Abuse row woman 'followed orders'

Discussion in 'Politics, Religion, Social Issues' started by radhak, May 12, 2004.

  1. radhak macrumors regular

    Joined:
    Aug 28, 2003
    Location:
    NJ, USA
    #1
    Abuse row woman 'followed orders'

    somehow this seems to me very believable, more than that a few soldiers were being randomly abusive behind their superior's back and photographing it.

     
  2. IJ Reilly macrumors P6

    IJ Reilly

    Joined:
    Jul 16, 2002
    Location:
    Palookaville
    #2
    I going to make a bold prediction: None of these trials will occur before November, unless they are held in secret military tribunals (a politically bad idea). It's going to be very difficult to pin responsibility for prisoner abuse on PFCs and other low-ranking individuals, when it's become so apparent from the recent Senate testimony that nobody higher up wants to admit to being in charge.
     
  3. Stelliform macrumors 68000

    Stelliform

    Joined:
    Oct 21, 2002
    #3
    I am dying to know who gave her the orders! According to the Brigadier General in charge of the prison, she wasn't allowed into the interrogation area. So who was in charge of this area? The CIA? We all know their fondness of the current administration. And who takes totally incriminating pictures like that? Smells to me like a setup. Perfect time to hurt GWB in the election. . . .
     
  4. mactastic macrumors 68040

    mactastic

    Joined:
    Apr 24, 2003
    Location:
    Colly-fornia
    #4
    Link

    My understanding is that the special court martial is for lesser offenses, and cannot hand out as tough a punisment as a general court martial, but it looks like someone wants these trials, or at least some of them, to proceed quickly.
     
  5. zimv20 macrumors 601

    zimv20

    Joined:
    Jul 18, 2002
    Location:
    toronto
    #5
    you really think this is all a politically motivated setup?

    on ABC news right now, there's a piece about two interregators who were trained at a US training facility. they were taught how to circumvent the geneva convention. they say the photos that have come out represent exactly what they were taught.

    the ICRC report says the techniques are systemtic, not a diabolical plot to make bush look bad.

    occum's razor suggests that the command to use these techniques come from a central location with the intent to get information.
     
  6. skunk macrumors G4

    skunk

    Joined:
    Jun 29, 2002
    Location:
    Republic of Ukistan
    #6
    Are you seriously suggesting that the 300 or so photographs are all part of some elaborate set-up to discredit Bush????? Get real, please!
     
  7. mactastic macrumors 68040

    mactastic

    Joined:
    Apr 24, 2003
    Location:
    Colly-fornia
    #7

    Also I would submit that what was done to the Iraqi prisoners seems to be calculated to take advantage of their cultural 'weaknesses' for lack of a better term. That seems to indicate to me that particular forms of persuasion were chosen by people who knew what would be the most humiliating.
     
  8. skunk macrumors G4

    skunk

    Joined:
    Jun 29, 2002
    Location:
    Republic of Ukistan
    #8
    And there's this:
    http://www.latimes.com/news/nationw...ns_lat,1,3656595.story?coll=la-home-headlines
    wherein we are told that the Geneva Conventions mean something COMPLETELY DIFFERENT in American english. And there I was, thinking it was all potaytoes and potahtoes....
    WASHINGTON — Top U.S. defense officials were forced to defend military interrogation techniques they have approved for use in Iraq, saying today that such practices as depriving detainees of sleep and placing them in "stress positions" do not violate international law.

    Under sharp fire from senators on a day when members of Congress viewed new and disturbing videos and photos of Iraqi prisoner abuse, Secretary of Defense Donald H. Rumsfeld told a Senate committee that Pentagon lawyers had decided that such practices as dietary manipulation and isolation for longer than 30 days complied with the Geneva Conventions, the international rules governing the treatment of prisoners of war.

    However, Sen. Richard Durbin (D-Ill.) told Rumsfeld and Army Gen. Richard B. Myers, chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, that techniques approved by the Pentagon "go far beyond the standard which says there will be no physical or mental torture nor any other form of coercion or that the people involved will be exposed to unpleasant or disadvantageous treatment of any kind."

    Myers replied that the practices are legal.

    "Every time we have an interrogation, we have an interrogation plan," he told senators. "Those are appropriate. And that's what we're told by legal authorities and by anybody that believes in humane behavior."

    The exchange came as the Bush administration was trying to ride out a furor over mistreatment of Iraqi war prisoners at the U.S.-run Abu Ghraib prison near Baghdad that has obscured the U.S. war effort and complicated plans to turn sovereignty over to Iraqis in six weeks.

    "Anything that's been authorized by the (Defense) Department was checked by the lawyers, and deemed to be consistent with the Geneva Conventions," Rumsfeld told the defense subcommittee of the Senate Appropriations Committee.

    Senators were extremely skeptical that sleep deprivation and stress positions and use of dogs meet that standard. And some Democratic senators called for the unequivocal adherence by the Pentagon to the Geneva Conventions during all interrogations, in Iraq or elsewhere.

    Rumsfeld called the abuses a "body blow" for the country. He said they were "terrible, inhumane and they are inexcusable." But he said they did not amount to the beginning of an end to U.S. goals in Iraq.

    Myers said that conditions in Iraq are going to get worse in the next month in Iraq, leading up to the date set for a handover of increased authority to an Iraqi government.

    "Between now and 30 June we know it's going to get worse," he said.

