Posted on 05/15/2004 2:00:11 PM PDT by HAL9000
I found it highly symbolic and instructive that the first one to court martial will be the numbskull taking the photos................
As I said above this too shall pass and the left will have to dredge up another thing to be outraged about.
Abu Ghraib has nothing to do with Nick Berg. One was a small group of degenerate trailer trash (a fraction of 1% of our military there) acting like a-holes and the other was a barbaric slaughter committed by savage terrorists.
If we coddle these people, then we can expect them pull another 9/11. Is thatwhat you want to happen? I say,if they take one of our heads we should take on of theirs. That's how we will win the war on terror and prevent another 9/11.
I'm not sure how making men pretend to orally pleasure each other or wear women's underwear on their heads is going to prevent another 9/11.
Personally, I subscribe to the "ticking time bomb" principle (I'm pretty sure Israel employs it): use just about any means to get information about an impending attack -- but not gratuitous abuse, such as these degenerates at Abu Ghraib meted out to the prisoners there. Other than getting themselves off, there was no purpose to what they did.
That should read: ...al Qaeda, which was responsible...
But other than that, I can't disagree with you. :)
A lot of no name reports around.
Also, if any terrorists whom we've captured need some special help in encouraging them to spill info, we tend to send them to places such as Egypt, Saudi Arabia, etc., where torture techniques are condoned -- and sometimes, they are threatened with being sent to Israel, and that threat often is enough to loosen tongues.
For some reason, when it comes to AQ, I have no problem whatsoever with this, if it means preventing more 9/11s.
Good point. I remember that being discussed, too.
And I am with you--I have no problem with that technique.
No. She was identified.
you're right, the country didn't, but "cold_daknight" did, and that's what my post was all about.
hm.. all it takes to be called a Dem is to put abuse of Iraqis and abuse of captured GIs on the same moral footing. dude, you've got some serious soul searching to do.
Calling all Geneva Convention scholars...
I read on another thread the reasoning behind applying the GC, namely that it is sort of a quid pro quo to guarantee certain basic treatment for OUR captured servicemen.
Has anyone read or heard of any GC objections for the treatment of our pow's?
Also, how does it apply to captured civilians?
BREAKING NEWS:
WABC 770am NYC just reported that Newsweek alleges:
Rummy approved:
(1) - Killing of enemy combatants!
(2) - Capture of enemy combatants!
(3) - Interrogation of enemy combatants!
Wow!
Seymour "Nam" Hirsh
I need another cold beer...
Where's the evidence of this program, New Yorker is just printing this trying to stir the pot.
Pulling out all the stops to keep this story going.
Depends. "Civilian" is not a word the Geneva Conventions uses. If the people are noncombatants, they have to be released back into the pond forthwith.
If they are unlawful combatants, those without a uniform, but fighting nonetheless, they are covered under the Conventions though in a different manner than "lawful combatants".
In any case it doesn't matter to the jihadists, they will kill any American they can get their hands on. TH GC is a one way street meaning only the good guys walk that talk.
From the New Yorker: Rumsfeld and Cambone went a step further, however: they expanded the scope of the sap, bringing its unconventional methods to Abu Ghraib. The commandos were to operate in Iraq as they had in Afghanistan. The male prisoners could be treated roughly, and exposed to sexual humiliation.
You can obviously make the argument that since this article doesn't say that Rumsfeld put down in writing, "Go ahead and sexually humiliate the prisoners", he isn't personally culpable...but I don't know how I feel about our defense secretary being completely clueless to what his direct underling is doing. Not that it matters, as Rumsfeld rightly said last week, he takes full responsibility. So if (a big "if" there, of course) this article is true, then Rumsfeld doesn't look so good.
President Bush has dismissed speculation that there is a secret Pentagon contingency plan to seize Pakistan’s nuclear weapons in league with Israel if the country becomes unstable.
During his meeting in New York earlier this year with President Pervez Musharraf, he bluntly denounced an article by investigative American journalist Seymour N, Hersh about the existence of such a Pentagon plan.
According to a report in the Washington Post on Saturday, Bush told Musharraf, "Seymour Hersh is a liar."
Statement from DoD Spokesperson Mr. Lawrence Di Rita
U. S. Department of Defense ^ | May 15, 2004 | Lawrence Di Rita
Posted on 05/15/2004 6:27:34 PM PDT by 68skylark
"Assertions apparently being made in the latest New Yorker article on Abu Ghraib and the abuse of Iraqi detainees are outlandish, conspiratorial, and filled with error and anonymous conjecture.
"The abuse evidenced in the videos and photos, and any similar abuse that may come to light in any of the ongoing half dozen investigations into this matter, has no basis in any sanctioned program, training manual, instruction, or order in the Department of Defense.
"No responsible official of the Department of Defense approved any program that could conceivably have been intended to result in such abuses as witnessed in the recent photos and videos.
"To correct one of the many errors in fact, Undersecretary Cambone has no responsibility, nor has he had any responsibility in the past, for detainee or interrogation programs in Afghanistan, Iraq, or anywhere else in the world.
"This story seems to reflect the fevered insights of those with little, if any, connection to the activities in the Department of Defense."
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1136372/posts
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.