Bush White House still Actively Championing Torture

[esskreemr]

Originally Posted by L.O.A.S.

Precedence for what? Who thinks what happened at Abu Ghraib falls closer to hazing (as in college fraternities) than it does to torture (as in Saddam's death rooms)? Now personnally I am disgusted by the actions of those few malcontents, but I do not believe it was santioned by our leaders.

1) The pictures that made it to public were the tip of the iceberg. The ones we saw did have a "hazing" kind of sentiment to them. How about the ones we didn't see? Some reactions were disgusted and horrified.

2) Few malcontents? There is evidence that this went on in multiple facilities, in different countries, on multiple occassions over an extended period of time. There are charges that this abuse was systematically "overlooked" by several levels of command.

3) Guess who gets to take the fall, the GI at the bottom of the sh*t heap. A few Generals may take longer to earn their stars but they won't be the ones who will be doing hard time.

[jeff]

Last one for tonight - I swear.

Isn't the above the exact same rationale that the Wehrmacht made for torturing French Resistance members? No uniform, slip in and out of population, they kill our guys, yup - we can torture them. Or in Stalinist USSR: these are backsliding capitalist revisionaries poisoning our socialist paradise - let's find out who their co-conspirators are!

(I'm not trying to raise What-his-name's rules about Internet debates - but this seems to be (for once) germane to the topic)

[mrbiggs]

Originally Posted by jeff

Last one for tonight - I swear.

Isn't the above the exact same rationale that the Wehrmacht made for torturing French Resistance members? No uniform, slip in and out of population, they kill our guys, yup - we can torture them. Or in Stalinist USSR: these are backsliding capitalist revisionaries poisoning our socialist paradise - let's find out who their co-conspirators are!

(I'm not trying to raise What-his-name's rules about Internet debates - but this seems to be (for once) germane to the topic)

I agree, I was about to post the same. There's alot of specualtion in these arguments, about how much torture there was, who knew about it, who we were torturing, what would have happened had we not tortured them, etc.

[esskreemr]

Originally Posted by Rogue

I have no problem with the methods used to gain information from these terrorist.
Among other things, this war will succeed or fail due to information/intelligence.

Our enemy offers no quarter (see the murder by beheading videos) none should be granted.

Yes, as long as WE'RE the ones doing the torturing, maiming, and killing, it's ok because we have justice on our sides.

I find this extraordinarily hypocritical and appalling. It's hypocritical because the same ones who are screaming we must bring the American way to the heathen savages of the Middle East are the same ones who are willing to sacrifice our humanity in order to do so. It's appalling because you seem to think that the end justifies the means, no matter what. This often comes from the shortsightedness of those with little actual concern for human beings in general.

What happens when China decides to not honor the Geneva conventions when another one of our surveillance planes takes a forced hard landing on their territory again? We're not at war, right? They don't have to detain them as enemy combatants.

[esskreemr]

Originally Posted by mrbiggs

That is the intention. The problem is that it might be an average joe caught in the wrong place at the wrong time. And that principle is one of the basic ones this country was founded on. Innocent until proven guilty, along with no cruel or unusual punishments. I realize that legally, the Constitution only applies to citizens of the U.S., but I think it would be slightly hypocritical to get rid of a horrible tyrant, and then not live up to our own standards of government.

(But I agree with you 100% on the first paragraph.)

Rats, I should have read that before I posted.

[L.O.A.S.]

Originally Posted by jeff

Last one for tonight - I swear.

Isn't the above the exact same rationale that the Wehrmacht made for torturing French Resistance members? No uniform, slip in and out of population, they kill our guys, yup - we can torture them. Or in Stalinist USSR: these are backsliding capitalist revisionaries poisoning our socialist paradise - let's find out who their co-conspirators are!

(I'm not trying to raise What-his-name's rules about Internet debates - but this seems to be (for once) germane to the topic)

Again with the word "Torture". The Nazis, the Stalinist, the Husseins did indeed torture. We Americans only "interrogate" (i.e. your body parts stay attached, and your heart keeps on beating). Not an fair or accurate comparison.

[Philistine]

Originally Posted by L.O.A.S.

Again with the word "Torture". The Nazis, the Stalinist, the Husseins did indeed torture. We Americans only "interrogate" (i.e. your body parts stay attached, and your heart keeps on beating). Not an fair or accurate comparison.

Well, except for those who died in custody. Or the one who was sodomized. Or savaged by dogs....

--Philistine

[L.O.A.S.]

Originally Posted by esskreemr

1) The pictures that made it to public were the tip of the iceberg. The ones we saw did have a "hazing" kind of sentiment to them. How about the ones we didn't see? Some reactions were disgusted and horrified.

2) Few malcontents? There is evidence that this went on in multiple facilities, in different countries, on multiple occassions over an extended period of time. There are charges that this abuse was systematically "overlooked" by several levels of command.

