Post by: mikhael on May 01, 2004, 09:16:38 am
http://www.cnn.com/2004/WORLD/meast/04/30/iraq.photos/index.html
Just to head off the argument about authenticity, I'm assuming this is authentic. The President believes it authentic, and if anyone would deny something like this, it would be him.
Post by: Rictor on May 01, 2004, 09:18:16 am
Bastards ought to be lynched.
Post by: kasperl on May 01, 2004, 09:20:41 am
The Daily Mirror posting it, well, when was the last time there where really gory pictures and they didn't post them?
Post by: Rictor on May 01, 2004, 09:24:34 am
Quote
Originally posted by kasperl
well, the lynching would start an outright war, as far there isn't one going on right now.
As well it should. No one believes what the Iraqis have been saying since the start of the occupation, it takes an American source + photos to put and end to that ****.
Post by: Gank on May 01, 2004, 09:25:29 am
http://www.newsday.com/news/nationworld/wire/sns-ap-us-iraq-prisoner-abuse,0,2346010,print.story?coll=sns-ap-nationworld-headlines
Their defense seems to be they weren't told it wasn't ok to torture people
Anyways they're appointing the former head of Guantanamo as the new head of the prision, so conditions should improve :rolleyes:
http://www.sky.com/skynews/article/0,,30100-13075721,00.html
Not the first time the brits have been caught at this stuff either iirc.
Post by: kasperl on May 01, 2004, 09:26:06 am
Well, I hate to say this, but is there any evidence that this is real? The pictures on the site are too low res to actually see something, but all I see is a guy with a bit of dark skin standing in a black sheet or something with a black hood on. The uniforms shouldn't be too hard to grab from some costume shop either. I can't really see how old the soldier looks, but I have my suspiciouns about the sources.
OTH, if this was real, it'd hardly be the first time this happened, now would it? I vaguely remember a picture of some poor kid being roasted alive above a campfire by some soldiers, either UN, US or some other western country.
Post by: Rictor on May 01, 2004, 09:28:34 am
oh, just for reference, the guy in charge of the torture was a a prison guard before he joined the Army. Quite a coincidence, huh?
Post by: kasperl on May 01, 2004, 09:32:24 am
Quote
Originally posted by Gank
No they've been assigned to other duties.
http://www.newsday.com/news/nationworld/wire/sns-ap-us-iraq-prisoner-abuse,0,2346010,print.story?coll=sns-ap-nationworld-headlines
Their defense seems to be they weren't told it wasn't ok to torture people
Anyways they're appointing the former head of Guantanamo as the new head of the prision, so conditions should improve :rolleyes:
http://www.sky.com/skynews/article/0,,30100-13075721,00.html
Not the first time the brits have been caught at this stuff either iirc.
ok, I didn't read those before my last post.
Well, as far as these are reliable sources, it gained some credibility in my eyes. Still, I am hardly surprised by this. If it is fake, well, this was going to happen at some point anyway, and if it was real, well, what do you expect when you go along and demonize an entire country in the media for a fair few months before invading it with not so heavily trained soldiers. I mean, no offence to the military, I am sure they get weapons training and ****, but I doubt they get philosohy classes on the difference between attacking someone and treating him like an animal.
Post by: kasperl on May 01, 2004, 09:33:59 am
Quote
Originally posted by Rictor
kasperl: happens all the time, just you don't hear about it. Thats what you get when you have a military force able to operate with impunity.
oh, just for reference, the guy in charge of the torture was a a prison guard before he joined the Army. Quite a coincidence, huh?
Dunno, once you get into one authoritarian position, you just want to roll into the next, aye? [ / cynisism]
Post by: kasperl on May 01, 2004, 09:42:50 am
http://www.prisonexp.org/
(BBC article: http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/middle_east/3674355.stm )
Post by: Gank on May 01, 2004, 09:47:49 am
Quote
Originally posted by kasperl
Well, as far as these are reliable sources, it gained some credibility in my eyes. Still, I am hardly surprised by this. If it is fake, well, this was going to happen at some point anyway, and if it was real, well, what do you expect when you go along and demonize an entire country in the media for a fair few months before invading it with not so heavily trained soldiers. I mean, no offence to the military, I am sure they get weapons training and ****, but I doubt they get philosohy classes on the difference between attacking someone and treating him like an animal.
:wtf:
You shouldnt need training to know that stripping your prisioners, putting bags over their heads and forcing them to simulate oral sex on each other while you took photos isn't ****ing allowed. Lack of training is a pretty ****ty excuse for being a sick bastard.
Post by: Gank on May 01, 2004, 09:59:20 am
Quote
Contractors in Iraq questioned about abuse
Los Angeles Times
WASHINGTON -- A private military contractor acknowledged Friday that its employees had been questioned in connection with allegations that U.S. soldiers abused Iraqi prisoners at the U.S. military's main detention center in Iraq.
CACI International of Arlington, Va., said the employees had volunteered to be interviewed in a case in which six U.S. soldiers have been charged with sexually and physically abusing Iraqi prisoners at Abu Ghraib prison outside Baghdad.
CACI, which provides services to the U.S. military ranging from intelligence gathering to computer networking, declined to identify the employees or their jobs at the prison, which houses about 8,000 convicted criminals and military detainees.
Military and industry sources said CACI was involved in the interrogation of some Iraqis being held at the prison.
A lawyer for one of the accused soldiers said CACI employees had encouraged military police to "soften up" Iraqis for questioning.
At Abu Ghraib, CACI conducted interrogations and a second U.S. company, San Diego-based Titan Corp., provided interpreters, industry and military sources said.
US uses private companys to interrogate prisioners? I wonder where there employees come from.
Post by: Stealth on May 01, 2004, 10:06:32 am
Quote
Originally posted by kasperl
Well, I hate to say this, but is there any evidence that this is real? The pictures on the site are too low res to actually see something, but all I see is a guy with a bit of dark skin standing in a black sheet or something with a black hood on. The uniforms shouldn't be too hard to grab from some costume shop either. I can't really see how old the soldier looks, but I have my suspiciouns about the sources.
i swear you've got to be the biggest dumass i know.
yeah, that's what it is. the american soldiers went to the nearby costume store, bought costumes, dressed up in them, took pictures of each other prending to be torturing and abusing the people in costumes, then somehow these pictures leaked to the press.
yeah kasperl, it's a hoax, it's one big hoax designed by the american soliders to get each other in trouble
:rolleyes:
Post by: mikhael on May 01, 2004, 10:08:16 am
But hey, who cares about consistency. These guys need to be thrown in Guantanamo as prisoners, not lynched.
Post by: Rictor on May 01, 2004, 10:10:52 am
Post by: Stealth on May 01, 2004, 10:14:25 am
because, you know, thousands of people were tortured and executed under Saddam Hussein, so a mere few dozen being tortured is OK, of course.
Post by: Bobboau on May 01, 2004, 10:37:17 am
Quote
Originally posted by me in another forum
I'm inclined to hand them over to the new Iraqi government and have them spend the next few decades in an Iraqi prison them selves.
the only saveing grace was that they didn't kill anyone, had they done that, I'd strip them of there weapons and dump them in the middle of Falujah. an example needs to be made of these stupid ****ing bastards.
Post by: Rictor on May 01, 2004, 10:49:04 am
Quote
Originally posted by Stealth
yeah, so since it's such a smaller number, it gives them the right to torture them as they please, right?
because, you know, thousands of people were tortured and executed under Saddam Hussein, so a mere few dozen being tortured is OK, of course.
Never said that. As I've said before, I don't support the hostage taking by insurgents. I can understand how it is necessary, but they were mostly civilians so I am against it.
However, yes, the number of people harmed is important. A man will get harsher punishment for killing 10 people than for killing 1. Same thing here.
And the conditions that the hostages were kept in was great compared the Abu Ghariab. They were all returned AFAIK, unharmed. The same can not be said for the Iraqis rotting in jail.
Bob: I doubt no one died. The prison has been operating for nearly a year, this report offers only a limited look at whats going on. There is no way of knowing whether people were killed and disposed of, unless the Army decides to speak up which I doubt will happen.
Post by: Kazan on May 01, 2004, 10:49:37 am
Quote
Originally posted by Rictor
I look forward to hearing "just a few bad apples" ad nauseum in the next few days.
Bastards ought to be lynched.
I'm sick and tired of you're bigotry against americans - go ****ing lynch yourself you little ****
Post by: Rictor on May 01, 2004, 11:05:47 am
also, don't throw a tantrum. keep it civil; I do.
Post by: kasperl on May 01, 2004, 11:18:43 am
Quote
Originally posted by Stealth
i swear you've got to be the biggest dumass i know.
yeah, that's what it is. the american soldiers went to the nearby costume store, bought costumes, dressed up in them, took pictures of each other prending to be torturing and abusing the people in costumes, then somehow these pictures leaked to the press.
yeah kasperl, it's a hoax, it's one big hoax designed by the american soliders to get each other in trouble
:rolleyes:
no, i mean that anyone, not nessicarely connected in any way to the military, could've made these pictures.
But, after reading on some other site that some Tommy's gave these to the Daily Horror, it invalidates my statement.
Post by: Kazan on May 01, 2004, 11:43:12 am
that's bigotry - go **** yourself
Post by: Bobboau on May 01, 2004, 11:53:18 am
Post by: Rictor on May 01, 2004, 11:59:36 am
Post by: Flipside on May 01, 2004, 01:44:12 pm
Just like the Police, some people become soldiers because they are petty minded little classroom bullies who are too cowardly to do it without some kind of 'higher authority'. Yes, the 'Few bad apples' line sounds old hat, it has been used a lot of times, because in most cases it is true.
I think it is disgusting the way these prisoners have been treated, and I hope the soldiers themselves are publicly stipped of duties, made to apologise and sent home in disgrace, while the locals watch, that is important.
It's just people being people, don't for one moment think any conquering army has behaved any better, and a great many have behaved worse.
Post by: Liberator on May 01, 2004, 01:45:03 pm
That's like me claiming all Canadians are a bunch of weak-kneed appeasers who'll be on what ever side of an issue will make the fewest people mad at us because of a few random comments I've seen from various sources.
Post by: Rictor on May 01, 2004, 02:01:15 pm
There are 35 millions Canadians and maybe 250,000 US soldiers. The likelyhood of uniform behaviour increases as the number of specimens decreases. And two, all soldiers go through the same basic training. They are all tought by the same authority and by the same rules, what is acceptable in the Army and what is not. In their duties as soldiers, their "upbringing" has been uniform. The same can not be said for any nation, outside of maybe a few staunchly Communist states.
And I am not saying that this hasn't been done by almost every conquering army in the history of mankind. But what was acceptable 1500 years ago is, I hope, no longer acceptable today. That, and also the US government spouts off alot of rhetoric proclaiming they are more moral, more just etc etc, so this is also a factor.
I for one would like all prisons under military supervision to be thouroughly inspected to confirm that such behaviour isn't widespread. This includes Guantanamo Bay, as they are reported to be among the worst violators of human rights.
