taught, and the traditional values of this country (as well as our religious principles) forbid any of what the bad guys do. It's a shame that consumer, corporatist capitalism has penetrated so far that at least a few Americans have lost all sense of pride, and hope, in the special thing that this country was put here to be.

Lincoln's remarks about the corrupting influence of slavery upon the slaveowner seem very much on point here.

But me, I am depressed to see Americans attacking people they consider, "unpatriotic," for having different ideas and some principles. That's the worst thing about the Michael Savages of the world--they legitimate hatred of fellow Americans.

Trace back in these threads over the last year or so, and you will see the ideological groundwork for this crap getting laid. remember all those discussions of how torture was sometimes justifiable? Well, this is one of the consequences. American soldiers playing sex games and getting into inflicting cruel little-boy pain and humiliations, and passing it off as somehow, "necessary."

The behavior was sick, and anybody with a grain of sense knows it, whatever they say on these threads. Only question is, whether it was an aberration or a set policy. If it was a set policy, some generals should go to jail. Probably, so should the Donald.

[Cryozombie]

But hey, tell ya what: why don't we just go through all the photographs and statements, and arrange to do EXACTLY to some of those on this forum what American soldiers did to helpless prisoners? Seems that'd settle the question of, "Gee, was that torture?" right quick. Any volunteers?

.

Sure pal, tell ya what...

Ill get naked, tied to a wall, and hell, I'll EVEN LET YOU ELECTROSHOCK ME, not just threaten to...

WHEN YOU CONCEDE to letting me kill your family by crashing them into a building and then following that up by burning you alive and then decapitating you?

Sound fair?

[MJS]

But me, I am depressed to see Americans attacking people they consider, "unpatriotic," for having different ideas and some principles. That's the worst thing about the Michael Savages of the world--they legitimate hatred of fellow Americans.

Having different ideas and principles???? What the hell are you talking about Rob????? To me, it basically sounds like you're saying its ok for what they did just because their ideas of punishment are different from ours??? Dude, if thats what you're saying, you are seriiously messed up!!! How the hell do you justify chopping someones head off compared to making someone think that they are gonna get shocked??????????? Again, 2 VERY different things here.

I also have to wonder. What would you think of all this if YOU had someone fighting over in Iraq or someone that you loved die on 9/11? Would you have a different outlook then?

I'm still waiting for how YOU would handle this situation????

Mike

[MJS]

He won't. He will go off on some wild tangent that has nothing to do with anything you ask him... as usual.

You're right! That is exactly what happened. I'm still waiting for his reply on how HE would handle this. Unfortunately, I'll probably be old and grey before that happens.

Mike

[Tgace]

Opinions are like.....(the same saying for excuses). :)

Solutions are rarer and tougher to come up with. Some people are very effective at cutting down ideas, but not so effective at submitting their own for examination.

[Cruentus]

Here is what the possabilities boil down too.

#1. What we did wasn't torture.

The fact is there are thousands, not 10 or 20 or 100, but THOUSANDS of photos of maltreatment against the prisoners. And not just frathouse pranks, but accounts of rape and beatings and murder. Just because we feel what terrorists do might be worse, that doesn't make what we did not torture.

#2 What we did may have been torture, but it was perfectly justified.

Last time I checked, 2 wrongs don't make a right. If someone rapes my wife, I will kill them, or bring them to justice through the system, plain and simple. I am not going to turn around and rape them. Just because horrific things may have happened to some of our soldiers and people, that doesn't give us liscense to do what ever the hell we want.

And F--- what "they" think about us, for the moment. As Americans, WE should hold ourselves to a higher standard then what was in those photos.

#3 O.K., O.K. It was torture, and it was not justified; but we weren't wrong. It was only a few soldiers that did it. So how could our country be blamed for the actions of a few?

First of all, there were THOUSANDS of photos and written statements, not just the few that hit the press. And according to both Democrates and Republican Senators on the news, the photos we haven't seen are far more horrific then what we have seen. So this isn't just the actions of a few.

Does this mean that "soldiers are bad." No, but it does mean that there was a top down order for these acts to occur. All the collaborating evidence supports that this was a top down order; the question is, how high does it go?

#4 O.K....fine. It was torture, and we were wrong.

Now we are getting somewhere. When you realize the problem, then you can solve it. Admitting fault is not such a bad thing. Many of our policy makers, republican and democrate, are willing to do this, and have done this. Yet, some of you here won't. It would be better for all of us in the long run.

[Tgace]

I agree, but I prefer to wait until all the evidence is in before jumping to judgement. If these pictures are all from the same camp then a reserve MP Bn does not an army make. If they are saying that this was an Army wide practice thats another story.

Allowing MP's (especially reserve troops) to participate in Intell operations (like interrogation) is a problem I have. These guys may have thought that this stuff was SOP. PFC England is now saying that "higher ups" ordered her pose for photos to be used as psyop material against other prisoners and that they were commended for doing a good job and that good intel was being aquired. If thats true, the blame goes much higher than some lowly PFC.

[loki09789]

Come on, Paul. You know how this game is played. The 'top down order' is just as implausible as anything else. They CYAed themselves because they never 'ordered' any of these specific acts. They did put pressure on fast results of interrogation of prisoners that trickled down to intelligence agencies getting creative and encouraging mental and physical abuse that the troops carrying such acts - generally National Guard/Reservists with far less man hours of professional reinforcement and strong leadership than active duty components - were justified 'because they told me too.' Well that doesn't fly for me because straight from my Guidebook for Marines:

"..You must never kill, torture or mistreat a prisoner, because such actions are a violation of the law and because prisoners may provide you vital information....Treating a prisoner badly will also discourage other enemy soldiers from surrendering.... this [proper treatment] will encourage the enemy to treat his prisoners (our buddies) well."

Now, if these reports aren't misrepresentations, exagerations of interrogation techniques no different than those that our soldiers endure during Escape and Evasion training. If these photos/reports of sexual abuse and attrocities aren't just urban legends being planted and used to the benefit of the Military INtel(MI) folks to intimidate prisoners, I say nail all involved for sacrificing professionalism for speed of intelligence - and based on the military response, they are of the same mind.

