The Sydney Herschel article said that the civilian interrogators are not subject to court martial, they are private employees. I still don't see why they shouldn't be tried under civilian criminal law, though. What they were doing must be illegal for everyone, not just soldiers. I'd have thought.SixofNine did you see the picture Clinton posted of two women holding a sign that says "We shaved our pubic hair, read our lips, no more Bush"? I laughed and laughed. Crude, but effective.
Torture to find WMD?
by Greenpalmtreestillmine 91 Replies latest social current
-
-
Yerusalyim
JESUS H. CHRIST when will you people start trying to deal in truth and fact rather than your liberal fantasy based in hating Bush and all things conservative. The fact that 900,000 plus new jobs have been created since January, and that Kerry's cries of a jobless recovery have fallen on employed ears must really have you pissed off.
The first premise is ENTIRELY wrong...these prisoners weren't even soldiers, they were criminals arrested after the war ended, for carrying weapons, defying coalition forces violently, etc. No one was asking them about WMD...low level nothings like this would have dick for information on WMD.
IF these soldiers were directed to do this nonsense by Contractors or CIA that does NOT get the soldiers off the hook, they know the rules, we're taught the rules from our first day in the military...NOR are the Contractors or CIA off the hook...they are subject to military law because of where they're at, and subject to US and International law, both of which prohibit this.
This media hype and the glee in the eyes of democrats pisses me off. Here's the facts, long before the media was involved, heads had started to roll. People were relieved of command, investigations started, and charges filed against individuals LONG before the media got wind of this. All the hyping is doing is hurting the morale of our soldiers and endagnering the lives of those held hostage...and those taken hostage in the future. THIS WAS BEING TAKEN CARE OF long before media intervention...the news did NOT need to run this story unless the issue was not being fixed...which it obviously was.
Six,
You and your ilk would HAVE to blackmail people to vote for Kerry by withholding sex because Kerry has no issues he can be elected on...the Economy is good, and he's not trusted with foriegn policy...look at the polls. Kerry is a loser as a politician.
Patio,
I'll address your lunacy line by line.
Also, if Rumsfeld and his drones felt the Iraqis had WMDs ready to go, why did he reduce the number of troops requested by the military? Since when are you a military expert, the US military accomplished a remarkable feat in our March to Baghdad...he reduced the number because that's all that was needed. And if the Secretary of Defense expected to have WMD lobbed at his troops why did he send them in without armored plated Humvees? We sent as many armoured HMMWV as practable...there aren't that many in the inventory...they use more fuel, and are much more expensive to ship...and most important to your point...they don't protect against a gas or chemical attack. Go learn a bit about the military before you criticize what you don't understand. Afterall if they had WMDs they certainly would have small missiles and artillery.
The truth is that the sanctions worked! Really, where's the proof of that? Iraq was a militarily crippled country, if the Administration had let the Inspectors do their job we would have that found that out. They had 12 years to "do their job" and got NO WHERE because Saddam didn't cooperate...but the countries that wanted the inspections to continue indefinitely made tons of money (illegally) from the Oil For Food kick backs Saddam was handing off to them Hmmm.....80 billion to find Osama....yeah I think that would have worked. OBL is in Pakistan and is unreachable there for any amount of money until the US gets the balls to say FUCK OFF to all the muslims in that region of the world...probably not a good idea with Pakistan having Nukes...Musharif would be diposed and we'd have radical muslims in charge...with Nuclear weapons...I'm ready to hear YOUR solution for getting Bin Laden...who is only a figure head and financier anyhow.
I'm still waiting for outrage from the left that The Oil For Food program was being used to line the pockets of the very people that oppossed the war in the UN...oh, that's right...it will never happen...sorry, I was dreaming that the left was balanced and principled.
-
Yerusalyim
two women holding a sign that says "We shaved our pubic hair, read our lips, no more Bush"? I laughed and laughed. Crude, but effective.
Crude yes, effective, NO, it just keeps showing that Kerry has no issue to run on other than Hate Bush and all conservatives.
-
SixofNine
Kerry is a loser as a politician.
Oh for godsake hush. He's just fine as a politician. You are a supporter of the dumbest, least effective, most dangerous president ever, who has surrounded himself with the least precient advisors ever. You have no room to criticize any politician ever again.
other than Hate Bush and all conservatives
There's alot to hate right now. -
patio34
Hi Yeru,
Your post:
JESUS H. CHRIST when will you people start trying to deal in truth and fact rather than your liberal fantasy based in hating Bush and all things conservative. The fact that 900,000 plus new jobs have been created since January, and that Kerry's cries of a jobless recovery have fallen on employed ears must really have you pissed off.
Off topic. You already have a thread on this. Though I can see you may want to divert attention.
The first premise is ENTIRELY wrong...these prisoners weren't even soldiers, they were criminals arrested after the war ended, for carrying weapons, defying coalition forces violently, etc. No one was asking them about WMD...low level nothings like this would have dick for information on WMD.
Read the LA Times today. The (known) abuses were done in an area reserved for high-level information. And do you expect the insurgents to wear uniforms. Who says they're not soldiers? Criminals in your own mind.