Post by: Flipside on May 01, 2004, 02:10:54 pm
It was unacceptable 1500 years ago if you truly followed the preachings of the church at the time, it would be considered a sin, but, of course, there were no TV cameras 1500 years ago either. And no-one dared talk, you had no Newspapers, unions etc then.
I'm not saying this to defend their actions, all I'm saying is that Humans havent changed that much in the last few millenium, they have understood more, true, but we still react to stimuli pretty much the same way. :(
Post by: mikhael on May 01, 2004, 11:33:16 pm
Quote
Originally posted by Liberator
While I won't pretend that there are bastards in the Military, your attitude that they are all bastards because of a few sickos is ludicrous.
That's like me claiming all Canadians are a bunch of weak-kneed appeasers who'll be on what ever side of an issue will make the fewest people mad at us because of a few random comments I've seen from various sources.
My eyes bleed every time I am forced to agree with you, Lib.
Can I get a coupla pints of O-neg?
Post by: Rictor on May 02, 2004, 01:18:13 am
Post by: karajorma on May 02, 2004, 03:53:02 am
Post by: Gank on May 02, 2004, 06:20:30 am
The plot sickens
http://newyorker.com/fact/content/?040510fa_fact
Post by: mikhael on May 02, 2004, 08:34:41 pm
That's... disturbing to say the least.
Post by: Gank on May 02, 2004, 08:47:51 pm
Post by: mikhael on May 02, 2004, 08:53:10 pm
Post by: Gank on May 02, 2004, 09:06:38 pm
Post by: Rictor on May 05, 2004, 12:35:40 am
http://216.239.41.104/search?q=cache:XYYOCOWnu_8J:www.am1500.com/personalities/joeryan.htm+KSTP+%22Joe+Ryan%22&hl=en
Post by: Bobboau on May 05, 2004, 11:57:25 am
care to give the interesting excerpts
Post by: ionia23 on May 05, 2004, 12:23:02 pm
See,the other side can screwup all they want, but if the coalition troops make one tiny stinkin' error in judgement it's "oooh evil American white devils" blah blah. Ludicrous. You don't hear a soul talking about what they did to Jessica Lynch. Or the hostages.
This was the action of a few individuals taking out their frustrations. Do I think it's reflective of the entire coalition force? Aww, hell no. Do I think they should be shot? Naw. Regardless of circumstances, they know what behavior is expected of them. Dishonoable discharge and some prison time is more than sufficient, followed up by apologies from their superiors.
I feel no sympathy for the inmates whatsoever. When you sign up for the wrong team, you get what you deserve. However, what our troops did was deplorable, but nothing compared to what the enemy does with impunity.
I find it most interesting that it seems the Geneva Convention applies to America and no one else.
Post by: Bobboau on May 05, 2004, 12:26:57 pm
Post by: ionia23 on May 05, 2004, 12:48:07 pm
Quote
Originally posted by Bobboau:yes: :lol:
Jessica Lynch, didn't you know that was all staged propaganda evil americans white devil white devil?
Post by: Flipside on May 05, 2004, 01:02:57 pm
I don't know what it more reprehensible to be honest :(
Edit : Not that all of them were btw, there are cases of abuse, and I hope the people are caught and bought to justice.
Post by: Havock on May 05, 2004, 01:21:46 pm
Quote
Originally posted by mikhael
Generally, I'm proud to be a veteran. Not, however, when it lumps me in with these bastards.
http://www.cnn.com/2004/WORLD/meast/04/30/iraq.photos/index.html
Just to head off the argument about authenticity, I'm assuming this is authentic. The President believes it authentic, and if anyone would deny something like this, it would be him.
true, i am not a veteran myself, but before the budget cuts, i was in training, if it is true, those people do not deserve the title "Soldier".
if it is not true, then someone is pulling off a really sick smearing here.
Post by: Liberator on May 05, 2004, 01:45:44 pm
Post by: Rictor on May 05, 2004, 02:43:11 pm
Also, Jessica Lynch was not harmed, she was given the best care available, better than any Iraqi. This has been documented for over six months now. The Iraqi doctors tried to hand her back, but their van was shot at. The hospital was deserted, all that Nighvision crap was for show. How about we just accept that yes, it was staged, and move on to something more recent.
Bob: what is interesting is that its a first hand report. I read most of it over, and there's nothing incriminating. But you get a sense of the mentality of the guards and interrogators, the routines of the prison and so on. What is also interesting is that the link I posted is a Google cache, and original has been taken down....
ionia: once again, you define the "right team" as "whoever the other guys are". Who is more guilty, te Americans who invaded or the Iraqis who are defending their home?
also, keep in mind, the CPA has stated at around 60% of the prisoners in Abu Gharaib are of no threat. That means that a large number of the are not insurgents at all, but rather innocents who got nabbed. Not all, and likely not even most, prisoners in there are guilty.
Post by: ionia23 on May 05, 2004, 03:27:05 pm
Quote
Originally posted by Rictor
ionia: once again, you define the "right team" as "whoever the other guys are". Who is more guilty, te Americans who invaded or the Iraqis who are defending their home?
Defending? From whom?
Post by: Rictor on May 05, 2004, 04:10:54 pm
Post by: Gank on May 05, 2004, 04:17:05 pm
http://story.news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=story&u=/latimests/20040505/ts_latimes/abuseinvestigationincludes25deaths&e=4
Some of you people are compleyte and utter twats, Bush himself has said this stuff is happening, yet you still think its a smear campaign.
Post by: ionia23 on May 05, 2004, 04:41:43 pm
Quote
Originally posted by Rictor
From the invaders, duh. From the guys shooting and imprisoning them... You'de do the same thing if anyone invaded the US, as would pretty much anyone else on Earth.
Depends on which side I was on.
Post by: Turambar on May 05, 2004, 04:56:09 pm
Post by: ionia23 on May 05, 2004, 05:01:01 pm
Quote
Originally posted by Turambar
I say we need to get these cameramen into israel, where they regularly torture Palestinians, not to mention holding them without an attorney. I'd like to see what the Jewish-owned media in this country (US) does then!
That's easy. The Geneva Convention apparently only applies to America.
Post by: Gank on May 05, 2004, 05:07:04 pm
Post by: ionia23 on May 05, 2004, 05:12:07 pm
Quote
Originally posted by Gank
uh-huh, thats why the US tortures people :rolleyes:
Blah blah, as a matter of policy they do not, blah blah.
Post by: Gank on May 05, 2004, 05:29:41 pm
edit, no need to go to the newyorker, read the report itself:
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/4894001/
Post by: Kazan on May 05, 2004, 05:32:04 pm
Post by: Turambar on May 05, 2004, 05:34:03 pm
Post by: Gank on May 05, 2004, 05:35:21 pm
Post by: Kazan on May 05, 2004, 05:35:57 pm
"One who discriminates against or who is hostile toward or prejudiced against Jews."
please don't speak again - it's pretty clear you're talking out your ass
Post by: Kazan on May 05, 2004, 05:36:46 pm
Post by: Gank on May 05, 2004, 05:46:30 pm
Quote
Originally posted by Kazan
http://dictionary.reference.com/search?q=antisemitic
"One who discriminates against or who is hostile toward or prejudiced against Jews."
please don't speak again - it's pretty clear you're talking out your ass
Actually Kazan you're talking out of your arse, Arabs are Semites, the man cant be descriminating against himself.
Gerald Levin, CEO and Director of AOL Time Warner
Edgar Bronfman, Sr., Chairman of Seagram Company Ltd
Edgar Bronfman, Jr, President and CEO of Seagram Company Ltd and head of Universal Studios
Sumner Redstone, Chairman and CEO of Viacom, Inc
Dennis Dammerman, Vice Chairman of General Electric
Peter Chernin, President and Co-COO of News Corporation Limited
tip of the iceberg mate, Disney for example is owned by a company who's head office is located in Jerusalem
Its not just your country either, Russia is pratically ran by 7 jewish Ogliarch/mafia bosses, though Putin seems to have taken a dislike to them.
Post by: Kazan on May 05, 2004, 06:02:04 pm
Post by: Gank on May 05, 2004, 06:16:20 pm
Anti-Semitism \An`ti-Sem"i*tism\, n. Opposition to, or hatred of, Semites, esp. Jews.
Sem·ite
A member of a group of Semitic-speaking peoples of the Near East and northern Africa, including the Arabs, Arameans, Babylonians, Carthaginians, Ethiopians, Hebrews, and Phoenicians.
http://dictionary.reference.com/search?q=semite
The man is a (half) Semite, calling him anti-semite is the wrong term.
Anywyas the remark wouldnt be anti-semite coming from anyone, its not discriminating against or derogatory towards jews, nor did he imply that jews control US media as you seem to think he did.
Btw I read somewhere that miriam webster was changing its definition of anti-semitism to opposition of Israel and/or Zionism. Ludicrious if true.
Post by: ionia23 on May 05, 2004, 06:25:50 pm
Post by: Rictor on May 05, 2004, 06:36:43 pm
Stop using the word so often and it might actually have some meaning.
As you can see from Gank's post, the media is owned to a large degree by Jews. Show me one American news corporation (no pun intended) that has displayed even the mildest criticism of Sharon and has questioned the legitimacy of the occupation, oppression etc.
and please, please call me anti-Semetic. Jewish on both sides, with some family members pretty active in the Jewish community worldwide.
Post by: Rictor on May 05, 2004, 06:41:39 pm
Quote
Originally posted by Gank
Btw I read somewhere that miriam webster was changing its definition of anti-semitism to opposition of Israel and/or Zionism. Ludicrious if true.
True. Opposition to Zionism is now defined as anti-Semetism.
Post by: Gank on May 05, 2004, 06:52:11 pm
Post by: SadisticSid on May 05, 2004, 07:47:44 pm
While I'm not naive enough to believe this sort of thing never happens, if that bog-roll of a paper the Daily Mirror has faked the pictures, may it be fined for every penny it has. And nothing would please me more to see that worm Piers Morgan disgraced.
Post by: Rictor on May 05, 2004, 08:25:03 pm
___________
We are being asked to believe that:
(1) The only abuse that occurred against anyone detained by American forces in Iraq was photographed and reported.
(2) No abuses occurred anywhere that were not photographed or reported.
(3) The one percent of US troops who are the "bad apples" all happen to serve together in the same unit... the unit that is the only one guilty, and that happened to get caught because of the photographs.
(4) The aggressive investigation now being proclaimed by everyone from George W. **** to CENTCOM, about abuses that were already on record in the military (an internal investigation had already been launched in February by Major General Antonio M. Taguba, but was kept from the public), would have happened had the photographs and story not been aired on national television.
(5) The military was not attempting to cover up their own investigation, and that they would have informed the public of these abuses even had Seymour Hersh not put the whole miserable episode into print.
(6) The military did not cover anything up in the two weeks between the time CBS warned them that they were going to air an expose and when they actually did air it.