If this is all information leaking and in the end it is no different than the myth building that Mid-East terror groups use to believe about Marines back in the '80's (you had to kill a family member to get into the Marines...was the myth), then it is a game that is dangerous and can loose the local crowd because they aren't in on it.

[Tgace]

I just hope that "good shoots" soldiers/MP's have been involved in dont get covered with the same blanket of abuse. Some prisoners will get shot if they are attempting an escape.

[Cruentus]

Come on, Paul. You know how this game is played.

Yea, I guess I do.

The evidence points to the idea that it was a top down order, but it may not have been very high up. We'll have to see what more evidence points too on that one.

[Cruentus]

I just hope that "good shoots" soldiers/MP's have been involved in dont get covered with the same blanket of abuse. Some prisoners will get shot if they are attempting an escape.

I hope not too.

[loki09789]

I don't think it is right, but it is easier to 'lower the bar' to the enemies level when they aren't an actual 'nation' or members of the same 'honor' club who adhere to the laws of land warfare and Geneva code.... mirroring is not a really big 'character' reaction to enemy action though is it?

[Tgace]

Where were inspections? Where was the leadership? Squad Leaders, Platoon Sgt.,First Sgt., Squad Leader, Company Commander.....Paul, you know that if we had did something like this in Bosnia, the whole company would have known in short order.

[loki09789]

Where were inspections? Where was the leadership? Squad Leaders, Platoon Sgt.,First Sgt., Squad Leader, Company Commander.....Paul, you know that if we had did something like this in Bosnia, the whole company would have known in short order.Exactly why I am not buying the "top down order" excuse. Firstly, when the words come out of a private's mouth, what do they really mean by "top down?" Hell, they have no idea where the order came from other than an NCO/Officer from their chain of command or NCO/Officer's that their chain of command allows to give orders to these non rates.

You know what is right and wrong. You know that you are not only allowed, but obligated to refuse unlawful orders... these pictures show how important strong small unit leadership is to a units morale and conduct. The intell/interrogation operations should have been conducted by Intel people, not MP's - especially reserve/NG troopies. The unit commander's should have told the intel guys to do so themselves - MP's might have run camp security, but that isn't the same as being intell/interrogation trained.

[Tgace]

Absofrigginloutely

[Ender]

;)

OK ... sarcasm ... got it ...

You know, if you click with the little arrow on the blue words with the line underneath them, it brings you to a new web page ... on that page .. you do get to read more information.... like this ...

and


by the way ... thanks for the chuckle ... this thread needed it a bit, and certainly I did ... ;)

I wanna see these Clerics leading thousands of demonstrators shouting "Allah Ackbar...Death to the Al-Qaeda infidels!...and I wanna see Al-Zaqwari hung in effigy and a picture of of Osama Bin Laden burned with them dancing around the picture......And I wanna see condemnation on every Arab newspaper and TV in the region from these clerics...These little lip service remarks don't cut it....nods..that should be enough for me....*L

oh, and leave the condenscending attitude at the door....it's so cliche' from your type.

[MA-Caver]

Exactly why I am not buying the "top down order" excuse. Firstly, when the words come out of a private's mouth, what do they really mean by "top down?" Hell, they have no idea where the order came from other than an NCO/Officer from their chain of command or NCO/Officer's that their chain of command allows to give orders to these non rates.

You know what is right and wrong. You know that you are not only allowed, but obligated to refuse unlawful orders... these pictures show how important strong small unit leadership is to a units morale and conduct. The intell/interrogation operations should have been conducted by Intel people, not MP's - especially reserve/NG troopies. The unit commander's should have told the intel guys to do so themselves - MP's might have run camp security, but that isn't the same as being intell/interrogation trained.

This is true, but be that as it may. When you're in charge of "dangerous" prisoners and the opportunity to do unto them what they've been doing to your buddies... remember what happened a few weeks ago when they dragged U.S. bodies through the streets? Opportunities for "pay-back" are plenty when you got days and days of being alone with someone who would do or have done the same. I'm not saying the mentality is/isn't there (seems that it had to be for the torture/abuse to happen) but it is a question of ethics that we as Americans should be civilized enough NOT to fall prey to that trap. It would help for the rest of the world to see that we (as Americans) are above such barbarism.
Yeah, I know I'm falling victim to wanting to have and believe in the America's "The Good Guys Image"... but, well ... dammit? Are we are or aren't we? I still want/like to be able to hold my head up and proudly say I'm an American!! But with atrocities like this... how we treat our prisoners and countries that we "say" we're trying to help... might as well wear a swaztika on one arm and a hammer and sickle on the other. What those soliders did (are still doing???) is no better/different/excusable than the treatment of the aforementioned governments/regimes/dictatorships (and they're failed governments mind you... a red flag if we ever needed one :redcaptur), have done to their prisoners.
Aren't we supposed to have the standards that everyone else looks up to and not DOWN on?

p.s. I realize that not everyone on this board is an American.

[rmcrobertson]

Hey, here's a little number from the latest news, available on my Microsoft browser front page:

"The father of Nick Berg, the American beheaded in Iraq, directly blamed President Bush and Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld for his son's death. "My son died for the sins of George Bush and Donald Rumsfeld. This administration did this."

But I know that won't bother anyone: personal attacks are so much easier.

I continue to be amazed by the utter failure on the part of some to recognize--or to admit, perhaps--a completely unacceptable series of violations of very basic moral precepts. 'Scuse me if I'm wrong, but aren't some of you the guys who keep lecturing the likes of me on the need for Solid, Timeless, Unchanging Moral Values? Or do these just apply when--I'm trying to put this politely--we're talking about WASPs? Or, I know--moral precepts apply only when it's convenient.

I continue to be amazed by the reiteration of the notion that I keep floating away from the Real Point on the part of people who keep dragging poor Nicholas Berg into it.

