Abu Ghraib Abuse Photos Include Rape And Sexual Assault

[clevin]

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2009/05/27/abu-ghraib-abuse-photos-i_n_208430.html

I can't say Im surprised.

At least one picture shows an American soldier apparently raping a female prisoner while another is said to show a male translator raping a male detainee.

Further photographs are said to depict sexual assaults on prisoners with objects including a truncheon, wire and a phosphorescent tube.

[Unspoken Demise]

Truley horrifying.
I'm kind of at a loss for words. :(

[Cromulent]

Sickening, but sadly unsurprising.

[leekohler]

I have no words. This is beyond horrifying.

[Apple Ink]

Shameful.. whats even more shameful is that this is being treated like nothing can be done about it. While I agree that releasing such photographs would create a truly demoralizing picture of the army and the country but still, just hiding this away is like 'ignorance is bliss' Pathetic!

[obeygiant]

Sickening, but sadly unsurprising.

Why the hell is it "unsurprising"? It should be surprising to everyone.

[leekohler]

Why the hell is it "unsurprising"? It should be surprising to everyone.

It's not surprising because of how the "enemy" was dehumanized prior to the war. When people adopt the mindset that the people they are fighting are less than human, it's very easy to see why this happened.

[mactastic]

Why the hell is it "unsurprising"? It should be surprising to everyone.
Not to anyone who actually keeps up on the news -- you know, actually having read the Taguba report, this was all contained within, just without the graphic descriptions.

[obeygiant]

Shameful.. whats even more shameful is that this is being treated like nothing can be done about it. While I agree that releasing such photographs would create a truly demoralizing picture of the army and the country but still, just hiding this away is like 'ignorance is bliss' Pathetic!

I wouldn't call it an "ignorance is bliss" situation. We know what happened and you and the rest of world can read about or see some of the other pictures online. This certainly isn't bliss.

from the article:
"I am not sure what purpose their release would serve other than a legal one and the consequence would be to imperil our troops, the only protectors of our foreign policy, when we most need them," Taguba was quoted by the Daily Telegraph. "The mere description of these pictures is horrendous enough, take my word for it."

I agree

It's not surprising because of how the "enemy" was dehumanized prior to the war. When people adopt the mindset that the people they are fighting are less than human, it's very easy to see why this happened.


Silly me, I thought it was the british nationalism talking. :confused:

[leekohler]

Silly me, I thought it was the british nationalism talking. :confused:

What does that have to do with anything? :confused:

[jecapaga]

Sadly, this is both horrifying and not surprising. I can't imagine the backlash that will occur if/when these are ever released.

[skunk]

Silly me, I thought it was the british nationalism talking. :confused:What are you talking about?

[mactastic]

What are you talking about?
I think it's just American nationalism talking. :confused:

[Peace]

This revelation doesn't surprise me at all. On the contrary. It's my opinion that this sort of stuff is still going on and has been for at least 50 years.

[skunk]

This revelation doesn't surprise me at all. On the contrary. It's my opinion that this sort of stuff is still going on and has been for at least 50 years.Only fifty? It was happening throughout and after the Great Patriotic War (19391942-45) too.

[Eanair]

Ugh.

There are no words. :mad:

[skunk]

"And I walked in and sat down and they gave
me a piece of paper, said, "Kid, see the psychiatrist, room 604."

"And I went up there, I said, "Shrink, I want to kill. I mean, I wanna, I
wanna kill. Kill. I wanna, I wanna see, I wanna see blood and gore and
guts and veins in my teeth. Eat dead burnt bodies. I mean kill, Kill,
KILL, KILL." And I started jumpin up and down yelling, "KILL, KILL," and
he started jumpin up and down with me and we was both jumping up and down
yelling, "KILL, KILL." And the sargent came over, pinned a medal on me,
sent me down the hall, said, "You're our boy."

[Peace]

"And I waked in and sat down and they gave
me a piece of paper, said, "Kid, see the psychiatrist, room 604."

"And I went up there, I said, "Shrink, I want to kill. I mean, I wanna, I
wanna kill. Kill. I wanna, I wanna see, I wanna see blood and gore and
guts and veins in my teeth. Eat dead burnt bodies. I mean kill, Kill,
KILL, KILL." And I started jumpin up and down yelling, "KILL, KILL," and
he started jumpin up and down with me and we was both jumping up and down
yelling, "KILL, KILL." And the sargent came over, pinned a medal on me,
sent me down the hall, said, "You're our boy."