(7) No one in the chain of command above Brigadier General Janis Karpinski is responsible for the failure to halt these abuses, even though Lieutenant General Ricardo S. Sanchez was informed of the investigation of these abuses, complete with sworn statements and photographs, by General Taguba last February.
Post by: Rictor on May 05, 2004, 08:33:33 pm
Post by: mikhael on May 05, 2004, 09:25:55 pm
All I know is that no one in the US State or Defense Departments are saying that this is a setup. Further, the President going on television and saying that our men did this is a pretty good indication that this isn't a set up. If there's ANYONE who would actively deny this, its the Shrub.
What kills me is that the man whose election promises included his belief in humility, refused to apologise on behalf of the nation--when 65% of the Americans thought he should. If I were President, that would have been the first thing out of my mouth.
Post by: Liberator on May 05, 2004, 09:39:16 pm
Post by: mikhael on May 05, 2004, 09:44:12 pm
Its not just the photos. Its the photos, the US Army report, the US Army soldiers, the fact that Rumsfeld knew about it and didn't tell **** until AFTER it hit the media. I mean, all the antecedents are admitting that it happened. All of them. Not one of the people who SHOULD be denying it to cover their own asses is denying it. That's a truly disturbing thing.
Post by: Kazan on May 05, 2004, 10:44:58 pm
Post by: mikhael on May 05, 2004, 10:57:28 pm
And that's another thing. We learned that doing stuff like this is WRONG. It was part of our training in boot camp. We had several classes on the Geneva Conventions. These soldiers knew what they were doing was wrong. Even if they were ordered to do it (as the former CO of the prison claims), the orders would be unlawful. The regs are pretty clear on unlawful orders.
Its just an ugly event and I'm sorry it happened. I'm damned ashamed that it was my service-mates that perpetrated it.
Post by: Kazan on May 05, 2004, 10:59:18 pm
Post by: Rictor on May 05, 2004, 11:56:03 pm
Quote
Originally posted by Kazan
if you're talking about the raping by us soliders of iraqi women - it was staged porno done by the hungarians and stolen by islamic proagandists - this has been proven and the news broke earlier today
Actually, Taguba's report cites examples of " A male MP guard having sex with a female detainee", and also "Sodomizing a detainee with a chemical light and perhaps a broom stick"...
Post by: Kazan on May 06, 2004, 07:11:40 am
Post by: Gank on May 07, 2004, 03:40:03 pm
Seems like the videos we havent seen are worse than what we have.
Post by: Rictor on May 07, 2004, 07:45:06 pm
Soldiers put harness on elderly woman and rode her around like a donkey (http://news.bostonherald.com/international/view.bg?articleid=19191)
Allegations that a 12 year old girl was tortured at Abu Ghraib (http://www.itv.com/news/623337.html)
Seymour Hersh says there's plenty more evidence of abuse and torture out there (http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,118955,00.html)
edit: also, I am without TV, so can someone fill me in as to what kind of videos have been shown?
Post by: Mr. Vega on May 07, 2004, 08:15:08 pm
Post by: Rictor on May 07, 2004, 08:26:13 pm
Post by: Gank on May 08, 2004, 10:29:55 am
Post by: Rictor on May 08, 2004, 12:20:19 pm
http://dailytelegraph.news.com.au/story.jsp?sectionid=1258&storyid=1302907
Post by: Flipside on May 10, 2004, 12:25:22 pm
Just keeps getting worse and worse really, somehow better and better doesn't seem appropriate :(
Post by: Bobboau on May 10, 2004, 12:35:47 pm
Post by: Flipside on May 10, 2004, 12:45:07 pm
"It said it met prisoners who were being held naked in complete darkness. Others had been held naked and were allowed to dress, but given only women's underwear. "
It happens in small steps, if you can do this to a prisoner, then surely you can do that to a prisoner :(
Post by: Rictor on May 10, 2004, 12:46:18 pm
Post by: Bobboau on May 10, 2004, 12:53:35 pm
Post by: Rictor on May 10, 2004, 01:03:23 pm
With all due respect, this is not about what you deem to be acceptable, for your own troops or anyone else. The fact is, there are long standing international laws regarding the treatment of POWs. Its not up to the troops, or even the commanders to make it up on the spot.
Also, you do realize that your situation is hypothetical only, right? US troops get more or less carte blanche. Even the most serious of crimes are excused by the Army, or given minimal reprimand. Now, assuming that someone ****s up bad enough to deserve serious punishment, and that the Army is powerless to protect him/her in the face of astounding evidence, they wouldn't be tortured. At worst, they spend the rest of their lives looking at the inside of a miliotary brig, but no way would any soldier ever treat his own the same way as an Iraqi prisoner.
Post by: mikhael on May 10, 2004, 01:21:14 pm
Post by: Gank on May 10, 2004, 02:43:13 pm
Post by: ionia23 on May 10, 2004, 02:47:12 pm
Quote
Originally posted by Gank
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/americas/1970312.stm
"You remember Operation Rolling Thunder?"
"Yeah. I think I do, yeah."
"September 1966. . . . You were piloting an F-105 Fighterchief. . . . 355th Tactical Fighter Wing out of Thailand. . . . "
"It was a military target,"
"It was a civilian target. . . . There were 11 civilian casualties."
"Why did you tell me that?"
"Because you could be charged and tried for a war crime. . . All wars are crimes."
- NBC "The West Wing: War Crimes"
Post by: Turambar on May 10, 2004, 02:49:45 pm
Post by: ionia23 on May 10, 2004, 02:50:31 pm
Post by: Rictor on May 10, 2004, 02:57:32 pm
Gank: hey, whats new? There's one country that considers itself above international law, and I think we all know which one.
Lets see...Rights of the Child, ICC, Kyoto, nuclear non-proliferation...I'm forgeting something I think. Maybe the Landmines thing, but I might be mistaken.
ionia: the Arab world? Excuse me? What, you mean like the Gook world, or the Black world? Or perhaps its those damn upity Injuns at it again. How about the Christian world, or the Aryan world.
just shut up, yeah?
___________
Quote
Judge Richard Goldstone, the first chief prosecutor at The Hague war crimes tribunal on the former Yugoslavia, echoed these sentiments saying:
"I think it is a very backwards step. It is unprecedented which I think to an extent smacks of pettiness in the sense that it is not going to affect in any way the establishment of the international criminal court".
:rolleyes: :rolleyes:
Post by: Gank on May 10, 2004, 03:36:29 pm
Quote
Originally posted by ionia23
- NBC "The West Wing: War Crimes"
Thats tv, we're talking about the REAL world.
Post by: ionia23 on May 10, 2004, 03:48:36 pm
Quote
Originally posted by Gank
Thats tv, we're talking about the REAL world.
So am I. All wars are crimes. All. You, of all people here, should know that.
Post by: ionia23 on May 10, 2004, 03:50:03 pm
Quote
Originally posted by Rictor
ionia: the Arab world? Excuse me? What, you mean like the Gook world, or the Black world? Or perhaps its those damn upity Injuns at it again. How about the Christian world, or the Aryan world.
just shut up, yeah?
Don't blame me, i didn't write the cartoon. If you find it racist, take it up with Farrington.
Post by: mikhael on May 10, 2004, 07:09:51 pm
Really. I'm slapping my knee.
Post by: Flipside on May 10, 2004, 07:25:33 pm
As far as I can tell, it was only a few people involved in this torture, not all American troops, those who disagree with Americas policies, in any country, will obviously point at this and say 'This is America'. But it's not, America is built on a lot of good ideas and principles, even if the establishment tries to screw with it wherever possible. I believe most people in Europe would know exactly how irritated and powerless the average 'man in the street' really is. It concerns me greatly that in some cases the torture may have been 'policy', whether misinterpreted or not. This has been going on in war, and far far worse, for centuries. The Spanish Inquisition were famous for making people swallow knotted rags and then puling their bowels and intestines out with them. I don't condone what those people did, but it doesn't take a King or President or Dictator to be an evil sadistic bastard. The man next door can do it just as well.
My own feelings are that America were wrong to do what they did, but I won't hate American's for being a part of a wrong decision. If I did, then surely I am just reciprocating the whole 'them and us' thing and making matters worse?
Post by: Rictor on May 10, 2004, 07:26:56 pm
And anyhow, when have Americans been sterotyped? Learn to differentiate between soldiers and citizens. As I've pointed out before, US troops in Iraq all have the same training. In their capacity as soldiers, they have all had a uniform upbringing.
Do you see a difference between implying 100,000 soldiers act the same, and implying that hundreds of millions of people from entirely different national and ethnic backgrounds act the same?
Post by: Jetmech Jr. on May 10, 2004, 07:28:41 pm
Quote
Originally posted by Flipside
I think the problem is that it is an ever-decreasing circle. The more America does to protect itself from the growing distrust, the more distrust they generate :(
As far as I can tell, it was only a few people involved in this torture, not all American troops, those who disagree with Americas policies, in any country, will obviously point at this and say 'This is America'. But it's not, America is built on a lot of good ideas and principles, even if the establishment tries to screw with it wherever possible. I believe most people in Europe would know exactly how irritated and powerless the average 'man in the street' really is. It concerns me greatly that in some cases the torture may have been 'policy', whether misinterpreted or not. This has been going on in war, and far far worse, for centuries. The Spanish Inquisition were famous for making people swallow knotted rags and then puling their bowels and intestines out with them. I don't condone what those people did, but it doesn't take a King or President or Dictator to be an evil sadistic bastard. The man next door can do it just as well.
My own feelings are that America were wrong to do what they did, but I won't hate American's for being a part of a wrong decision. If I did, then surely I am just reciprocating the whole 'them and us' thing and making matters worse?
IMO, that has gotta be the smartest thing ive seen said in this whole thread. :)
Post by: jdjtcagle on May 10, 2004, 07:33:45 pm
Quote
Originally posted by Flipside
I think the problem is that it is an ever-decreasing circle. The more America does to protect itself from the growing distrust, the more distrust they generate :(
As far as I can tell, it was only a few people involved in this torture, not all American troops, those who disagree with Americas policies, in any country, will obviously point at this and say 'This is America'. But it's not, America is built on a lot of good ideas and principles, even if the establishment tries to screw with it wherever possible. I believe most people in Europe would know exactly how irritated and powerless the average 'man in the street' really is. It concerns me greatly that in some cases the torture may have been 'policy', whether misinterpreted or not. This has been going on in war, and far far worse, for centuries. The Spanish Inquisition were famous for making people swallow knotted rags and then puling their bowels and intestines out with them. I don't condone what those people did, but it doesn't take a King or President or Dictator to be an evil sadistic bastard. The man next door can do it just as well.
My own feelings are that America were wrong to do what they did, but I won't hate American's for being a part of a wrong decision. If I did, then surely I am just reciprocating the whole 'them and us' thing and making matters worse?