Why haven't I been parroting the sentiments you want me and other to parrot about terrorism's being wrong? Because, gee, I thought normal adults pretty much knew that already. Because, gee, I was brought up to believe that Americans believed that they could trust other Americans, that we had common interests that ran deeper than minor political differences. Because, gee, I was brought up to believe that this was a great and strong country that was confident enough to tolerate dissent, that didn't need to crush opposition because the whole point was to try and find out the truth, that was stronger for our disagreements. Because, gee, they taught me that our Founding Fathers were great men precisely because they believed and said things that were dangerous and disagreeable. Because, gee, they taught me that this country was, "the last best hope," of humankind precisely because WE WERE SOMETHING NEW, AND BETTER, AND WE DID NOT STOOP TO THE EVIL THAT THE BAD GUYS DID, NO MATTER WHAT THE PROVOCATION. Hell, they even taught me that America set an example of justice, peace, and tolerance for the rest of the world to follow.

I realize it's comforting for a couple of you guys to believe that I was raised by Lesbian communists just outside Beijing, but the fact of the matter is that I will bet you I was raised far more traditionally than anybody on this thread, with the possible exception of Mr. Edward. And you know what they taught me, way back then? That my country was better than torturers and bullies and dictators and imperialists and liars.

So--were they wrong to teach me that?

Some other time, we can get into the whole 'nother issue of a martial artist's response to this stuff. Guess they got that wrong too--I always read, and was taught, that a martial artist shows restraint and compassion at all times, and never bullies. They didn't even bring up the whole issue of whether a martial artist was allowed to torment the helpless, whatever the reason or cause might be.

Guess they figured that the answer to that last bit was obvious.

[RRouuselot]

I wanna see these Clerics leading thousands of demonstrators shouting "Allah Ackbar...Death to the Al-Qaeda infidels!...and I wanna see Al-Zaqwari hung in effigy and a picture of of Osama Bin Laden burned with them dancing around the picture......And I wanna see condemnation on every Arab newspaper and TV in the region from these clerics...These little lip service remarks don't cut it....nods..that should be enough for me....*L

oh, and leave the condenscending attitude at the door....it's so cliche' from your type.
Agreed!!!!

[RRouuselot]

Just to add some of my own twisted thoughts on the subject.............I work on a military base.

First comment I heard was "why were they so stupid to take photos?"

I would have to agree.....look at the Nazis.....they took photos as well and it lead to some pretty damaging evidence.

Another comment I heard was "it’s a real war..real prisoners....not like Hogan’s Heros TV program....it’s R-E-A-L"

Again I agree.....things like this and the Nick Berg incident are horrifying but that’s what wars are....horrifying.

[michaeledward]

oh, and leave the condenscending attitude at the door....it's so cliche' from your type.
I'm sorry ... you said that they did not condemn the acts. But in the very article I referred to, there was a variant of the word 'condemn' at least twice.

I can only assume that you did not expose yourself to the report because a) you do not know how or b) you do not care to know another point of view.

In this very thread, it has been pointed out that reports of prisoner abuse from the International Committee of the Red Cross come from more than 10 detention facilities in Iraq, yet some continue to put forth the arguement that it was just a 'few bad apples'. I suppose my type gets frustrated when people choose to remain unaware of what is going on around them.

Mike

[old_sempai]

As Sherman said "war is hell." However, does anyonce recall hearing similar outcries from the western media during the 1st Gulf war when Jeffrey Zahn appeared on Iraqi & Arab TV with cigarette burns on his face, with his eyes and face also showing the effects of having been beaten. Or of the Female American Helicopter pilot immediately raped after capture, or of the 3 British Commandoes of Bravo Two Zero that were tortured to death by Saddam's goons. As for Mr. Berg his death is abhorrent, but then to his passport identified him as Jewish and also had an Israeli stamped affixed to it showing he had also traveled to Israel. He may have been a kind hearted adventurer according to his family, but was he that naive that he did not recognize that he was going in harms way, and as a civilian no less. His family did, but they were unsuccessful in their efforts to dissuade him from going, and now they chose to lay the blame elsewhere.

[marshallbd]

As Sherman said "war is hell." However, does anyonce recall hearing similar outcries from the western media during the 1st Gulf war when Jeffrey Zahn appeared on Iraqi & Arab TV with cigarette burns on his face, with his eyes and face also showing the effects of having been beaten. Or of the Female American Helicopter pilot immediately raped after capture, or of the 3 British Commandoes of Bravo Two Zero that were tortured to death by Saddam's goons. As for Mr. Berg his death is abhorrent, but then to his passport identified him as Jewish and also had an Israeli stamped affixed to it showing he had also traveled to Israel. He may have been a kind hearted adventurer according to his family, but was he that naive that he did not recognize that he was going in harms way, and as a civilian no less. His family did, but they were unsuccessful in their efforts to dissuade him from going, and now they chose to lay the blame elsewhere.I understand about the passport....I made a few trips to Israel on a Government passport and had stamps from Israel....when the time came to go to the middle east, I ordered a replacement passport with no stamps to avoid the hassles that might come with having a passport with Israeli stamps in it. :asian:

[marshallbd]

As Sherman said "war is hell." However, does anyonce recall hearing similar outcries from the western media during the 1st Gulf war when Jeffrey Zahn appeared on Iraqi & Arab TV with cigarette burns on his face, with his eyes and face also showing the effects of having been beaten. Or of the Female American Helicopter pilot immediately raped after capture, or of the 3 British Commandoes of Bravo Two Zero that were tortured to death by Saddam's goons. I dont remember there being as much of an uproar about the abuse our people recieved in the Desert Storm.. as there is now..... :asian:

[old_sempai]

and fail to provide background data that would serve to put what they report in proper perspective. Consequently, not many are aware that anyone with an Israeli Stamp on their passport is generally not able to travel to Muslim countries, such as Syria, Egypt, Saudi Arabia or Iran. Mr Berg not only had an Israeli stamp on his passport, but had his prayer shawl with him as well. It makes one wonder was he that naive not to realize he was putting a bullseye on his back especially since Zawaqari along with the rest of the Al Qaida followers are extremely passionate with regard to their hatred of Israel and Jews.

[Makalakumu]

I also have to wonder. What would you think of all this if YOU had someone fighting over in Iraq or someone that you loved die on 9/11? Would you have a different outlook then?

I'm still waiting for how YOU would handle this situation????

I'm still waiting to see this link between Iraq and 911? People sure have this stuck in there mind and there is absolutely no evidence. Everytime I hear this, all the samurai in me thinks of is funshi...what a disgrace to rational thought.

