What did leaders expect in war - a rose garden?

St. Louis Post-Dispatch | 05/07/2004 | Bill McClellan

[Graybeard58]

I am not offended, shocked or disgusted at the photographs from Abu Ghraib prison in Baghdad. The Iraqi prisoners are hooded and naked. In one photograph, a prisoner is standing on a box with his arms outstretched. He has wires attached to his arms. According to the accounts I have read, he was told he would be electrocuted if he fell off the box. I imagine he was terrified. In many of the photographs, you can see American jailers smirking. My reaction is, So what?

[Ursus arctos horribilis]

There have been films out made during WW2 of American submariners machine gunning Japs in the water after torpedoing their ship.(kill them now, or kill them later, works for me) There are also films out of American soldiers and marines shooting the Jap wounded.

The Japs set the stage for it all on Guadacanal, when Americans witnessed blades flashing in the sun as the Japs beheaded American prisoners and wounded. And for this the Japs Paid ten thousand times over before wars end.

And the above does not bother me a bit. We also know what the Islamist pigs did to American and coalition prisoners. So I say stop the hazing, just kill all the 8@stards when they surrender, take no prisoners, and that will neither bother me either.

Make self preseration the top priority for the Islamist CS, they will never like, nor love us, so make them fear us for a hundred years. Let the word spread througout the Moslem world, do not cross the Americans.

To those whom in the MSM and the demoncRATs who are using this for short term political gain. You are putting the propaganda and the weapons into the hands of our enemies who use it to kill, torture and rape our American and coalition service people. you are the real terrorists in America, you are aiding and abetting the enemy, you should be treated as the terrorists you are.

I never thought I could have come to the cold hatred I am beginning to feel for some in this country. I think I now have some small understanding as to what made the American civil war one of the most bloody conflicts in history. It was the mutual hatred of two distinct peoples who no longer had a common middle ground, and we are now moving ever closer to that disaster once again.

[TracyPA]

War is hell. Did you ever see pictures of soldiers who went through a lot of combat? Their eyes are dead. The human body can only take so much..then they snap. Some soldiers will suffer shell-shock, others will take a bunch of prisoners out back. Atrocities happen in war-that's a fact. It's why war is the last resort. The attack on 9/11 was our last resort. People jumping from the World Trade Center should be in every paper-as a reminder of why we are fighting this war on terror.

[meenie]

All sorts of imaginative arguments can be made to justify the actions of the individuals involved in the prison photos. They've done worse to us, it's just some GIs having fun, it's a political issue by the leftists, etc. The only reasonable argument that I have seen is that a plot to ambush has been discovered and prevented by a torture method that would have not been possible without torture. In a case or two this could have happened. Against this single argument we have inflamed opinion in Iraq and the world that we are no better than the lowly Arab that uses these methods as well as the Germans, Japanese, Russians, Chinese, and the number of other despots around the world have done.

A glaring hypocrisy that I can see is that most of these regimes did not undertake or claim to be an example of freedom and democracy in their actions. They were interested in conquest and made no representations otherwise. The problem that is more worrisome is the Iraqi opinion that has been aroused and how that opinion can be used to recruit more to the insurgency call and the deaths to our own troops that will result. Force protection and concern of the safety of our troops should be the main consideration in this issue. For these reasons, I feel the damage that has been done in the use of these methods has outweighed any possible advantage.

[CasearianDaoist]

Here, here! I am sick of this nonsense. What utter childishness.

[DHerion]

Tell your doctor to lower your medication.

How is Bush not accepting the nomination going to do anything but make a tough situation tougher? Are these thugs going to give up if Bush steps down? I can see the TV interview now with an Ansar al-Islam.

"Bush resigned. Allah be praised. Here is my weapon. I can go back to goat herding now."

[R. Scott]

The prisoners in question are not POWs under the rules established by the Third Geneva Convention. They have not met the criteria.

Art 4. A. Prisoners of war, in the sense of the present Convention, are persons belonging to one of the following categories, who have fallen into the power of the enemy:
(1) Members of the armed forces of a Party to the conflict, as well as members of militias or volunteer corps forming part of such armed forces.