Well said :nod:
Post by: Rictor on May 10, 2004, 08:08:18 pm
not to mention that aside from any torture or "inappropriate behaviour", there is the entirely acceptable and intended role of a soldier as a killer. Sure, he didn't torture anyone, but he still fragged 15 Iraqis, some of suspect legitimacy.
this might be an interesting read. Its not nearly so wordy as the guy's previous artcle (remember I posted it a while ago...).
click click (http://www.counterpunch.com/goff05042004.html)
Post by: Flipside on May 10, 2004, 09:03:30 pm
As far as your average GI knows, every single local is a fundamentalist. A GI is not trained for diplomatic missions. They are not a Policing Force, they are an Army, they invade places. No offence to any Americans here, but it didn't work in Vietnam, and it won't work in Iraq, your army is set up to kick ass, not kiss it ;)
I can't justify what has happened there, please don't think that I do, least of all the torture. I'm suggesting the possibility this isn't happening because they are American, this isn't happening because America is the most powerful nation on the planet. This is happening because they are human, and as much as we love to think otherwise, humans do things like this if they think they can get away with it.
Post by: mikhael on May 10, 2004, 11:40:19 pm
Post by: Rictor on May 11, 2004, 01:59:57 am
oh and, the Red Cross has reason to believe that 70%-90% of the prisoners are innocents, which goes even beyond the Taguba 60%. Real comforting to know, eh?
http://news.ft.com/servlet/ContentServer?pagename=FT.com/StoryFT/FullStory&c=StoryFT&cid=1083180400050&p=1012571727172
Post by: ionia23 on May 11, 2004, 11:08:17 am
Quote
Originally posted by mikhael:yes: :yes: :yes:
Nah. Don't bother to argue with Rictor. He's right. Just ask him.
Post by: Flipside on May 11, 2004, 12:00:42 pm
Yet again, I am not condoning this, or the shootings, I wonder how many Russian or Polish soldiers shot Germans near the end of the war simply because they were German? Yes, your source quotes his own opinion, it may be technically more detailed than mine, but that doesn't make him right, that just means he has an opinion, just as yours OR MY opinions are not baseless simply because we do not agree.
As for comments that are pertaining to the subject, I believe the subject of the thread was the Red Cross releasing pictures of American Soldiers torturing prisoners. Any other details so far have been in the form of accusation, assumption and third party interviews. I don't think we will EVER learn the truth, but how is that different from any other government in existence?
If we allow ouselves to be drawn into this cycle of distrust and hatred through association, then we are helping to accelerate a division made by a few men, which could be catastrophic to billions, and I don't mean the torture, and also playing along to precisely what both sides want.
Neither side in this 'War' is actually big enough to hurt the others, it's fundamentalists vs fundamentalists, the crime is the ordinary people that both sides use as fodder to fight their fights for them. The American Establishments are greedy, self centred bastards, I don't doubt that for one moment, but from the American People I have heard nothing but Shock, shame and guilt.
If we are to have a judgement on 250 million people, I won't do it because of the actions of less than a hundred of them, or the orders of less than 10. And yes I am concerned that this may have been American policy, but I can garauntee it was the policy of less people than you have fingers, and Soldiers are not chosen for the ability to think through the moral outcome of situations :(
There MUST be a reckoning for those who are guilty of this crime, they should be punished, this much is obvious, but to carry the hatred on for all of them makes us no less small minded than those who created the situation.
Post by: Rictor on May 11, 2004, 12:10:04 pm
Not one to waste a good diversion, Dubya imposes sanctions on Syria. (http://sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/news/archive/2004/05/10/national1308EDT0581.DTL) That'll teach 'em camel jockeys.
edit: I really don't know where people come up with this, but I never implied that all of America was guilty. What I am implying, is that this is far more widespread than just a few cases here and there. Yeah, a handful of people made that policy, but thousands executed it. And "I was just following orders" has a pretty bad history as an excuse in any court of law.
Post by: Flipside on May 11, 2004, 12:28:31 pm
Some say this, some say that (http://story.news.yahoo.com/fc?cid=34&tmpl=fc&in=US&cat=US_Armed_Forces)
And to prove that small mindedness and viciousness can happen anywhere
http://story.news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=story&cid=514&e=11&u=/ap/20040511/ap_on_re_mi_ea/egypt_iraq_american_beheaded
Not everything is a conspiracy, it just tends to look like it. And the above story is a prime time example of the tit for tat routine on a world scale which is dragging us ALL under, regardless of our opinion of the situation ;)
Post by: Rictor on May 11, 2004, 12:39:23 pm
I actually find the analogy to be a very good one. 18 guys crash a plane in to the WTC, acting on orders from higher ups. Now the 18 are dead, and the higher ups are on the run, as is the entire organzation, since its purpose is clear: to kill Americans and their allies.
A handful of Americans torture Iraqis, and now they're in **** and the higher ups (read: Rummy) are "on the run". What is missing, however, is to recognize the purpose of the organization which they serve(d).
Quote
Originally posted by Flipside
Not everything is a conspiracy, it just tends to look like it.
I'd much rather err on the side of mistrust than on the side of naivete.
Post by: Flipside on May 11, 2004, 12:41:17 pm
Edit : Oh, and I agree with your analogy regarding 911, just as I agree that two wrongs don't make a right. To me it just goes to show that one 'side' is no better than the 'other'. What confuses me is why thousands and thousands had to die or suffer for people to start realising such an obvious fact :(
Post by: ionia23 on May 11, 2004, 12:42:04 pm
Quote
Originally posted by Rictor
edit: I really don't know where people come up with this, but I never implied that all of America was guilty.
Excrement. Anything that gives you the slightest opportunity to talk smack about America you seize onto and never let go in the slightest. I've already come to grips that all things American fill you with contempt. Fine, you're entitled to your prejudices.
I call it "Kazan-itis".
edit: What I find the most appalling is you can dissect America for any dinky little mistake or error in judgement they make, but you would lay down and defend the people who do THIS (http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2003/02/24/iraq/main541815.shtml) .
Post by: Rictor on May 11, 2004, 12:49:06 pm
It is much, much easier to take and hold power with a lack or ethics. Therefore, and history backs me up on this, it can be assumed that anyone with power is unethical, unless they prove otherwise. Anyone with power will want to protect it, and the best way to protect it is through lies, misdirection, denial and anything else that is deemed to be effective.
Consipiracies are self-proving. If you believe that people with power are prone to consiparcies, then it naturally follows that they will seek to keep them hidden. Its like that cartoon posted here a while back "There is only one consipracy, and that is the one to make it seem like there is only one conspiracy" :D:D
But anyway, none of this is conspiracy theorizing, so its not really relevant.
Post by: Rictor on May 11, 2004, 01:05:43 pm
Quote
Originally posted by ionia23
Excrement. Anything that gives you the slightest opportunity to talk smack about America you seize onto and never let go in the slightest. I've already come to grips that all things American fill you with contempt. Fine, you're entitled to your prejudices.
I call it "Kazan-itis".
edit: What I find the most appalling is you can dissect America for any dinky little mistake or error in judgement they make, but you would lay down and defend the people who do THIS (http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2003/02/24/iraq/main541815.shtml) .
It not prejudice, its fact. Lots and lots of fact.
And torture is not a "dinky little mistake". What makes you think tis a mistake? Anything that America does wrong, oh well its a mistake. Anything that "they" do wrong, they're evil by nature. Bull****. This isn't a mistake, its ****ing systemic.
This comes from your assumption that the American army is a pure and good organization. So, anything they do that is evil, well thats just a few stray sheep. al Queda kills, GIs kill, ain't no difference. It is folly to believe that any army is anything but an organized terrorist group.
And since when do I have to be defending anyone. I'm not ****ing defending either side. A lack of support for one side does not mean active support for the other. They're noth equally evilb
___________________
One man is beheaded, and this is worse than 10,000 dead civilians killed during the bombing and occupation? This is worse than 70% of the population of Abu Ghraib, rotting in jail nd being subjected to god knows what, when they're completely innocent? A life is a life is a life.
Post by: Rictor on May 11, 2004, 01:38:02 pm
Post by: ionia23 on May 11, 2004, 03:02:45 pm
Quote
Originally posted by Rictor
It not prejudice, its fact. Lots and lots of fact.
And torture is not a "dinky little mistake". What makes you think tis a mistake? Anything that America does wrong, oh well its a mistake. Anything that "they" do wrong, they're evil by nature. Bull****. This isn't a mistake, its ****ing systemic.
This comes from your assumption that the American army is a pure and good organization. So, anything they do that is evil, well thats just a few stray sheep. al Queda kills, GIs kill, ain't no difference. It is folly to believe that any army is anything but an organized terrorist group.
And since when do I have to be defending anyone. I'm not ****ing defending either side. A lack of support for one side does not mean active support for the other. They're noth equally evilb
___________________
One man is beheaded, and this is worse than 10,000 dead civilians killed during the bombing and occupation? This is worse than 70% of the population of Abu Ghraib, rotting in jail nd being subjected to god knows what, when they're completely innocent? A life is a life is a life.
Once again, if it has anything whatsoever to do with all things American, it must be evil. Time to stop wasting my time.
Post by: mikhael on May 11, 2004, 07:35:35 pm
Post by: Rictor on May 11, 2004, 07:50:37 pm
oh, thats right, I said I was through.
Post by: mikhael on May 11, 2004, 08:03:55 pm
Thanks for saving the rest of us time.
Post by: Rictor on May 12, 2004, 02:08:33 am
Quote
But the thing is, this wasn't done on a national level. It was one cleric, and god knows there's bound to be a few nutty ones in a large enough group. He isn't speaking for any large faction, and certainly not for the Iraqi people. I doubt he even speaks for al-Sadr, cause if he supported this, he would have made the annoucement himself. He's radical, yes, but he has held off on directly declaring war on the US or the IGC.
Its like the one US general that said how Allah is the devil and he's a fake god and how his (the general's) god is the true god. There's a few loons in every bunch.
I never knew the specific nutjob I was reffering to, one General Boykin, was advising the Pentagon on interogattion techniques. This ain't gonna go over too well with Muslims.
http://www.reuters.com/newsArticle.jhtml?type=topNews&storyID=5109973
Post by: ionia23 on May 12, 2004, 01:18:37 pm
Quote
Originally posted by Rictor
I never knew the specific nutjob I was reffering to, one General Boykin, was advising the Pentagon on interogattion techniques. This ain't gonna go over too well with Muslims.
http://www.reuters.com/newsArticle.jhtml?type=topNews&storyID=5109973
Evidently a certain anti-american around here never bothered to read any of Amnesty International's reports on interrogation tactics used in prisons in, say, Turkey, Iraq, Afghanistan. If anything, they'd be dissapointed we exercised too much restraint.
Post by: Rictor on May 12, 2004, 01:45:15 pm
Yeah, Pol Pot was better than Hitler, Pinochet was better than Stalin, the US is better than Saddam. Thats a child's game.