[Makalakumu]

Opinions are like.....(the same saying for excuses). :)

Solutions are rarer and tougher to come up with. Some people are very effective at cutting down ideas, but not so effective at submitting their own for examination.

What really can a person do in this situation? At best, I will say you have high expectations. At worst...well, never mind. I know that I don't have enough information to suggest anything on my own. That is where these discussions help.

[Makalakumu]

Come on, Paul. You know how this game is played. The 'top down order' is just as implausible as anything else. They CYAed themselves because they never 'ordered' any of these specific acts. They did put pressure on fast results of interrogation of prisoners that trickled down to intelligence agencies getting creative and encouraging mental and physical abuse that the troops carrying such acts - generally National Guard/Reservists with far less man hours of professional reinforcement and strong leadership than active duty components - were justified 'because they told me too.' Well that doesn't fly for me because straight from my Guidebook for Marines:

"..You must never kill, torture or mistreat a prisoner, because such actions are a violation of the law and because prisoners may provide you vital information....Treating a prisoner badly will also discourage other enemy soldiers from surrendering.... this [proper treatment] will encourage the enemy to treat his prisoners (our buddies) well."

Now, if these reports aren't misrepresentations, exagerations of interrogation techniques no different than those that our soldiers endure during Escape and Evasion training. If these photos/reports of sexual abuse and attrocities aren't just urban legends being planted and used to the benefit of the Military INtel(MI) folks to intimidate prisoners, I say nail all involved for sacrificing professionalism for speed of intelligence - and based on the military response, they are of the same mind.

If this is all information leaking and in the end it is no different than the myth building that Mid-East terror groups use to believe about Marines back in the '80's (you had to kill a family member to get into the Marines...was the myth), then it is a game that is dangerous and can loose the local crowd because they aren't in on it.

Respectfully, Paul, I think you missed this document.

http://www.michael-robinett.com/declass/c000.htm

Torture and mental duress were an official part of US policy in the past. Why would that just go away? MKU may be a project that was discontinued, but it does not mean that it didn't evolve.

Unfortunately there is no way for the average person to find much out about this matter. The amount of obfuscation in this case is very suggestive though. The only thing I can think of when ever I hear anything from any side in this case is that one needs to be VERY skeptical.

These acts frighten me (911, Nick Berg, Prisoner Abuse, ect...). I can't imagine what was going through the peoples minds when they partake in such brutality. :(

[Cruentus]

I cought a portion of Bill O'rielly's radio show last night (yes, I listen to "liberal" media as well as "Conservative" to get all sides).

The Berg incident is going to be used to link Al Queda to Saddam, to try to justify why we went in to Iraq in the first place. Watch. By no later then next month the media and the administration will be saying, "See...we told you that Al Queda and Iraq were linked! Those men who did that to Berg were Al Queda!" :rolleyes:

Supposedly the man who was reading the long message in arabic has been identified by voice to be a certian Al Queda operative (forgot his name though). Considering that would be all to perfect for this administration, and it doesn't collaborate with other evidence, I am skeptical that it is the person they are refering to. However, it may have been Al Queda. But this just means that the pro-war people will use this incident to try to logically present the idea that Al Queda has been in Iraq all along; not thinking critically and realizing that since the fall of Saddam, many terrorist organizations have travelled to Iraq who weren't there before.

There are other sources that say that the Al Queda person that the voice is supposed to match to is actually dead. Then again, there are other sources that also say that the whole thing was staged, which I don't believe.

But, no matter what the truth really is, we'll just have more lies for the use of political posturing rammed down our goards.

[michaeledward]

The terrorist referred to is 'al Zawahari', if I am not mistaken, or mis-spelling his name. He is Jordanian by birth. He was reportedly trained at an al Qaeda training camp in Afghanistan. He was reportedly injured during the battles in Afghanistan. The injuries received in Afghanistan were treated in an Iraqi hospital.

'Big John', O'Reilly's guest host on the Radio Factor yesterday was strenuously pushing al Zawahari's treatment in an Iraqi hospital as a Hussein-al Qaeda connection. The premise is, if he was treated in Iraq, it could only be because Saddam Hussein authorized and condoned it.

This premise can be used to explain how George H.W. Bush had links with Timothy McVeigh - after all, McVeigh served in GHWBush's Gulf War, and lived under GHW Bush's presidency. So, they must be linked. Can't you all see it.

[marshallbd]

Exactly why I am not buying the "top down order" excuse. Firstly, when the words come out of a private's mouth, what do they really mean by "top down?" Hell, they have no idea where the order came from other than an NCO/Officer from their chain of command or NCO/Officer's that their chain of command allows to give orders to these non rates.

You know what is right and wrong. You know that you are not only allowed, but obligated to refuse unlawful orders... these pictures show how important strong small unit leadership is to a units morale and conduct. The intell/interrogation operations should have been conducted by Intel people, not MP's - especially reserve/NG troopies. The unit commander's should have told the intel guys to do so themselves - MP's might have run camp security, but that isn't the same as being intell/interrogation trained.I just heard a small blurb of a quote from one of the soldiers involved that the command did not know what was going on...he said if they did "there would be hell to pay" this soldier is expected to plead guilty at his court martial. :asian:

[loki09789]

I just heard a small blurb of a quote from one of the soldiers involved that the command did not know what was going on...he said if they did "there would be hell to pay" this soldier is expected to plead guilty at his court martial. :asian:
If he does, I respect his willingness to take personal responsibility. Believe it or not, the military will also recognize the demonstration of moral courage/accountability as well. I think it should be the case all up and down the chain of command for those involved. Those who were neglegent in leadership roles should take ownership of that, those who shirked professionalism/decency for speed should own up too.

Again, with PsyOps though, how many of these stories and claims/pictures were creations intended to shake prisoners into talking vs. how many of them are real is left to be discovered. Some of the stories will be true, but some are really far fetched to be true and sound as if it is a 'story from a guy who heard it from...' among the prisoners. I know that according to the Geneva code, a fighting man/woman is suppose to continue the fight even as a prisoner. Some (but definitely not all) of this could be a smear campaign as part of that spirit.

