 |
| |
|
|
The Mad Viking
|
 |
of the Great White North
Feb 2000
time: 05:35
|
|
The situation faced is a common conundrum.
You have captured enemies who have information.
That information will save the lives of your friends, brothers in arms, countrymen, allies.
The prisoners are lying. They mock you. They insult you, and tell you that your country has no business being there.
The situation is untenable. Outside, chaos. Random, non-sensical violence. Certainly there is no sign that the insurgents deserve your respect.
So what do you do?
Treat the lying insurgent scum like royalty, and by inaction, let your friends DIE?
Or bite the bullet, and do what it takes to save American lives, to maintain a degree of order in the chaos.
*
In the absence of CLEAR AND UNEQUIVOCAL ORDERS to the contrary, you will get actions that the public considers torture. Inevitably, in occupations like this one.
It is BS to scapegoat the footsoldiers on this one.
And it is a compelling argument to get out, when you have to resort to the same tactics as the despot you sought to depose...
|
|
| |
|
|
|
Kontiki
|
|
Canada
Aug 2001
time: 00:35
|
|
And maybe not turn it into a photo shoot.
|
|
| |
|
|
|
the_ceebs
|
|
From the 1978 protocol to the geneva conventions
2. The following acts are and shall remain prohibited at any time and in any place whatsoever, whether committed by civilian or by military agents:
(a) Violence to the life, health, or physical or mental well-being of persons, in particular:
(i) Murder;
(ii) Torture of all kinds, whether physical or mental;
( iii ) Corporal punishment ; and
(iv) Mutilation;
(b) Outrages upon personal dignity, in particular humiliating and degrading treatment, enforced prostitution and any form of indecent assault;
|
|
| |
|
|
|
MichaeltheGreat
|
|
Apolyton Grand Executioner
|
 |
mooning the house that Ruth built.
Oct 1999
time: 21:35
|
|
quote:
Originally posted by SlowwHand
And if one p.o.w. was sodomized, that's wrong; but it's one.
It's not the norm. How many prisoners are there?
What has been done to our side?
Sorry. No crocodile tears for the Iraqi soldiers.
A discharge for those involved, because stupidity is not a defining characteristic you want to have in place.
Unless you're Iraqi. |
Or texan?
Discharge my ass, they violated several articles of the UCMJ, and the publicity attached to their actions puts US troops in the field at risk. The only difference here is that the officers should swing too, not walk away over the backs of the enlisted, like usually happens.
And Tex, you of all people should know, living there in Texas, that a defense "oh, some other people did worse to some other people, so what I done wasn't a big deal" flies in a court of law about as well as your average pig flies, and about as often.
|
|
| |
|
|
|
MichaeltheGreat
|
|
Apolyton Grand Executioner
|
|
mooning the house that Ruth built.
Oct 1999
time: 21:35
|
|
quote:
Originally posted by The Mad Viking
The situation faced is a common conundrum.
You have captured enemies who have information.
That information will save the lives of your friends, brothers in arms, countrymen, allies.
The prisoners are lying. They mock you. They insult you, and tell you that your country has no business being there.
The situation is untenable. Outside, chaos. Random, non-sensical violence. Certainly there is no sign that the insurgents deserve your respect.
So what do you do?
Treat the lying insurgent scum like royalty, and by inaction, let your friends DIE?
Or bite the bullet, and do what it takes to save American lives, to maintain a degree of order in the chaos.
*
In the absence of CLEAR AND UNEQUIVOCAL ORDERS to the contrary, you will get actions that the public considers torture. Inevitably, in occupations like this one.
It is BS to scapegoat the footsoldiers on this one.
And it is a compelling argument to get out, when you have to resort to the same tactics as the despot you sought to depose... |
Unfortunately, you're a bit wrong on this one. Interrogation and obtaining prompt intelligence from prisoners is an essential fact of life, but there are effective methods and ineffective methods, and interrogators have to be concerned about the quality, complexity, and time-sensitivity of the information they're trying to obtain.
The actions taken against the prisoners (forget for the moment whether the intent was information extraction or abuse or something else) were taken over a period of months. That's useless for any purpose of obtaining time-sensitive intel. The organizations responsible also kill off any argument about tactical intel. These prisoners were handled by an independent MP brigade and an independent MI brigade, not the MP and MI companies of a division in the field. Any information these people would give would be pretty heavily bureaucratized through the chain of command.
It's a bit different from the battalion commander a few months ago who put a pistol to the head of a prisoner in the field, then pulled the trigger after pulling the pistol a couple of inches to the side. He scared the **** out of the wrong guy (prisoner turned out not to be an insurgent) and was shafted for it because the news got out, but what the colonel did was completely legitimate - he was trying to obtain info that was of immediate importance in the field where his men were engaged with the enemy. That situation rates a lot more slack in prisoner handling than does routine imprisonment for an indefinite time.
As far as whether these prisoners lied or mocked their captors, most prisoners in situatiions like that get pretty docile. There are no lawyers, nobody to run to, nobody but the guards who have essentially unlimited power over you. You have to be damn-near suicidal and fanatic to do anything other than comply with whatever you're told to do in that situation.