Post by: ionia23 on May 12, 2004, 02:14:23 pm
Quote
Originally posted by Rictor
So, you think its valid to align your moral compass around Chinese prisons? or Saddam for that matter? I keep hearing "well, at least the US is better than Saddam". Sure, he was worse, but there will always be someone who is worse.
Yeah, Pol Pot was better than Hitler, Pinochet was better than Stalin, the US is better than Saddam. Thats a child's game.
It's better than where your moral compass seems to be aligned....
Post by: Fineus on May 12, 2004, 04:52:58 pm
By no means does that make beheading a man right. But it does somewhat alter the nature of any moral high ground any Western country tries to take in the conflict. Pound for pound the US has killed more innocents than anyone else involved - but because they're not from America there's no song and dance and shout of tragedy for them (or so it seems).
And no, I'm not anti-American for the sake of it. I judge what I see based on the evidence at hand - not on anything else. Don't even start labelling me with that ****.
Post by: Flipside on May 12, 2004, 04:57:37 pm
Post by: ionia23 on May 12, 2004, 04:58:48 pm
Quote
Originally posted by Kalfireth
As far as I can tell, his seemed to be aligned the same as mine - all life is equally important - one middle eastern man is worth the same as any American mans or visa versa. The US has killed large amounts of innocents and this fact was shrugged off as unavoidable casualties in the "peace keeping" process.
By no means does that make beheading a man right. But it does somewhat alter the nature of any moral high ground any Western country tries to take in the conflict. Pound for pound the US has killed more innocents than anyone else involved - but because they're not from America there's no song and dance and shout of tragedy for them (or so it seems).
And no, I'm not anti-American for the sake of it. I judge what I see based on the evidence at hand - not on anything else. Don't even start labelling me with that ****.
Hey, you said it, not me.
Post by: Fineus on May 12, 2004, 05:00:44 pm
Post by: ionia23 on May 12, 2004, 05:10:52 pm
Quote
Originally posted by Kalfireth
No doubt, but in recent history America has been no angel. Not to say any other country has - but people seem to be discussing moral high ground here - and America as a country is in no position to take that high ground given the actions of her military (for fairness sake note: from time to time. I'm not saying the US military is totally barbaric, merely that they've commited some pretty nasty stuff too - which seems to have been conveniently swept under the carpet for arguements sake).
I'd hardly call having the prisoner abuses played round the clock, Congressional hearings about them, a personal apology from the President, and court martials for all involved being "swept under the carpet".
The actions of our military are the actions no one but us and are allies were willing (or able) to take, and we've been criticized for it since day one. Some kid in Iraq gets his hand run over by a tank, everyone calls Jihad. Some contract worker trying to help rebuild infrastructure in Iraq is butchered alive in front of the whole world, we "get what we deserve".
We're expected to be divine, omnipotent, perfect in every way, and we're not. But at least we're doing something.
I hope it turns out to be the right decision.
Post by: Fineus on May 12, 2004, 05:16:54 pm
God himself could apologise for something that has gone wrong in my life - but I'd still feel raw about it if it was serious enough... the death of a loved one for instance. As someone who's totally uninvolved from this conflict both by nation and any other possible relationship - I can afford to see things this way. No doubt if I had a friend or relative who went out to fight and died doing it - I'd feel a different way.
But those in charge can't let their judgement become clouded by personal involvement. That's why they're in charge.
And you as a nation are expected to make the right decisions because you make decisions. I'm not suggesting for a moment that apathy is the solution but I am saying that anyone who takes responsibility should be made to answer for the choices they make - and if they start telling people what is "right" and what is "wrong" then they should act according to what they say - not a separate agenda to suit themselves.
Unfortunately, nobody in a position of power works that way.
Post by: Flipside on May 12, 2004, 05:19:06 pm
With Iraq, you have a country with a hell of a lot of people with guns, who have both been fed a complete string of lies, half-truths and exaggerations about each other, not a good situation to be in. I remember when I worked for the Police, one of the Anti-Terrorist squad was shown a Video with a mock IRA attack. The vehicle used was a white transit van. The next day, the Terrorist squad were stop-searching all White Transit Vans, just in case one of them held terrorists. It's the same assumptions being made here in a way ;)
America has been applying it's internal politics to the world stage of late, that is the problem. As usual, the American government decided to call in only experts who would say what they wanted to hear, and thinking the world would be ok with that. Or rather, expecting their own people to accept their word without question.
It's like our own troops allegedly gunning down innocent people. I find it hard to believe of my own army, who I have a lot of respect for, but if it has happened, then I must accept that.
However, that said, I'm waiting on my decisions, Rumsfield has already made it clear he knew about the nakedness, the humiliation and the dietary changes. I have a feeling that if direct orders to torture the prisoners are going to come to the public eye, it will be within the next couple of weeks. If I see those, then I think the whole world will have a long hard think, and, sadly enough, some of the world will judge ALL Americans on it, partly because they will be told all Americans are like it, partly because they want to believe it.
It's a pity really, as I've said before America is founded on good principles, which have been twisted by certain people, and, as they say, the Road to Hell is paved with Good Intentions :(
Post by: ionia23 on May 12, 2004, 05:29:56 pm
Quote
Originally posted by Flipside
It's a pity really, as I've said before America is founded on good principles, which have been twisted by certain people, and, as they say, the Road to Hell is paved with Good Intentions :(
I'm at a loss for words, that sums it up perfectly. :yes: :yes: :yes:
Post by: ionia23 on May 12, 2004, 05:30:43 pm
Quote
Originally posted by Kalfireth
I dont recall saying you got what you deserved (even if someone else did). My point is that you can't be suprised that people feel negative emotions in your direction when these things happen.
God himself could apologise for something that has gone wrong in my life - but I'd still feel raw about it if it was serious enough... the death of a loved one for instance. As someone who's totally uninvolved from this conflict both by nation and any other possible relationship - I can afford to see things this way. No doubt if I had a friend or relative who went out to fight and died doing it - I'd feel a different way.
But those in charge can't let their judgement become clouded by personal involvement. That's why they're in charge.
And you as a nation are expected to make the right decisions because you make decisions. I'm not suggesting for a moment that apathy is the solution but I am saying that anyone who takes responsibility should be made to answer for the choices they make - and if they start telling people what is "right" and what is "wrong" then they should act according to what they say - not a separate agenda to suit themselves.
Unfortunately, nobody in a position of power works that way.
You hit the nail on the head perfectly. In a messed up way, I think i was trying to say that. I'm also mental.:yes:
Post by: Rictor on May 12, 2004, 05:33:08 pm
Thousands of innocent have been:
-Killed
-Detained without proof and without the right of due process.
-While in prison, they have been maltreated with the current allegations only being the tip of the iceberg,
-Had their possessions (money and valuables as well as guns) confiscated.
Now, one American gets killed and its the end of the world. A tragedy, yes, as are all civilian deaths. But America by no means has the moral high ground here. If I were to post a thread every time an Iraqi civie got killed, well you can imagine...
Flipside: thoughn I agree that we can't play the blame game down through all of human history, it is reasonable to expect some accountability for recent actions, say in the past 50 years or so. I'm not about to start blaming Turkey for crimes by the Ottoman Empire, but the actions we are talking about are happening right now, as we speak, and will continue to happen. I think its perfectly reasonable to hold America, and every other country, responsible for what they have done.
Post by: Flipside on May 12, 2004, 05:47:07 pm
Right, now 'England and America' go to Iraq to oust Saddam, that is the 'motto' as it were of the invasion, and even then with extreme internal strife regarding it's legitimacy, especially in the UK's case. So, here we have one iinstance of the countries involved, and already there are people who do not agree with it.
Later on a small percentage of those people, 'The British and American Army' are ordered by an ever smaller number of people 'The British and American Government' to invade Iraq. So, you are saying that each entire country is responsible for the behaviour of a small percentage of it's people for actions that the largest group were completely unaware of? (Not the invasion, of course, the torture)
Recompense will need to be made, I don't doubt that, and those guilty at any level should be dealt with, whether by trial by judge or by vote, but to hold an entire country responsible is just a bit much to my mind.
Post by: Grey Wolf on May 12, 2004, 05:52:42 pm
Post by: Rictor on May 12, 2004, 06:19:06 pm
Yes, the Army and government are responsible. But there is something to be said for the citizen's role in a democracy. In theory, there should be no matter that is not open to public scrutiny. Which in the case of prisons, amounts to giving human rights groups the power to thouroughly and constantly examine prisons (military or civilian) for such abuses. And then, if they find such abuses, have them investigated, and not by the guilty parties since that would invalidate the whole process. The problem lies in the fact that the vast majority of prison abuses can be easily kept hidden. These guys were just stupid to take pictures. But lets assume they had half a brain and did not proudly show off the evidence. The abuses would still have occured, but no one would pay attention. From now on, soldiers will know better than to indicte themselves so blatantly. There is no great mystery as to what goes on in prisons, its pretty much common knowledge that the guards are not the kindest of people. I just can't bring myself to believe that I am supposed to ignore the abuses that are going on, simply becuase they are not reported. Obviously, you don't need special training to tell you not to torture detainees. So, its a rather sadistic nature that resulted in what we're seeing now. Your opinions may well differ, but I believe that this is the mentality of a great many soldiers, who will undoubtedly commit such actions in the future, but be smart enough to keep the evidence to themselves.
Give any man such power of others, and more often than not he will abuse it. And this goes doubly so for soldiers who are taken from among the less educated, and go in with the type of mindset that Lynndie England had, which was (and I'll try t the find the article) more or less "lets go kill us some Arabs"
edit:
rape stories are comming to light. Until now, it has mostly been focused on male detainees, but its seems the women got a piece of the pie too.
http://www.guardian.co.uk/Iraq/Story/0,2763,1214698,00.html
Post by: Setekh on May 13, 2004, 08:46:29 am
Quote
Originally posted by Flipside
It's a pity really, as I've said before America is founded on good principles, which have been twisted by certain people, and, as they say, the Road to Hell is paved with Good Intentions :(
That's the story of the world. And remember, it's always like that - bad things can only be born out of goodness first. Genuinely bad things require intelligence, time, and power to come into effect - and these things are, in themselves, good. That's why I think evil is a parasite to good, rather than an equal and opposite force.
Post by: Gank on May 17, 2004, 05:20:00 am
Post by: ionia23 on May 17, 2004, 01:14:39 pm
Quote
Originally posted by Gank
http://www.newyorker.com/fact/content/?040524fa_fact
Seeing as the rest of the world doesn't seem to be bound by the Geneva Convention, I don't see any reason for us to be either.
I really love all this "oooh, look at those horrid Americans" routine. It's brilliant. What I'd like to see is world reaction to an American Marine holding up the severed head of an Iraqi prisoner to the camera saying "We can do this to your entire family at will. Knock it off."
Yeah.
Of course, at that point liberation turns to subjugation. Besides, we're better than that.
The soliders who did what they did were following orders that were, at best, obscure. However, they knew better. They'll pay for it.