(2) Members of other militias and members of other volunteer corps, including those of organized resistance movements, belonging to a Party to the conflict and operating in or outside their own territory, even if this territory is occupied, provided that such militias or volunteer corps, including such organized resistance movements, fulfil the following conditions:[
(a) that of being commanded by a person responsible for his subordinates;
(b) that of having a fixed distinctive sign recognizable at a distance;
(c) that of carrying arms openly;
(d) that of conducting their operations in accordance with the laws and customs of war.

(3) Members of regular armed forces who profess allegiance to a government or an authority not recognized by the Detaining Power.

(4) Persons who accompany the armed forces without actually being members thereof, such as civilian members of military aircraft crews, war correspondents, supply contractors, members of labour units or of services responsible for the welfare of the armed forces, provided that they have received authorization, from the armed forces which they accompany, who shall provide them for that purpose with an identity card similar to the annexed model.

(5) Members of crews, including masters, pilots and apprentices, of the merchant marine and the crews of civil aircraft of the Parties to the conflict, who do not benefit by more favourable treatment under any other provisions of international law.

(6) Inhabitants of a non-occupied territory, who on the approach of the enemy spontaneously take up arms to resist the invading forces, without having had time to form themselves into regular armed units, provided they carry arms openly and respect the laws and customs of war.

[Reactionary]

I don't give a rat's ass about them, either. These people enslave, multilate, and murder on a global scale. They kill men, women and children, civilians, anyone who is a non-believer.

Do what needs to be done to make them talk. These vermin don't deserve any consideration.

[cardinal4]

I was attacked by one the granola eaters at work over my stance and was defended by another one! The one who defended me, (Whom I always thought was redeemable)pointed out that most of the inmates in Abu Grahib now, were the guards during Sddams tyranny. These people who we are so concerned with, raped kids in front of their parents, stung them with scorpions, and threw them off of roofs. The more I hear of this story, the angrier I become that there are so many Americans who favor murderous Iraqis over our troops..

[R. Scott]

Doesn't self righteousness equate with pride?

[CasearianDaoist]

Tell me about. I would like to hear CHeney get up and say what you just said to me. There need to be some real Moral outrage. I am disappointed with the GOP leadership on the Hill. This is the perfect chance to seize the bull by the horns and denounce the RAts and there media shill for what they have been up to for a year. Fat chance of that though. We will see. I am with you though.

What utter nonsense.

[Old fashioned]

What is your excuse?

[ApplegateRanch]

The first problem is that the Arabic "outrage" is an exercise of the highest form of hypocrisy.

The second problem is equating 'humiliation' to 'atrocities'.

The third problem is the lapse in command that allowed the jackasses involved to take and distribute photos of themselves in the act.

Give them a slap on the wrist for the technical violations; then hang them for terminal stupidity for documenting their infractions for the entire world to see & scream.

Then again, I am a neobarbarian; having "rules" for war simply legitimizes it as another sport, complete with penalty box.

[cardinal4]

I don't see much, if any, difference between the defenders of these atrocities on this thread and the perpetrators themselves.

I see no pride in this statement, just self loathing. Maybe thats the term I should have used..

[genefromjersey]

I'd suggest waiting to see how things play out.

[cardinal4]

Or perhaps ask Jessica Lynch what it felt like to get raped and left to die on a stinking cott after getting her legs broken, her spine damaged and her arm broken in an ambush. Ask her how she feels about the death of her four comrades who were SHOT by Iraqis after their capture.

THEN GET BACK TO ME WITH YOUR MORE REALISTIC DEFINITION OF THE WORD "ATROCITY".

The Crusader gets it..

[spunkets]

"The prisoners in question are not POWs under the rules established by the Third Geneva Convention. They have not met the criteria."

This administration maintains that they are POWs and are to be treated as such, unless otherwise notified. That means Commander in Cheif Bush said so. His Sec of Def. Rumsfeld acknowledges that fact. See for example...

This was true before any of this hit the media.

[jpp113]

Article 4 of III Geneva Convention

A. Prisoners of war, in the sense of the present Convention, are persons belonging to one of the following categories, who have fallen into the power of the enemy:

(1) Members of the armed forces of a Party to the conflict, as well as members of militias or volunteer corps forming part of such armed forces.

