Top Officers in Abu Ghraib Case Cleared

Remove all ads!

I was not being sarcastic. Having minor intelligence handicap is quite different from being mentally ill.

 

I fail, from the information I have seen displayed, to see where the prisoners were subjected to excruciating or severe pain. This is the definition of torture. As Darkwolf said, the use of the word "torture" is intended to elicit an emotional response. Use the proper words, please, if you're going to play the "dictionary definition" game...

Edit: (I didn't see the BBC link provided above. It doesn't mention anything about a metal bar that I saw, though, interestingly enough, it calls it "abuse" in the title...)

And no, this is nothing to do with "medieval-style" torture, or making light the injustices the prisoners went through. This is about the sensationalism this story has been subjected to for over a year. No, it does not represent the whole of the American military. No, it is not any sort of corruption that goes to the upper echelons of the US military. That is, to put it simply, a deranged conspiracy theory. It has no proof to back it up. We may as well be discussing Roswell, New Mexico, or the person who "really" shot JFK, or the Illuminati, who surely rule the world invisibly, as this rubbish.

 

Sorry, Slith. As much as I tend to respect your opinions, I cannot agree.

Forcing sexual activity is not less of a deal than, let's say, roasting someone a bit, biting the crap out of him to get information etc. Rape is way, way more traumatic than any sort of merely physical "preparation for interrogation". Especially if we are talking about mental pain. Especially if talking about women in cultures holding chastity and fidelity dear, such as Christianity or Islam. If I were female, I would choose a session on the coals or daily beating over rape.

Let's face it: Any soldier who has ever raped anyone is not a hero of the neighbourhood with a mistake under his belt. It's a disgrace that should be cast out of the army and of the society as well. There is no place in the civilised world for rape and none for rapists, except in prison. Get them off the normal citizen's sight, where normal citizens include thieves, thugs and all sorts of little bullies and petty frauds. Rapists and molesters need to be ousted. Any soldier with a mere tendency towards skipping on the consent part in sexual activities needs to be sent to a correction centre or, better still, a psychward for violent patients with criminal tendencies. Zero tolerance for molestation and rape.

I have already done a couple of topics on this. And, you know what? I censured them a bit. I have seen photos of what those "heroes" did to women. I haven't put the links in any of the posts. They were too gross. But I can PM them to anyone above 15 years of age (arbitrary distinction on my part) who promises not to bitch about gross content after seeing it.

Forcing someone to have sex is always excruciating pain. It's technically impossible to perform without inflicting severe pain unless you use gun point kind of threats or drug the person up or whatever. And the mental pain is no less than excruciating from what I know about rape victim and rape cases. Forcing someone into sex against his or her will is not just mere abuse.

At the moment, I'm starting to get shakes at the sight of a US uniform while a couple of years ago the sight would fill me with excitement and maybe some sort of admiration.

 

@Taluntain: No, I respect Amnesty International. When I requested a viable source, I meant something like that. And no, I don't see torture as being impossible when in a US uniform, and I find that viewpoint as deluded and ridiculous as you do. I read the article, but it was a bit vague - I want specifics, if they're available. Do you have another source?

@chevalier - I agree with your post, and I wasn't looking at things through that viewpoint at the time of my previous postings.

 

Well Amnesty International has a way of blowing things out of proportions making it look somwhat similar to greenpeace from time to time so I would not find it very surprising if it would be condemned as an inreliable source.

 

Sorry for getting to so close to lashing out, Slith. Must be a tough thing to listen to. I know the feeling from having to look on the commie regime military uniforms. The same Polish eagle, but brutalised in shape and robbed of the crown. People who wore that eagle executed those who wore the one with the crown on the head. They allied themselves with the Soviets who did the same on Polish lands as was done in Abu Ghraib. Imagine a band of drunken class-conscious reds storming into a landed gentry household. And they allied themselves with those. It happened sixty years ago, but...

Anyway, I'm glad we have agreed on the sexual abuse being torture. Or however we call it, it being excruciating pain delivered to helpless victims for morbid pleasure of those who did it. The pictures I've seen... it was more gross than hard core porn I've seen people drool over.

You know what I hate about it, also? The way they have the guts to call it "a guard having sex with a detainee". The guy who said that deserves a slap across the mouth with a military shovel.