Post by: vyper on May 17, 2004, 01:42:59 pm
Quote
Seeing as the rest of the world doesn't seem to be bound by the Geneva Convention, I don't see any reason for us to be either.
I really love all this "oooh, look at those horrid Americans" routine. It's brilliant. What I'd like to see is world reaction to an American Marine holding up the severed head of an Iraqi prisoner to the camera saying "We can do this to your entire family at will. Knock it off."
It does apply to the rest of the civilised world - you don't see British troops disregarding Geneva.
As for the head... aye... ahuh.... :wtf:
Quote
They'll pay for it.
We shall see.
Post by: karajorma on May 17, 2004, 01:45:24 pm
Quote
Originally posted by ionia23
Seeing as the rest of the world doesn't seem to be bound by the Geneva Convention, I don't see any reason for us to be either.
Then drop the act about how you went in to liberate Iraq. IF you don't want to hold to the Geneva Conventions just say "We went into Iraq cause we wanted the money and GW wanted to prove he had a larger dick than his dad"
Post by: ionia23 on May 17, 2004, 01:47:07 pm
Quote
Originally posted by karajorma
Then drop the act about how you went in to liberate Iraq. IF you don't want to hold to the Geneva Conventions just say "We went into Iraq cause we wanted the money and GW wanted to prove he had a larger dick than his dad"
"Still a man hears what he wants to hear and disregards the rest, mmm mmm mmm" -Simon & Garfunkel
Post by: vyper on May 17, 2004, 01:52:09 pm
Quote
GW wanted to prove he had a larger dick than his dad
Urgh....
Post by: karajorma on May 17, 2004, 02:02:43 pm
Quote
Originally posted by ionia23
"Still a man hears what he wants to hear and disregards the rest, mmm mmm mmm" -Simon & Garfunkel
The dog with no bone barks the loudest. :rolleyes:
Post by: ionia23 on May 17, 2004, 02:09:11 pm
Quote
Originally posted by karajorma
The dog with no bone barks the loudest. :rolleyes:
The dog with the most teeth bites the hardest. :p
Post by: Rictor on May 17, 2004, 05:56:50 pm
http://tv.ksl.com/index.php?nid=5&sid=94232
ionia: "the world" is bound by the Geneva convention. The difference is, you are strong enough to ignore it with impunity. Look how many war crimes trials are going on at the Hague "court".
Its nice of you not to generalize. There are 190 nations in the world, excluding the US. Maybe 10% of them have recently commited acts which breach the Geneva Convention. So, from this you get "the world".
So, either stick the the rules, or quit going on and on about freedom, democracy, human rights and all that other stuff that is, apprently, bull****.
Post by: ionia23 on May 17, 2004, 06:19:03 pm
Quote
Originally posted by Rictor
and also, this:
http://tv.ksl.com/index.php?nid=5&sid=94232
ionia: "the world" is bound by the Geneva convention. The difference is, you are strong enough to ignore it with impunity. Look how many war crimes trials are going on at the Hague "court".
Much like the people who sawed off Nick Berg's head, which you shed the most beautiful crocodile tears over. At least we'll own up to it.
Its nice of you not to generalize. There are 190 nations in the world, excluding the US. Maybe 10% of them have recently commited acts which breach the Geneva Convention. So, from this you get "the world".
Correction: Got caught violating the Geneva Conventions. Of course, in your universe, it only matters if America does it. We've been down this road before.
So, either stick the the rules, or quit going on and on about freedom, democracy, human rights and all that other stuff that is, apprently, bull****.
Much like your "The Only Good American Is A Dead One" approach? And people call me dangerous....I dread to ask where you're from...
Post by: Rictor on May 17, 2004, 06:31:23 pm
Quote
Originally posted by ionia23
Much like the people who sawed off Nick Berg's head, which you shed the most beautiful crocodile tears over. At least we'll own up to it.
Never did that.
Quote
Originally posted by ionia23
Much like your "The Only Good American Is A Dead One" approach? And people call me dangerous....I dread to ask where you're from...
or that.
Quote
Originally posted by ionia23
Correction: Got caught violating the Geneva Conventions. Of course, in your universe, it only matters if America does it. We've been down this road before.
Yes we have. The Geneva Convention applies to all countries which signed on, which from what I know is all of 'em save for one or two. Equally.
See this, what I am typing right now? Yes, this. This is me saying that the Geneva Convention applies to all nations equally. Got that? Now, from now on, try not to speak for me, especially when it directly contradicts the above statement.
I'm sorry if the most of the rest of the world has the gaul to obey what they signed. Your claims that they have broken the Geneva Conventions but never got caught, until you can back that up with some evidence, you're talking out of your ass.
Post by: ionia23 on May 17, 2004, 06:39:48 pm
Quote
Originally posted by Rictor
Hmm, and to think they say I am the one sees what he likes.
See this, what I am typing right now? Yes, this. This is me saying that the Geneva Convention applies to all nations equally. Got that? Now, from now on, try not to speak for me, especially when it directly contradicts the above statement.
I'm sorry if the most of the rest of the world has the gaul to obey what they signed. Your claims that they have broken the Geneva Conventions but never got caught, until you can back that up with some evidence, you're talking out of your ass.
This is so unbelievably laughable it's not worth spending 1/2 an hour dredging up every possible violation (publicly available) done by everyone everywhere just to pacify you. Besides, I'm an american, what could I possibly know about anything, right? I am capable of two things: consumption and murder. There's no way I could ever hope to break through your prejudices.
Post by: Rictor on May 17, 2004, 06:44:31 pm
Post by: mikhael on May 17, 2004, 07:53:02 pm
Quote
Originally posted by ionia23
Seeing as the rest of the world doesn't seem to be bound by the Geneva Convention, I don't see any reason for us to be either.
I believe we HAVE to be bound by the Geneva Conventions. Even if the rest of the world is full of murderers, strongmen, thugs, warlords, and dictators who disregard it, we, as a nation have to abide by the Geneva Conventions. If we don't, we piss over our own values.
At least that's how I see it, anyway. :blah:
Post by: ionia23 on May 17, 2004, 08:09:53 pm
Quote
Originally posted by mikhael
I believe we HAVE to be bound by the Geneva Conventions. Even if the rest of the world is full of murderers, strongmen, thugs, warlords, and dictators who disregard it, we, as a nation have to abide by the Geneva Conventions. If we don't, we piss over our own values.
At least that's how I see it, anyway. :blah:
yeah, i know. I was being overly sarcastic. Couldn't help myself....
Post by: DeepSpace9er on May 17, 2004, 08:35:27 pm
I also heard from the Boston Globe, which is owned by the New York Times, that some of these pictures of "soldiers" were actually photographs taken from a Turkish porn site of actors dressed up in uniforms or whatever strips of clothing to make them look like soldiers.
This whole story has to be looked at in the proper perspective, and thats the main problem the press has and the majority of people who are calling for the resignation for Rumsfeld. Where was the outcry for Reno's resignation during Wako?
One more point. Where is the outcry over the guy from Phillidelphia who was decapitated on camera by terrorists for the supposed torture? Its BS that he was killed because of torture. Those terrorists have no loyalty, they kill their own countrymen, women and innocent children. Why should they care that a few prisoners had womens underpants on their heads and the like?
Post by: Rictor on May 17, 2004, 08:51:27 pm
Quote
Originally posted by DeepSpace9er
Topic is too long to read every post, but from what ive heard, these Iraqis werent innocent civilians rounded up by mistake. Remember this is a prison, so therefore they must have done something wrong, or at the least been caught doing something sucpiscious like digging a little hole by the side of the road for no apparent reason. Not that im supporting what these "soldiers" are doing and have done, personally i think its reprehensible that the servicemen have lowered their personal morals and standards to such a level.
The Army has made no attempts to deny the 60% innocent figure given by thier own man, Taguba, nor the 70-90% innocent figure given by the Red Cross.
Remember, most of the guys in there were rounded up last fall. At the time, the occupation was going pretty smoothly, so the military had time to dick around and do sweeps for insurgents, which got alot of innocents detained.
What your're saying, is that since they are in prison they must have done something wrong. And since they did something wrong, they are in prison. Circle logic my friend. What happened to "innocent until proven guilty"? And yet, the military does not have to provide a single shred of evidence to anyone; how very convenient.
Post by: Bobboau on May 17, 2004, 09:18:56 pm
Post by: karajorma on May 18, 2004, 04:10:45 am
Quote
Originally posted by DeepSpace9er
Topic is too long to read every post, but from what ive heard,
[SNIP]
One more point. Where is the outcry over the guy from Phillidelphia who was decapitated on camera by terrorists for the supposed torture?
Next time read the topic before complaining about the lack of something in it.
Post by: Gank on May 18, 2004, 05:34:58 am
Quote
Originally posted by Bobboau
well they'd better start or they will have an uproseing on there hands and I don't mean this punky little 3000 man Al Soder guy either, 25 million armed and pissed off people would make things a hell of a lot worse.
You're underestimating Al-Sadr, he's got a much larger following than that and its growing every day. Its not being reported as much as it should be but theres a major offensive against him underway now and it has potential to get very very ugly very very quick. In the last few days alone the Italians have been ran out of nasiriyah, Sistanis house has been shot up and one of Islams holiest sites acquired a few bullet holes courtesy of the US.
Sadr mightnt have popular support among the shias but he does have a large following, hundreds of thousands if not more and people are fickle, one wrong move and the US could make him into a national hero. Here back in 1916 after the easter rising the guys who took part were spat on and had stuff thrown at them by the people of Dublin when the brits carted them off. The brits put them up against a wall, shot them and a week later they were the greatest figures in Irish history and the brits got kicked out of most of the country shortly after.
http://www.juancole.com/
good site for keeping up with whats going on in the south.
Post by: DeepSpace9er on May 18, 2004, 06:29:55 am
Quote
prison they must have done something wrong. And since they did something wrong, they are in prison.
You basically took a point i made and said it twice in two different ways.
Quote
And yet, the military does not have to provide a single shred of evidence to anyone; how very convenient.
The military just loves wasting men and resources watching a bunch of people that could possibly have thought of trying to terrorize Iraq. Would you rather have it the other way? Lets not arrest people until we see them with RPGs pointing at Humvees or watch people with brick looking things under their clothes walk through a crowd. There is a possibility that innocents will be picked up, but considering whats at stake, its a small chance the military is obligated to take for their own safety and the safety of everyone else.
Post by: Rictor on May 18, 2004, 06:48:02 am
Post by: Bobboau on May 18, 2004, 08:36:27 am
Post by: Gank on May 18, 2004, 09:42:17 am
Quote
In the poll, which was taken just before the April uprising of the militia led by radical Shiite Muslim cleric Moqtada Sadr, a large proportion of Iraqis from the central and southern parts of the country said they backed him, with 45 percent of those in Baghdad saying they support him, and 67 percent in Basra.
67 percent in Basra alone is over a million supporters. 45 percent of Baghdad is 2 and a half million. Note when this was taken, right before the US decided to go after Sadr, remember what you said before about the US looking like it was trying to mess things up? Thats a CPA poll. You want a conspiracy theory for it check out www.raptureready.us and see where the antichrist comes from.