I notice there hasn't been any mention of the intell that was collected, confirmed or acted on successfully from all this mess. I wonder what good stuff/dope/intell came from all of this. What ever it was/is, I don't know if it is worth it to win the little missions or the 'war' but sacrifice international image, just seems to make more problems than it is worth.

[loki09789]

Respectfully, Paul, I think you missed this document.

http://www.michael-robinett.com/declass/c000.htm

Torture and mental duress were an official part of US policy in the past. Why would that just go away? MKU may be a project that was discontinued, but it does not mean that it didn't evolve.


I didn't miss the document, but I doubt that a lt. in the Military Intelligence corps was privy to it in his training. This really smacks of over zealous, under trained attempts at initiative at lower levels because of nonspecific, unclear communications of 'urgency' from above.....

[Cruentus]

This premise can be used to explain how George H.W. Bush had links with Timothy McVeigh - after all, McVeigh served in GHWBush's Gulf War, and lived under GHW Bush's presidency. So, they must be linked. Can't you all see it.

I can see it now... must be good citizen....must....support president...must... :uhohh: :erg:

[Tgace]

Making 'em Talk
Sunday 14 July 2002
repeated the following Wednesday at 2.30pm
US military interrogators are currently having a hard time extracting information from the ex-Taliban and al-Qaeda fighters detained in Camp X-Ray at Guantanamo Bay. Hardly surprising - but how do you get inside the minds of hostile captives, without going outside the constraints of the Geneva Convention? Is there such thing as a truth drug? This week we talk to two psychiatrists, as well as one military man with hands-on experience; he's the author of an interrogators' manual entitled "Make 'em Talk".

Transcript:
David Rutledge: Hi, David Rutledge here, welcoming you once again to All in the Mind. And it’s the vulnerability and the resilience of the mind that’s our subject this week. Specifically, the minds of the Taliban and Al-Qaeda fighters held in American captivity in Guantanamo Bay in Cuba. These captives, including the two Australians David Hicks and Mamdouh Habib, live in small chain-wire cells, under constant spotlight surveillance, dressed in orange boiler suits, at times manacled and at times blindfolded. And these captives have been specifically chosen for extensive interrogation.

We don’t know exactly what’s going on inside the interrogation rooms. However, we do know that military psychologists and military psychiatrists are supporting the interrogation teams. The captives are classified as “illegal combatants” and not prisoners of war, so they’re not protected under the Geneva Convention. We can therefore assume that when it comes to their interrogation, the gloves will be coming off. Well, it was a Pentagon official who said recently that “all appropriate steps and measures are being taken to turn the interrogations up a notch”. But how exactly are such interrogations “turned up a notch”? What happens to the mind in solitary confinement? and is there such thing as a truth drug?

This week Paul Brennan has gone in search of some answers.

Paul Brennan: We have inherited from the second world war the now comic cliché ‘we have ways of making you talk.’ The interrogator’s aim is to extract from the prisoner information that can be turned against the enemy, either in the military or the propaganda war. Military interrogators work in various ways. The British, prior to interrogating some Irish insurgents, put black bags over their heads and made them stand against a wall with their hands on their heads for days. They bombarded them with 85 decibel noise of whirling helicopter blades. During the Yom Kippur War, some Israeli soldiers captured by the Russians were injected with high doses of a drug that caused screamingly painful muscle cramps and panic breathing. This helped the interrogators. Another high-tech way of giving the prisoner a pummelling without leaving too many bruises, is to use silent and low frequency ultrasound. It induces vomiting, disorientation, epilepsy and can be delivered with accuracy by laser beam.

But it’s still the good old rough-and-ready third degree that remains popular with the front line military. Bob Newman is a former US marine with some practical experience interrogating Iraqis during Desert Storm. He’s written a book about interrogation techniques – which include exhaustion, isolation, degradation and fear. Newman’s book is called Make ‘Em Talk. So what makes a good interrogator?

Bob Newman: First of all, he needs to be mature, and to be focused very tightly on objectives and goals that he wants to reach. He has to be patient and very disciplined. The information that a good interrogator can extract from a source, a prisoner of war, could really make the difference between success on the battlefield and a very bloody failure.

Paul Brennan: Now, tell us about your experience as a fighter/interrogator during Desert Storm. We’re talking Kuwait 1991.

Bob Newman: We started taking prisoners in staggering numbers, and we did not have enough interrogators, true interrogators, whose fulltime job it is in the Marine Corps to interrogate people, to process quickly enough on the battlefield all of the people we were capturing. So in part, folks up at the regimental and divisional level were relying on the very few people, such as myself, who had some interrogation experience. So we had to do very quick battlefield interrogations, where we wanted tactical information – not strategic information or biographical information, but tactical information – that could help the battlefield commander on the spot. So we wanted to know unit disposition, unit strength, weapons, unit movement, and especially immediate future plans, so that we could prevent those plans from ever taking place.

Paul Brennan: Now, in your book Make ‘Em Talk, some of the interrogation techniques sound to me like torture. Are they?

Bob Newman: No, they’re not. As a matter of fact, if you read through the book, you’ll see a lot of insistence that it is absolutely unnecessary and absolutely illegal to torture somebody. Torture gains physical compliance, and if you speak to former prisoners of war such as the Americans who ended up in the Hanoi Hilton, the Hoa Lo Prison in downtown Hanoi during our Vietnam War, they’ll tell you that somebody who has physical control of you can make you do what they want you to do. It doesn’t necessarily mean that torture can get good, useful, practical battlefield information. (my emphasis)

Paul Brennan: A commentator in the Wall Street Journal recently advocated the use of truth serums on the Taliban and Al-Qaeda prisoners at Camp X-Ray and Camp Delta. What do you think?

Bob Newman: Well, that’s an old ploy from Hollywood movies, frankly. There is no such thing as truth serum. But if you want to get him to blab a little bit, and feel a little more comfortable, and get him to “open up” if you will, then sodium pentathol can be useful.

Paul Brennan: A Pentagon official said recently that interrogations of Taliban and Al-Qaeda suspects were going to be “turned up a notch”, that’s his phrase. How precisely can interrogations be “turned up a notch”?