3) Guess who gets to take the fall, the GI at the bottom of the sh*t heap. A few Generals may take longer to earn their stars but they won't be the ones who will be doing hard time.

Please provide if you have specific examples on the acts and various locations of these abuses. I only know the limited information from TV. My point on the Abu Ghraib abuses, is this is what happens when you take stupid, immature individuals, give them power and put them in a leaderless vacuum.

You are correct that the closer you are to the bottom, the more likely you'll get dumped on. Still, this is not the military of the 70's. Supposedly all the high school drop outs and criminals should have been weeded out long ago. A soldier/person knows what is right and wrong, and what constitutes a legal order. Making a naked pyramid of prisoners just for kicks and grins is wrong. Taking pictures of your misdeeds is just stupid.

[esskreemr]

Originally Posted by L.O.A.S.

Again with the word "Torture". The Nazis, the Stalinist, the Husseins did indeed torture. We Americans only "interrogate" (i.e. your body parts stay attached, and your heart keeps on beating). Not an fair or accurate comparison.

http://www.indybay.org/news/2004/04/1679030.php

How many incidents were there where the perpetrators weren't stupid enough to take pictures?

[mrbiggs]

Originally Posted by L.O.A.S.

Again with the word "Torture". The Nazis, the Stalinist, the Husseins did indeed torture. We Americans only "interrogate" (i.e. your body parts stay attached, and your heart keeps on beating). Not an fair or accurate comparison.

Our government can do alot to you without even touching your body. I don't have access to classified documents or anything, but my guess is that psychological torture has advanced to the point where the government could really screw you up, if nothing else. (How about the "keep your arms up or die" thing? And apparantly, the soldiers thought of that themselves.)

Even without, putting a hood over someone's head and beating them with a tool doesn't kill them, or take their body parts off, usually. But if you were in that situation, I'm sure you'd classify it as torture. Just because we haven't sunk to the level of the Nazis doesn't mean it's not torture.


Eskreemr, I actually thought you put it better than I did.

[esskreemr]

Originally Posted by L.O.A.S.

Please provide if you have specific examples on the acts and various locations of these abuses. I only know the limited information from TV. My point on the Abu Ghraib abuses, is this is what happens when you take stupid, immature individuals, give them power and put them in a leaderless vacuum.

Here are some more:
http://www.albasrah.net/images/iraqi-pow/iraqi-pow1.htm

[Rogue]

Originally Posted by esskreemr

Yes, as long as WE'RE the ones doing the torturing, maiming, and killing, it's ok because we have justice on our sides.

I find this extraordinarily hypocritical and appalling. It's hypocritical because the same ones who are screaming we must bring the American way to the heathen savages of the Middle East are the same ones who are willing to sacrifice our humanity in order to do so. It's appalling because you seem to think that the end justifies the means, no matter what. This often comes from the shortsightedness of those with little actual concern for human beings in general.

What happens when China decides to not honor the Geneva conventions when another one of our surveillance planes takes a forced hard landing on their territory again? We're not at war, right? They don't have to detain them as enemy combatants.

First we must win.
My concern is for my fellow countrymen not the bastards who brought the war to us.
War is hell.
This is not the Soviet Union.
Are our pilots flying those planes in to Chinese buildings? Have we taken ANY aggressive steps towards China? Is our aircraft properly marked and identifiable? Are our pilots in uniform?

You have so much concern to the ones who would kill your loved ones in front of you and then kill you. I don't get it?

[mrbiggs]

Originally Posted by Rogue

First we must win.
My concern is for my fellow countrymen not the bastards who brought the war to us.

You're generalizing. Not every prisoner our Army takes in Iraq is a terrorist. Actually, near none. There are NO CONNECTIONS between Iraq and Al-Qaeda, officially.

On top of that, not every prisoner is necessarily part of the Iraqi resistance, either. You're suggesting that we not just punish, but TORTURE people without trial? We're supposed to be setting a good example for the Chinese and the like, not sinking to their level the second the Constitution doesn't limit us.

Originally Posted by Rogue

War is hell.
This is not the Soviet Union.
Are our pilots flying those planes in to Chinese buildings? Have we taken ANY aggressive steps towards China? Is our aircraft properly marked and identifiable? Are our pilots in uniform?

The problem is that it's all a matter of perspective. The Chinese consider the Dalai Llama (apologies for spelling) to be a threat to their society. Maybe they think our pilots are ABOUT to head into a building. Remember whasshisname, that pilot that got shot down in Russian airspace? (In the 50's or 60's) He wasn't making a hostile move, and he's lucky to be alive. Alot of countries really don't screw around. They shoot first and ask questions later, as they say. And I think it's important that we set a good example. And I also think that doing so is beneficial for the safety of our troops.