As for your casualties, bit of patience mate. The Mahdi armys been in control of Najaf, Karbala, Amarah, Samawah, Hilla and Kufa since the start of April and now they've ran the coalition out of Nasiriyah. The US is only starting to go after them now and as they enter more urbanised areas expect more losses. Mahdi army is only a militia though and is poorly equipped and trained so dont expect huge losses. US keeps going the way its going though they wont be fighting just the Mahdi army though.
Post by: Bobboau on May 18, 2004, 09:49:49 am
I'm aware of the fundies, why do all the crazed christian fundementalist web sites all end in .us :mad:
Post by: Gank on May 18, 2004, 10:27:50 am
And the dont all, the other major one is www.raptureready.com.
As for the polls, you're confusing the Mahdi army with Sadrism, the Mahdi army is a militia drawn from slums while the Sadr movement is a large politic-religious movement with a huge base which has existed under Saddams repression for decades. Its bigger than just Moqtada Al-Sadr and the Mahdi army and getting rid of those isnt going to make it go away. Not that the US could do it anyway, Saddam couldnt and he had longer and his hands werent as tied. The only way the US can salvage anything out of this is by cutting Sadr into the political process and dropping the charges, be a bit more embarrasing than the Fallujah farce but they're not going to gain anything by going after him. Even the guys hes supposed to have murdered's brother has said he doesnt want Sadr arrested.
btw have a link for that poll? and lol at the wmds, still banging that drum?
Post by: Bobboau on May 18, 2004, 10:38:32 am
and you know my point with the WMD remark meant that untill I see it I'm not going to beleive it.
Post by: Gank on May 18, 2004, 10:54:39 am
Post by: Rictor on May 18, 2004, 11:10:57 am
http://seattletimes.nwsource.com/html/nationworld/2001927572_iraqpoll13.html
Post by: ionia23 on May 18, 2004, 01:07:03 pm
Quote
Originally posted by Rictor
This is the most recent poll IIRC, 82% want US out.
http://seattletimes.nwsource.com/html/nationworld/2001927572_iraqpoll13.html
Of course, you don't see them being asked about their opinions of the head-sawer-offers, do you. noooooo.....
Post by: Gank on May 18, 2004, 01:13:01 pm
Post by: Rictor on May 18, 2004, 01:51:10 pm
Quote
Originally posted by ionia23
Of course, you don't see them being asked about their opinions of the head-sawer-offers, do you. noooooo.....
Because I'm sure that 4 guy in ski masks are having a negative effect on the lives of Iraqis as the US occupation. Again, you're blowing it way out of proportion. One guy getting beheaded is not the same as a year+ of brutal occupation.
Post by: ionia23 on May 18, 2004, 01:53:04 pm
You know, screw it. I'm starting to sink to the level of some of you. I'm not doing it anymore. Have it your way for now.
Post by: Gank on May 19, 2004, 06:05:34 am
Post by: DeepSpace9er on May 19, 2004, 06:32:56 am
Quote
Again, you're blowing it way out of proportion. One guy getting beheaded is not the same as a year+ of brutal occupation.
Um brutal is a very strong word. Brutal is what Saddam Hussein was to his own people: mass graves, rape rooms, torture (torture is not hazing-like sexual humiliation. Torture is cutting limbs off one at a time, stretching the body, cutting fingers and toes off etc.), forced consrciption, piss poor education.
AFAIK the US has reversed these things: rebuilt schools opoen to everyone including women who were previously barred, reconstruction of Iraqs infrastructure, giving the people freedom to choose thier leaders in Iraqs first free elections, rebuilding Iraqs army and police forces.
People who call this occupation in Iraq brutal have had life too easy and deserve to be occupied themselves by truly brutal occupiers. You will never EVER find a less brutal occupying force then the US, mark my words.
Post by: SadisticSid on May 19, 2004, 07:10:46 am
Quote
Originally posted by DeepSpace9er
Um brutal is a very strong word. Brutal is what Saddam Hussein was to his own people: mass graves, rape rooms, torture (torture is not hazing-like sexual humiliation. Torture is cutting limbs off one at a time, stretching the body, cutting fingers and toes off etc.), forced consrciption, piss poor education.
AFAIK the US has reversed these things: rebuilt schools opoen to everyone including women who were previously barred, reconstruction of Iraqs infrastructure, giving the people freedom to choose thier leaders in Iraqs first free elections, rebuilding Iraqs army and police forces.
People who call this occupation in Iraq brutal have had life too easy and deserve to be occupied themselves by truly brutal occupiers. You will never EVER find a less brutal occupying force then the US, mark my words.
Yeah, you don't get the US throwing their enemies in acid baths or executing prisoners at random. Their presence is far better than Saddam's. However saying that the US forces are the least brutal occupiers is quite unlikely - no slur on them, but there are more experienced soldiers around such as those men in the British Army who were involved with peacekeeping duties in NI.
Post by: Gank on May 19, 2004, 07:12:44 am
Quote
Originally posted by DeepSpace9er
Um brutal is a very strong word. Brutal is what Saddam Hussein was to his own people: mass graves, rape rooms, torture (torture is not hazing-like sexual humiliation. Torture is cutting limbs off one at a time, stretching the body, cutting fingers and toes off etc.), forced consrciption, piss poor education.
Theres now mass graves in fallujah, torture in Abu Gharib, and setting dogs on people is torture, and at least one case of rape caught on camera. Remeber Saddam had decades to commit his atrocitys, US is just beginning.
Quote
Originally posted by DeepSpace9erNo they werent
AFAIK the US has reversed these things: rebuilt schools opoen to everyone including women who were previously barred,
Quote
Originally posted by DeepSpace9er
reconstruction of Iraqs infrastructure,
Which the US destroyed:rolleyes:
Quote
Originally posted by DeepSpace9erElections? You havent given them that freedom, The IGC was handpicked by the US and so will be the body which take soverignty on june 30th, though the US will remain in full control
giving the people freedom to choose thier leaders in Iraqs first free elections,
Quote
Originally posted by DeepSpace9er
rebuilding Iraqs army and police forces.
Which the US destroyed :rolleyes:
Quote
Originally posted by DeepSpace9erSpoken by someone from a country which has never been occupied by anyone. A country built on land taken from the natives who were slaughtered or stuck on reservations. People like you should spend a month in Abu Gharib with a hood on your head and some hillbilly chick sticking a broomstick up your arse repeatedly.
People who call this occupation in Iraq brutal have had life too easy and deserve to be occupied themselves by truly brutal occupiers. You will never EVER find a less brutal occupying force then the US, mark my words.
Post by: Gank on May 19, 2004, 07:16:31 am
Quote
Originally posted by SadisticSid
Yeah, you don't get the US throwing their enemies in acid baths or executing prisoners at random. Their presence is far better than Saddam's. However saying that the US forces are the least brutal occupiers is quite unlikely - no slur on them, but there are more experienced soldiers around such as those men in the British Army who were involved with peacekeeping duties in NI.
Or the Irish army in the Leb, or the Norwegians, or basically anyone whos served overseas and not let rip with a machinegun anytime someone threw a stone at them.
Post by: karajorma on May 19, 2004, 07:23:51 am
Quote
Originally posted by DeepSpace9er
rebuilt schools opoen to everyone including women who were previously barred
Wanna explain why Iraqs chemical weapons speciallist who was captured a few months before Saddam was a woman then?
Seriosuly DS9er. If you want to complain about Iraq at least get your facts straight.
Post by: Rictor on May 19, 2004, 08:22:09 am
Post by: Rictor on May 19, 2004, 11:11:14 am
and, former Guantanamo head sacked for being too soft on prisoners (http://www.guardian.co.uk/guantanamo/story/0,13743,1219887,00.html)
also, they arrested several employees of NBC (news channel), who were beaten and humiliated while in custody. article here (http://news.myway.com/top/article/id/392678|top|05-18-2004::14:44|reuters.html)
Post by: Gank on May 19, 2004, 11:20:41 am
US is walking a very fine line in Karbala
Post by: DeepSpace9er on May 19, 2004, 04:20:39 pm
Quote
Theres now mass graves in fallujah, torture in Abu Gharib, and setting dogs on people is torture, and at least one case of rape caught on camera. Remeber Saddam had decades to commit his atrocitys, US is just beginning.
The only mass graves in fallujah is the US defending itself from who..... terrorists. There is a mass grave in New York City too.. thats the US's fault too right? Saddam gassed his own people the Kurds. It took 7 seconds for each person to die and im sure they died in groups. It would be more correct to say that he committed attrocities for decades. Abu Gharib is a scandal at best not an attrocity. You only think its an attrocity because the mainstream media has been hyping it to cover up the real attrocities the terrorists are committing.
Historically and today, Arab women have NO RIGHTS. They are completely subjected to men.
Quote
Which the US destroyed
Happened to Berlin too during WWII so, according to you general, it would be smarter to sustain more casualties to preserve the infrastructure.
Quote
Elections? You havent given them that freedom, The IGC was handpicked by the US and so will be the body which take soverignty on june 30th, though the US will remain in full control
First free elections scheduled for early 2005. They would never be on the map if Saddam were in power.
Quote
Which the US destroyed
The Republican Guard was Saddam's military. He used it as his police force and army. A good portion of it was surrendured by its commanders during the invasion and eventually disipatted. You obviously know nothing about warfare if you think that invading a country isnt going to destroy its army.
Quote
Spoken by someone from a country which has never been occupied by anyone. A country built on land taken from the natives who were slaughtered or stuck on reservations. People like you should spend a month in Abu Gharib with a hood on your head and some hillbilly chick sticking a broomstick up your arse repeatedly.
Im loking at this objectively. Let me give you some examples of true brutality in occupation:
Ukraine after WWII: estimated 30 million people killed by Stalin for not accepting communism.
East Germany after WWII: reconstruction never took place, vitually no political or personal freedom.
Now lets look at the way other countries handle POW's and prisoners:
Vietnam during war: North Vietnamese STARVED American POWs and made them live without any clothes.
Political Prisoners of Cuba: Life in prison without parole, little food, bodily torture, firing squads etc.
Russian prisoners: Siberian labor camps, little food, freezing temperatures, gas chambers etc.
German concentration camp: gas chambers, starvation huts, lethal injections, little food, filth, disease, little clothing, brutal discipline.
Seems to me like this US mistreatment of prisoners is nothing compared to even the first example I gave.
People like you want the US to loose. You want Iraq to be a mess, you want **** to look like an incompetent fool and the UN and EU to be the solution to the worlds problems. You hate everything good America stands for, you love to blame the worlds problems on America, especially when a conservative president is running the show. Its pretty obvious the way you constantly bash everything the US does and make it sound like you actually WANT Saddam Hussein to be in power still and all the evil that he stood for to be reinstated.
