US military in prisoner torture Photographs

You may remember: CNN did a poll a long time ago when the possibility of U.S. torturing Iraqi prisoners, unlawful combatants or terrorists was first brought up. The majority of viewers voted it was OK.

I also was in a collegiate discussion when the same issue was used as a topic for debate and my fellow classmates wholly agreed -- with roughly one or two dissenters who were shouted down -- that the systematic torture of prisoners (even the sodomizing of young boys as what happened in this latest news uncovery) is a viable option for the U.S. to undertake. The overall classroom agreed that, "They deserve it!"

The bottom line is: Yes, it's horrific and most people in the U.S. don't give a damn. If you look beneath the societal veneer of gentility, you will find the average human being is quite cruel regarding the suffering of others.

 

It is much too easy to blame a few sadistic individuals and a military bureaucrat for prisoner maltreatment.

War crimes are are the puss that flows out of sores caused by a systemic disease called war.

The military, the government, and ultimately all Americans who support the war effort (I'm a strong supporter) must consider their responsibility for these and other unknown atrocities. It is not possible to have a war and not come away with bloody hands.

 

Continuing that train of thought, couldn't all of society be held responsible for the dark side of human behavior?

After all, it doesn't take a war for humans to be inhumane toward each other..

BTW GAP, T'was not I who raised the concern about the European media, but I understand your observation.

 

I'm telling you the Iraqis love this stuff. Just like what a dominatrix does to people, that soldiers were doing that to the Iraqi prisoners. And just like the dominatrix's customers, the Iraqis absolutely adored it!!!

 

Flask: Yes, it is a shame that perfectly decent people in the ordinary sense lose all feeling of compassion in relation to horrifying things which happen beyond their own line of sight.

 

For some reason, world leaders have always thought that murdering another human being without legal, governmental permission is inhumane. Tell me though, what's the difference between murdering someone on your own free will, and getting the president's permission to do it? The reason those soldiers felt so free to photograph themselves harming other humans is because of the life-long assumption that having the right to murder them is worse than torturing assumedly harmful oppressors. The soldiers should not only be taken out of the military, but should be incarcerated by the United States for what they have done. They should be legally persecuted in a court, tried before a jury, and punished. However, I seriously, and unfortunately doubt that will happen.

What a bunch of effers. Makes me proud to be an American.

 

On the contrary, I fully expect the people who committed those crimes to be incarcerated under the UCMJ and the people that overlooked that behavior and created the conditions for it to flourish to be thrown out of the military.

 

JF is correct here zvezdy,

Keep in mind, even though the actual photographs are now being released, the incidents actually happened last NOV/DEC.

The US military has already completed its article 32 investigation months ago(which is similiar to a civilian grand jury), and court martial proceedings are already being initiated.

The commander of this unit has already been relieved of command.

If you haven't been able to tell from the reactions of the superiors, the military views such behavior with a very grim eye.

I'm sure the same seriousness with be applied from the British side of things with their recent allegations as well.

 

I don't know where this 'European Media Agenda' rubbish comes from, but I assure you here in Britain our right-wing press /hate/ reporting things like this, because they /hate/ admitting that 'our boys' aren't infallible.

I'm with Branthoris, though. As inexcusable as the conduct of these soldiers is, the psychology of war is going to make people do things they wouldn't normally do. I don't think there's such a thing as 'the psychology of people looking after illegally-imprisoned 'combatants', and that shouldn't be forgotten.

 

Wow, again I am surprised at the reaction here to a story. I fully expected far more outrage, especially from the anti-war folks. And I was going to join them.

I call for the execution of the soldiers who did this, and I'm surprised to see I'm the only one. ? These actions are unforgivable, and not far from treason when you consider the repercussions that will surely follow. Anyone wanting to destroy the U.S. and the war effort couldn't have done a better job. Consider this against all the anger that is/was directed towards the Natalie Maines's of the world for undermining and subverting the war effort.

I guess people don't like when the shoe is on the other foot. This type of reprehensible cruelty is exactly the thing we are fighting against and are so morally shocked to see when it happens to us.

These "soldiers" are the lowest form of manure on the planet. They are, IMO, guilty of worse crimes than those who have tortured members of the coalition, for a number of reasons. They weren't raised in a coarse culture of hate like many terrorists, i.e. they "know better." They know that the whole basis of our side being "right" in this conflict is that we don't engage in this type of behavior. And they know their behavior will cause more of our troops and innocents to suffer torture themselves, in this generation and future ones.

If they do not meet the highest form of punishment, i.e. execution, how could that not be interpreted as outright acceptance and even an implicit condoning by the U.S. and its military?

Disgusting.

Shameful.

 

They weren't raised in a coarse culture of hate like many terrorists, i.e. they "know better."

