Welcome Guest [Log In] [Register]
We hope you enjoy your visit.


You're currently viewing our forum as a guest. This means you are limited to certain areas of the board and there are some features you can't use. If you join our community, you'll be able to access member-only sections, and use many member-only features such as customizing your profile, sending personal messages, and voting in polls. Registration is simple, fast, and completely free.


Join our community!


If you're already a member please log in to your account to access all of our features:

Username:   Password:
Add Reply
Prisoners!! What to do with them; Prisoners!! What to do with them
Topic Started: May 21 2004, 11:50 PM (244 Views)
somerled
Member Avatar
Admiral MacDonald RN
All that withstanding.

What atbout people who have abducted by the military for "questioning" - often late at night in raids - and who were not engaged in the activities described above at the time (or perhaps ever) and found themselves subject to imprisonment and torture by the USA military and CIA ?

What about those murdered prisoners then ?
Offline | Profile | Quote | ^
 
doctortobe
Speak softly, and carry a 57 megaton stick!
Links? Proof? How do we not know that the stories were fabricated? ;)
Offline | Profile | Quote | ^
 
Swidden
Member Avatar
Adm. Gadfly-at-large; Provisional wRench-fly at large
I think it is fair to assume that Zarqawi and his group were just looking for an excuse to pull what they did to Mr. Berg. If it had not been the news coming out Al-Grhaib, it would have been something else.

Somerled, there are investigations going on relating to prisoner deaths. Those that turn out to be murder, then the offenders will be tried and (if convicted) sent to prison. That's the difference between the US forces and the insurgent/terrorist forces. This may sound trite and simplistic to you, but it does not get any better than that. Undoubtedly, when you have a couple hundred thousand troops and/or contractors there are bound to be problems with some of those involved. I am no t making an excuse on their behalf, merely stating an unfortunate fact of life. I take some comfort in the knowledge that when our guys screw up, they will face consequences.
Offline | Profile | Quote | ^
 
somerled
Member Avatar
Admiral MacDonald RN
Swidden :
That is so.

Let us hope that everyone - including as far up the chain of command as it goes - and this sounds like a long way up the military food-chain - perhaps all the way to Bush - are taken to book and prosecuted.

Are the intelligence people also being prosecuted as well ?
Offline | Profile | Quote | ^
 
doctortobe
Speak softly, and carry a 57 megaton stick!
There are actually a number of things that you can look at in the investigation to see how far up it goes.

1. Which prisoners were tortured?

If they were prisoners that had direct connections with the insurgency, then it very well could have been a concerted effort from up the CoC. However, if the prisoners were random and some weren't part of the insurgency, then it would seem that the torture was a result of "jailer justice".

2. How much pressure were intelligence officials under to gather information?

This is important because an officer's career depends on how well he can do his job. A poor evaluation might just mean that you prospects of promotion are forever gone. Given this, if the MI people were under great pressure to gain intel, then they would be more likely (note the word likely, not probable) to allow this to happen as they would believe that it would be less risky to do this then to fail in their mission. On the other hand, if the demand for intelligence was not career threatening, then MI officers would be foolish to risk their careers when such tactics were unecessary in any event. If that were the case, then it would seem that the guards were targeting the insurgent prisoners for revenge due to attacks on American soldiers.

3. Were there any major policy changes?

It is important to know how whether or not there were any changes to the SOP just before the start of the torture. This COULD indicate that officers or even general staff were involved. Lack of this would not automatically prove the officers or generals innocent, it is merely a smoking gun if it is found.

4. Have the murder and rape allegations been proven? (this is also a personal question on my part)

If the allegations have been proven, then that would actually speak against officers being involved. For one thing, as mentioned before, it is doubtful that officers would condone these tactics unless they felt that they were in danger of losing their careers due to being unable to meet the demands of their superiors (even then it is doubtful that the majority of American officers would condone this). However, while one COULD make an argument that the tactics of humiliation were inclusive in the acceptable forms of psychological manipulation for interrogation (such as sleep deprivation), murder and rape would give you a court martial no matter what excuse you give. Murder and rape in the prisons by soldiers would probably point to it being confined to those few soldiers. This is a smoking gun on the Enlisted soldiers only if this is found out. Officers could still be involved if it is found to be false.

BTW, has it been determined whether or not the murdered prisoners (if any) were murdered by soldiers? Could it have been other prisoners?


These questions are currently under investigation and I don't believe we have any of the answers yet. Given that, it is unwise to draw conclusions based only on what the media and your gut instinct tells you.
Offline | Profile | Quote | ^
 
« Previous Topic · Politics and World Events Forum · Next Topic »
Add Reply

Tweet
comments powered by Disqus