[Maeve_Mari]

Originally Posted by Rogue

First we must win.
My concern is for my fellow countrymen not the bastards who brought the war to us.
War is hell.
This is not the Soviet Union.
Are our pilots flying those planes in to Chinese buildings? Have we taken ANY aggressive steps towards China? Is our aircraft properly marked and identifiable? Are our pilots in uniform?

You have so much concern to the ones who would kill your loved ones in front of you and then kill you. I don't get it?

First, Iraq did not have anything to do with airplanes flying into buildings. Second, our plane was in a no-fly zone - which is something we do quite often. That could be construed as an aggressive act. And third and fourth, quite often our planes and pilots are not marked or in uniform when we send them over and into China.

Geneva Convention is in place to protect our guys who we send in too.

[Rogue]

Originally Posted by esskreemr

Here are some more:
http://www.albasrah.net/images/iraqi-pow/iraqi-pow1.htm

That's it?
Remember these aren't jay walkers.

Funny how the Daily Mirror's headline was "Vile"
What was the headline after the beheadings of truly innocent people?

Has anyone seen the production that shows Sadam's torture video. People being thrown off buildings, fingers and hands being cut off, rape rooms childrens prisons, mass graves the list goes on and on.
That's right, we can't show those images over and over and over again because they TRULY ARE vile, barbaric, sadistic, brutal...

[mrbiggs]

Originally Posted by Rogue

That's it?
Remember these aren't jay walkers.

Funny how the Daily Mirror's headline was "Vile"
What was the headline after the beheadings of truly innocent people?

Has anyone seen the production that shows Sadam's torture video. People being thrown off buildings, fingers and hands being cut off, rape rooms childrens prisons, mass graves the list goes on and on.
That's right, we can't show those images over and over and over again because they TRULY ARE vile, barbaric, sadistic, brutal...

So you're saying that as long as we're not as bad as Saddam, it's OK?!

[esskreemr]

Originally Posted by Rogue

First we must win.

Win what? A fight with ghosts? Where every action we take creates 10 more who are willing to take up arms against us in hatred? Can we win an unconventional war fighting in a conventional manner?

Originally Posted by Rogue

My concern is for my fellow countrymen not the bastards who brought the war to us.

Fair enough. Did the over 10,000 Iraqis (women and children included) bring the war to us? Or were they in the wrong place at the wrong time?

Originally Posted by rogue

War is hell.

Yes particularly for those who have lost lives, loved ones, livelihoods, and what ever meager safety they had.

Originally Posted by rogue

This is not the Soviet Union.

The only thing I can say is maybe not yet. We seem to be willing to move in that direction at the behest of those who "know better".

Originally Posted by rogue

Are our pilots flying those planes in to Chinese buildings? Have we taken ANY aggressive steps towards China? Is our aircraft properly marked and identifiable? Are our pilots in uniform?

Your point?

Originally Posted by Rogue

You have so much concern to the ones who would kill your loved ones in front of you and then kill you.

I have absolutely NO concern for those who would kill my loved ones in front of me. To date, no one has tried. I do have a concern for the HUMAN FRICKIN BEINGS who are caught up in this "conflict" (or is this a war, I keep forgetting). They live, they breath, they love, they laugh, they die.

I also have grave concerns about an administration that took us into a war that has costs tens of thousands of lives on both sides without paying a clear dividend. In addition, as the facts of the matter come out, we learn that they were either incredibly STUPID or wanted this war at any cost. We lie, they die, not a fair trade. Meanwhile, Osama Bin Laden (you remember HIM don't you? You know, one of the true architects of the attack? Tall guy, long beard, kidney problem, hates America?) is laughing at us while his recruits pour in.

Originally Posted by rogue

I don't get it?

Yes, I know, you don't get it. I'm sure I can try to explain until I'm blue in the face. You see, we have this set of ideals, some call it rule by law, some call it the American dream. Some think that if it is trully the right way, then it should be applied to everyone. Others feel that it is ok to abandon virtues and ideals as soon as they become inconvenient.

You can't define an act as heinous and then go and commit the same act. That's hypocrisy. If you can live with it, fine, that's up to you. Some people don't live their lives based on a system of situational ethics.

[L.O.A.S.]

Originally Posted by esskreemr

You can't define an act as heinous and then go and commit the same act. That's hypocrisy. If you can live with it, fine, that's up to you. Some people don't live their lives based on a system of situational ethics.

I agee that tha hypocrisy is bad, but Situational ethics do and should exist when it comes to the GWOT. Interrogation techniques should differ between the everyday captured insurgent fighting his own jihad, to known terrorist, to OBL. This is the grey area that our leaders need to define, because it is important that there be boundaries (i.e rules). It is ridiculous to grant OBL the rights and protection that an ordinary criminal would receive. It is also ridiculous to use inject truth serum into a Iraqi insurgent who crossed the border looking to mix it up with the evil Americans. I choose to trust that our leaders will come up with the right balance, hence the need for the "Interrogation Memo".