I Love Arlo Guthrie !!

If you noticed my post skunk you would see I said "at least" 50 years.;)

[freeny]

Would Republicans volunteer for this?...

[skunk]

Would Republicans volunteer for this?...Sure, it's all part of the SERE training I expect.

[leekohler]

Would Republicans volunteer for this?...

Oh- I'm sure they would. :rolleyes:

[Eraserhead]

Only fifty? It was happening throughout and after the Great Patriotic War (19391942-45) too.

I'm sure it happened in Queen Victoria's children's sibling rivalry Great Patriotic War World War 1 too...

[remmy]

Only fifty? It was happening throughout and after the Great Patriotic War (19391942-45) too.

What happened?

[skunk]

I'm sure it happened in Queen Victoria's children's sibling rivalry Great Patriotic War World War 1 too...Don't forget we invented Concentration Camps in 1899 during the Round Up the Bloody Dutchmen Threatening Our Exclusive Hegemony Grab Another Huge Slice of Someone Else's Mineral Deposits, After All They're Only Black Men Boer War, too.

[Eraserhead]

What happened?

The US behaved badly wrt to human rights.

[skunk]

The US behaved badly wrt to human rights.Not only the US, to be fair.

[Eraserhead]

Not only the US, to be fair.

I'm sure the British did it too to an extent, but even the Indians who accuse the British of a lot of wrongs don't accuse us of torture.

[skunk]

I'm sure the British did it too to an extent, but even the Indians who accuse the British of a lot of wrongs don't accuse us of torture.

http://www.guardian.co.uk/uk/2005/nov/12/secondworldwar.world

Sorry to burst your bubble. Of course the things we did in Ireland are particularly horrendous, too.

[OutThere]

We had a long discussion about this today in one of my politics classes...talk about fuel for radical anti-American ideology. Makes me sick.

[Abstract]

While I agree that releasing such photographs would create a truly demoralizing picture of the army and the country but still, just hiding this away is like 'ignorance is bliss' Pathetic!


I think they should release the photos. If the photos aren't supposed to create a demoralising picture of the army and the country, what else are they supposed to do? What those people did was disgusting, and the truth is disgusting. How else should we feel? They know that by not showing the photos, the full impact of what happened will never be felt. I know the US government doesn't want to conjure up an even stronger reaction from people than they need to, but since they'd (probably) agree that this was horrific, they may as well show us the photos and let us be disgusted to the maximum possible level, because that's the way people around the world should feel as human beings.

[Peterkro]

http://www.guardian.co.uk/uk/2005/nov/12/secondworldwar.world

Sorry to burst your bubble. Of course the things we did in Ireland are particularly horrendous, too.

Kenya and Malaya provide further examples.

[solvs]

Why the hell is it "unsurprising"? It should be surprising to everyone.
Sadly, It's not surprising to those of us who've been paying attention. I posted something a few days ago about allegations of children being abused in front of their parents. And no, it isn't isolated to the last admin, but that still doesn't make it right. What we've been doing in the name of security, and ironically freedom, is completely unacceptable.

Sadly, this is both horrifying and not surprising. I can't imagine the backlash that will occur if/when these are ever released.
We've already had the backlash from when this started happening, photos or not. What about the backlash when we try to sweep it under the rug by not even investigating? That isn't exactly helping either.

[WinterMute]

As long as there has been war there has been rape and torture, go back as far as historical records allow and you'll find reports of the brutality of the military against prisoners and defeated enemy populations, the actions of the modern military are almost spotless in comparison to what Gengis Khan or Alexander the Great's forces did during their conquests.

The fact is that modern military conduct, however abhorrent to us civilian types, is immeasurably improved from ancient times, and even from the conflicts of the last century.

That there is so little evidence emerging is surprising, and that the uproar caused by it's discovery is immense is predictable.

In militaristic terms we have come full circle to the days of the Roman legions, highly disciplined professional armies fighting limited actions on designated battlefields. Contrast that against the massive collateral damage seen in the West Bank or in the early days of the Gulf wars.