Bob Newman: Well, how about this. The first thing we’re going to do is bring in some interrogators that he has not experienced before. And here’s an example: instead of the interrogator coming in, announcing who he is and demonstrating control, that he is in charge of the situation to the source, we could bring in somebody who does not come across as an interrogator. Perhaps he’s posing as a fellow prisoner of war, and is going to use soft sell techniques to get the information out of the prisoner, the real prisoner, without him even knowing that his new room mate is ‘on the other side’. What I really like to use, and I’ve found this to be extremely useful, is sleep deprivation. But what you have to do with sleep deprivation, be very careful that the source does not become so tired that he is giving you information that he thinks is accurate, but in reality is very inaccurate. So that’s a problem there. Another thing that you can always use is the reward system. Let’s say he’s used to getting one bowl of rice and a small piece of meat and all the water he can drink every day. The second one for “turning up the notch” would be to reward him with additional food, food that he really likes. And you can find out what food he really likes by any number of sources. One is to simply ask him what he likes, find out a little bit more about his culture, where he grew up, what would be standard meals for him, and merely show him that by co-operating he will be rewarded. And finally, you can turn up the heat by a technique that refers back to his family. By letting him know and stressing to him that he will survive this situation if he co-operates, and he will be back as soon as we can possibly get him back with his family. He will be repatriated. And therefore that is a reward system as well.

Paul Brennan: Modern interrogation technology has really got the prisoner under it’s thumb.

Bob Newman: Absolutely and that’s what it is: the prisoner is under the interrogator’s thumb. Look at Mr. Abu Zubaida, the number three man in Al-Qaeda, who is under US care right now. He is the guy who, under proper interrogation, gave up the name of American Jose Padilla, a Chicago gangland member who was planning to detonate a radiological or “dirty” bomb in Washington DC. Zubaida gave us Padilla’s name because Zubaida was properly interrogated.

Paul Brennan: Bob Newman, counter-terrorist consultant in Denver Colorado.

Now, even if the interrogations are carried out within the constraints of the Geneva Conventions, the sheer persistence and duration of such interrogations can still leave you in poor mental shape. Professor Derrick Silove is a consultant psychiatrist at the Sydney-based organization STARTTS, Service for the Treatment and Rehabilitation of Torture and Trauma Survivors. I asked him about the range of symptoms presented by survivors of interrogation.

Derrick Silove: The range is very wide, actually, because we obviously see a skewed sample. We see people who had severe reactions, and we shouldn’t forget that a lot of people go through it without too much trouble. They might have a few sleepless nights and a few bad dreams and that’s the end of it. So we see the high end of the spectrum, of people who have what we call post traumatic stress disorder and/or depression – the two often go together – and when they have the full-blown syndrome, it’s pretty serious. Because then they really have serious sleep disturbances, nightmares, flashbacks, their concentration is impaired, they may be very depressed and even suicidal.

Paul Brennan: Do you have evidence from your patients that confirms that drugs are being used by military interrogators?

Derrick Silove: Yes, there’s no doubt. It’s becoming a worldwide trend. Psychoactive drugs are available, both illicit and legal ones, across the world. And they have a very profound effect on reducing resistance.

Paul Brennan: Can you give us an example of how one or two or perhaps three drugs work and help the military interrogator?

Derrick Silove: Well, they often use combinations. So you get a combination of sedative drugs and stimulant drugs, which can be very disorientating, because on the one hand you’re kind of stupefied, and half drowsy and half asleep, which reduces your resistance in a sort of drunk-like state. On the other hand, you’re being aroused and stimulated, and your brain is charging very rapidly, and so you are more likely to talk a lot and spill the beans and free-associate. So it can be incredibly disorientating and undermining when you get these cocktails of drugs.

Paul Brennan: When people come to you as a result of that kind of interrogation, how do you actually pick up the pieces, psychologically speaking?

Derrick Silove: The core strategy is still a counselling approach. That is to re-engage the person; they often feel very cut off from humanity as a consequence, and everything else really flows from that engagement in terms of providing practical assistance, medication sometimes, psychological support of various kinds, and a willingness to actually listen to the story as it unravels. Because people feel very lonely and isolated with this knowledge which they’ve never often been able to communicate to anybody else, out of shame and guilt and many other reasons.

Paul Brennan: In addition to drugs, military interrogators use – and have used for years – solitary confinement. How does that actually work on the mind?

Derrick Silove: People firstly become very disorientated. They lose track of time, day and night, especially if the lights are left on all the time or they are in dark all the time, so they lose track of time. That in itself is very psychologically undermining. It’s something that none of us really experience, but if you lose track of time you really get very distressed and disturbed. You also lose a spatial orientation. You start losing track of where you are, what the place is and so on. So you start developing what is almost like a delirium, you really feel like you’re out of touch with reality. People get paranoid, they misinterpret everything as threatening, they become very focused on obsessional thoughts. For example, the next meal becomes the key issue. So their mind become very constrained in its capacity to think widely and broadly, and the sense of loneliness, being cut off from the world is immense.

Paul Brennan: What’s the difference in long-term prognosis between those who’ve survived interrogation without spilling the beans, and those who have in some way either compromised themselves or their friends?

Derrick Silove: I think that makes a huge difference. But I should also say that with so-called modern techniques, very few end up not spilling the beans. Because if the interrogators are well-versed in their trade, it is actually almost impossible to resist. But those who have spilled the beans under certain circumstances, are those people who are very racked by guilt, shame, a sense of being completely devastated by the experience. And they feel that their integrity has been destroyed. I’ve had one patient say “there are just bits and pieces of me left scattered around the interrogation room, I just don’t exist any more as an integrated human being”, and I thought that was a very stark illustration of what it feels like. Especially if you’ve been a militant or someone with very strongly held ethical standards prior to that.

Paul Brennan: Professor Derrick Silove.

Military interrogations hold prisoners in solitary confinement where everything is controlled: the prisoner’s lighting, the noise, the temperature, their air supply, their total visual environment, as well as their access to food, water and ablutions. On top of all this are many possibilities for medical, chemical and electrical interventions into the prisoner’s body and into the prisoner’s mind. So with all this physical and psychological power in the hands of the interrogators, the crucial question is: isn’t it really just a matter of time before the prisoner’s mind is destroyed? Derrick Silove again.

