US Occupation troops no worse than German troops who occupied Europe

[PalmHarborTchr]

Occupation troops always commit crimes against the occupied.

The German troops occupying France, Belgique, Holland did much of what
the American troops are doing in Iraq. Both held midnight raids on private homes, taking civilians out into the night and to prison....taking both men and women. Both put them in prison or camps without formal charges both abused these people. Both governments installed puppet governments. The Germans installed Marshal Henri Philippe Petain, to head the VICHY government, gave them self-government in 70 percent of France. The german troops supported the power of the Vichy government. The
"insurgents" were communists et al, attacking the German soldiers.
Today we call them the "free French"..they were supported by the British
Government. They were less than 2 percent of the French population.
Germany said they invaded these countries to stop the spread of
"Bolshevism" what we now call Communism. In the US a conservative radio host by the name of Father Caughlin (a Catholic priest) had a Sunday night radio show and supported Mr. Hitler's efforts at fighting "Bolshevism". He was of course a Conservative Radio Host...he had over 25,000,000 listeners on Sunday night through out the US. The Pope in Rome knew the real truth about Mr. Hitler and had Father Caughlin's Bishop pull him off the air.
History has a way of repeating itself.

[dragula53]

which this one is.

The United States isn't trying to stop the spread of anything.. except random acts of violence towards innocent people.

The pictures of naked people circulating are the acts of stupid young people. not exactly war crimes. Nothing like the electrified pools of water that went on in the prison before they were there.

I don't know what the hell these kids were thinking when they decided to do these things, but that's what happens when you put an 18-year-old in charge of something and tell them to act responsibly.

And occupying armies have never been the most pleasant things to behold, no matter the nationality, or the place of occupation. The media is what is making this entire scenario such a painful thing to behold. The media=bad.

Moo

[evil]

while i do not agree with the occupation/war or whatever that is going on in iraq the comparison to nazi occupation seems pretty crazy to me.
are the u.s. troops rounding up iraqi civilians into a ghetto to be departed?
are they killing civilians on the spot for having opposing viewpoints or bad blood?

[MongoTheGeek]

while i do not agree with the occupation/war or whatever that is going on in iraq the comparison to nazi occupation seems pretty crazy to me.
are the u.s. troops rounding up iraqi civilians into a ghetto to be departed?
are they killing civilians on the spot for having opposing viewpoints or bad blood?

No so therefore we aren't even "as bad". :D

I don't see why he went to the Nazis for that comparison. Such a more effective comparison could have been made to Ghengis Khan and the mongols. Why we didn't stack the heads in piles 15' high.

[virividox]

this isnt news, this should be placed in the political forum where all this rhetoric is discussed and debated.

as to who is right, honestly i dont care but dont post to flame. its just not right

[caveman_uk]

Nobody came out of WW2 smelling of roses. The victorious forces in the second world war didn't exactly treat their defeated foes as well as we are lead to believe. Large number of German POWs died through neglect in the camps of the western allies. Admittedly the Russians treated their vanquished foes much worse - rivalling the Germans themselves for barbarism - with the liquidation of villages, murder of civilians and prisoners and widespread rape.

If you want to read about the history that most sources gloss over take a look at 'Crimes and Mercies: The Allies' Policy of Occupation in Germany After 1945' by James Bacque

[mactastic]

Great, so now in addition to sinking to a level where Bush is trying to make a distinction between the torture committed by Saddam and that committed by US troops, now we are drawing distinctions between ourselves and the Nazis? Can our reputation sink much lower?

[IJ Reilly]

Great, so now in addition to sinking to a level where Bush is trying to make a distinction between the torture committed by Saddam and that committed by US troops, now we are drawing distinctions between ourselves and the Nazis? Can our reputation sink much lower?

Sure, and plenty of people are prepared to sink it even further. The other day on the radio I heard a right wing think-tanker make a few of truly shocking and offensive remarks about this situation. First, that it was being trumped up by the media as a way of undermining US efforts in Iraq and wounding the President; second, that anyone who talks about it is on the side of terrorists, and third, that the treatment of Iraqi prisoners was no worse than college hazing. Fortunately, someone else on the program told this maniac that his ideas were utterly despicable. So yes, as bad as it's become, we don't seem to have any trouble finding Americans who'll tell the rest of us to close our eyes, shut our mouths, and stick out our middle fingers at the rest of the world.