Of course we find these actions disgusting, they are the work of disturbed people, but it truly is the minority, as always, that are perpetrating the acts.

Wider discussion of the vile nature of war nonwithstanding, our forces are the "cleanest" in history.

[skunk]

Wider discussion of the vile nature of war notwithstanding, our forces are the "cleanest" in history.I very much doubt it.

[Eraserhead]

Malaya provide further examples.

Neither the Singaporeans or the Malays accuse us of torture (though they criticise us for our poor education policies and exasperating racial tensions.) and I don't think either country is particularly bad on torture these days. They are particularly critical of the Japanese behaviour in WW2 however.

I'm sure the emergency was fairly messy, but I don't think we should be too hard on ourselves.

[obeygiant]

Sadly, It's not surprising to those of us who've been paying attention. I posted something a few days ago about allegations of children being abused in front of their parents. And no, it isn't isolated to the last admin, but that still doesn't make it right. What we've been doing in the name of security, and ironically freedom, is completely unacceptable.


Well, solvs, I have been paying attention and its still surprising. You seem to have very low expectations if you're so unsurprised.

Also your use of the royal we/us is borderline obnoxious. Speak for yourself! Otherwise who the F are you talking about?

We haven't been doing anything like this in the name of security or freedom. This is a couple prison guard jackasses who were giddy with authority and decided to commit unspeakable acts on a prisoner.

[DoNoHarm]

People,

America IS NOT AND HAS NEVER BEEN the defender of human rights it wants you to believe it is. Whites couldn't marry Chinese people until 1948 in CA and even later in other states. Blacks didn't get (on paper) equal rights until 1965. 1965!!!! They've materially and philosophically supported the most brutal regimes in the name of their strategic interest. It's time the world woke up and realized that the US (EVEN WHEN LED BY OBAMA) is a militarist bully of the world that is too cowardly and weak to confront it's self when photos of torture and rape are staring itself in the face.

[Blue Velvet]

This is a couple prison guard jackasses who were giddy with authority and decided to commit unspeakable acts on a prisoner.

I'm interested in learning how you come to that conclusion.



The abuse of detainees at Abu Ghraib in late 2003 was not simply the result of a few soldiers acting on their own. Interrogation techniques such as stripping detainees of their clothes, placing them in stress positions, and using military working dogs to intimidate them appeared in Iraq only after they had been approved for use in Afghanistan and at GTMO. Secretary of Defense Donald Rumsfeld’s December 2, 2002 authorization of aggressive interrogation techniques and subsequent interrogation policies and plans approved by senior military and civilian officials conveyed the message that physical pressures and degradation were appropriate treatment for detainees in U.S. military custody. What followed was an erosion in standards dictating that detainees be treated humanely.


It is not just me arguing that Abu Ghraib was a function of a policy dictated and approved at the highest levels. It's the entire Republican Senate leadership of the Armed Services Committee. It's every objective journalist's conclusion. It's in several Pentagon reports. It's demonstrable in the photos themselves.

http://andrewsullivan.theatlantic.com/the_daily_dish/2009/05/cheneys-core-contradiction.html

For further reading (http://www.nytimes.com/ref/international/24MEMO-GUIDE.html) about the memos...

[xUKHCx]

I'm interested in learning how you come to that conclusion.

Many of us are still waiting for a reason for his other statement


Silly me, I thought it was the british nationalism talking. :confused:

[obeygiant]

I'm interested in learning how you come to that conclusion.


Well I guess Rumsfeld has something to answer for then. :)

[WinterMute]

I very much doubt it.

Why?

There is no sanctioned (and legal) slaughter of prisoners as was common in earlier times, there is no taking of "vassals", the spoils of war used to mean women and children taken as slaves, the noble families being most highly prized, there are no "blackened earth" campaigns, bent on the destruction of the homelands of the enemy.

The very fact that the Western forces are no Imperialistically driven means less "denial and subjugation" actions and more police actions.

Don't get me wrong, armies still kill thousands of innocents, and there are greater atrocities committed in open combat than can be seen in the pictures currently in the news, but the difference is that these acts are illegal and actionable under the rules of engagement and occupation, they were not in the past.