Post by: Rictor on May 19, 2004, 04:54:30 pm
Quote
Originally posted by DeepSpace9er
The only mass graves in fallujah is the US defending itself from who..... terrorists. There is a mass grave in New York City too.. thats the US's fault too right? Saddam gassed his own people the Kurds. It took 7 seconds for each person to die and im sure they died in groups. It would be more correct to say that he committed attrocities for decades. Abu Gharib is a scandal at best not an attrocity. You only think its an attrocity because the mainstream media has been hyping it to cover up the real attrocities the terrorists are committing.
Insurgents is the word you're looking for. You see, you can't just brand someone a terrorist becuase they attack the US. Attacking an invading force is a valid form of self-defense, and is therefor not terrorism.
Abu Ghraib is the tamest of what is happening in US prisons. Don't assume that just because there are no photos, it ain't happeneing. As I've said before, you believe every story told by Saddam's prisoners about rape rooms and torture, but you refuse to believe those very same people when they state that the US is torturing detainees.
Quote
Originally posted by DeepSpace9er
Historically and today, Arab women have NO RIGHTS. They are completely subjected to men.
Iraq was secular. Sorry, but thats a historical fact.
Quote
Originally posted by DeepSpace9er
Happened to Berlin too during WWII so, according to you general, it would be smarter to sustain more casualties to preserve the infrastructure.
True, but you can not congratulate the US for rebuilding what it destroyed in the first place.
Quote
Originally posted by DeepSpace9er
First free elections scheduled for early 2005. They would never be on the map if Saddam were in power.
I'm wondering how free will the elections be? With a US military presence, the "interim" government being made by a crew hand-picked by the US, and several US state media outlets, Iraq 2005 has every probability of being Venezuela 2001.
Quote
Originally posted by DeepSpace9er
The Republican Guard was Saddam's military. He used it as his police force and army. A good portion of it was surrendured by its commanders during the invasion and eventually disipatted. You obviously know nothing about warfare if you think that invading a country isnt going to destroy its army.
Again, why should they be thanked for rebuilding what they destroyed in the first place? Not to mention that the real butchers behind Saddam's reign are being put back in to places of power within the military and police.
Quote
Originally posted by DeepSpace9er
Im loking at this objectively. Let me give you some examples of true brutality in occupation:
Ukraine after WWII: estimated 30 million people killed by Stalin for not accepting communism.
East Germany after WWII: reconstruction never took place, vitually no political or personal freedom.
Now lets look at the way other countries handle POW's and prisoners:
Vietnam during war: North Vietnamese STARVED American POWs and made them live without any clothes.
Political Prisoners of Cuba: Life in prison without parole, little food, bodily torture, firing squads etc.
Russian prisoners: Siberian labor camps, little food, freezing temperatures, gas chambers etc.
German concentration camp: gas chambers, starvation huts, lethal injections, little food, filth, disease, little clothing, brutal discipline.
Seems to me like this US mistreatment of prisoners is nothing compared to even the first example I gave.
Three of the above examples took place under the USSR, one in Cuba and one under the Nazis. I'm not going to count Vietnam because the US commited just as many attrocities as the VC and NVA. Read up on the Phoenix Program.
And still, being better than the worst regimes in history is easy. Should we get down on and our hands and knees and thank the US for being better than Stalin? No. They must be judged according to the Geneva Convention and international law.
Quote
Originally posted by DeepSpace9er
People like you want the US to loose. You want Iraq to be a mess, you want **** to look like an incompetent fool and the UN and EU to be the solution to the worlds problems. You hate everything good America stands for, you love to blame the worlds problems on America, especially when a conservative president is running the show. Its pretty obvious the way you constantly bash everything the US does and make it sound like you actually WANT Saddam Hussein to be in power still and all the evil that he stood for to be reinstated.
If people find lots of faults, thats means there ARE lots of faults. If there are 100 things wrong with my car, I will not stop working until all of them are fixed. Not 52, not 73, all of them. I can criticize without being called anti-American, just like I can criticize Israel without being anti-Semetic.
Post by: Gank on May 19, 2004, 05:16:29 pm
Quote
Originally posted by DeepSpace9er
The only mass graves in fallujah is the US defending itself from who..... terrorists. There is a mass grave in New York City too.. thats the US's fault too right? Saddam gassed his own people the Kurds. It took 7 seconds for each person to die and im sure they died in groups. It would be more correct to say that he committed attrocities for decades. Abu Gharib is a scandal at best not an attrocity. You only think its an attrocity because the mainstream media has been hyping it to cover up the real attrocities the terrorists are committing.
The US surrounded and invaded Fallujah because four of its mercenarys were killed and killed 600+, thats not defending itself. Invading Iraq wasn't defending itself, all its claims that Iraq was a threat have been proven to be bull****.
Quote
Originally posted by DeepSpace9er
Historically and today, Arab women have NO RIGHTS. They are completely subjected to men.
Stereotyping borne out of Bigotry. Iraqi women went to school like they do in most arab countrys, you're talking out of your arse
Quote
Originally posted by DeepSpace9er
Happened to Berlin too during WWII so, according to you general, it would be smarter to sustain more casualties to preserve the infrastructure.
What?, wtf sort of ****e are you talking? US blew up the infrastructure, they deserve no accolades for rebuilding it, and I suggest you go check on whats actually been done before you continue the discuaaion
Quote
Originally posted by DeepSpace9er
First free elections scheduled for early 2005. They would never be on the map if Saddam were in power.
Blow your trumpet when its time to blow it, not long before it happens.
Quote
Originally posted by DeepSpace9er
The Republican Guard was Saddam's military. He used it as his police force and army. A good portion of it was surrendured by its commanders during the invasion and eventually disipatted. You obviously know nothing about warfare if you think that invading a country isnt going to destroy its army.
You dont have a ****ing clue do you, RG was a small part of Saddams army, the bulk of it was made of conscripts and Iraqss police force was a seperate entity. Go talk about something you know about.
Quote
Originally posted by DeepSpace9er
Im loking at this objectively. Let me give you some examples of true brutality in occupation:
............
Seems to me like this US mistreatment of prisoners is nothing compared to even the first example I gave.
Its still brutality, just because theres people worse than you doesnt mean your good. Piss poor arguement, we're not as bad as such and such :rolleyes:
Quote
Originally posted by DeepSpace9er
People like you want the US to loose. You want Iraq to be a mess, you want **** to look like an incompetent fool and the UN and EU to be the solution to the worlds problems. You hate everything good America stands for, you love to blame the worlds problems on America, especially when a conservative president is running the show. Its pretty obvious the way you constantly bash everything the US does and make it sound like you actually WANT Saddam Hussein to be in power still and all the evil that he stood for to be reinstated.
I never mentioned the EU or UN and **** doesnt need me to make himself look like an incompetent fool, hes doing a damn good job himself. As are you.
Post by: Flipside on May 19, 2004, 05:29:04 pm
I personally think that what America needs to do now is hand over to the UN, not because they are more powerful (cos they aren't), not because I think they are any 'better' at these things, but because they are far less likely to recieve the kind of hatred that will be readily aimed towards America by the Iraqis, also, because no nation trusts any other nation as far as they could throw them, it's difficult for things like Al Ghraib to happen, simply because everyone is watching everyone else like bloody hawks ;) I'll admit the UN have their faults, and plenty of them, but I think the main problem here is the fact that a country that Iraqis have been told to fear and mistrust has invaded.
I would consider that action by America a far braver thing to do than any attack on rebel hideouts or daring rescue mission. Simply because I believe it would be the 'right' thing to do, which isn't always the most pleasant or satisfying, or indeed pride fulfilling thing to do.
But then, there is the matter of all that oil....... :nervous:
Post by: DeepSpace9er on May 19, 2004, 05:46:30 pm
Post by: Rictor on May 19, 2004, 05:54:35 pm
b) The UN are not nearly as competent as people believe. You are right on this count, the "peacekeepers" couldn't find their asshole with both hands.
c) You're right, America should withdraw from the UN. And watch as they become World Enemy #1, a position which they already occupy. The UN was created to serve the interests of peace. If it has erred in the past, that is because it has forgoten this and has acted as a yes-man to the US.
Post by: Flipside on May 19, 2004, 06:01:38 pm
THAT is why they need to take stock of the situation, you don't stay in power for years when you behave like Saddam without being one intelligent s.o.b.
1) He never doubted for one millisecond he would lose the war.
2) The WMD's if they existed are long long gone. You can blame UN inspections if you like, but I think they were gone probably a week or two after **** made his comments about Iraq needing a change of leadership.
3) The resistance was firmly established before the war ever started, they would be instructed to occupy holy buildings, thus making desecrations of shrines a self-fulfilling prophecy.
4) Saddam will have told his people that the Americans are there to take the Oil and that any promises they make will be lies. One of the first Priorities would be to stabilise Oil supply, Saddam knew that, another self fulfilling prophecy.
5) Sadly, the whole torture thing was almost like a free gift :(
That's why I suggested the UN, because Saddam won't have planned for America willingly taking a step back from confrontation.
edit : The other reason I suggested the UN is because I am damned if I can think of any other force on the planet other than the Americans that are large enough to be able to.
Post by: mikhael on May 19, 2004, 06:50:41 pm
Quote
Originally posted by DeepSpace9er
Seems to me like this US mistreatment of prisoners is nothing compared to even the first example I gave.
You don't seem to get it. ANY mistreatment of prisoners by American soldiers is wrong. Its worse than all the other things you mentioned. It doesn't matter how many people got killed in Russia, nor does it matter how many people lost their rights in East Berlin.
All that matters is that OUR people shat upon OUR principles. OUR people pissed on the values that WE hold sacred.
Who the **** cares what iraqis or russians or cubans do? Its not relevant. People like to pull in other horrible events in history and compare them to what our troops did, and somehow act like that makes it somehow acceptable. That's called a strawman argument: pulling in irrelevancies, trashing them, and acting like you've proved your point.
If we can't claim to be "exporting democracy" and then follow despotic practices. Its a direct contradiction of what we say we stand for and what we claim to believe.
Post by: mikhael on May 19, 2004, 06:52:02 pm
Quote
Originally posted by DeepSpace9er
If things were to turn out right, turning it over to the UN is the worst mistake you could ever make. The UN is incompetent. The only way they justify their existence is US funding. ... IMO, the US should cut all funding to the UN and watch them, in all their powerlessness shrivel up and die like the League of Nations.
You say that like the US isn't several years behind on paying it UN dues. We're already NOT fnding the UN.
Post by: ionia23 on May 19, 2004, 06:57:52 pm
Quote
Originally posted by Flipside
5) Sadly, the whole torture thing was almost like a free gift
Kind of like Clinton's knobber in the oval office for the Republican party. Dammitall.
Post by: Rictor on May 19, 2004, 07:10:56 pm
Post by: vyper on May 19, 2004, 07:43:18 pm
Post by: vyper on May 19, 2004, 07:47:16 pm
Post by: Gank on May 19, 2004, 09:37:41 pm