[Stelliform]

now we are drawing distinctions between ourselves and the Nazis?

Only extreme left people trying to start a flame war or a Bush bashing orgy. You decide what he wants...

[Stelliform]

Sure, and plenty of people are prepared to sink it even further. The other day on the radio I heard a right wing think-tanker make a few of truly shocking and offensive remarks about this situation.

Somewhere between the opinion that the U.S. is evil or the U.S. is perfect lies the truth.

[IJ Reilly]

Somewhere between the opinion that the U.S. is evil or the U.S. is perfect lies the truth.

Yes, of course. But this government has failed to realistically manage expectations, or to reckon with the fact that many people in the world start out their day suspicious of American motives. Whether these feelings of cynicism towards the US are entirely justified or not hardly matters -- because what we've done is vastly widened the perceived gulf between what the US says it wants, and what it does. This comes at a time when we desperately needed to narrow this gap. I don't want to base too much of my argument on what the most radical individuals on either side are saying right now, but OTOH, I'm not going to give much quarter to those who'd claim that our standing in the world is improving as a result of the Bush doctrine, when clearly it is deteriorating rapidly.

[virividox]

this is laughable. there are so many broad and sweeping statements being made in this thread, without proper proof or evidence.

war is cruel, war is terrible, blah blah blah we all know that and the victors are never saints. lets get over that

the question is are they doing more harm than good

that remains to be seen.

[Thanatoast]

And occupying armies have never been the most pleasant things to behold, no matter the nationality, or the place of occupation. The media is what is making this entire scenario such a painful thing to behold. The media=bad.

MooInteresting logic. US soldiers torture prisoners. Media reports on the torture. Therefore the media is bad.

Is anyone else seeing a small gap in the logic, here?

Bush has dropped the ball, big time. His motives were always questionable, but now his methods have proven to violate what he calls his "principles". Apologists are simply blinding themselves to the fact that they've been misled into an unwarrated, destructive war.

"Our torture isn't as bad as their torture" isn't a valid argument, especially when one claims the purpose of their war was to promote "freedom" and "liberty".

[IJ Reilly]

Is anyone else seeing a small gap in the logic, here?


No, no... the logic, such as it is, is totally consistent: Anything reported by the media that reflects poorly on the Bush administration is automatically suspect, probably motivated by politics and very likely wrong. What's really going on here is a massive case of cognitive dissonance. Some Americans are struggling to reconcile two, contradictory ideas.

[zimv20]

liberal media: asks questions and does investigative journalism
fair and balanced media: tells us what we all already know

[zimv20]

btw, i really don't give a rat's ass if someone in the US thinks this stuff isn't that bad. what matters is how it's playing in the arab world. 'cuz all this action was supposed to reduce terrorism, right? or was it all really just about killing some arabs?

[toontra]

this is laughable. there are so many broad and sweeping statements being made in this thread, without proper proof or evidence.

war is cruel, war is terrible, blah blah blah we all know that and the victors are never saints. lets get over that

the question is are they doing more harm than good

that remains to be seen.

The way it works is you contribute something (analysis or opinion) to the thread and others respond.

If you find this process laughable why are you even reading, let alone posting.

[poopyhead]

which this one is.

The United States isn't trying to stop the spread of anything.. except random acts of violence towards innocent people.

The pictures of naked people circulating are the acts of stupid young people. not exactly war crimes. Nothing like the electrified pools of water that went on in the prison before they were there.

I don't know what the hell these kids were thinking when they decided to do these things, but that's what happens when you put an 18-year-old in charge of something and tell them to act responsibly.



Moo

these are not 18 year old kids, they are people in their mid 20's through 30's some of whom were prison gaurds in the US. Age is in no way an excuse for such obviously psychopathic behavior.

[mactastic]

Hell, we charge 14 year-olds as adults here. Why would anyone suggest these 'kids' are too young to know right from wrong?

[pseudobrit]

btw, i really don't give a rat's ass if someone in the US thinks this stuff isn't that bad. what matters is how it's playing in the arab world. 'cuz all this action was supposed to reduce terrorism, right? or was it all really just about killing some arabs?

I'm glad someone else see this problem for what it is.