[Peterkro]

Neither the Singaporeans or the Malays accuse us of torture (though they criticise us for our poor education policies and exasperating racial tensions.) and I don't think either country is particularly bad on torture these days. They are particularly critical of the Japanese behaviour in WW2 however.

I'm sure the emergency was fairly messy, but I don't think we should be too hard on ourselves.

"But under the banner of fighting communism, British forces were given free rein in Malaya. Collective punishments were inflicted on villages for aiding insurgents. A shoot-to-kill policy was promoted, tens of thousands of people were removed into "new villages" and used as cheap labour, and British soldiers had themselves photographed holding guerrillas' decapitated heads. The idea that the revolt was ended through "winning hearts and minds" is a myth; it was crushed by overwhelming force, such as massive aerial bombing."

http://www.thehandstand.org/archive/november2004/articles/edcell.htm

Reading the book by Mark Curtis will supply much detail of atrocities in Malaya and other areas of the world much of it gleaned from U.K. government sources.

Some info regarding the present situation in Malaysia:

http://www.hrw.org/en/news/2009/04/27/human-rights-watch-letter-prime-minister-malaysia

[Eraserhead]

http://www.thehandstand.org/archive/november2004/articles/edcell.htm

None of the accusations made in that article are sourced.

Some info regarding the present situation in Malaysia:

http://www.hrw.org/en/news/2009/04/27/human-rights-watch-letter-prime-minister-malaysia

Lets put that into perspective, there are an enormous number of governments who behave much worse than the Malaysians do with the ISA, and frankly their position on gay rights is a more serious issue.

Wrt to Britain I doubt we behaved like angels, but I also doubt that we were worse than the other colonial powers - and given most of our ex colonies are today some of the most successful countries in the world (with the exception of India, Pakistan and Bangladesh) I think we did reasonably well.

[Peterkro]

None of the accusations made in that article are sourced.



Lets put that into perspective, there are an enormous number of governments who behave much worse than the Malaysians do with the ISA, and frankly their position on gay rights is a more serious issue.

Wrt to Britain I doubt we behaved like angels, but I also doubt that we were worse than the other colonial powers - and given most of our ex colonies are today some of the most successful countries in the world (with the exception of India, Pakistan and Bangladesh) I think we did reasonably well.
I don't think others were as bad or worse is any defence. Sources are difficult to come by as the Brits even at that time were adept at black propaganda,more recently historians have started to uncover the truth of what happened during the "emergency". The pictures of soldiers carrying the heads are well known and I have seen them myself although a quick online search failed to turn them up. The book I referred to is a good source as it used as I said U.K. government documents.Below is some hearsay although from multiple sources:

Taking it upon themselves to disprove a veiled
accusation from labour MP George Brown that not just the American, but the British army as well
had been responsible for war-time atrocities, the Sunday People newspaper invited their readers to
write in if they had knowledge of an atrocity committed by the British army. Sure enough, one of the
men from the platoon at Batang Kali contacted the paper claiming that torture had been used exten-
sively by the platoon and that those killed had been split up into three separate groups, forced to
march off in different directions and then systematically shot in the back by the British soldiers. One
by one, other members of the platoon came forward and corroborated the story. Dr. Anderson main-
tained that this example demonstrated that in certain circumstances the British army had been pre-
pared to systematically cover up the truth.

http://ccw.politics.ox.ac.uk/events/archives/mt05_ch_anderson.pdf

[skunk]

None of the accusations made in that article are sourced.
Hearts heads and minds?
173307

Wrt to Britain I doubt we behaved like angels, but I also doubt that we were worse than the other colonial powers - and given most of our ex colonies are today some of the most successful countries in the world (with the exception of India, Pakistan and Bangladesh) I think we did reasonably well.Too right we didn't. Vast swathes of the African continent, Kenya in particular, but also Ghana, Nigeria, South Africa, Tanganyka, bear witness to our colonial brutality. As for "most of our ex colonies" being "some of the most successful countries in the world", are you referring to those colonies where the aboriginal people were almost wiped out?

[Peterkro]

Danke schon. ^^

[Eraserhead]

I accept that they behaved worse than I thought - its interesting that it isn't always being discussed in the countries concerned however:

I don't think others were as bad or worse is any defence.

If you don't use that as a partial defence you land up having to say that every government on earth has behaved outrageously.