(2) Members of other militias and members of other volunteer corps, including those of organized resistance movements, belonging to a Party to the conflict and operating in or outside their own territory, even if this territory is occupied, provided that such militias or volunteer corps, including such organized resistance movements, fulfil the following conditions: (a) that of being commanded by a person responsible for his subordinates; (b) that of having a fixed distinctive sign recognizable at a distance; (c) that of carrying arms openly; (d) that of conducting their operations in accordance with the laws and customs of war.

(3) Members of regular armed forces who profess allegiance to a government or an authority not recognized by the Detaining Power.

(4) Persons who accompany the armed forces without actually being members thereof, such as civilian members of military aircraft crews, war correspondents, supply contractors, members of labour units or of services responsible for the welfare of the armed forces, provided that they have received authorization, from the armed forces which they accompany, who shall provide them for that purpose with an identity card similar to the annexed model.

(5) Members of crews, including masters, pilots and apprentices, of the merchant marine and the crews of civil aircraft of the Parties to the conflict, who do not benefit by more favourable treatment under any other provisions of international law.

(6) Inhabitants of a non-occupied territory, who on the approach of the enemy spontaneously take up arms to resist the invading forces, without having had time to form themselves into regular armed units, provided they carry arms openly and respect the laws and customs of war.

B. The following shall likewise be treated as prisoners of war under the present Convention:

(1) Persons belonging, or having belonged, to the armed forces of the occupied country, if the occupying Power considers it necessary by reason of such allegiance to intern them, even though it has originally liberated them while hostilities were going on outside the territory it occupies, in particular where such persons have made an unsuccessful attempt to rejoin the armed forces to which they belong and which are engaged in combat, or where they fail to comply with a summons made to them with a view to internment.

(2) The persons belonging to one of the categories enumerated in the present Article, who have been received by neutral or non-belligerent Powers on their territory and whom these Powers are required to intern under international law, without prejudice to any more favourable treatment which these Powers may choose to give and with the exception of Articles 8, 10, 15, 30, fifth paragraph, 58-67, 92, 126 and, where diplomatic relations exist between the Parties to the conflict and the neutral or non-belligerent Power concerned, those Articles concerning the Protecting Power. Where such diplomatic relations exist, the Parties to a conflict on whom these persons depend shall be allowed to perform towards them the functions of a Protecting Power as provided in the present Convention, without prejudice to the functions which these Parties normally exercise in conformity with diplomatic and consular usage and treaties.

C. This Article shall in no way affect the status of medical personnel and chaplains as provided for in Article 33 of the present Convention.

Remember jurisdiction. Doesn't appear that these prisoners would be covered by Art. 13

[TracyPA]

"War is cruelty. There's no use trying to reform it, the crueler it is the sooner it will be over"-
William Tecumseh Sherman

[randog]

A friends dad was in military intelligence, and was involved in interrogation of japanese prisoners of war, because he happened to be an Oriental language expert when war broke out . To his dying day, he REFUSED to tell what was involved, he did say he was "not proud of it" but that he would "do it again" to save US lives.

An older friend of mine was in WWII in the Pacific, Navy. He told me some stories about how we (Americans) fought the war that were difficult to listen to. He too would do it over again if he had the chance.

I've been looking over this whole "abuse" thing for a few days now and I've got to add myself to the list of those that aren't outraged/shocked/mortified by what happened. Call me a bad person, whatever, but I really can't muster up much sympathy.

A previous poster talked about Colonel West who fired a shot next to a prisoner's head. I remember when that happened and about 99.9% of the people on this board rallied to Col. West's side. E-mails were shot out to politicians, defense funds were set up, letters to the editor were written, etc.

I'll just leave it at that.

[randog]

To see what the term "atrocity" really means, go find some photos of the Nazi Concentration camps, or view the photos of the four Americans hanging upside down by one leg from a bridge, after having been murdered and burnt to a black, crispy charcoal state by their Iraqi captors. Or view the photos of Iraqi thugs standing over dead American POWs who have their limbs torn off and their pants down.

Thank you for bringing some perspective to this. Jeezus H., you'd think it was 1944 and pictures of Auschwitz were filtering back.