The real problem is twofold, and has **** to do with domestic politics, paritsan games and "Bush bashing":

1) How the Iraqi people's views are changed.
this will impact the volume and intensity of attacks on our troops in Iraq

2) How the Arab world's views are changed
this will impact the volume and intesity of attacks against our citizens here and abroad

Regardless of how badly we insult the Iraqi people, they stand little chance of doing us much harm at home. The Saudis and Egyptians however have shown us they are more than capable of exterminating large numbers of us.

We could add a third facet to this: How the world's (most of whom were formerly known as "allies") views are changed.

We've cried wolf, insulted our strongest NATO partners, chilled relations with a warming Russia and would subsequently have a hard time convincing allies to come to our aid even if we were attacked and legitimately needed their help.

[Desertrat]

I'd say it's a given that maltreatment occurs in all prisons. There are two issues: First, is it institutionalized by the central government as a normal procedure. Second, how commonplace and widespread is it in any country's incarcerations of whatever sort.

The reaction in this country against the malbehavior of its own--and commonly honored--people should answer the first question. The second will be answered before too much longer, I think.

FWIW, I've read that investigations into similar but lesser misdeeds has been going on since the beginning of the incarcerations of any Iraqis. I don't have any specifics as to numbers or results.

The only way I know that there can be any positive change in any part of the Arab world's reactions is to place maximum charges against the perps, and those found guilty would then receive the maximum sentences. The trials would have to be public.

'Rat

[mactastic]

Institutionalized? I dunno about written down in instruction books and officially given orders. But somehow enough people looked the other way that many many pictures were taken. And somehow many of the acts they engaged in seem to strike at the very core of Muslim dignity. They seem designed to break the prisoners, not just to be cruel. So I don't know if we can call it institutionized, but someone or multiple people thought this out.

[Desertrat]

mac, "institutionalized" in the sense of the Nazi treatment of any resistance against them, where disabling physical torture was commonplace. And, FWIW, in the sense of the killing of people in Iraq by Saddam's police and military. You can continue on to most of the thugocracies around the world.

Commonplace incarceration with abuse, torture and killing in a relatively casual manner, sanctioned throughout the governing system. The Gulags of the Soviet Empire serve as another example.

'Rat

[mactastic]

Fair enough 'Rat. But will the rest of the world make that distinction? I'm frankly more concerned with how this makes us look abroad and not so much about the domestic fallout. Our soldiers are in more danger today because of this. If one of them gets taken and abused this way....

[professor]

[...]The only way I know that there can be any positive change in any part of the Arab world's reactions is to place maximum charges against the perps, and those found guilty would then receive the maximum sentences. The trials would have to be public.

'Rat

I think the damage has long been done. No matter what punishment of those stupid soldiers, the image of the U.S. has already suffered to an irrevocable degree.
"The fish stinks from the head down" said the old Greeks, and as long as Bush isn't removed in a credible way (remember Nixon?), there will be no peace ever. Matters will get worse. The resentments against the U.S. under its current leadership is not limited to the islamic world (which is much bigger than the Arabic world). No matter what amount of weapons are flown in and bombs are cast, the message brought to them is that of a screwed-up value system. A case of bad marketing for the superiority of Western ideals. A "Western World" which carries religion on their banners but exposes nothing but violence is itself doomed to become a permanent vistim of violence. Of course, this may be part of the master plan, to make it easier to control the American public and to stay in power.

[Desertrat]

Yeah, professor, you may well be correct. The frustration for me lies in the knowledge that those around the world who are seizing on this event for propaganda purposes know full well it's an aberration, and that the abuse is commonplace in many of the very countries fomenting against us.

"...the message brought to them is that of a screwed-up value system. A case of bad marketing for the superiority of Western ideals. A "Western World" which carries religion on their banners but exposes nothing but violence is itself doomed to become a permanent vistim of violence."

Okay. We need to pull out of NATO and save our tax dollars from the IMF, the USAID and other imperialistic efforts. End the movement of money to Swiss and Cayman bank accounts via our foreign aid programs. "Bring the boys home" from South Korea and the Balkans, etc. Limit our overseas military to the Marine guards at our embassies.

That way, existing values in foreign countries--absent our evil values--will create peace on earth and goodwill toward all mankind.

Not rantin' at you, prof...

