or
Join Now!
|
|
Home/Society & Culture/Religion/Christianity
|
| Forum |
Ask A Question |
Question Board |
FAQs |
Search |
Return to Question Board
| Question Details |
Asked By |
Asked On |
| Enough already... |
Itsdb |
06/15/05 |
Senator Durbin from the Senate floor yesterday:
"When you read some of the graphic descriptions of what has occurred here--I almost hesitate to put them in the RECORD, and yet they have to be added to this debate. Let me read to you what one FBI agent saw. And I quote from his report:
On a couple of occasions, I entered interview rooms to find a detainee chained hand and foot in a fetal position to the floor, with no chair, food or water. Most times they urinated or defecated on themselves, and had been left there for 18-24 hours or more. On one occasion, the air conditioning had been turned down so far and the temperature was so cold in the room, that the barefooted detainee was shaking with cold. ..... On another occasion, the [air conditioner] had been turned off, making the temperature in the unventilated room well over 100 degrees. The detainee was almost unconscious on the floor, with a pile of hair next to him. He had apparently been literally pulling his hair out throughout the night. On another occasion, not only was the temperature unbearably hot, but extremely loud rap music was being played in the room, and had been since the day before, with the detainee chained hand and foot in the fetal position on the tile floor.
If I read this to you and did not tell you that it was an FBI agent describing what Americans had done to prisoners in their control, you would most certainly believe this must have been done by Nazis, Soviets in their gulags, or some mad regime--Pol Pot or others--that had no concern for human beings. Sadly, that is not the case. This was the action of Americans in the treatment of their prisoners."
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
OK - does anyone here deny that abuses have occurred at Gitmo? They have occurred, can we agree on that? Good.
So what happens next? Address the issues, make changes, be more transparent, etc.? Or do we continue to furnish more ammo to the enemy with irresponsible comparisons and criticisms such as Amnesty International's and Durbin's? What is the rest of the story with this particular detainee, has anyone told us? He was chained, he was cold, he was hot, and by golly he suffered through rap music - ok, so that would be torturous for me.
I think I've heard everything about how the U.S. should be setting the example, by I guess we're a long way from hearing every possible ridiculous comparison to Gitmo. But IS there a comparison?
Nazis: "State-sponsored killing of six million Jewish men, women, and children and millions of others"
"Holocaust." Encyclopædia Britannica. 2005. Encyclopædia Britannica Premium Service 15 June 2005
Auschwitz: "Its poison-gas chambers could accommodate 2,000 at one time, and 12,000 could be gassed and incinerated each day"
"extermination camp." Encyclopædia Britannica. 2005. Encyclopædia Britannica Premium Service 15 June 2005
Between 1.1 and 1.5 million people died at Auschwitz; 90 percent of them were Jews. Also among the dead were some 19,000 Roma (Gypsies) who were held at the camp until the Nazis gassed them on July 31, 1944-the only other victim group gassed in family units alongside the Jews. The Poles constituted the second largest victim group at Auschwitz, where some 83,000 were killed or died."
"Auschwitz." Encyclopædia Britannica. 2005. Encyclopædia Britannica Premium Service 15 June 2005
Belzec: "one of the most gruesome sites of the Holocaust-the Nazis killed at least 600,000 Jews...Belzec was one of three extermination camps (including Sobibor and Treblinka) set up under a plan to exterminate the entire Jewish population of central and eastern Poland."
"Belzec." Encyclopædia Britannica. 2005. Encyclopædia Britannica Premium Service 15 June 2005
Chelmno: "opened in December 1941 and closed in January 1945 and was operated to execute Jews, most of whom were Polish. Some Soviet prisoners of war and Roma (Gypsies) were also executed here. Estimates of the number executed range from 170,000 to 360,000...The facilities included three gas vans and two crematoria that were 32.5 feet (10 metres) wide and 16-19 feet (5-6 metres) long. Gassing began on December 8, 1941, just hours after Pearl Harbor was struck by Japanese planes. For the Nazis, the drawback of the vans was their limited capacity. They could not handle large numbers of victims. They were also slow. The excruciating suffering of the victims, who died by asphyxiation, was of little concern to the SS, but the task of unloading the vans after each use was time-consuming and “unpleasant.” Dying took so long that the anguished victims could not control their bowels. As a result, other camps used stationary killing centres. Chelmno acquired a special reputation for its “efficient” bone-crushing machine (Knochenmühle)."