And that makes it more difficult to criticise the people who behaved the worst, and means you can't ignore minor abuses of power.

As for "most of our ex colonies" being "some of the most successful countries in the world", are you referring to those colonies where the aboriginal people were almost wiped out?

I made the point to show that British rule brought some benefits to the places we ruled.

[skunk]

I made the point to show that British rule brought some benefits to the places we ruled.I see what your intent was, I just disagree that your assertion supports it. British colonialism was undoubtedly less appalling than that practised by the Belgians or the Portuguese, but it's still to be measured on a scale of "appalling" rather than "beneficial".

[Peterkro]

If you don't use that as a partial defence you land up having to say that every government on earth has behaved outrageously.



That indeed is my position to quote Mr Acton.
"Power tends to corrupt, and absolute power corrupts absolutely. Great men are almost always bad men."

[skunk]

That indeed is my position to quote Mr Acton.
"Power tends to corrupt, and absolute power corrupts absolutely. Great men are almost always bad men."Mr Acton spoke a lot of sense.

[solvs]

We haven't been doing anything like this in the name of security or freedom. This is a couple prison guard jackasses who were giddy with authority and decided to commit unspeakable acts on a prisoner.

Sorry I missed this, but if you believe that, then you haven't been paying attention. This is far, far worse than that, and goes much further than the incidents even mentioned here. This has been repeated in other threads, complete with sources. Which, sorry if you don't like it, but were done in our names. Our military, and our government's hired contractors, as well as our CIA, has been doing this, in the name of protecting our citizens. You may not think so, and may not see it or want to see it, but the victims and their families certainly do, some of whom turn out to not be the terrorists they've been made out to be.

I know this has been sold as a couple of bad apples, but thank you BV for further proving it's anything but.

[obeygiant]

Which, sorry if you don't like it, but were done in our names. Our military, and our government's hired contractors, as well as our CIA, has been doing this, in the name of protecting our citizens.

So you are just a guilty as I am. :p

[Zombie Acorn]

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2009/05/27/abu-ghraib-abuse-photos-i_n_208430.html

I can't say Im surprised.

Im a bit surprised you would purposely misquote the article.

The article:
One photo reportedly showed an American soldier apparently raping a female prisoner and another was said to show a male translator raping a male detainee, the Telegraph reported.

Your post:
At least one picture shows an American soldier apparently raping a female prisoner while another is said to show a male translator raping a male detainee.

[Eraserhead]

So the torture by the CIA never happened?

[solvs]

So you are just a guilty as I am.
Well, yeah. Sadly, we are. At least to them. And in the way that those we elected to represent us aren't doing anything about it, to say nothing of those we (even if we didn't vote for them) put into power who did it in the first place.

That's what happens when a gov does something in your name.

Im a bit surprised you would purposely misquote the article.
The photos are real. I don't know what was misquoted. Because one part says reportedly? Still happened. Still photos of it. And worse.

So the torture by the CIA never happened?
Reportedly.

But seriously, no, it did. So did abuse by Blackwater. And much worse. So, so much worse.

[Zombie Acorn]

Well, yeah. Sadly, we are. At least to them. And in the way that those we elected to represent us aren't doing anything about it, to say nothing of those we (even if we didn't vote for them) put into power who did it in the first place.

That's what happens when a gov does something in your name.


The photos are real. I don't know what was misquoted. Because one part says reportedly? Still happened. Still photos of it. And worse.


Reportedly.

But seriously, no, it did. So did abuse by Blackwater. And much worse. So, so much worse.

There is one retired general who is reporting these particular photos exist, the pentagon has denied their existence. I can't know for sure either way and so I don't attempt to quote a news article and change the contents to lean either way. It said "reportedly" for a reason, not "at least one photo".

[Eraserhead]

There is one retired general who is reporting these particular photos exist, the pentagon has denied their existence. I can't know for sure either way and so I don't attempt to quote a news article and change the contents to lean either way. It said "reportedly" for a reason, not "at least one photo".

So if the Japanese deny that the rape of Nanking (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rape_of_nanking) happened does that mean we should take their word for it?

I don't think the pentagon is that reliable a source on this...

[Zombie Acorn]

So if the Japanese deny that the rape of Nanking (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rape_of_nanking) happened does that mean we should take their word for it?