'Rat

[mactastic]

The frustration for me lies in the knowledge that those around the world who are seizing on this event for propaganda purposes know full well it's an aberration, and that the abuse is commonplace in many of the very countries fomenting against us.

But how do you know that this is an aberration? Allegations are coming in from Iraq, Afghanistan, and Gitmo. The goverment has lost credibility with me when they say these are isolated incidents after graphic proof of extensive torture in brought to light. Soldiers willing to be photographed violating what they know to be the rules aren't afraid of being caught by their superiors.

Surely it doesn't reflect on the vast number of honorable members of the military. But it points to a systematic attempt to 'soften up' prisoners who are viewed as less than human.

This kind of act puts our troops at higher risk, destroys our reputation abroad, recruits more terrorists willing die to kill us, makes our job in Iraq orders of magnitude more difficult, and has got to be terrible for the morale of the troops in country. And all that is in addition to being morally repugnant, not to mention illegal.

I would submit that it is a very small step from writing 'Die Sand Ni**er' on the side of a bomb to be dropped on the enemy to the dehumanization that permits the acts we've seen on film.

And I guarantee you the worst stuff they did isn't on camera.

[IJ Reilly]

But how do you know that this is an aberration? Allegations are coming in from Iraq, Afghanistan, and Gitmo. The goverment has lost credibility with me when they say these are isolated incidents after graphic proof of extensive torture in brought to light. Soldiers willing to be photographed violating what they know to be the rules aren't afraid of being caught by their superiors.

Exactly. Knowing what we know, why the heck is anyone still insisting on this "aberration" explanation?

[blackfox]

Well, it is official.. some people are **********. Especially in War...the world over. Why is this such a big surprise? There are ********** in Government, in Churches, and in our communities, did we really expect the military to be free of them? When you try to distance yourself from the fact you are actually killing people, use euphemisms for graphic destruction and loss of life, is it surprising that some people exhibit psychopathic or sociopathic tendencies? I mean, what kind of person films their atrocities?
I advocate the harshest penalties to those directly involved, and alot of firing among those who were complicit...but it is foolish to think this kind of behavior will ever disappear completely...from any society or institution thereof...it is a complicated problem, people deal with fear and death in some pretty strange ways...and war always has lots of both. This is not an apology for these acts, they are of course, deplorable...but it is foolish to think the US (or anyone) is above them happening...

[IJ Reilly]

I mean, what kind of person films their atrocities?

The kind who are trying to impress their superiors?

[mactastic]

Which begs the question.... What occured that ISN'T on film?

[IJ Reilly]

Which begs the question.... What occured that ISN'T on film?

Right. And in his testimony yesterday Rumsfeld let drop a warning that other photos and video might surface, which means he knows they exist and is hoping against hope that nobody leaks them and makes the administration's position even more untenable. Pretty clearly this is just the tip of the iceberg. This story has a long, long way to run.

Another dynamic began to take hold yesterday, which seems to have eluded the notice of the professional pundits. The family and friends of one of the accused soldiers (the young female PFC) started fighting back, saying that the behavior recorded in the photos was out of character for her. As time passes, little by little, we're going to start learning about the people in these photos, and no doubt we'll find that they're not all evil creatures with wild eyes and blood dripping from their teeth. They're going to look a lot like normal, everyday people who are used to doing as they are told, and like nearly everyone else, are eager to please their superiors.

What is also emerging is a story of the administration being in possession of information about this abuse for over a year, and doing nothing about it, apparently hoping nobody would find out.

[Desertrat]

If it were not an aberration, there would not be all this uproar. Were it occurring anywhere near the same level in Afghanistan, some soldier would have done the same as happened in Iraq to cause the word to get out.

In any prison, anywhere, there is always going to be some amount of harsh treatment; it's commonly more on a one-on-one basis and random. But this mess is just too well organized to compare with other situations, as if all were this same level of psychological--and to a lesser extent physical--brutality.

The larger question, to me, revolves around the fact that these GI Bad Folks were born and raised here in the USofA. Your kids or siblings. My neighbors' kids. Offspring of "those nice folks down the street". My grandkid, maybe, if I had one. Considering that in my mind there's no way the officers in the chain of command could not have known and condoned, it's more than people in their teens and twenties.

