Abu Ghraib: More
Jesse Walker | May 1, 2004, 11:28am
Seymour Hersh has more details on the Abu Ghraib torture scandal, drawing on a 53-page report by Major General Antonio M. Taguba:
Taguba's report listed some of the wrongdoing:
Breaking chemical lights and pouring the phosphoric liquid on detainees; pouring cold water on naked detainees; beating detainees with a broom handle and a chair; threatening male detainees with rape; allowing a military police guard to stitch the wound of a detainee who was injured after being slammed against the wall in his cell; sodomizing a detainee with a chemical light and perhaps a broom stick, and using military working dogs to frighten and intimidate detainees with threats of attack, and in one instance actually biting a detainee.
But the most disturbing information that Taguba uncovered and Hersh has brought to light is the extent to which the moral rot at Abu Ghraib infected officers and indeed the very culture of the place, not just the six grunts on the dock. In Hersh's words, this "abuse of prisoners seemed almost routine -- a fact of Army life that the soldiers felt no need to hide."
Rick Barton | May 2, 2004, 4:15am | #
TJIT:
"The war lifted millions of people from oppression and was in that sense very humane. I'm sure the Iraqis are happy that they no longer have to worry about having their tongues cut out if they say the wrong thing."
And it killed and maimed tens of thousands. Are you so sure that millions of Iraqis who have had a relative or friend killed or maimed are happy? All this for a phony pretext. What of the hundreds of Americans who have died?...The thousands of Americans who have been injured?
Our government is financing oppressive governments in, Uzbekistan, Occupied Palestine, Egypt, and Jordan. Each of these increase the risk of attack against US. The US government's financing of the Israeli occupation of Palestinian land was one of the specific reasons for the 9/11 attack.
If our government closes down more news papers the Iraqi people will have to worry less about "saying the wrong things", won't they?
"I agree that it (the war on terror) is a potential threat."
Only a potential threat?? And just how bad would the Patriot Act have to be before you would consider it a real threat?
"The real enemy is religions and governments who produce a domestic situation so horrible that for the people who live their participating in terrorism is the only real chance for improving their lives."
That is a good reason for the Israeli government to end the occupation of Palestinian land, and for our government to quit paying for it. It is not a good reason for the US to attack other countries.
"Twenty people with not much money and very rudimentary training killed thousands of US citizens and caused billions of dollars of economic losses."
So then, what makes you think that taking out a bunch of nations would alleviate the threat and could ever possibly be worth the cost in lives and money?
"(Iran, Syria, Saudi Arabia) have considerable terrorist infrastructure."
Terror is a weapon...a tactic. A lot of nations that do not like us have real WMD. And Iran, Syria and Saudi Arabia pose no threat to us.
"Our new bases in Iraq ...will produce .... an enormous military pressure on these governments from outside."
This might benefit the deigns of the current regime in Israel but it would increase the risk to the US at an enormous cost.
"If we continue to ignore the societal problem terrorists will continue to be created. And at some point the terrorist will get a WMD into the US and the destruction will be massive."
So our government should quit the support of repressive regimes which engender these societal problems and more importantly, makes us the target of terrorist grief.
"terrorism today is mostly caused by failed nation states not US foreign policy."
That statement is disproved by two facts. 1) There are many failed nation states. 2) Terror against us has emanated from regions that have seen the brunt of US government intervention.
More importantly; The overwhelming evidence is that then 9/11 happened as a direct result of our governments hyper-interventionist foreign policy, Visa a vie the Mid-East:
In his 9/11 Fatwa Bin Laden told us the three reason for the 9/11 attack:
1. The American military in the Arabian Peninsula too close to Mecca. (This idiocy is at last ended)
2.The blockade if Iraq.
3. American government support for the Israeli government's occupation of Palestinian land.
http://www.ict.org.il/articles/fatwah.htm
"Limited government and individual liberty are my guiding principles" "it is essential that we stop the failed nation states in the Middle East from producing more terrorists to defend against. It may take 20 years, it may take 50 years but not changing them will produce disastrous results for them and us."
If limited government and individual liberty are really your guiding principles, you should have compunctions about having the government force Americans to participate in wars and a crusade that are not in their interest to fulfill your vision that you believe may take 20 or 50 years to come to fruition!