IF these soldiers were directed to do this nonsense by Contractors or CIA that does NOT get the soldiers off the hook, they know the rules, we're taught the rules from our first day in the military...NOR are the Contractors or CIA off the hook...they are subject to military law because of where they're at, and subject to US and International law, both of which prohibit this.
Well, we'll just have to wait until more facts are known.
This media hype and the glee in the eyes of democrats pisses me off.
That is entirely your interpretation at the outrage. But I'm glad you've shown some more of your lack of tolerance for facts. Did you agree what Rush Limbaugh said?
Here's the facts, long before the media was involved, heads had started to roll. People were relieved of command, investigations started, and charges filed against individuals LONG before the media got wind of this.
Are you serious? Not according to the International Red Cross. Why is it the head of the prison wasn't removed till the news hit the media? Why are they NOW taking action to relieve the overcrowding in Abu Gariab? Why are there so many reports about this being systematic? I think you need to read more widely. And I mean just the regular press.
All the hyping is doing is hurting the morale of our soldiers and endagnering the lives of those held hostage...and those taken hostage in the future. THIS WAS BEING TAKEN CARE OF long before media intervention...the news did NOT need to run this story unless the issue was not being fixed...which it obviously was.
Interesting that you don't put the blame for the endangering and morale of the soldiers where it belongs: with the guilty parties. Do you really think the Iraqis didn't know about what was going on? Read more widely.
Well, I guess we'd have to take your word for it (but I'd never do that). The way it looks to me, though, is very little was being done. As I said before, the prison overcrowding (60% were estimated by the Red Cross or Amnesty International to be innocent) continued until the media. I could go on and on, but it's a waste of time. Anyone who is genuinely interested in what's going on just needs to read the press.
Six,
You and your ilk would HAVE to blackmail people to vote for Kerry by withholding sex because Kerry has no issues he can be elected on...the Economy is good, and he's not trusted with foriegn policy...look at the polls. Kerry is a loser as a politician.
Ridiculous. It was a joke. Lighten up.
Patio,
I'll address your lunacy line by line.
It wasn't my post.
Pat
-
Greenpalmtreestillmine
JESUS H. CHRIST when will you people start trying to deal in truth and fact rather than your liberal fantasy based in hating Bush and all things conservative.
When President Bush starts dealing straight so will I. He was elected President of ALL Americans not just the born agains, the corporations and the global democracy theorists.
The fact that 900,000 plus new jobs have been created since January, and that Kerry's cries of a jobless recovery have fallen on employed ears must really have you pissed off.
No actually, my eyes and ears have been busy watching all the President's men playing mop up.
The first premise is ENTIRELY wrong...these prisoners weren't even soldiers, they were criminals arrested after the war ended, for carrying weapons, defying coalition forces violently, etc. No one was asking them about WMD...low level nothings like this would have dick for information on WMD.
Oh, ok....so American CIA agents and paid Contractors were busy telling the American soldiers to "soften" up the criminals and deny them basic needs because they carried weapons and defied coalition forces? That makes no sense, they were being prepared for interrogation why? Because they were carrying weapons and fighting? Uhhhh....no I don't think so. The reports are that as these prisoners were brought in, the soldiers were told which ones to leave alone, which meant they got their meals and cigarettes and kept their clothes, and which should get the softening treatment to get them ready for interrogation.
IF these soldiers were directed to do this nonsense by Contractors or CIA that does NOT get the soldiers off the hook, they know the rules, we're taught the rules from our first day in the military...NOR are the Contractors or CIA off the hook...they are subject to military law because of where they're at, and subject to US and International law, both of which prohibit this.
A Senator was quoted as saying that the chain of command was broken. The Contractors were in charge of things in that prison far more than they should have been. This whole thing must have come from people who have great authority and an important agenda. It sounds like what's happened before in the Administration, the micro-managing of military affairs by civilian politicians. For sure the soldiers will get punished, as for anyone else, well, time will tell.
This media hype and the glee in the eyes of democrats pisses me off.
I am not a democrat. The problem is that President Bush has given me no reason to have confidence in his ability to do his job. That's all. The American people hired him to do a job. Many of us feel he has shown himself negligent in his duties, so much so that we would like to give the job to someone else. That's not so bad is it? I don't have a Republican or Democratic agenda or loyalty.
Here's the facts, long before the media was involved, heads had started to roll. People were relieved of command, investigations started, and charges filed against individuals LONG before the media got wind of this. All the hyping is doing is hurting the morale of our soldiers and endagnering the lives of those held hostage...and those taken hostage in the future. THIS WAS BEING TAKEN CARE OF long before media intervention...the news did NOT need to run this story unless the issue was not being fixed...which it obviously was.
Don't tell me, tell the Congress where both Republicans and Democrats are fuming over this whole thing. The media did not take the pictures, the media did not torture, the media did not order the torture. The military, CIA, Contrators and Government did. So if anyone is responsible for hurting the morale of the soldiers look to latter not the former.
