Arab anger at Iraq torture photos

[Bottle or the Gun]

Most of your post was complete rubbish but I thought the bolded part stood out as being particularly stupid.

Well done.

Graham

Really. What is the reason then? Instead of calling me stupid, tell me what it is for.

 

[Bottle or the Gun]

I'm NOT referring to an extradition scenario. Here's an article (wa post).

Okay, extradition is the wrong term. But agreements between governments is another legal issue.

Have any American citizens been loaned out to other countries for torture or is it only foreign citizens that some country may also have a legitimate claim to as well as us?

And guess what? It isn't our responsibility what happens internally in a country until it affects us, as it should be. We have political asylum to protect those escaping a threatening situation. We do not offer that to alleged terrorists and other criminals that other countries have an interest in as well.

If the oppression of people in a country occurs then it is the responsibility of the country involved and the responsibility of the citizens to change that system. We did it a few hundred years ago. Others can do it.

 

[Bjorn]

Faked Pics?

Bush has 'apologised' on Arab TV (though he never used the word, 'sorry').

Blair has said the torture and degrading treatment is unacceptable, even though an investigation into the Pics is still going on.

Neither of the leaders would have taken this action (IMO) unless at least some of the photographs are known to be genuine.

I don't think there is anyone who seriously claims that the 60 minutes photos are faked. The story behind them is as official as can be.

Unfortunately other ones, that might be faked, are just confusing the issue.

 

[gnome]

I am reminded of another "invading" army rolling through the idyllic, if damp, Belgian country side.

You see, this army would approch a town or village and some angry citizen, much like the angry Iraqis, would pop off a round or two at the passing soldiers.

The "invading" officers would then turn out all of the men in that villiage and decimate them--or sometimes completely anihilate them.

The images I have seen are humiliating, but a far cry from what I would call torture. To be sure, I would not want to be on the bottom row of a man-meat pyramid.

But it sure as hell beats some alternatives that I can pluck out of my layman's knowledge of man's in-humanity to man.

Point taken... so what are you arguing as a result? How many people are saying this is the worst abuse of prisoners? The fact that American servicemen crossed the line at ALL is enough to generate my outrage...

 

[Crossbow]

Another small point, is that I think that this is the first time in the history of the USA, where Americans had been so blantly caught violating the Geneva Convention and many of their own rules and regulations concerning the treatment of POWs.

Two words: "My Lai".

I hope I'm spelling that correctly.

Three words: "Check Your Facts."

Mi Lai was village that was attacked by the Americans in order to get to a few VC who were using it as a staging/storage area. The VC left almost as soon as the Americans arrived, and as such the villagers were not considered POWs. While several were executed, only one low-ranking officer was held accountable who was later pardoned by President Nixion on the grounds that since there was a danger to the Americans at the time, the actions did not warrant legal punishment.

In this case however ...
The people concerned were already considered POWs,
they were no immediate danger to the prision staff,
they were far removed from the fighting,
well established procedures and rules were violated, and
the events in question seem to be results of proudly sadistic behavior.

Please check the report that was recently released on the subject if you wish to check these facts for yourself.

By the way, in addition to your mispelling, you never did address the first point I made.

 

[Mycroft]

Originally posted by gnome

Point taken... so what are you arguing as a result? How many people are saying this is the worst abuse of prisoners? The fact that American servicemen crossed the line at ALL is enough to generate my outrage...

Is that realistic?

We have about 150,000 soldiers over there, the vast majority are pretty young. While any individual action that crosses the line is certainly deplorable, is it reasonable to expect that all 150,000 will never cross any line?

 

[varwoche]

Okay, extradition is the wrong term. But agreements between governments is another legal issue.

Have any American citizens been loaned out to other countries for torture or is it only foreign citizens that some country may also have a legitimate claim to as well as us?

And guess what? It isn't our responsibility what happens internally in a country until it affects us, as it should be. We have political asylum to protect those escaping a threatening situation. We do not offer that to alleged terrorists and other criminals that other countries have an interest in as well.