There are fairer and less costly ways to change the world than by war and other government interventions...ways that are more effective as well.
madpad | May 2, 2004, 11:19am | #
I just went to: english.aljazeera.net
Here's what they report:
"Five settlers killed in resistance strike
Sunday 02 May 2004, 15:26 Makka Time, 12:26 GMT
Palestinian resistance fighters have killed five Jewish settlers in the Gaza Strip before being shot dead by Israeli occupation troops."
I bet if they called them "terrorist" they'd get a lot of play and outrage.
I understand we're dealing with a different mentality amongst the Arab cultures (sincerely, I don't mean that negatively) but it constantly mystifies me that the deaths of innocent children - regardles of which side their parents are on - doesn't bring some outrage against the methods of the Terrorists/Resistance Fighters by their own side.
This prison story had generated a lot of outrage from all ranks of OUR side -hawk and dove alike.
We are disgusted that anyone in our ranks would treat anyone that way.
The Palestinians and Arabs who despise us (aside from myraid cultural differences) know no such limits of outrage for their own behavior.
They have established a baseline of doing anything, no matter how vile and repulsive to anyone's sensibilities, to acheive their ends. Their leaders have convinced them that this approach is an effective one. The less redical elements excuse the radical behavior for a number of reasons.
We, on the other hand, still believe in fair play for everyone.
Remember Kevin Spacey in "The Usual Suspect" when he tells the story about Kaiser Soze killing his own family to get to his enemies. He related it to Vietnam and said the winner was the guy willing to do what the other guy wouldn't.
It's kind of like "Fear Factor" with lives in the balance.
Will we only win when we become worse than they and can react to this prison story with a "So what? It's war. What do you expect. What's happened to them is a damn sight better than what happens in prisons across 57 non-democratic Arab countries every single day. You want miserable prisons? Check out China, Russia, Indonesia. I'll put Abu Ghraib up against the Hanoi Hilton any day of the week."
I don't defend the prison abuses in any way and I for one, don't subsribe to this line of thinking. And I hope we do emerge as a shining beacon of democracy that changes the tide.
But it sure seems that if we're going to accomplish that end, this has dimmed that beacon more than a little.
plunge | May 2, 2004, 12:27pm | #
"But whatever the election outcome, this is still an issue that Bush has not answered to everyone's satisfaction."
Heck, turns out he was lying when he claimed to have released all documents. Turns out he could have simply signed a full release, like Kerry and McCain did. But nope, he gave it out piecemeal, and held back the key documents like pay stubs, w2s, mandatory evaluation write-ups, the mandatory final write-up on his grounding, etc.
Bush: I have nothing to hide.
People: Then release the documents, especially X
Bush: I've released them all already, I did so in 2000
Bush: No wait, I plan to release them all now
Bush: Here's the documents. Now you've seen them all
People: Er, no, what about X
Bush: Look, I already released all the doocuments that there are, and that's that
Bush: Also, here are more documents, Y,Z, and W
People: Ok.... but still, what about X?
McClelan: The President has released all his documents, and he will not be commenting further
Rick Barton | May 3, 2004, 2:10am | #
TJIT,
I'm not sure if the demographics of the 9/11 hijackers fit the hypothesis of " a domestic situation so horrible that for the people who live their participating in terrorism is the only real chance for improving their lives." Weren't a lot of them from Middle or upper-middle class circumstance in Saudi Arabia?
But, I think wanting a more free, open and prosperous life for the people in the Mid-east is a very laudable desire.
I want our government to take a much more hands (and money) off approach to the Mid-east and but that does not mean isolating ourselves from the region at all. The government and ourselves are separate entities.
In ending our governments financing of oppressive governments in Occupied Palestine, Egypt, and Jordan we would decrease the chance for terrorist reprisals but we also would likely help to open up those societies. This is especially true for Palestine. We should encourage trade with the nations of the region of the by zeroing out any tariffs or duties. The free market oriented Dubai of the UAE is an illustrative example. Dubai is known as "Hong Kong of the Mid-east". They keep their religious fundamentalists distanced from government power and the pursuit of profit is the order of the day.