Derrick Silove: I wouldn’t go as far as to say that the mind is destroyed totally or forever. I think people can recover from this. I think they always say they’ve changed as a person, they’re not the same person. But I think the key lesson is that there is a threshold beyond which people can’t resist, and the modern techniques very quickly reach that threshold.

Paul Brennan: How important, then, is religious belief?

Derrick Silove: Well, the research certainly shows that adherence to religion can be a very protective factor. There’s no doubt that people who have the comfort of religion – because that’s something that you can take with you into any situation, including solitary confinement – it can make a huge difference. But I also have to say that there are those people who, at the end of these processes, give up on their religion or on any spiritual faith, because they’ve kind of lost faith. And that’s a very devastating experience. They just cannot believe a true god or gods could sanction such a thing, and therefore it actually destroys their faith.

Paul Brennan: If you were trying to help somebody who was perhaps going to go into military interrogation, what kind of advice could you give them as a psychiatrist?

Derrick Silove: Well, it’s interesting that it’s not just psychiatrists, but actually some militant groups in various parts of the world actually do train their cadres to do precisely that. So we have some knowledge about that, and it’s the obvious: the one is to try to draw on the experiences of those who have been through it, to prepare the person exactly for all the variations of interrogation that they’re likely to go through. The second thing, and I think that’s the most helpful, is to tell them to spill the beans – and groups do that nowadays. They say, they tell them quite precisely “don’t spill the beans too quickly, otherwise they won’t believe you. Put up a sham resistance, and then pretend that it’s all over, calmly, and tell them whatever you know”. And the way they prepare them for that is by giving them as little information as possible, in other words make sure that each individual knows very little, and basically elaborate if you need to, with a bit of imagination to satisfy whatever they want. Because basically, withholding that information just doesn’t help in the end.

Paul Brennan: So there’s no future for the tight-lipped hero?

Derrick Silove: Very little, unfortunately. I think they are more the substance of novels nowadays, rather than reality.

Paul Brennan: Derrick Silove, Professor of Psychiatry at the University of New South Wales.

For many months now, prisoners have been held for interrogation at Guantanamo Bay in Cuba. They’ll all Taliban and Al-Qaeda fighters and they’re all Muslims. What can we surmise about the vulnerability and resilience of their minds in the face of modern interrogation methods? Dr. Malik Badri is Professor of Psychology at the International Islamic University in Kuala Lumpur. He’s held academic positions in Jordan, Saudi Arabia and Sudan, and has also written a book on contemplation in Islam. Dr. Malik Badri describes the ordeals of Bilal, one of Islam’s first political prisoners during the seventh century.

Malik Badri: Bilal was an Ethiopian slave in Mecca. And his master used to, when he accepted Islam and rejected the bowing to their stone carved gods, he was taken in the hot sun and they would put very heavy stones on them and he would beat him and tell him, “just say something to say that you have refused Islam, and say something good about our gods” but he would only repeat the words ahadun ahad, God is only One. And he was able to feel that all the pain that he received was something that would bring him nearer and nearer to God, since he is sacrificing for the sake of God.

Another prisoner in Islamic history, a man who was put in prison a few centuries ago, was Ibn Taymiyyah. And he was put in prison in Cairo, he was from Damascus. Ibn Taymiyyah was very famous for having said the very famous sentence when he was arrested. He said, “What are they going to do to me? If they put me in prison then this is a chance for me for contemplation. If they send me out of the country, to deport me, it would be like tourism. And if they kill me, I will be a martyr. What can they do to me?”

Paul Brennan: Now, while a Muslim warrior can no longer continue his jihad of the sword, in prison he must continue his mental and spiritual jihad. What does this actually involve?

Malik Badri: They say when the Prophet came from a battle, he said to his companions, “We have returned from the small jihad to the major jihad.” They asked him, “What is the major jihad? What is more than what we were doing?” He said, “The jihad of the soul, the jihad of your desires that take you away from God, is a greater jihad. This is the major jihad.” Prayer is very important, the repetition of certain exhortations to Allah is very important. This by itself will bring about a form of relaxation. It can increase the hormones that are related to relaxation, and make the person in a happy state which cannot be described by words.

Paul Brennan: Would a Muslim see their survival in prison as a kind of divine test, a divine lesson?

Malik Badri: Yes indeed. You see, if man can actually transcend himself to a higher level of reality, then indeed, whatever happens to man in terms of something which is painful, can be explained cognitively by him in two ways. Either this is a way by which God is helping him to forgive his sins, or else it is a way by which God elevates his position spiritually. So people who are in prison, who have this kind of conception, will actually be able to tolerate their imprisonment very well. And they can see that the prison is something which God has sent them in order to improve their status.

Paul Brennan: Now, while solitary confinement can separate every single prisoner from every other prisoner, do you think in some way they can communicate through something like a common heart or a common spirit?

Malik Badri: People when they are in prison, and when they are in solitary confinement, it seems that their psychic ability will be sharpened. I have known of a number of cases in which people who came out of prison, they would say they would actually know about what is happening in their homes, by their dreams. And at times, while they are awake, they would get this kind of – what we call inspiration. I feel that those people who have a belief in a hereafter, and the ability actually to communicate, these people are the ones who can tolerate quite a lot of psychological stress in prison. Even they can tolerate physical stress which does interfere chemically with their brains.

Paul Brennan: How can they spiritually transcend a truth drug?

Malik Badri: When it comes to the chemical, then the bodies of all people are the same. We must say that even we, in the field of psychiatry, we are using these drugs already. And a patient who has a lot of pent up feelings, maybe he has secrets which he cannot say to the doctor, is given a drug at times, and this drug will make him speak. This is what is known as catharsis, or abreaction, and in this sense we are actually using something which can also be used in prisons, to let those in prison who know certain information, can bring it up. Modern technology has actually been able, and modern medicine and modern biochemistry, if used in this manner, it can actually wreck anybody.

Paul Brennan: Dr. Malik Badri, Professor of Psychology at the International Islamic University in Kuala Lumpur.