I dunno. I, and folks like me, are called "Old fuddy-duddies" when we look with disfavor on the well-reported malbehavior of the Younger Set.* The rudeness and discourtesy, the "I have the right to express myself" arrogance...Maybe our chickens are heading home for their roosts...

'Rat

* Sometimes, to us Old Farts, the Younger Set goes upward towards 40. :)

[pseudobrit]

If it were not an aberration, there would not be all this uproar.

I don't think the two are mutually exclusive. I think it can be widespread and cause an uproar. In fact, that's why the uproar will not fade away right now.

I think such abuse, even the murdering of civilians, are the accepted norm in our military, and it's condoned from the top down.

It comes down to, again, the wrong tool for the job. You do not give your army a crash course on "peacekeeping" and proceed to use infantry who've been trained for very aggressive, hostile tactics for years in a "peacetime combat" role unless you want to **** all over the population you're occupying.

The real problem is that Bush is a sociopath who couldn't care less about the Iraqi people. We are seeing the manifestation of his persona.

[Ugg]

Yeah, professor, you may well be correct. The frustration for me lies in the knowledge that those around the world who are seizing on this event for propaganda purposes know full well it's an aberration, and that the abuse is commonplace in many of the very countries fomenting against us.



I call bs on this one 'Rat. What about the extra-territorial prisons like Guantanamo Bay that are springing up around the world, and the "export" of prisoners to countries like Israel where torture is condoned. This is not an aberration but a cancerous growth that is growing way too fast. How the hell do you think we can hold up the torch of liberty when we ourselves are continually responsible for torture and abuse and the lack of regard for human rights? gw & co. might as well put a blind fold over lady liberty's eyes for all the regard they have for the concept, and might as well tear down the beacon as well and replace it with the fires of hell.

This has gone too far and its time to stop it before it destroys us and the rest of the world as well.

[IJ Reilly]

Likewise. 'Rat, I'm disappointed and discouraged to see you wading so far into the deep-end of denial, and even more so to hear you making this absurd and distressingly lame generational-cultural argument. This isn't about young 'ens with bad upbringings. I think you'll find, at least for the most part, that the people prosecuted will be eager, if inexperienced and poorly trained, low-level enlisted people and reservists who were doing what they were told. War atrocities are always carried out by such people, but they are condoned, if not encouraged or ordered, by their superiors. We need to know who ordered them to do what, and why. Further, we need to find out why the ICRC's repeatedly expressed concerns about the treatment of prisoners in both Iraq and Afghanistan were ignored by the administration for over a year.

[Desertrat]

IJ, you're right that these aren't kids with bad upbringing--and that's the point. Hey, I was 19 when I was drafted, and not yet 20 when I went to S. Korea on Occupation Duty. Young, eager and stupid. But, no way in Hell could you have gotten me to abuse the helpless. Even guys who had been in the stockade at Pusan made no reference to abusive MP behavior. (We had one guy in the outfit who'd been in Korea almost three years, trying to get his 16 months of "good time". Stockade time didn't count.)

Regardless, I know as well as anybody about the responsibilities of those higher up the chain of command. "Reprimands" just don't cut it.

Ugg: Why bring up Gitmo? It's a political/legal problem, not one of abuse of those imprisoned there. Blindfolding and handcuffing during movement from Point A to Point B is not abuse. The prisoners are gaining weight, their dietary material is what they're accustomed to, and they can pray as they wish. Heck, there are even arrows painted on the ground so they know in which direction is Mecca.

'Rat

[Sayhey]

Ugg: Why bring up Gitmo? It's a political/legal problem, not one of abuse of those imprisoned there. Blindfolding and handcuffing during movement from Point A to Point B is not abuse. The prisoners are gaining weight, their dietary material is what they're accustomed to, and they can pray as they wish. Heck, there are even arrows painted on the ground so they know in which direction is Mecca.

'Rat

'Rat, you can't really believe that? The International Red Cross issued a rare public statement concerning the psychological state of the men at Guantánamo. Human Rights Watch and Amnesty International have consistently criticized the treatment of prisoners there. I would recommend reading this statement by HRW exec. dir. Kenneth Roth on the "Stress and Duress" (http://hrw.org/english/docs/2004/05/07/iraq8562.htm) techniques of the US forces.