"Chelmno." Encyclopædia Britannica. 2005. Encyclopædia Britannica Premium Service 15 June 2005
Majdanek: "In October 1941 it received its first prisoners, mainly Soviet prisoners of war, virtually all of whom died of hunger and exposure. Within a year, however, it was converted into a death camp for Jews...With seven gas chambers, two wooden gallows, and some 227 structures in all, it was among the largest camps. In September 1943 the Nazis added a large crematorium containing five ovens...During its almost four years of existence, some 500,000 persons from 28 countries and of 54 nationalities passed through Majdanek. According to the most reliable estimates, about 360,000 died there."
"Majdanek." Encyclopædia Britannica. 2005. Encyclopædia Britannica Premium Service 15 June 2005
Sobibor: "Built in March 1942, it operated from May 1942 until October 1943, and its gas chambers killed a total of about 250,000 Jews...The gas chambers' victims at Sobibor were killed with carbon monoxide."
"Sobibor." Encyclopædia Britannica. 2005. Encyclopædia Britannica Premium Service 15 June 2005
Treblinka: "The Nazis opened the first, Treblinka, 2.5 miles (4 km) from the railway station in December 1941 as a small forced-labour camp. The second, larger, ultrasecret camp-called “T.II” (Treblinka II) in official dispatches-was 1 mile (1.6 km) from the first and opened in July 1942 as an extermination camp for Jews as part of the “final solution to the Jewish question”...The total number killed at Treblinka was some 750,000 or more, making it second only to Auschwitz in the numbers of Jews killed."
"Treblinka." Encyclopædia Britannica. 2005. Encyclopædia Britannica Premium Service 15 June 2005
Buchenwald: "Although there were no gas chambers, hundreds perished each month from disease, malnutrition, exhaustion, beatings, and executions...some 240,000 prisoners from at least 30 countries were confined at Buchenwald. At least 10,000 were shipped to extermination camps, and some 43,000 people died at the camp...contained an official department for medical research, the Division for Typhus and Virus Research of the Hygiene Institute of the Waffen-SS, whose doctors and technicians tested the effects of viral infections and vaccines on inmates."
"Buchenwald." Encyclopædia Britannica. 2005. Encyclopædia Britannica Premium Service 15 June 2005
Sachsenhausen: Of the roughly 200,000 prisoners who passed through Sachsenhausen, some 100,000 died there, mainly from disease, executions, and overwork in local armaments factories"
"Sachsenhausen." Encyclopædia Britannica. 2005. Encyclopædia Britannica Premium Service 15 June 2005
Dachau: "In the course of Dachau's history, at least 160,000 prisoners passed through the main camp, and 90,000 through the branches. Incomplete records indicate that at least 32,000 of the inmates died there from disease, malnutrition, physical oppression, and execution...The first inmates were Social Democrats, Communists, and other political prisoners. Throughout its existence, Dachau remained a “political camp,” in which political prisoners retained a prominent role. Later victims included Roma (Gypsies) and homosexuals, as well as Jehovah's Witnesses.
Dachau was the first and most important camp at which German doctors and scientists set up laboratories using inmates as involuntary guinea pigs for such experiments as determining the effects on human beings of sudden increases and decreases in atmospheric pressure, studying the effects of freezing on warm-blooded creatures, infecting prisoners with malaria and treating them with various drugs with unknown effects, and testing the effects of drinking seawater or going without food or water."