 

Chev,

There are a lot of fakes floating out there in cyberspace, are you absolutely certain that these pictures you reference are real?

 

Real or not Rumsfeld admitted to prisoners being raped, and this included children (I posted a BBC link on SP a while ago, I will hunt it down if you are interested) so this sort of thing happened/still happens, we just don't know to what extent.

 

As an American, I must sadly agree with this assessment. If this kind of stuff were happening to our boys, yeah, we'd call it torture. And a rose by any other name...

 

If you do search on abu ghraib (in post body, not thread title) and find threads started by me, you'll get testimonies from people about 14 year old girls being locked away from other prisoners and without clothing, women being threatened with rape or actually raped. Then also children. It's possible to find the pictures this route, as well, only you're going to have to do some digging. I didn't link to the pictures for obvious reasons.

 

Back in 1985 no-one was punished for the following, and unfortunately the same thing happens today:

 

I am sorry, but in what I have read and search online, I have found only very limited cases of this type of behavior, and I do not believe that it is widespread. I also have seen no evidence that indicates that these things are still happening, though to some extent I am sure that they are, it is an inevitable part of war, and anyone who can't recognize this either has an axe to grind or has lost complete touch with reality.

Again, compared to the way that Arabs treat Arabs, and the limited scope of the incidences, this is simply a political issue that has been blown out of proportion, primarily for political game. There is a difference between investigative reporting to try and make sure that these abuses are minimized, and political activists using it with a focused intent of the destruction of certain public figures. If the investigators discover that one of the favorite targets of those who oppose the war were culpable in these crimes, then the story becomes about them, but until then, IMO, this story just being churned in hopes that some of the splatter will stick, and those doing the churning could care less if those stained are guilty or innocent.

 

Heh, so it's pretty natural, right? No. The fact that some of them can't hold their zippers zipped is something you need to consider before letting your boys at someone.

 

Chev,

Again, someone attributing something to me that I didn't say. Weird how sometimes it is acceptable to do that here, depending on what side of an argument you are on.

What was done is wrong, and those guilty of causing or delivering the abuse should be punished. My position is that it that there is no proof that this goes very far up the chain of command.

The responsible people should be punished. By the same token, there are mitigating factors. You are so focused in on this rape thing, and make it sound like the US military is raping and pillaging its way across Iraq, I mean, you admit that you now shake when you see a US GI (not sure if it is fear or rage, but both are illogical). 99% of our soldiers have held themselves to a standard of war higher than any military to enter a conflict before them.

I am not stating what they did is acceptable, and hopefully that will be the last time I have to say it.

Tal,

How do you know the people responsible for causing it are that broad or deep? Again, you blur the lines of taking responsibility for (meaning that they are going to clean up the mess), and being responsible for (guilty of committing a crime, either directly or as an accomplice). As I just stated, this is not a widespread issue, thus there are not enough people to justify "mass convictions". We have a phrase for what you want; it is called a "witch hunt".

 

Taken out of context, that sentence could come back to haunt you.

 

Quite a claim this one and probably one where you are more guessing than actually basing it on facts. The true results about the cruelties and crimes of this war will probably come forth only several years from now. Anyway the way the Finnish army behaved during the Winter War was very civil and there are no records of any rapes or abuses committed by Finnish soldiers during that war, only some records about shooting surrendering Russians, which really was in a way understandable since they had the nasty habit of blowing themselves up with a hand grenade after claiming to surrender. The continuation war offered a lot more crimes because of its different nature but that's really a different conflict.

Anyway this kind of behaviour should not be acceptable and only shrugged away by claiming that it happens during war. Sure it happens but that does not mean that it should be tolerated in any way. I would like a neutral committee to investigate this issue, a similar one they had to investigate the WMD issue. Also a significant increase of supervision in prisons similar to Abu Gharib would be required, I don't know what action the Bush adminstration or the US military has taken to prevent these kinds of sorry events but to me it's obvious that when these things happen something is wrong somewhere.

 

AMaster,

Only with those who chose to selectively interpret the meaning.

Then again, given the environment, you are probably right.

Morg,

Let me clarify that to say an occupying military force before them. No it is not scientific and is a puffery statement. It is a statement that is intended to emphasize our restraint in bombing cities, towns, and religious buildings with other wars in which a nation is occupying another nation with an active resistance.

[ May 10, 2005, 20:50: Message edited by: Darkwolf ]