    In an interview after the hearing, Myers confirmed that he knew that Lt. Gen. Ricardo Sanchez, commander of U.S. ground forces in Iraq, had approved the use of muzzled dogs in interrogation rooms. But he said the dogs were not approved to be used threateningly against prisoners. He also said their use as a security measure was consistent with the Geneva Conventions.​
     
  9. mactastic macrumors 68040

    mactastic

    Joined:
    Apr 24, 2003
    Location:
    Colly-fornia
    #9
    According to this it's 1,800 images and an 'undisclosed' number of video clips.
     
  10. skunk macrumors G4

    skunk

    Joined:
    Jun 29, 2002
    Location:
    Republic of Ukistan
    #10
    That's some conspiracy... :eek:
     
  11. mactastic macrumors 68040

    mactastic

    Joined:
    Apr 24, 2003
    Location:
    Colly-fornia
    #11
    Do you think it would qualify as 'vast'? ;)
     
  12. skunk macrumors G4

    skunk

    Joined:
    Jun 29, 2002
    Location:
    Republic of Ukistan
    #12
    I dunno, but it's certainly left-wing! :p
     
  13. IJ Reilly macrumors P6

    IJ Reilly

    Joined:
    Jul 16, 2002
    Location:
    Palookaville
    #13
    There's no conspiracy theory like a massive, complex and fantastical conspiracy theory to get the juices really flowing. The ICRC must be in on it too.
     
  14. IJ Reilly macrumors P6

    IJ Reilly

    Joined:
    Jul 16, 2002
    Location:
    Palookaville
    #14
    No, not "vast" -- closer to "half-vast."
     
  15. skunk macrumors G4

    skunk

    Joined:
    Jun 29, 2002
    Location:
    Republic of Ukistan
    #15
    Don't forget the UN. They are at the root of this. And the FRENCH!!! Why didn't I see that before?
     
  16. skunk macrumors G4

    skunk

    Joined:
    Jun 29, 2002
    Location:
    Republic of Ukistan
    #16
    :rolleyes:
     
  17. IJ Reilly macrumors P6

    IJ Reilly

    Joined:
    Jul 16, 2002
    Location:
    Palookaville
    #17
    Bloody 'ell. And can anyone account for what the Germans were up to during all of this? I thought not!
     
  18. skunk macrumors G4

    skunk

    Joined:
    Jun 29, 2002
    Location:
    Republic of Ukistan
    #18
    Up to no good, I'm sure!
     
  19. Sun Baked macrumors G5

    Sun Baked

    Joined:
    May 19, 2002
    #19
    Sort of sad that people don't stand up for others, but blindly follow orders.

    Especially when they think the orders are a bit weird.

    But some of these tactics are practiced here on US soil all the time, especially sleep deprivation and making people uncomfortable.

    Should make some of the police interrogation cases interesting if these are deemed torture to prisoners in Iraq, and the impact it'll have on case law here.
     
  20. skunk macrumors G4

    skunk

    Joined:
    Jun 29, 2002
    Location:
    Republic of Ukistan
    #20
    Yup.
     
  21. mactastic macrumors 68040

    mactastic

    Joined:
    Apr 24, 2003
    Location:
    Colly-fornia
    #21
    I think the main problem is that the people involved were not professionals. The methods described are, by and large, 'torture lite'. The problem comes in when you have untrained soldiers and reservists acting on raw emotion. Also those 'torture lite' tactics should only be used in extreme cases such as hardened terrorists trained to resist questioning. From all accounts, most of the Iraqis were picked up in neighborhood sweeps. Even US commanders estimate that over 80% were innocent. Torturing the innocent isn't productive, unless your goal is to create blood enemies.

    Of course, the pictures members of Congress saw today supposedly contained evidence of rape and murder of Iraqis.
     
  22. Thanatoast macrumors 6502a

    Thanatoast

    Joined:
    Dec 3, 2002
    Location:
    Denver
    #22
    From the beginning of the "war on terror" Bush has done his utmost make clear that prisoners captured by the US are not to be held under the Geneva Conventions and that the US will not consider itself bound by any international rules or accepted practices in regards to those prisoners. Now his policies have come back to bite him in the ass. My only sorrow is that the rampant blame-shifting going on means that neither he nor his immediate cronies will get the axe for their disgusting actions and orders in the name of "defending" the nation.
     
  23. poopyhead macrumors 6502a

    poopyhead

    Joined:
    Jan 4, 2004
    Location:
    in the toe-jam of greatness (Fort Worth)
    #23
  24. blackfox macrumors 65816

    blackfox

    Joined:
    Feb 18, 2003
    Location:
    PDX
    #24
    I've said this before in other threads recently, and I will again:
    To understand all this, just substitute "Isreal" for the "United States" and it all makes sense (not that I feel any better)...
     
  25. takao macrumors 68040

    takao

    Joined:
    Dec 25, 2003
    Location:
    Dornbirn (Austria)
    #25
    'following orders' is _no_ excuse for war crimes. period.

    i was thought during my service if i get an order which would conflict with human rights,geneva convention etc.
    you _have to_
    1. ask for an _written_ order
    2. contact the next higher commanding person and ask if this order is correct... he has to give you a written permission to follow the order despite breaking the convention and human rights

    and after that you can either follow the order or disobey the order without punishment

    i guess similiar things exist in the US Army and because of that i just don't believe things like "i didn't know that these things were happening"
     

Share This Page