You don't have to treat prisoners like royalty at all - in fact, you have to show them at all times who is in control, but there are correct, legal, and non-sadistic ways of doing that. Procedures for safely and effectively handling high-risk prisoners have been pretty well hammered out. They just weren't applied from a command level on down. Seeing Karpinski whining on national TV the other day made me want to puke. Here's someone who is supposedly a goddamn O7, trying to publicly duck any responsibilty and make excuses. It's command responsiblity, period.
There are also effective ways of interrogating prisoners, and it's been pretty well established that disorientation and psychological manipulation are more effective than humiliation, threats, or actual torture, if you have the time and place to put those in practice. As we do and did in Abu Ghraib.
There is nothing, absolutely nothing, that excuses the misconduct that has been documented so far.
|
|
| |
|
|
|
MichaeltheGreat
|
|
Apolyton Grand Executioner
|
|
mooning the house that Ruth built.
Oct 1999
time: 21:35
|
|
quote:
Originally posted by East Street Trader
I was shaken by that dishonourable discharge sentence.
Presumably there were some really strong mitigating factors (I mean really strong). Because dishonourable discharge seems trivial as a response to murder. |
In WW2, there wasn't a single allied soldier even subjected to a court-martial in regards to handling of enemy prisoners of war. It is trivial, and there's a big difference. In the days of WW2, we covered for our own when it came to dealing with the enemy, and we knew we were in a decisive fight, where we would win or lose in an absolute sense, and the winners would dictate whatever terms they desired to the losers. There was also a bigger risk of domestic political fallout if one of our (meaning any allied country's) soldiers was prosecuted for doing something to the enemy, regardless of circumstance.
Now, wars are much smaller, much less total in every sense of the word, and much more subject to political scrutiny and posturing.
|
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
|
|
Ramo
|
 |
Austin, Texas, USA
Oct 1999
time: 23:35
|
|
quote:
We can, if we send more than a couple thousand. The Iraqis just don't like to think of what will happen if we have to clean up the mess. |
If we send much more than a couple thousand, we'd have to keep much more than a couple thousand in Fallujah for a very long time, just to maintain control. And if this spreads to other parts of the Sunni belt, same thing.
quote:
We got rid of the last guy we didn't like. We don't have to like the next one, in fact he can say whatever the hell he likes, as long as he plays ball with us on the big issues. |
Same difference. We aren't going to find someone who plays ball and can keep control of the country if everyone hates our guts.
quote:
What exactly would they do about it? Request an UN force to expel us?
|
Indefinitely long rebellion until political pressure from casualties forces us out.
quote:
So? Maybe they had more pressing concerns, or figured Sadr would do something stupid, get turned into a spot of grease by the US, and then not only solve the Shiite problem of what to do about Sadr without anyone getting their hands dirty and while giving anyone who wants someone to blame the US as a scapegoat |
You really believe that Sistani et al. had the clout to squash the rebels themselves without undermining their own political goals?
quote:
It's very far from a full scale insurrection, and doesn't really amount to more than testing the waters and seeing what response is forthcoming. |
I didn't say that it was full scale insurrection. It, however, demonstrates broad support for the rebels among the Shia. And this started before a lot of important things that are giving the rebels greater validity among the rank and file (such as, allowing a Ba'athist general to take over Fallujah and of course the prison scandal).
|
|
| |
|
| |
|
|
|
MichaeltheGreat
|
|
Apolyton Grand Executioner
|
|
mooning the house that Ruth built.
Oct 1999
time: 21:35
|
|
quote:
Originally posted by Ramo
If we send much more than a couple thousand, we'd have to keep much more than a couple thousand in Fallujah for a very long time, just to maintain control. And if this spreads to other parts of the Sunni belt, same thing.
|
Or we just start running our chosen Iraqi cadres through the School of the Americas. 
quote:
Same difference. We aren't going to find someone who plays ball and can keep control of the country if everyone hates our guts.
|
Not everyone does, not by a long shot. We're still dealing with a tiny percentage of the overall population.
quote:
Indefinitely long rebellion until political pressure from casualties forces us out.
|
Won't happen.
quote:
You really believe that Sistani et al. had the clout to squash the rebels themselves without undermining their own political goals?
|
I don't believe they have any interest in doing so. The best thing for Sistani to do was what he did - sit back, and if Sadr gets wasted by the Americans, that's plus two for Sistani, if the Americans back down, then Sadr's stuck if he continues the same **** when there's a sovereign Iraqi government, etc. Sadr painted himself into a corner when he decided to get openly uppity, and Sistani's cool as a cucumber letting it play out without taking any decisive action unless and until it's in his interest to do so.
quote:
I didn't say that it was full scale insurrection. It, however, demonstrates broad support for the rebels among the Shia. And this started before a lot of important things that are giving the rebels greater validity among the rank and file (such as, allowing a Ba'athist general to take over Fallujah and of course the prison scandal). |
"Broad support" is a bit different from "having better things to do than really care about what Sadr is doing." The Montreal Expos have some fans too. 
|
|
| |
All times are GMT. The time now is 05:35.
Apolyton Time is 00:35. |
top of page
|
| archivepost |
|
Forum Rules:
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts
|
HTML code is ON
vB code is ON
Smilies are ON
[IMG] code is ON
|
|
|
|
|
|
05-05-2004 01:46
), this is the last thing we need.
|