"Dachau." Encyclopædia Britannica. 2005. Encyclopædia Britannica Premium Service 15 June 2005
T4 Euthanasia Program: "In October 1939, Adolf Hitler empowered his personal physician and the chief of the Chancellery of the Führer to kill people considered unsuited to live...
A new bureaucracy, headed by physicians, was established with a mandate to kill anyone deemed to have a “life unworthy of living.” Some physicians active in the study of eugenics, who saw Nazism as “applied biology,” enthusiastically endorsed this program. However, the criteria for inclusion in this program were not exclusively genetic, nor were they necessarily based on infirmity. An important criterion was economic. Nazi officials assigned people to this program largely based on their economic productivity. The Nazis referred to the program's victims as “burdensome lives” and “useless eaters.”
"While the program's personnel killed people at first by starvation and lethal injection, they later chose asphyxiation by poison gas as the preferred killing technique. Physicians oversaw gassings in chambers disguised as showers, using lethal gas provided by chemists...The total number killed under the T4 Program, including this covert phase, may have reached 200,000 or more."
"T4 Program." Encyclopædia Britannica. 2005. Encyclopædia Britannica Premium Service 15 June 2005
Soviet gulags: "the system of Soviet labour camps and accompanying detention and transit camps and prisons that from the 1920s to the mid-1950s housed the political prisoners and criminals of the Soviet Union. At its height the Gulag imprisoned millions of people...By 1936 the Gulag held a total of 5,000,000 prisoners, a number that was probably equaled or exceeded every subsequent year until Stalin died in 1953. Besides rich or resistant peasants arrested during collectivization, persons sent to the Gulag included purged Communist Party members and military officers, German and other Axis prisoners of war (during World War II), members of ethnic groups suspected of disloyalty, Soviet soldiers and other citizens who had been taken prisoner or used as slave labourers by the Germans during the war, suspected saboteurs and traitors, dissident intellectuals, ordinary criminals, ...
Figures supposedly compiled by the Gulag administration itself (and released by Soviet historians in 1989) show that a total of 10 million people were sent to the camps in the period from 1934 to 1947. The true figures remain unknown.
At its height the Gulag consisted of many hundreds of camps, with the average camp holding 2,000-10,000 prisoners. Most of these camps were “corrective labour colonies” in which prisoners felled timber, laboured on general construction projects (such as the building of canals and railroads), or worked in mines. Most prisoners laboured under the threat of starvation or execution if they refused. It is estimated that the combination of very long working hours, harsh climatic and other working conditions, inadequate food, and summary executions killed off at least 10 percent of the Gulag's total prisoner population each year. Western scholarly estimates of the total number of deaths in the Gulag in the period from 1918 to 1956 range from 15 to 30 million."
"Gulag." Encyclopædia Britannica. 2005. Encyclopædia Britannica Premium Service 15 June 2005
Pol Pot: " His radical communist government forced the mass evacuations of cities, killed or displaced millions of people, and left a legacy of brutality and impoverishment...It is estimated that from 1975 to 1979, under the leadership of Pol Pot, the government caused the deaths of at least one million people from forced labour, starvation, disease, torture, or execution while carrying out a program of radical social and agricultural reforms..."
"Pol Pot." Encyclopædia Britannica. 2005. Encyclopædia Britannica Premium Service 15 June 2005
The Killing Fields were a number of sites in Cambodia where large-scale killings were carried out by the Khmer Rouge during their rule from 1975 to 1979 . The best-known of these sites is Choeung Ek . If someone would commit something considered a crime by the Khmer Rouge, they would, depending on the seriousness of the crime, receive a warning from the Angkar (the Khmer Rouge Government). More than two warnings resulted in the convict being sent for re-education, which meant certain death. People were often encouraged to confess to Angkar their prerevolutionary lifestyles and crimes, being told that Angkar would forgive them and "wipe the slate clean." This, of course, meant being taken away to places such as Tuol Sleng or Choeung Ek for torture or execution. The executed were buried in mass graves. In order to save ammunition, the convicted were often executed using only sharpened bamboo sticks. The soldiers who committed the executions were mostly brainwashed young men from peasant families."