If the oppression of people in a country occurs then it is the responsibility of the country involved and the responsibility of the citizens to change that system. We did it a few hundred years ago. Others can do it.

You're moving the goalposts here BOG, and you're buying into the charade. Concede the point and move on.

 

[gnome]

Is that realistic?

We have about 150,000 soldiers over there, the vast majority are pretty young. While any individual action that crosses the line is certainly deplorable, is it reasonable to expect that all 150,000 will never cross any line?

It is the individuals that I am outraged at... whether that anger carries over to the leadership will depend on the full circumstances behind it, and the measure of the response. This is still playing out, and so I shall reserve judgment.

 

[PygmyPlaidGiraffe]

The release of a State Department report on the human rights record of the United States was delayed because it would not have been heard above the "noise" of the exploding scandal on prisoner abuse in Iraq.



ABC news link

 

[headscratcher4]

Is that realistic?

We have about 150,000 soldiers over there, the vast majority are pretty young. While any individual action that crosses the line is certainly deplorable, is it reasonable to expect that all 150,000 will never cross any line?

No, and yet, given the nature of the mission (or at least, the post-hoc justification -- i.e. liberating Iraq from the bloody tyrany of the Baathists and Saddam), being liberators and not devolving into occupiers and capricious overlords is essential. Indeed, not humiliating people is mission critical (is that the way they say it in the military?). It is as important as achieving any strategic goal on the ground using technology or military force.

This is an utter defeat for the battle to win hearts and minds. It is a Den Bien Pho, as it were, because whatever moral credibility our policy aspired to died on the floor with the naked prisoner wearing the dog collar.

Those who commited these acts (crimes) have put every American (not just service man) at increased danger. THey have awarded OBL the biggest propganda victory he could possibly want. They have killed truth, because in how this will be used against the US truth will not matter, as scale (comparison to Saddam, other arab regimes or OBL) will not matter. Such is the nature of our position as occupiers.

This is also what happens when you put stupid and arrogant people in charge of critical missions...like interogations. Arrogance blinded them from any consideration that there were consequences to their actions, or that their actions could get out -- what did they think would become of the photos that were being snapped? THat they would only be circulated in the super-secret world of enlisted men and women who were acting as gaurds?

Sorry to be ranting here, but these people have done as much damage to US policy and US objectives and to US national security as any one could do. As many an expert has noted, it will be a long, hard slog to rebuild any US credibility on this, and on Human Rights in general....let me posit a future UN Human RIghts meeting looking at CHina or Cuba...."Mr. Chairman," Says the Cuban ambassador, "The U.S. has nothing to say on this issue. Let me show you some photos of how the US respects human rites before you consider condemning our glorious revolution...."

 

[PygmyPlaidGiraffe]

hmmm, apparrantly we can "look forward" to

100s more pictures and apparantly video tape to follow with graphic images allegedly showing worse abuses than we have already seen.

"there are other photos that depict incidents of physical violence towards prisoners, acts that can only be described as blatantly sadistic, cruel and inhuman... many more photographs and indeed some videos. The pictures I've seen depict conduct, behaviour that is so brutal and so cruel and so inhumane that anyone engaged in it or involved in it would have to be brought to justice... Congress and the American people and the rest of the world need to know this... Be on notice, that is a fact."

- Rumsfeld

 

[Jocko]

Is that realistic?

We have about 150,000 soldiers over there, the vast majority are pretty young. While any individual action that crosses the line is certainly deplorable, is it reasonable to expect that all 150,000 will never cross any line?

To a sociologist or anthropoligist, no. The worst impulses of human nature always get the better of some poeple. Hard to tell who they are until the opportunity arises.

To a military mind, however, the way in which such incidents are handled play a big part in where that line is drawn. It is sensible to assume abuses will occur; it is likewise sensible to publicize the consequences to the other 150,000. That strategy is what keeps such things so rare that they continue to shock and outrage the establishment at large.