The White House and the Pentagon have tried to portray the incidents of abuse in Iraq as isolated episodes, the work of a few misguided soldiers and officers. In an interview aimed at Arab television viewers on Wednesday, President Bush explained that, in a democracy, "everything is not perfect" and "mistakes are made." *
*
But Roth and other human rights activists see a pattern here, and they say it's not an accidental one. Roth says the abuses in Iraq are part of a "systemic problem" that arises from the U.S. government's approval of "stress and duress" interrogation techniques and its failure to crack down on soldiers and intelligence officers who go too far. *
*
"This is not simply a few rotten apples at the bottom of the barrel," Roth says. Rather, he says, what happened in Iraq is the inevitable result of a "culture of permissiveness" that started in the highest offices in Washington and has now spread to the jail cells at Abu Ghraib.

...Last June, President Bush issued a statement in which he vowed that the United States would lead the way in the "worldwide elimination of torture." Has the president done enough to try to prevent the sort of abuses that occurred at Abu Ghraib, or has he created a culture that encouraged them? *
*
There has been a culture of permissiveness with respect to interrogations that goes all the way to the top, including to Donald Rumsfeld. You see it first of all at Guantánamo, where the Bush administration basically ripped up the Geneva Conventions -- simply refused to apply absolutely straightforward provisions of the Geneva Convention with respect to who is a prisoner of war, what kind of hearing are they entitled to, things that were followed in other wars with enemies who were comparably hated. *
*
The Bush administration just refused to apply these straightforward provisions. That automatically sends a signal that international law is not going to bind the United States in fighting its war on terrorism. *
*
Second, [the administration has been slow to act] even in cases where there clearly has been abuse in the interrogation process. For example, in the cases of the two people who died in U.S. custody at Bagram Air Base about two years ago now, who were declared by the U.S. military [medical] examiner to be cases of homicide, still to this day there is no public accounting of what happened to the people who were responsible for those homicides.

[Desertrat]

Sorry, but there's not one thing in that cite concerning Gitmo which denies what I said: It's a legal issue, not one of torture. Iraq is about torture, albeit generally psychological rather than destructive of the victim's bodies. (And all things considered, including the culture, the psychological is probably worse in many ways.)

'Rat

[Ugg]

Sorry, but there's not one thing in that cite concerning Gitmo which denies what I said: It's a legal issue, not one of torture. Iraq is about torture, albeit generally psychological rather than destructive of the victim's bodies. (And all things considered, including the culture, the psychological is probably worse in many ways.)

'Rat

So, what do you consider being locked up in a dog kennel for two years if not psychological torture? Oops, forgot to mention, no access to attorneys and no access to anything other than a Koran and the unrelenting Cuban sun.......... Oh, yeah thanks for the arrow pointing east and the fact that their bellies are full and the female physicians. Come on, it's a disgrace to this nation.

Gitmo is bad news but you haven't addressed the fact that the US is exporting prisoners to countries where torture is legal and the US is establishing prisons on foreign territory to circumvent US law.

[Sayhey]

Sorry, but there's not one thing in that cite concerning Gitmo which denies what I said: It's a legal issue, not one of torture. Iraq is about torture, albeit generally psychological rather than destructive of the victim's bodies. (And all things considered, including the culture, the psychological is probably worse in many ways.)

'Rat

There has been a culture of permissiveness with respect to interrogations that goes all the way to the top, including to Donald Rumsfeld. You see it first of all at Guantánamo, where the Bush administration basically ripped up the Geneva Conventions -- simply refused to apply absolutely straightforward provisions of the Geneva Convention with respect to who is a prisoner of war, what kind of hearing are they entitled to, things that were followed in other wars with enemies who were comparably hated.

Do I need to find the ICRC letter on conditions at Guantánamo? Normally the ICRC findings are confidential but because of the situation in Cuba they had this to say:

For the ICRC, the question of the legal status of the persons held at Guantanamo Bay and the legal framework applicable to them remains unresolved.

The ICRC's main concern today is that the US authorities have placed the internees in Guantanamo beyond the law. This means that, after more than eighteen months of captivity, the internees still have no idea about their fate, and no means of recourse through any legal mechanism.