I don't think the pentagon is that reliable a source on this...

Who is taking anyone's word for anything? The article was misquoted to lean the thread in a particular direction. There probably are photos, doesn't mean I can go around saying I am 100% sure they are real off of one report and no evidence.

[Eraserhead]

Who is taking anyone's word for anything?

The analogy is that what you are doing is expressing doubt on the issue of the torture happening and being sanctioned by the American government because the Pentagon has denied it. And that is like expressing doubt on the issue of the rape of Nanking happening because the Japanese have denied it (or parts of it) from happening.

[solvs]

There is one retired general who is reporting these particular photos exist, the pentagon has denied their existence. I can't know for sure either way and so I don't attempt to quote a news article and change the contents to lean either way. It said "reportedly" for a reason, not "at least one photo".

It's more than that, this is just another in a long line of articles about the subject. The pictures exist. Worse than Abu Gharib. Much worse. What they did, we already know some of, and have additional info on more. Whether this particular photo exists or not (though it does) isn't as important as you're trying to obfuscate. He should have used the word reportedly in this particular case, fine, I'll give you that. Drop in the bucket though. I, and others, have provided evidence of others as well. Not to mention Abu Gharib, which you've seen, and we now know to be more than just "a few bad eggs".

Something those same people denying this photo exists (though how would they know something doesn't exist?) said back then.

[DoNoHarm]

I know someone who goes to Westpoint and he says they watch videos of Iraqi's having sex with goats. The dehumanization of the enemy is nothing new to war. What else did people think would happen when you invade another country?

[Zombie Acorn]

I know someone who goes to Westpoint and he says they watch videos of Iraqi's having sex with goats. The dehumanization of the enemy is nothing new to war. What else did people think would happen when you invade another country?

All of my friends who were in Iraq were trying to gain the respect of the people while they were there by giving them back their country. :confused: Maybe I talked to the wrong soldiers though.

[Gelfin]

I know someone who goes to Westpoint and he says they watch videos of Iraqi's having sex with goats. The dehumanization of the enemy is nothing new to war. What else did people think would happen when you invade another country?

At West Point? Seriously? Can you provide more information about this?

[solvs]

All of my friends who were in Iraq were trying to gain the respect of the people while they were there by giving them back their country. :confused: Maybe I talked to the wrong soldiers though.
My best friend and cousin were trying to do that (stories about giving candy and clothing being better than threats down the barrel of a gun, though never really knowing who among them the enemy actually could be), but not all of their co-workers were. The contractors were the worst though. Some of the stories we've had here that seem so terrible are only the tip of the iceberg. Haven't heard of this particular thing with the goats, but I have heard similar ways to dehumanize. They did this in WWII with the entire public, and we've since seen some of the propaganda films they showed to soldiers then as well. Just think of the view we've seen of Iraq, the talk of WMDs, "terrorists" (even some of whom who weren't actually), while we rarely see the innocents caught in the crossfire, nor hardly even the effects on our soldiers. That's how it becomes so easy to sell a war, get soldiers riled up against the enemy (which can be tough when they then have to help and police those same people later, as my friend did), and have a populace that thinks torture of anyone is ok because they're "bad people".

This is why we need to show the photos. They show the truth, as horrible as it is. The worry is that they'll hate us and want to kill us, as if they don't already. They worry it will cause more damage to the troops, even if rooting out the bad will actually separate them from the good, and that it shows precedent where we have no moral standing if they torture ours because we're basically allowing ours to do it to them. We cover them up, and refuse to even investigate those who ordered it, then scratch our heads as to why we're hated and mistrusted.

[InvalidUserID]

Sick and unforgivable actions always take place during "war" times.

I mean, if you are asking soldiers to kill the enemy, they don't see them as people but just as targets or less than humans.

Not defending it at all, just something that you see throughout history.

:mad:

[skunk]

Sick and unforgivable actions always take place during "war" times.

I mean, if you are asking soldiers to kill the enemy, they don't see them as people but just as targets or less than humans.

Not defending it at all, just something that you see throughout history.