Doesn't matter one iota.

I would stake a large sum of money that any average group of soldiers from the United States, or any other part of the world, would end up doing similar things given similar circumstances.

What they did was extremely wrong. No question about it. However, without even reading about it, I can say that the problem almost certainly began with lax leadership. If the leaders don't keep everyone else in line, the rest will follow suit, especially if the leaders actively encourage such behavior.

Read about the Stanford Prison Experiment, Fierce. You'll see how degraded people can get in a short amount of time under even controlled circumstances. Remove the controlled setting and things can get almost unimaginably worse.

Such was the breeding ground for the Holocaust.

 

Interesting experiment, although rather cruel. How is something like that considered legal?

Anyway, of course even good people can act badly under dire circumstances. We always here the "mob mentality" excuse when riots break out. But I believe people know right from wrong. And people are more willing to act wrong if they can find justification, and if they think there won't be retribution. It doesn't mean we have to accept it.

 

Interesting experiment, although rather cruel. How is something like that considered legal?

Well, it would never be allowed today. It was done during a different time of ethics in psychology. Interestingly, Dr. Zimbardo (who I had the good fortune of meeting last week) was a high school classmate of Dr. Stanley Milgram, who is famous for his electric shock experiment with obedience.

It was cruel in the end, and it's fortunate that Dr. Maslach put a stop to it. But, part of the ramifications of both the aforementioned experiments is that neither Zimbardo nor Milgram anticipated just how bad things would get. Before his first experiment, Milgram believed that there had been a specific flaw in Germans that had allowed the Holocaust to happen. That they were innately inclined toward evil, if you will. After his test was done and then replicated around the world with numerous changes in variables, it's safe to say that any group of people can do awful things given the "right" circumstances.

But I believe people know right from wrong. And people are more willing to act wrong if they can find justification, and if they think there won't be retribution.

People generally know right from wrong, I think. But, the lines can be blurred sometimes, I believe. After my earlier post, I looked at an article on this, and sure enough, there was the mention of leadership:

In an e-mail, a commissioned officer in the unit, the 372nd Military Police Company, based in Cumberland, Md., acknowledged that the abuses had occurred but attributed them to a far-reaching failure in leadership.

"I won't defend my soldiers," the officer wrote, on the condition of anonymity. "They knew better."

The officer added: "I am extremely disappointed in the way the Army has handled the entire situation and feel the leadership has been made the scapegoat for a few individuals. I think the leadership problems go much higher than the brigade commander."

An issue emerging in the defense of military police allegedly involved in abuse is whether the treatment was condoned or encouraged by military intelligence units interrogating Iraqi prisoners.

It takes some really remarkable people to stand up and say "Enough!" and/or refuse to participate in such things.

 

"it's safe to say that any group of people can do awful things given the "right" circumstances. "

I don't disagree, but I would say that life-experiences still have a lot to do with it, too. The "right" circumstances might have a much lower threshold for someone who has lived a life of abuse, or indoctrination towards hate, etc. That was the point about holding the American soldiers to a higher standard than terrorists.

Basically, by citing the experiment, I think you're saying that if I was one of the soldiers, I might do the same thing they did. Well I guess we'll never know, but I'll take a stand and say I wouldn't. If I'm wrong, then God forgive me.

Now, I'm not egotistical enough to think I'm "better" than any of my fellow humans; we're all made of the same stuff. I don't pretend to know what makes us all individuals, save for our own unique experiences. Or whether we each have a "soul", or whatever. And I'll be the first to acknowledge, all it takes is for someone to cut me off in traffic to remind me of my own "dark side." But nonetheless, I will stand here now and say I couldn't do what was done in those pictures, even if I can't philosophically explain why. Call it faith, if you will.

I look into the eyes of those laughing soldiers, and I feel I'm looking into the same eyes as the 9/11 hijackers. People may not like that, but I'm telling you, it's that same complete and utter disregard for the suffering of others, and the enjoyment of it, that the 9/11 hijackers were feeling. And that's what causes 99% of the problems in this world.

I thought that's what we were fighting against in this War on Terror. The enemy isn't always the guy who's a different color.

 

I oppose the death penalty, so accordingly oppose executing those responsible. I also don't think you should jump to conclusions about the appropriate sentence just on the basis of photographs. With respect to both the American and British allegations, proper investigations and, then, trials need to occur. It's encouraging to hear from Mr44 that the US has already been investigating for months.

But life imprisonment for the perpetrators might, in the end, ultimately be warranted. Unfortunately the maximum sentence for torture under the United States Code is 20 years (correct?) and British law only allows for a sentence of 30 years for crimes against humanity.

 

I guess people don't like when the shoe is on the other foot. This type of reprehensible cruelty is exactly the thing we are fighting against and are so morally shocked to see when it happens to us.