If only the Nazis had rap music they might have been as bad the Americans at Gitmo. Is Gitmo the moral equivalent of the Nazis, gulags or Pol Pot? Chains, rap music, heat, cold, ungloved Koran handling - family gas chambers, "efficient bone crushing machines," typhus research, "determining the effects on human beings of sudden increases and decreases in atmospheric pressure, studying the effects of freezing on warm-blooded creatures, infecting prisoners with malaria and treating them with various drugs with unknown effects, and testing the effects of drinking seawater or going without food or water," gas showers, execution by bamboo stick? |
Clarification/Follow-up by Itsdb on 06/15/05 3:39 pm:
Try this one Ronnie, is it shaving "evil into degrees and shades" to compare the incident with a detainee, likely captured on the battlefield under no government, wearing no uniform, probably allied with a terrorist organization, who's slogan is probably "death to America" without regard to any particular evils assumed, that would slice the guard's throat in an instant that Durbin describes - to rounding up innocent Jews and herding them into family gas chambers? Which would more closely resemble an attempt to carry out justice?
Clarification/Follow-up by Saladin on 06/15/05 3:50 pm:
Steve,
It is what is done that is evil, not to whom it is done, and not how the person came into custody.
There are moral absolutes!
Ronnie
Clarification/Follow-up by Choux on 06/15/05 4:20 pm:
It, I don't understand your comment especially since I agree with you, more or less. ??????
Clarification/Follow-up by Choux on 06/15/05 4:53 pm:
Penny:: I know. :)
Clarification/Follow-up by freethinker on 06/15/05 6:06 pm:
IT,
rather long, too long perhaps, but ....
Does it matter why these prisoners were jailed?
They are human beings and should be getting humane treatment.
But the treament they received (and perhaps still receive) is NOT HUMANE.
It is an abomination to treat people that way, whatever they have done.
It is a major shame after so many years that most of them still have not been legally sentenced for what they did.
A MAJOR SHAME.
What the nazi's and the other baddies did has little to do with what the americans do/did now.
But the US is treating these prisoners in an immoral way.
And that places the US indeed in that list of "bad" countries.
There is no listing of who is the worst.
But there is a list of those countries that handle their prisoners in an immoral way.
And the US is on that list, now.
Point. Period!
Clarification/Follow-up by tomder55 on 06/16/05 6:47 am:
same with you . FT . I want to see what you think is acceptable interogation techniques and accptable conditions for housing prisoners. I've asked this many times and all I get is what people would NOT do . Clarification/Follow-up by Itsdb on 06/16/05 9:13 am:
Ronnie,
>>There are moral absolutes!<<
As the Vice President has said these are bad people - what was the alleged crime of the "useless eaters" and Jews?
Clarification/Follow-up by excon on 06/16/05 9:31 am:
Hello tom:
Acceptable interrogation techniques? Easy:
Don't touch 'em, have their lawyer present, and don’t deprive them of basic necessities, like food, drink and sleep.
Hello Its:
Cheney said these are bad people. Ok, let's try 'em. We try bad people every day. No evidence? Bummer, then we'll have to let 'em go, and NO, I don't care who said they're bad people.
excon
Clarification/Follow-up by Itsdb on 06/16/05 10:13 am:
Choux, you don't understand my comment because my question was not "Is a little torture less morally repugnant than horrific torture," I didn't condone torture at all.
What's morally repugnant is equating isolated incidents against "bad people," for which personnel have been or are being disciplined, to the wholesale, systematic slaughter of millions of innocents. Not one of these terrorists has died at Gitmo have they?
Steve
Clarification/Follow-up by Itsdb on 06/16/05 10:20 am:
Free,
>>rather long, too long perhaps, but ....<<
Long yes, but barely scratching the surface of the atrocities committed against millions of innocents to whatever befell these few terrorists.