If the media had not run the story do you think Rumsfeld would have appeared before the Armed Services Committee answering questions? Do you think the President would have been shown any of the pictures? We do not live in a military junta. This a democracy with 3 branches of government. The Pentagon had no right not to FULLY inform the Congress and the President of what exactly had gone on. Torture and rape are not supposed to be the ususal in American military prisons but maybe the American people are stupid and maybe, just maybe, this was considered no big deal because for the military, it is no big deal. I don't really believe that, but you know, I wouldn't bet the farm on it.
By the way, if this is how Iraqi's found "carrying weapons" are treated I wonder how Saddam's accommodatiions have been? Fortunately the International Red Cross has been trying to keep tabs on guy. I never thought I would ever say something like that but in the new Bush era anything is possible.
What I would like to know is this: Are politicians more loyal to their party or their country? If Kerry, Bush, Rumsfeld, Cheney, Clinton, Powell, Kennedy etc., had to choose between loyalty to party or loyalty to country which one would they choose? Americans are dying for their country, in my fantasy world politicians would be willing to die for their country too.
Sabrina
-
Euphemism
I'm going to double check this, but I believe that Iraq is under martial law right now, which means everybody there is subject to USCMJ. I know some people I can ask.
Jeff.. that's what I thought too, but according to Phillip Carter, that only applies in a war zone, whereas Iraq is officially a postwar occupation zone. I'd be curious to know what your source has to say.
Anyway, the contractors are still subject to US law, so they can certainly be tried in federal court.
-
Yerusalyim
for godsake hush. He's just fine as a politician. You are a supporter of the dumbest, least effective, most dangerous president ever, who has surrounded himself with the least precient advisors ever. You have no room to criticize any politician ever again.
A fine politician? One that hasn't seen a side of an issue he couldn't support "I voted for the 87 billion before I voted against it" The guy who wants to raise taxes as the economy is finally really churning and producing jobs and INCREASING government revenues. The guy who thinks the war on terror is a matter for the justice department instead of the Pentagon...be my guest. The "dumb" president I support went to Yale, and even drinking way too much at the time had a C average...what was your average at Yale? This "dumb" president was smart enough to see that the way to fix the economy after the Tech Bubble burst was to lower taxes...which were WAY too high...inspite of all the nay sayers...and who was correct...the economy has seen the highest sustained growth rate since Reagan, and that was done without billions of artificially busting the economy as was done by Reagan through military spending. And John Kerry isn't yelling about a jobless recovery anymore either...over 900,000 NEW jobs created since January alone, 8 straight months of job growth and counting as well...and an unemployment rate now lower than the average under your hero, Bill Clinton...the economists are revising their figures every week, and it's now conservatively estimated that there will be another 1 million jobs added to the economy. More people own their own homes now than EVER before in US history. Yep, this is a dumb man I support. Even though I disagree with the expenditure, he's been able to do what the Dems only promised to do for decades, produce a prescription drug benefit in Medicare. So, the dumbass president with a C average from a local yocal school like Yale (twice elected as governor by the way) brought the economy through a recession that began in the previous administration, the Tech bubble burst, 9-11, and Enron, with a sustained growth rate of around 5% and one quarter alone that was 8%. He promised that if we stayed the course the deficit spending required because of loss of Revenue from the shrinking economy...and the tax cuts, would be halved by the end of his next four years...the GAO had to revise that figure...there is so much revenue coming in now that the deficit is expected to be halved NEXT YEAR...dumb ass presient. Bush is indeed a dangerous president...dangerous to terrorists. Over 2/3rds of OA's operational staff has been captured or killed. We know where UBL is, we just can't get him....see, the "dumb" president knows that if the US violates Pakistan's boarders and captures UBL that Musharif would be overthrown and the NUkes they have would be in the hands of radical muslims. The dangerous president knows that we can not afford to wait for the enemy to strike us...that we have to go after the enemy. And the policy works as Libya demonstrated...Col Qaddafi coughed up his WMD after he saw what happened to Saddam. Yep...Bush is dangerous to our enemies...let's see, your guy said that this was a matter for Law enforcement...I wonder how many terrorists the law enforcement guys had caught and or killed under Clinton...or Bush before 9-11? Your guy wants to crawl back to the UN to kiss Kofi Anan's keister...and the rest of the Security Council while he's at it...the ones that oppossed our war in Iraq...the ones who wanted 12 unproductive (and uncooperated with) years of inspections to continue BECAUSE THEY WERE MAKING MILLIONS PERSONALLY with Saddam in Power....that's the guy you want to support? No thanks...I'll keep Bush...and from the look of the polls...so will the rest of the US...cuz your guy...he ain't got any issues to run on.
-
Yerusalyim
But, trying to put this post back on track...if someone WAS trying to use abuse (this was not torture...it's called humiliation what these Iraqi prisoners went through...not torture...at any rate...it's one of the WORST ways to get reliable information.
-
SixofNine
...not torture...at any rate...it's one of the WORST ways to get reliable information.
So you're saying, "possibly more stupidity from the administration in charge of this war"? Stop, you're killin' me!