If you do business try to do some with concerns in Arab countries. The bill that imposed trade restrictions on Syria that past at the behest of the Israeli government lobby was a definite move in the wrong direction. BTW, part of the Israeli right was very critical of it, albeit a much more pro-free market right than Sharon represents. When I have occasion to speak with students and others from the Mid-east; I am openly critical of US foreign policy but I am also openly proud of American liberty and our capitalistic culture. Most Arabs I've spoken with know that we have something special here and are curious about, and appreciative of our freedom.
Iran is an interesting case. Calling Iran a member of the "axis of evil" set back the reformers. They are a society in flux. Change in a libertarian direction is possible there. They have a strong entrepreneurial element. There are Iranian chat rooms where freedom is definitely in the air (or cyber space). Talk with them; tell them of the wonders of liberty. There are many Iranian immigrants in this country who are making it in this land of relative freedom of enterprise and they tell the folks back home, This probably helps fuel the reform movement.
Along that line, I think that a more open immigration policy would help open up the Region. Also, the government should make student and business visas much more abundant for people from the Mid-east. BTW, I know Castro is scared to death of this type of approach toward Cuba. He knows that freedom is infectious.
In leaving Iraq the US government should try to encourage a constitution that severely restricts what voting majorities can do to minorities (any good constitution must do this). The government should definitely not leave any bases there, as they would provoke hostility in the region, which we do not want. Here is a site that is in itself a very hopeful development. I found out about it on this blog.
MINARET OF FREEDOM INSTITUTE : Calling the Faithful to Freedom
http://www.minaret.org/
hypocrisyalert | May 8, 2004, 2:44am | #
First let me say that these crimes must be punished. Everyone is shocked and disgusted by this psychological torture and humiliation, which will effect the victims for the rest of their lives.
But the International Community's reaction is riddled with hypocrisy:
1. Bad treatment for US troops?
It is conventional wisdom among pundits that ill-treatment by a few US troops will result in worse treatment against American POWs. Really?
In the past, US POWS and even civilians have hardly been treated according to the Geneva Conventions. Daniel Pearl beheaded, the Fallujah four mutilated and burned, Jessica Lynch raped come to mind. Tiger cages and torture in Vietnam, forced death marches and executions during WWII. Perhaps the pundits could tell me of a conflict where American POWs were protected?
The threat of bad treatment for POWs might have more effect if it hadn't already happened.
2. Torture=bad, Torture-Killing=Good?
How did the world respond when 4 civilians were tortured, mutilated, burned, shot, executed, their bodies parts burned, stepped on, dragged and hung from bridges? In much of the press, it was hardly denounced, and actually used as more evidence of either American failure or blame was cast on the non-combatant civilian workers as being "spieds" or "mercenaries".
Clearly a few humiliating sexual poses would be preferable to mutilation-death-desecration. Apparently rape, torture, mutilation and execution of Americans POWs and even civilians is okay....
3. Demand for apologies
Here's the game:
-If you only apologize, Iraqis will forgive you
-Bush and others apologize
-Declare these apologies invalid for some reason -- they were too indirect, they were personal statements, etc.
-The apology provokes no forgiveness, only shrill denunciations about trying to sneak out of responsibility. A Saudi paper screamed "Killers should apologize!"
4. War=Bad, Terror=Good?
This is a part of a larger pattern of hypocrisy: War is "evil", terror is good. War by nations against nations is wrong. Civil war and insurgency are "heroic". Thus, nations which fight wars must be harangued for real and imagined war-crimes, while their insurgent, terrorist counterparts can extermination civilians, rape, torture and mutilate with impunity---after all, they are not governments, so how can they be held responsible.
Thus, the rape of Jessica Lynch and female soldiers in the first Gulf War are laughed off. Thus, executions of American civilians like Daniel Pearl and an elderly wheel-chair bound Achille Lauro passenger is never called a war crime--the terrorists act with impunity. Only wars are protested; Terrorist atrocities and war crimes are laughed off, ignored, or worse, secretly sympathized and justified.
5. Get ready for more hypocrisy
Some Iraqis despite official apologies and even compensation ,and despite experts from the Arab media who claimed that “if only Bush would apologize” the Iraqis will forgive you, radicals in Iraq and elsewhere will no doubt seek to get “Revenge”. When American POWS are tortured and executed what can we expect? Loud, shrill denunciations by the world’s press?? I doubt it. More likely are apologetics, excuse-making, justifications, and even glee. Such is the craven nature of the “World Community”.