>>Does it matter why these prisoners were jailed?<<
Absolutely it matters...especially in comparing it to the wholesale, systematic slaughter of innocents.
>>They are human beings and should be getting humane treatment.
But the treament they received (and perhaps still receive) is NOT HUMANE.<<
I admitted abuses happened above. Is the ICRC reporting any more problems?
>>It is an abomination to treat people that way, whatever they have done.<<
What way? Chained. Cold. Hot. Rap music? Is that our policy - to abuse these detainees?
>>It is a major shame after so many years that most of them still have not been legally sentenced for what they did.
A MAJOR SHAME.<<
Since when in modern history has it been unusual for governments to hold captured enemy personnel without charge and throughout the duration of the conflict?
>>What the nazi's and the other baddies did has little to do with what the americans do/did now.<<
No, it has NOTHING to do with these incidents.
>>But the US is treating these prisoners in an immoral way.<<
I ask again, what is the ICRC saying now?
>>And that places the US indeed in that list of "bad" countries.<<
If we did not hold the guilty among our own accountable - yes. If we did not make a concerted effort to correct problems - yes. But what makes it worse is for own "leaders" to irresponsibly and incorrectly equate us with monsters like Hitler.
>>There is no listing of who is the worst.<<
No, but the U.S. does not now nor ever belong on any list with the Nazis, gulags or Pol Pot. There is a key word here, prison, for bad people. Gitmo is not a gulag, a concentration or extermination camp engaged in the wholesale slaughter of innocents - or the slaughter of anyone for that matter. Surely even you can understand that.
>>But there is a list of those countries that handle their prisoners in an immoral way. And the US is on that list, now.
Point. Period!<<
Who hasn't handled prisoners in an immoral way, free? Who hasn't made mistakes? Is Gitmo an Auschwitz-like mistake or not?
Clarification/Follow-up by tomder55 on 06/16/05 10:31 am:
then what happen when they do not cooperate ? just release them ?
they are not entitled to due process. would you give them miranda rights too ?
Clarification/Follow-up by tomder55 on 06/16/05 10:35 am:
I asked what you would do . 2 of the 3 were what you would not do . Besides having a lawyer (unprecidented until last summer in American history for a detainee of war to be granted so) .How would you get the information you need from interogations ? Clarification/Follow-up by Itsdb on 06/16/05 10:43 am:
ex,
Since when is it not customary, usual, responsible and within our rights to hold captives without charge throughout the duration of a conflict?
Steve
Clarification/Follow-up by Choux on 06/16/05 12:55 pm:
It:: SO WHAT DID YOUR COMMENT TO MY ANSWER MEAN??????? Clarification/Follow-up by Itsdb on 06/16/05 12:58 pm:
Just arguing like a woman, Choux.
Clarification/Follow-up by Choux on 06/16/05 1:01 pm:
I just asked you to answer my question regarding a confusing comment you made about "family gas chambers" to one of my answers.
All you do is argue like a woman and go in circles, and circles.
I'm not going to challenge you anymore about your thinking process...that is, how stupid you are. I feel like I'm talking to a retarded guy, and hence, I don't feel good about myself.
Have a nice life.
Adios!!!
Mary Sue Clarification/Follow-up by Itsdb on 06/16/05 1:30 pm:
Choux, you're not feeling good about yourself has nothing to do with me. I didn't condone any torture, I didn't agree with you, I was being sarcastic in my comment. Perhaps you'd feel better about yourself if you didn't need to have everything explained to you?
Clarification/Follow-up by freethinker on 06/16/05 3:36 pm:
It's
Out of all your answers drips the same :
The idea that immoral behaviour can be (or should be) meassured along it's type or value of immorality.
But that is a totally wrong suggestion.
Immoral behaviour is immoral behaviour.
No matter if that behaviour is nazi immorality, pol pott immorality, or present US immorality.