Through its visits, the ICRC has been uniquely placed to witness the impact this uncertainty has had on the internees. It has observed a worrying deterioration in the psychological health of a large number of them. This has prompted the ICRC to ask the US authorities to institute a due legal process in accordance with the judicial guarantees stipulated by international humanitarian law. This process should formalize and clarify the fate of each and every individual in Guantanamo and put an end to the seemingly open-ended system of internment that currently exists. The ICRC has also asked the US authorities to implement significant changes at Guantanamo Bay.

ICRC (http://www.icrc.org/Web/eng/siteeng0.nsf/iwpList74/951C74F20D2A2148C1256D8D002CA8DC)

I would also think that the supposed "outrageous" claim of the released British detainees of the use of prostitutes to shame the muslim prisoners might be in need of reevaluation in light of the photos of recent weeks. We have already discussed before in other threads the violations of the Geneva Convention at Guantánamo around the housing of prisoners in open air cages.

'Rat, I think the idea that the "Stress and Duress" tactics at Gitmo are somehow fine, but the use of the same tactics in Baghdad is not, is truly unsupportable. This crap is the result of putting the intelligence gathering needs of the military first and the need to respect the Geneva Convention last. It is not confined to one prison in Baghdad.

[Desertrat]

"Through its visits, the ICRC has been uniquely placed to witness the impact this uncertainty has had on the internees. It has observed a worrying deterioration in the psychological health of a large number of them."

Give me a (Bleeping) break! "Uncertainty". Yeah, right. Same as for any military prisoners, anywhere, anywhen.

Why not just say to never intern anybody for anything, anywhere? After all, we don't want the poor dears to undergo uncertainty. Why not get rid of the idea of parole for civilian prisoners in the U.S.? After all, the prisoner's worry about whether or not the Parole Board will grant his release would create a harmful uncertainty. (Pardon the sarcasm, but this sort of nonsense just really gives me a serious case of the chaps.)

Y'all have fun. I'm on the highway in the earlyish AM...

'Rat

[skunk]

Give me a (Bleeping) break! "Uncertainty". Yeah, right. Same as for any military prisoners, anywhere, anywhen.
'Rat
Yes, but...
These prisoners have for the most part not even been processed: we have no idea whether they had actually done ANYTHING. Some of them are undoubtedly innocent civilians found in the wrong place at the wrong time. Anyway, we all know "the war is over" (it must be Christmas already) so these people are civilian detainees, and should not be subjected to what passes for military discipline.

[IJ Reilly]

(Pardon the sarcasm, but this sort of nonsense just really gives me a serious case of the chaps.)

Funny, but that's what violations of human rights do for me, especially when they're perpetrated by my country. You know, human rights -- the thing we're supposed to be in Iraq to promote?

[Sayhey]

Give me a (Bleeping) break! "Uncertainty". Yeah, right. Same as for any military prisoners, anywhere, anywhen.

'Rat

Sorry the abuses at Gitmo don't worry you. All of the moves to ignore the Geneva Convention and circumvent international law worry me. So, 'Rat, I'll give you whatever break you want, just don't expect me to think the mistreatment of POWs by our government, in our name, is something to be shrugged off as inconsequential.

[skunk]

Funny, but that's what violations of human rights do for me, especially when they're perpetrated by my country. You know, human rights -- the thing we're supposed to be in Iraq to promote?
IJ, I must ask you: do you suppose that the kind of behaviour evidenced by the recent reports is any worse than what goes on at the average US prison? Is there not a strong vein of brutality running through the American system, from high-school hazing through fraternity rituals, "Skull and Bones" initiations, WCW, porn sites and the rest? Coupled with ignorance of and contempt for other cultures, this is a dangerous mix to inject into a complex society like Iraq. I tend not to think of it as torture, so much as a racist expression of Anglo-Saxon triumphalism. These are people we all know. We may not like them, but they live in our street. I expect that even if we had had full UN backing and world approval, these things would still have gone on, after all, they did in Afghanistan, Vietnam, Korea, the Philippines, Haiti, etc, etc. It's not just a regime change we need, it's a culture change. It won't be quick.

[Neserk]

Funny, but that's what violations of human rights do for me, especially when they're perpetrated by my country. You know, human rights -- the thing we're supposed to be in Iraq to promote?

I was so angry about all of this (reading people's justification of such behavior) that I literally had to get away from my computer. It has been a while since I have *felt* this much anger for an event that wasn't physically close (eg I didn't see it live). The whole thing literally makes me sick.