U.S. soldier accused of beating Iraqi prisoners says, `It is war'

SFgate ^ | (11-25) 10:26 PST PHILADELPHIA (AP) -- | DAVID B. CARUSO

[r9etb]

This is war.

Yes, it is. And it's war against the sort of people who go around attacking people for no good reason. You'd have us act like them, apparently.

Perhaps even you would act different when attacked by an Iraqi

We're told in this story that she was not attacked. Instead, she and three others beat the prisoners without provocation.

who would do far worse if he had captured her.

Whether or not the Iraqi would have acted differently toward her is irrelevant.

[ConservativeMan55]

Ping for your interest!

[ConservativeMan55]

So you are saying you don't believe the American Solider?

BUT...you do believe the filthy Iraqi terrorist?

Is that what you are saying?

[ConservativeMan55]

If I was attacked by an Iraqi I would do FAR worse than what she did.

[r9etb]

It is the "Iraqi" side when you take a filthy Iraqi terrorists word over an American soldiers word.

Well, let's just look at what the article says:

Fellow soldiers testified that the four Pennsylvania reservists punched and kicked prisoners who were being brought to an American camp in southern Iraq on May 12.

Now -- if you want to call her fellow soldiers "filthy Iraqi terrorists," you're free to do so. It would be more reasonable, however, if you simply read the article before posting stupid opinions.

[Eagle Eye]

We're told in this story that she was not attacked. Instead, she and three others beat the prisoners without provocation.

Bull$hit, bull$hit, bull$hit, you are making this up as you go. The story said: The reservists have said they were acting in self-defense.

You chose to fabricate to take sides against US soldiers. What a POS you are.

[r9etb]

What do you do in (allegedly) Iraq?

[ConservativeMan55]

Fellow soldiers testified that the four Pennsylvania reservists punched and kicked prisoners who were being brought to an American camp in southern Iraq on May 12.

You wanna play the pick apart game? I can play it too? Where does it say that they testified about an unprovoked attack? Where in the world does it say that the filthy Iraqi terrorist wasn't attacking the other soldiers?????????????

[r9etb]

You didn't even read the article, did you?

You might try reading it -- especially the parts where Americans are describing the actions of the four guards.

When you do so, you'll discover that I'm not making things up as I go.

What a POS you are.

Oh, brother.

[ConservativeMan55]

Where in the article does the testimony describe the actions of the prisoner?

Unless you can produce that your "Iraqi Side" has no credibility.

[ConservativeMan55]

Ping...perhaps you could add some insight into this.

[eastforker]

A Bad Conduct Discharge is treated the same as a felony I would presume.

[Steel Wolf]

This is one of the most ignorant conversations I've ever stumbled upon on FR. Granted, we do not have all of the facts here, but think about it.

100 MPs guarding 8000 prisoners, assuming three rotating shifts of 8 hours each, would mean that about 30 MPs are on shift at any given time, with another 30 for QRF (quick reaction force) and 30 who are asleep. They probably haven't had a day off in months.

Their prisoners are well fed, well rested, and can communicate in Arabic. They could discuss slitting your throat right in front of you, and you'd have no idea. Also, if they don't speak any English you don't know if they are resisting because they don't understand, or because they don't intend to cooperate.

This means that at any given time the active MPs are outnumbered and surrouded by thousands of potentially hostile and physically capable prisoners. I'm not an MP, but I can almost guarentee that they didn't have anywhere near the manpower or resources needed to adequately care for this many prisoners.

Also, the Army's rules on what is considered EPW abuse are extremely strict and often unreasonable given the circumstances. How do you convince someone that wasn't there and didn't know the situation that the actions that you took were necessary as part of self defense?

So there they are, in a war torn foriegn land, physically handling thousands of prisoners a day, arranging for food, showers, medical treatment, interrogations, and documenting. All day, every day, you're dealing with hordes of angry, resisting prisoners who physically resist you, spit on you, and who 'don't respect women' to put it nicely. (Note that two of the dendendents are women)

Now, it's easy for us to sit back and say 'Beating prisoners isn't the America way' or 'If they can't hack the stress, they shouldn't be MPs'. I'm telling you that these troops were set up for failure by being forced to work under such unsafe conditions with inadequate resources. It was just a matter of time before someone lost their cool and overreacted due to stress. There is no indication that these abuses reported were during interrogations or for pleasure.

If this is the worst abuses that the enemy has faced in our care, then we're saints compared to anyone else who's ever run an EPW camp. Most of the blame for this should be placed on the leaders that put the troops in this position in the first place.

[ConservativeMan55]

I see. I presume that means IF she is convicted she won't be able to carry a firearm as well?

Somebody get this story out to the National Media!

[ConservativeMan55]

Amen.

[r9etb]

You wanna play the pick apart game? I can play it too? Where does it say that they testified about an unprovoked attack?

Do you think she would have been demoted and discharged if they'd testified she was responding to an attack?

Hell, man -- even she doesn't deny it. The best she can do is say, "mistakes will be made," and appeal to our sympathy by pointing out the dangers (which are the same as those faced by the guards who don't beat their prisoners, BTW).

C'mon, now, C-man. It's not "pro-Iraqi" to agree that Americans should not beat prisoners, in the same way that it's not "pro-criminal" to argue that American cops shouldn't beat prisoners.

If the prisoners attacked them first, then they deserve whatever beating they got. But if the guards beat their prisoners for no good reason, then the cops deserve punishment.

[DannyTN]

"Ping...perhaps you could add some insight into this."

LOL Thanks for the Ping, but I don't know what to make of this.

• Part of me says it's poetic justice for the way Islamists treat women.
• Part of me says we don't beat prisoners.
• Part of me says, it is war, and they are out to kill us.
• Really depends on why she was beating him. I don't feel like I know the facts in this case well enough to judge.
• At least she didn't whip him with a pig!

[Lijahsbubbe]

http://www.post-gazette.com/pg/03245/217277.stm

And add to that the solders look as if they have excellent records.

Paul Feenstra, spokesman for Republican U.S. Rep. John Peterson of Venango County, said the congressman had not asked for an inquiry. However, he said the MPs have "impeccable records" while those they're accused of abusing were Baath Party officials and Syrian terrorists.

[Eagle Eye]

Doesn't matter. There's no need to know.

[ConservativeMan55]

"If the prisoners attacked them first, then they deserve whatever beating they got. But if the guards beat their prisoners for no good reason, then the cops deserve punishment."

And she says that the prisoner attacked her. Thats all you need right there. But you LIBERAL IRAQI LOVING BLIND FRUITCAKE are too blind to believe her.