Treat these detainees properly, give them a trial (some have not seen even a judge in three years), and keep them - if needed - imprissoned, but treat them as you would US citizens.
There is only one form of humans, regardless where they come from, and whatever they did.
Clarification/Follow-up by Itsdb on 06/16/05 3:48 pm:
Free,
This is not about measuring immoral behavior, our government is not engaged in a wholesale slaughter of innocents at Gitmo. Period.
Steve
Clarification/Follow-up by freethinker on 06/16/05 3:57 pm:
Steve : you still don't get it, I see :
IMMORAL BEHAVIOUR IS IMMORAL BEHAVIOUR.
Slaughter of people is indeed immoral.
Mistreatment and treatment of people unlike you treat your "own" is immoral too.
There may be levels in attrocities.
But there are no level in immorality.
Actions are either moral or immoral.
"Gitmo" is immoral. Point.
Clarification/Follow-up by paraclete on 06/16/05 10:12 pm:
Chou
You may have noticed that Australia has been singually free of such events and there is a reason for it, we are a more reasonable society, tough but fair. We do not torture people, and we don't allow possession of certain substances and weapons by the general population. There are parts of the country where immigrants have brought their culture of violence with them, but this is actively discouraged.
Tom
There is a problem with mandatory detention for illegal immigrants and asylum seekers, and I would use the same words regarding long term detention, but the policy achieves its intention which is deterent in nature. What is it you suggest we do with stateless persons? we don't have any borders to escort them to.
Clarification/Follow-up by tomder55 on 06/17/05 3:52 am:
Clete ;
what you say about your illegal immigration problem is the same one we have at Gitmo;even worse . We have Stateless combatants who violated all provisions of Geneva just by being on the battle field . Our idiotic Congress passed a law that says we cannot return them to their country if we know which one they are native of if we cannot guarantee that they will not be tortured upon return . Detainees we have released have in some cases returned to the battle to attack our soldiers . What exactly are we supposed to do with them ? Trditionally prisoners are held until wars are over . John McCain spent years in the Hanoi Hilton under brutal conditions. I do not suggest beatings but to complain that the a/c was turned up or not turned on is crazy. Clarification/Follow-up by Itsdb on 06/17/05 7:19 am:
Clete,
So the U.S. is holding enemy combatants (terrorists) captured on the battlefield, some of who have been released and caught on the battlefield again. They're well fed, probably receiving better healthcare and food than some poor children in our country. Out of some 24,000 interrogations, seven "relatively minor" cases of abuse have been confirmed, the U.S. government is guilty of "reprehensible and disgusting behaviour."
But for Australia you ask "What is it you suggest we do with stateless persons?" Unbelievable. Clarification/Follow-up by Itsdb on 06/17/05 9:37 am:
Free,
I really do get and agree with your point, "IMMORAL BEHAVIOUR IS IMMORAL BEHAVIOUR."
But why can't you acknowledge that abuses have been investigated, acknowledged, charges filed, punishments meted, and steps have been taken to correct those problems? Must the U.S. now beat itself, bow down and grovel at the feet of the world and concede to their every demand?
I have never justified abuse, but I have also yet to see conclusive evidence that torture and abuse were U.S. policy. Individuals responsible for such abuses are being held accountable, isn't that what a moral society does? Out of some 28,000 interrogations, how many confirmed cases of abuse were there? Do we have a policy of rounding up innocents, herding them though gas chambers, conducting medical experiments on them? How many detainees have died at Gitmo?
Detainees are fed well, including accomodations for religious considerations. They receive first rate healthcare, mental health teams are assigned to the detainees, they receive calls to worship 5 times a day, have arrows stenciled in floors pointing to Mecca and special storage for the 1600 Korans that have been distributed. Many have been charged, many have been released, the status of all of them are being reviewed and investigated on a regular basis. We have no interest or policy - as has been stated a number times - in detaining people indefinitely, without charge, in inhumane conditions.