So there it is: according to one interrogator, one psychiatrist and one Muslim psychologist, all human beings, when subject to the vast battery of interrogation techniques, can be threatened, bribed or just pharmaceutically steered into spilling the beans. This surely dispels forever the romantic vision of the human mind as the resilient repository of the sacred self. The biotechnologies of interrogation, it seems, are heralding the post-human future, where your mind is not necessarily your own.

David Rutledge: Paul Brennan there, reporting on military interrogation.

[Tgace]

My point about "solution" is...is there intelligence we need to get and if so how far should we go to get it? Just asking for it isnt going to work. What techniques are OK and what is torture? If you thought that a prisoner you had knew about an immenent attack on a 9/11 scale...how far would you go to get that intel? What techniques do you think are OK and whats too far. Thats presenting an idea.

My idea...I have no problem with the sensory deprivation,drugs (carefully applied), yes..even threats of physical harm without actually doing it,nudity, hooding etc. If its applied as a technique of interrogation for an exact purpose and not for entertainment, vengance or sadistic pleasure of guards.

I do have a problem with actual physical harm being inflicted, sexual abuse, forcing prisoners into degrading acts with each other etc.

[Cryozombie]

Hey, here's a little number from the latest news, available on my Microsoft browser front page:

"The father of Nick Berg, the American beheaded in Iraq, directly blamed President Bush and Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld for his son's death. "My son died for the sins of George Bush and Donald Rumsfeld. This administration did this."
But I know that won't bother anyone: personal attacks are so much easier.


Yes but... in all reality isn't that exactly what that is? A personal Attack by Nick Berg's father on President Bush? Unfortuantley, regardless of George Jr's f-ups, In Nick Berg's case the president had nothing to do with it... Nick Berg was not "Sent there" he chose to go, I recall reading that he considered going a... what did they say... rush? thrill? somthing along those lines... We know how far out you are, so of course instead of seeing that you use it as ammo against the Administration you claim to be brought up so strongly to believe in.



I continue to be amazed by the utter failure on the part of some to recognize--or to admit, perhaps--a completely unacceptable series of violations of very basic moral precepts. 'Scuse me if I'm wrong, but aren't some of you the guys who keep lecturing the likes of me on the need for Solid, Timeless, Unchanging Moral Values? Or do these just apply when--I'm trying to put this politely--we're talking about WASPs? Or, I know--moral precepts apply only when it's convenient.

I continue to be amazed by the utter failure on the part of YOU to recognize--or to admit, perhaps-- that most everyone here has said we went too far... But no... all you can hear with your own ego stroking going on about how you are brought up better than the rest of us is "YAY, LETS TORTURE RAGHEADS FOR FUN!" (Pardon the expression, but I feel like that is what Robert thinks of us)



I continue to be amazed by the reiteration of the notion that I keep floating away from the Real Point on the part of people who keep dragging poor Nicholas Berg into it.


Well Sir, if you wish for people to stop reiterating that notion, you have but to ADDRESS people's questions directed at you, instead of going off on some tangent that does not answer what you were asked. I know focus is a big deal... but can you try it before complaining people claim you have none?



Because, gee, they taught me that this country was, "the last best hope," of humankind precisely because WE WERE SOMETHING NEW, AND BETTER, AND WE DID NOT STOOP TO THE EVIL THAT THE BAD GUYS DID, NO MATTER WHAT THE PROVOCATION. Hell, they even taught me that America set an example of justice, peace, and tolerance for the rest of the world to follow.

This is the notion that has the situation completely ATFU. AMERICA didn't do those things... SOME PEOPLE DID. PEOPLE are failible, and as such, PEOPLE DO THINGS WRONG. PEOPLE, angry, sad, vengeful, or just plain MEAN did what they did because they were facing an Enemy who's NATION felt it was ok... I'm sorry to hurt your moral feelings, but AMERICA still is better. Why can I say that? Because Instead of celebrating this evil those INDIVIDUALS did, we are looking to punish them... not dancing in the streets and cheering. But you don't believe that.




I realize it's comforting for a couple of you guys to believe that I was raised by Lesbian communists just outside Beijing,

Haha, theres that LSD again making you think we said things we didnt.



but the fact of the matter is that I will bet you I was raised far more traditionally than anybody on this thread, with the possible exception of Mr. Edward. And you know what they taught me, way back then? That my country was better than torturers and bullies and dictators and imperialists and liars.

Wow. Nice Ego. Does it come with a display case or do you just take it out and show it to people?



Some other time, we can get into the whole 'nother issue of a martial artist's response to this stuff. Guess they got that wrong too--I always read, and was taught, that a martial artist shows restraint and compassion at all times, and never bullies. They didn't even bring up the whole issue of whether a martial artist was allowed to torment the helpless, whatever the reason or cause might be.

Guess they figured that the answer to that last bit was obvious.

Maybe you read too much. try living... OUTSIDE of a book. The notion "that a martial artist shows restraint and compassion at all times, and never bullies" is a nice one... and it is, I agree, (OMG we agree on somthing???) the most commonly taught... but it is NOT the only notion taught. Add to that, ONCE AGAIN that people are failible, and well... Keep in mind, Robert, the "martial" in martial arts refers to fighting, combat and warfare... and durring a fight, only being "honorable and moral" leads to one thing... and its not "going home safley" after the battle is over.

[Makalakumu]

I didn't miss the document, but I doubt that a lt. in the Military Intelligence corps was privy to it in his training. This really smacks of over zealous, under trained attempts at initiative at lower levels because of nonspecific, unclear communications of 'urgency' from above.....

If you have the time, read through it. Its very interesting reading and the kind of mental and physical duress described in the photos slips into this framework. I'm not sure how it was arranged through the chain of command, perhaps this was a case in which the chain of command was hijacked by the CIA. At the Senate hearing, the joint cheifs were talking about this very thing.

We all could go round and round on this forever. The truth is that we just won't be privy to the information that could answer our questions. I'm sick of speculating. Trust nothing unless it comes directly from the people involved. And then you can expect half of that pool of information to be lies. Anyone with half a connection to this thing is going to pulling up the iron undies - dispicable - yet ya gotta cover yer butt.