That's what really puzzles me about the pro-war reaction to this all, actually. Those 'Terrorist Scum' would be cursed in every language if photos of being tortured got it. Look at Private Jessica (Lynch, was it?), celebrated as a war heroine for surviving the vicious capture and torture of the Iraqis, when all that happened was that she got decent medical care and was released as soon as she was physically fit to be.

Also, I find it quite ironic that TV stations are lambasted for showing pictures of the coffins returning from combat as 'undermining the war effort', whereas these soldiers actions spread across every front page in America and Britain are 'an effect of war'. Talk about perspective...

 

And with perfect timing:

A US hostage escapes! And all he wants to do is...get back to work!

 

Just saw on CNN, there's a New Yorker reporter accusing the military top brass as responsible for what happened at the prison and that due to a new internal military report they were not isolated incidents. He's saying the things that were done by the minority of soldiers and the larger amount of civilian contractors were in fact encouraged by higher authority, largely in the intelligence services designed to break the will of captives, 60% of whom were unlikely to have anything to do with the insurgency and in violation of the Geneva conventions. In one incident where an inmate died the body was apparently packed into ice, given a fake IV, driven in an ambulance to an unknown point and dumped off to cover up what had been done.

This is the third investigation at the prison.

Mr. Hersh, the reporter, says the responsiblity for all of this ultimately falls on General Sanchez, and that though he may not have condoned what was going on there, he did know about it and could have done more to stop it.

 

Has this reporter offered any sort of solid evidence?




b4k4^2

 

I'm sorry, but this looks bad, bad, bad. My friends and I saw this story together while we were having a few bevvies and the first thing that was said was "Someone needs to go over to Iraq to free the Iraqi people from that evil regime" It was said in jest, but all jokes have a basis in truth.

It looks bad for a coalition that has stated the reason it is there (other than WMD) is to stop this type of thing happening. I know it's a supposedly isolated incident, but it does have an effect on the perception of people around the world of what the hell is going on there and in Guantanamo Bay and in Afghanistan.

 

So, let me ask you about your opinion on these articles, Uruk?

Because I am truly interested in your thoughts on what they illustrate..

STORY 1

STORY 2

STORY 3

STORY 4

First off, I mean no disrespect at all toward the ADF, or to Australia in general.

Just like the actions of a few Americans shouldn't be the standard that all are judged, nor should it be extrapolated into anything else but what it is.

Only those who are practicing extreme schadenfreude, or completely blind by their own views, would even think that was the case.

Simply put, Human nature is imperfect.

I propose that as a collection of individuals, any country will have evidence of that imperfection.

 

I'm talking about perceptions though. Ok, maybe this is the only isolated case other than the British oone that's just popped up. It still gives the perception, however unjustly, that the coalition is doing just what they propose to eliminate from Iraq.

I'm not going to make excuses for bad conduct in Australia but those cases you've highlighted are not only irrelevant because they are dealing with the totally seperate issue of illegal immigration, but from memory most of those accusations were shown to be false.

It's all about perceptions. I think the Australian government is actively encouraging perceptions of Australia being tough on illegal immigration, in an effort to prevent it. One must remember though, the detained illegal immigrants are detainees only as long as they wish to be. They are free to leave the country, but they choose to stay in detention whilst their applications go through the legal processes.

 

Except that doesn't really address the larger issue that I raised does it?

None of us were in the prison with the MP's either, so technically, we don't know what is true or false with respect to their actions either.

I was at least hoping that you would pick up on the larger point about human nature, rather focusing on the specific examples..

Why is it so easy for you to jump to conclusions about the US, but automatically defend your fellow Australians?

Because, for the most part, the ADF is who you intereact with. They are somebody's son, or daughter, or spouse, or parent..

Well, guess what..The same goes for every one of us.

Of course, to you, the ADF allegations have to be false, because Australians would never do anything like that.

However, every human is imperfect, no matter where they come from.

Does this mean that everyone one of us is judged by the actions of a few?

Perhaps..

Would we all act in the same manner in that situation?

No..I hope not.. But that doesn't mean that ordinary people sometimes act in atypical ways.

 

You make a good point, Mr44, but it does not contradict the fact that an investigation needs to be made to make sure this problem is not systemic throughout the military.

Calling for an investigation does not mean I believe that it is a systemic problem, only that it could be one and we need to find out sooner rather than later.

 

but it does not contradict the fact that an investigation needs to be made to make sure this problem is not systemic throughout the military.

Of course.

But again, keep in mind, the actual incidents of abuse took place at least 6 months ago.

As a result, the military already conducted an investigation that lasted from last Dec to Feb.

OFFICAL DOD

STORY 2