On the other hand, we do, as the rest of the world, have an interest in not releasing terrorists to unleash further mayhem. That is moral, it is in the interest of society. We are not indiscriminately rounding up Muslims for summary torture and/or execution. Hitler euthanized "useless eaters," while as one headline put it, "Guantanamo Guards Tortured Prisoner with Music"
Gitmo is necessary - it is not Auschwitz.
Clarification/Follow-up by freethinker on 06/17/05 11:27 am:
Indeed Steve : Gitmo may be necessary - Auschwitz was not.
But that does not change the situation that in Iraq and at the Bay "resort" there was immoral behaviour by US troops, and that the US government first tried to hide that.
Immoral behaviour is immoral behaviour, Steve.
Clarification/Follow-up by Itsdb on 06/17/05 1:00 pm:
Free,
Where was the coverup? I must have missed that. I can certainly understand trying to handle issues as sensitive as this quietly - as any mistake or perceived injustice by the Americans is magnified 1000 times over. We tend to correct our mistakes and try to do better, as it should be.
Durbin's remarks dishonor not only the majority of men and women of our country that do serve honorably at Gitmo and elsewhere - but the memories of those millions of innocents slaughtered at the hands of murderous dictators.
Clarification/Follow-up by freethinker on 06/17/05 2:14 pm:
Yes indeed, the stink of a few baddies scent the smell of the entire group.
But do you think that most Germans knew and agreed with Auswitz, most Cambodians with Pol Pott, most Ruskies with Stalin, etc. etc. etc. ?
The baddies always form a minority!
Durbin's remarks are a warning to all : "ANY FORM OF IMMORAL BEHAVIOUR WILL TEND TO INCREASE VERY RAPIDLY".
Had in Iraq the military powers thought the same way once they were informed of what happened there, it would have been a clear warning for the warders at the BAY resort.
But they did not. And the immoral behaviour DID SPREAD.
It was only stopped after the rumours bubbled up through the military restrictions to the international press, that action was taken.
German, Russian, Cambodian, Chinese, yes even American, immoral behaviour tend to increase if left unpunished.
Clarification/Follow-up by Itsdb on 06/17/05 2:43 pm:
Free,
Most Americans and our leaders agree abuse is a bad thing, which is why we punish the guilty - not the innocent, and not those who dissent from atrocious government policies.
Clarification/Follow-up by freethinker on 06/17/05 4:51 pm:
That's not completely true :
Military commanders did NOT take any action although it was known that abuse took place (both in Iraq as in the Bay resort).
Your leaders were FORCED to take action and start punishing the culprits as the result of hugh international protest against the misuse of prisoners, when photographs proved the attrocities to take place.
Always remain honest Steve!
Clarification/Follow-up by tomder55 on 06/18/05 5:15 am:
investigations began long before the press was alerted . Clarification/Follow-up by Itsdb on 06/18/05 5:44 am:
free,
As tom noted, "investigations began long before the press was alerted." Except I'd change that to long before the press found an excuse for a scandal. We were already taking action - that's what we do.
Clarification/Follow-up by freethinker on 06/18/05 5:31 pm:
Precisely the point : nobody took PREVENTIVE action to protect the detainees.
Only after the immoral behaviour leaked out worldwide, action was taken immediately.
It should have been done in days after the start of the investigation.
There is your immoral behaviour : they KNEW for months that what was happening was wrong, but the "condoned" it : after all these detainees were just Afghani or Iraqi fighters !
Durbin was spot on !
Clarification/Follow-up by Itsdb on 06/18/05 9:00 pm:
Free,
Stop moving the goal posts would ya?
Your prior argument was "Military commanders did NOT take any action although it was known that abuse took place (both in Iraq as in the Bay resort).
Your leaders were FORCED to take action and start punishing the culprits as the result of hugh international protest against the misuse of prisoners, when photographs proved the attrocities to take place."
Now it's "nobody took PREVENTIVE action to protect the detainees..." but they did take action after the "leak."