If the charges are borne out, as I think they must be, the perpetrators should be punished as severely as legally possible. The moral high ground is expensive real estate, after all.

 

[Renfield]

Maybe it should have been photos of prisoners and family members being fed into wood chippers. Oh, wait....previous regime, my bad.

Yes, but we're supposed to be liberators, remember. We are a foreign, Christian country occupying a nation of muslims. I think we need to set a slightly higher standard, especially if we're going to convince the Iraqi's we really are there to bring the "freedom", I don't think we ought to be going around torturing their citizens, especially when we're not even sure the people being tortured are guilty of anything.

 

[reprise]

Let's remember that those soldiers who are facing charges are not doing so because they offended Arab sensibilities. They are facing charges because they broke the laws of their own nation.

 

[Jocko]

Let's remember that those soldiers who are facing charges are not doing so because they offended Arab sensibilities. They are facing charges because they broke the laws of their own nation.

As well they should. One would hope that a central tenet of what we're trying to accomplish there is not prosecuting people for "offending" others, but for breaking the law.

 

[varwoche]

My simplistic view on war is that it is sometimes necessary, and it is sometimes the right thing to do, but we should always hate it. We should always understand that it kills people, and that in order to do it, we have to train people to become killers.

Understand, yes. In the same way I understand there are violent criminals in society at large. Just because I understand doesn't make it acceptable however.

Not to mention, the trained killers excuse doesn't apply in the event the "abuses" are systemic. I await the investigation.

 

[varwoche]

I wonder if those who have been trivilaizing these events (Tony, epepke, Frostbite, Mycroft, Bottle or Gun, corbin) care to re-assess stated positions based on what's been learned in past day or two...

msnbc

But Rumsfeld warned the committee that the worst was yet to come. He said he had looked at the full array of unedited photographs of the situation at Abu Ghraib for the first time Thursday night and found them “hard to believe.”

“There are other photos that depict incidents of physical violence towards prisoners, acts that can only be described as blatantly sadistic, cruel and inhumane," he said. “... It’s going to get a good deal more terrible, I’m afraid.”

Rumsfeld did not describe the photos, but U.S. military officials told NBC News that the unreleased images showed U.S. soldiers severely beating an Iraqi prisoner nearly to death, having sex with a female Iraqi female prisoner and “acting inappropriately with a dead body.” The officials said there was also a videotape, apparently shot by U.S. personnel, showing Iraqi guards raping young boys.

 

[headscratcher4]

My simplistic view on war is that it is sometimes necessary, and it is sometimes the right thing to do, but we should always hate it. We should always understand that it kills people, and that in order to do it, we have to train people to become killers.

Assume for a moment that this is true -- a debateable point -- that torture is sometimes necessary to get information, especially information that might save lives.

Than, if this is so, it should be on the highest authority and held to the highest standard. Dershawitz (sp?) was on TV the other morning and made essentially the same point. He said that when and if torture is applied, the highest standards and authorities should be in the chain and responsible -- especially because torture is so notoriously unreliable -- i.e. you get the information you want, not necessarilly the information you need.

In any event, nothing about this situation goes to that standard. As yet, there seems to be no chain of command. No clear orders only an atmosphere of permissiveness. Denile by the highest authorities and little guys (pfcs, sargents, etc. left to hang in the wind). Further, these actions, as stated before, put the US reputation to a horrible test and it failed...such decisions should not be left in the hands of the lowest ranks, always in the highest ranks.

Finally, I heard the family of the female depicted in the pictures holding the dog leash on the radio last night, understandably trying to defend their daughter/sister. The sister argued "she was only following orders..." where have we heard that before?

 

[rikzilla]

The following is relevant to this thread as well:
<iframe width="100%" height="400" src="http://www.randi.org/vbulletin/showthread.php?s=&action=showpost&postid=1870447650"></iframe>

....suffice to say, I hope there was no such policy.

-z