:mad:And, as it is something you see throughout history, doesn't that tell you that war is utterly indefensible except as a matter of survival? These "routine" instances of dehumanised cruelty and savagery should be exposed to the light of day precisely because they are unavoidable when you throw away the rule-book, which you inevitably do when you indulge in a war of choice. People have said "never again" too often to remember, only to revert to warmongering again when imagination fails. They need to be constantly reminded of why they said it to prevent recidivism.

[it5five]

The analogy is that what you are doing is expressing doubt on the issue of the torture happening and being sanctioned by the American government because the Pentagon has denied it. And that is like expressing doubt on the issue of the rape of Nanking happening because the Japanese have denied it (or parts of it) from happening.

And the analogy really falls flat when you consider people like Zombie Acorn are the ones always telling us how you can't trust big government. Yet they will gladly accept the word of the same "big government" they are busying decrying the other 90% of the time when it is politically convenient for them.

We saw the same thing with the whole CIA-lies-to-Congress fiasco.

[Zombie Acorn]

My best friend and cousin were trying to do that (stories about giving candy and clothing being better than threats down the barrel of a gun, though never really knowing who among them the enemy actually could be), but not all of their co-workers were. The contractors were the worst though. Some of the stories we've had here that seem so terrible are only the tip of the iceberg. Haven't heard of this particular thing with the goats, but I have heard similar ways to dehumanize. They did this in WWII with the entire public, and we've since seen some of the propaganda films they showed to soldiers then as well. Just think of the view we've seen of Iraq, the talk of WMDs, "terrorists" (even some of whom who weren't actually), while we rarely see the innocents caught in the crossfire, nor hardly even the effects on our soldiers. That's how it becomes so easy to sell a war, get soldiers riled up against the enemy (which can be tough when they then have to help and police those same people later, as my friend did), and have a populace that thinks torture of anyone is ok because they're "bad people".

This is why we need to show the photos. They show the truth, as horrible as it is. The worry is that they'll hate us and want to kill us, as if they don't already. They worry it will cause more damage to the troops, even if rooting out the bad will actually separate them from the good, and that it shows precedent where we have no moral standing if they torture ours because we're basically allowing ours to do it to them. We cover them up, and refuse to even investigate those who ordered it, then scratch our heads as to why we're hated and mistrusted.

I think we need to keep in mind that things like Abu Ghraib only represent a small minority of our soldiers. At the same time they create a big impact when being reported. I don't know how anyone could expect to train for this type of war (kill the enemy, protect the civilians) without expecting a section of soldiers who couldn't handle it. You have to dehumanize the enemy to some extent or you are going to have 100% post traumatic syndrome soldiers coming home. Some people can't handle it, especially when the bad guys and the good guys aren't clearly marked like in an actual field war.

[.Andy]

I think we need to keep in mind that things like Abu Ghraib only represent a small minority of our soldiers. At the same time they create a big impact when being reported. I don't know how anyone could expect to train for this type of war (kill the enemy, protect the civilians) without expecting a section of soldiers who couldn't handle it.
In summary this paragraph aims to belittle the US military's horrific actions against defenseless individuals under their care. It was only a small number who were unhinged due to the exceptional circumstances. Not for instance atrocities that were sanctioned and encouraged by higher command (they weren't looking at the time).

You have to dehumanize the enemy to some extent or you are going to have 100% post traumatic syndrome soldiers coming home. Some people can't handle it, especially when the bad guys and the good guys aren't clearly marked like in an actual field war.
You'll get 100% PTSD rates anyway. But by that time the dehumanising brainwashing would have already worked. The young men and women sent to war under the pretense that they're making the most righteous sacrifice will have killed people, returned, and be long forgotten and suffering out of sight. They can be ignored and demonised if they speak out, whilst the new batch of kids is groomed into a life of killing and misery.

[skunk]

I think we need to keep in mind that things like Abu Ghraib only represent a small minority of our soldiers. At the same time they create a big impact when being reported. I don't know how anyone could expect to train for this type of war (kill the enemy, protect the civilians) without expecting a section of soldiers who couldn't handle it. You have to dehumanize the enemy to some extent or you are going to have 100% post traumatic syndrome soldiers coming home. Some people can't handle it, especially when the bad guys and the good guys aren't clearly marked like in an actual field war.You can't tell me that anybody sent to war, especially one as questionable as this one, doesn't suffer from PTSD. Besides, in an illegal war of invasion and occupation, who are the "bad guys"?