You should know better than that free, if there's one thing our troops are trained on it's discipline. When they forget or ignore their discipline - they then become "the disciplined."
Your timeline doesn't add up. The Abu Ghraib "scandal" came to the public's attention on April 30, 2004 in an article by Seymour Hersh in The New Yorker. The CBS 60 Minutes II story followed that.
Now check this out, "WASHINGTON, March 20, 2004 – The military is going to prefer charges against six soldiers accused of abusing detainees at the Abu Gharib prison, coalition officials announced today in Baghdad.
Military spokesman Army Brig. Gen. Mark Kimmitt also said the anticipated spike in attacks against coalition targets expected at the March 19 anniversary of the start of military operations in Iraq did not occur.
Kimmitt said the charges against the six personnel are a result of a criminal probe begun in January. The six personnel have been administratively reassigned, pending investigation results.
They are being charged with criminal offenses to include conspiracy, dereliction of duty, cruelty and maltreatment, assault and indecent acts with another.
The coalition takes all reports of detainee abuse seriously and all allegations of mistreatment are investigated, Kimmitt said. "We are committed to treating all persons under coalition control with dignity respect and humanity. Coalition personnel are expected to act appropriately, humanely and in a manner consistent with the Geneva Conventions."
The International Committee of the Red Cross examines the prison and the procedures used there. While the detainees are not prisoners of war, they are treated in accordance with the Geneva Conventions, Kimmitt said.
At the same time the criminal investigation began, Combined Joint Task Force 7 commander Army Lt. Gen. Ricardo Sanchez ordered another investigation to examine the administrative and procedural policies at Abu Gharib. That report has been delivered to Sanchez and details will be released later, Kimmitt said."
Now that we have our dates right, let's see what our attitude was prior to the "scandal" breaking...
"April 28, 2004 — Six soldiers to be tried for abusing detainees at a Baghdad prison fall far short of representing their military comrades who are serving honorably at the facility, a coalition spokesman told reporters in Baghdad today.
"This does not reflect the vast majority of coalition soldiers, the vast majority of American soldiers, who are operating at Abu Gharib prison," said Army Brig. Gen. Mark Kimmitt, deputy operations officer for Combined Joint Task Force 7. "Understand that a very, very small number were involved in this incident and of the hundred and hundreds of guards that they have out there, a small number were involved."
The six soldiers were charged with criminal offenses to include conspiracy, dereliction of duty, cruelty and maltreatment, assault and indecent acts with another for activities at the Abu Gharib prison, Kimmitt told reporters in March.
"I am not going to stand here and make excuses for these soldiers. I am not going to stand here and apologize for these soldiers," he said during today's Baghdad press briefing. "If what they did is proven in a court of law, it is incompatible with the values we stand for as a professional military force and the values we stand for as human beings."
Where are you going to move the goal posts to now free?
Steve
Clarification/Follow-up by freethinker on 06/19/05 5:32 pm:
Ok Steve, I note that you prefer to remain living in your fantasy bell, instead of descending into reality.
Most probably out of - in this case - mistaken US patriotic feelings.
All I pointed out is that some actions in these prisons there were IMMORAL.
And that is does not matter how many people were involved in it.
What did matter was that those in charge - although aware of what was going on - failed to take action BEFORE the news dripped onto the frontpages of all papers.
After that it took only a surprising short number of days to arrest the culprits.
IMMORAL, Steve, totally IMMORAL!
(I won't come back on this again, so spew your venom in your final reaction. Fine with me!)
Clarification/Follow-up by Itsdb on 06/20/05 7:18 am:
free,
Good that you won't respond I suppose, since you fail in your analysis of my position and defending your own.
The reality is I've acknowledged immoral is immoral, but if we applied your scope of "immoral is immoral" to everyone, tell us which countries we can omit from the comparison to Nazis, gulags and Pol Pot.
Steve
|
| |
|
Your Options |
Additional Options are only visible when you login! !
|
|
|
|
