SI
SI
discoversearch

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor.  We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community.  If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.
Politics : Foreign Affairs Discussion Group -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?


To: FaultLine who wrote (131074)5/2/2004 11:30:46 PM
From: epicure  Respond to of 281500
 
No matter how carefully you train men, there will be atrocities, and there will be incidents like this one. This is one of the costs of war- if you can't bear the cost, for the objective you are trying to achieve, than you should not have started a war (IMO). There have been no US wars where such issues did not crop up, and there never will be, unless the wars are fought with atomic bombs, and men are not forced into physically controlling enemy soldiers.



To: FaultLine who wrote (131074)5/3/2004 2:00:13 AM
From: cnyndwllr  Read Replies (2) | Respond to of 281500
 
FaultLine, re: "Nuts to these jailer jerks. They really screwed up."

Yes, but did they "screw up" by abusing prisoners or was it mostly the getting caught thing that was the screw up?

The level of "disgust" for their actions by some on this thread, by Bush, by Kerry and by the military generals is somewhat surprising. How come we never asked ourselves why those we caught seemed to "sing like birds?" Do they have a change of heart when we catch them so that they become newly aligned with our interests, do we use chemical persuasion, or do they sing like birds because they're trying to aviod physical or mental pain from our interrogation techniques or those of our proxies?

The military never fully reveals what they're doing to make those prisoners talk but, unless my memory is faulty, some of the newly disgusted on this thread were gleefully talking about how if our prisoners didn't talk we'd just send them to places like Egypt or Jordan where "they know how to make them talk." At that time I guess it was ok to subject our prisoners to extreme physical torture as long as we had someone else to do the job? It's the elephant in the room and we just didn't care until the ugly pictures came out and we got caught.

The "jailer jerks" did screw up by getting caught, but the ones that may have really screwed up might be those that have the control of the facility. Even if they didn't encourage and condone torture, the maxim that "absolute power corrupts absolutely" should hold a clue as to why many prison guards, left unchecked, almost ALWAYS abuse prisoners. Those in charge of such conditions must have known that. The question is, therefor, whether those in control were criminally negligent or whether they actually fostered that kind of abusive climate in order to get information from the prisoners.

As for me; if I thought a prison guard was sure that the lives of his buddies were hanging in the balance and he tortured a prisoner to get information that might help them, I'd call that one of the costs of war and punish him lightly. I can honestly say, however, that even under those circumtances I don't believe I'd have done it myself; it's just too much memory to have to live with for an increased chance of living.

By the way, I went through a "special processing" when I turned myself in after taking a two week "leave extension" that the army considered AWOL. A lot of the guys were there for more serious military crimes. Part of the "processing" involved entering a basement with about 12 MPs and 8-10 naked men sitting at attention on benches. Most of them were blubbering and sobbing with running noses and tear-wet faces.

Two more naked guys were in a pushup position with their fingers resting on a ledge about 6 inches off the floor. They were quivering with the effort of staying in that position and whenever one went to the floor the MPs would start screaming at him and throw him headfirst into the wall until he got back in position.

All the guards had batons and they'd sneak in behind the seated prisoners and crack them down beside them on the bench making a rifle-shot noise, while screaming in their ears. When I rotated to the bench I could hear them beating the living shit out of one the guys who came in behind me but I couldn't see it because we were faced into the wall.

Every one of those MPs was a sadist. No one but a sadist would have done that kind of duty. I know the army knew it was going on because I went AWOL from there the next weekend and when I turned myself in a second time on the following Monday the Sergeant Major in charge asked to see me. He ASKED me if I'd gone through "special processing" and when I told him I had he said I was the first one he'd ever had voluntarily come back after going through the process.

I actually got lucky with that guy. He liked me and when I told him to just ship me out to Vietnam and I'd do fine, he looked me in the eyes and said, "I think you will." He got me out that same day without more "processing" and without another article 15.

I read later that the place finally got busted when some congressman's kid was getting beaten and his buddy got out earlier and called the congressman. The congressman had enough pull to get someone down there and they caught them in the act.

The thing is that these guys were doing some rough things to their own countrymen. There are always people like that and they tend to gravitate to positions where they can satisfy their sadistic tendencies. It's no surprise that it happened in Iraq; the only question is whether it was militarily sanctioned or whether they were mavericks.



To: FaultLine who wrote (131074)5/3/2004 9:26:33 AM
From: broadstbull  Read Replies (2) | Respond to of 281500
 
Ilsa Koch Gets Kotched

It's Not A Job. It's An Adventure.



Fred Reed

Monday, April 3, 2004

Regarding the torture of Iraqi men by the American military as chronicled by the world’s press:

Janis Karpinski, reportedly a general in the American military, presided over the prison where it happened, and therefore over the torture. To her I want to say: I’m proud of you, Janis. As one who served in the armed forces, as one whose father was in the Pacific in World War II, and spent the rest of his career as a mathematician for the Navy, I want to thank you for making your prisoners give each other blow jobs. This is what America stands for, after all: Compulsory blow jobs. Giving sadistic little bitches and sonsofbitches sex toys to torment. I’m proud of you, Janis.

Now, the soldiers who did it apparently were enlisted. What may we deduce from this?

Enlisted men do not undertake systematic complicated degradation and torture of prisoners without the knowledge and approval of their officers. The officers knew. Officers to what level? Officers are college graduates and understand the political implications of such things. A lieutenant is too junior to risk it and in any event couldn’t hide it from the captain. Prisons—I’ve been in a bunch of them—are intimate places. People know what goes on.

Karpinski, covering her behind (as well she might: this is war-crimes stuff and she could take the fall) says why she had no idea and who would have thought it and anyway the intelligence people were behind it. Sure. I believe she didn’t know. Stalin didn’t know what was going on either. Naw. In this business we’re all virgins.

But suppose, as Karpinski says, the intelligence agencies were behind it. Then it was deliberate, systematic, and authorized, wasn’t it? Not rogue soldiers. American policy. A general as much as says so. Intelligence agencies don’t just, oops, torture people systematically. You know, like stepping on the cat. Who could doubt the word of a general?

The pictures, note, are trophy pictures. The torturers are proud of what they are doing. They think it’s a hoot. They want to show people back home. (Though perhaps not their mothers.) Note how obedient the Iraqis are. Think about this. One man doesn’t give another a blow job for the amusement of Twiggy unless he is terrified of the consequences if he refuses. Is it only psychological torture? In the pictures, yes. Somebody is behind them with whips and pliers. Those men are scared shitless, and they have a reason.

Torture is routine in war and intelligence. We know about assassinations by the CIA and Mossad, don’t we? An agency that will kill people won’t torture them? It isn’t remotely just the Americans and Israelis. Pick your war and read the history. It’s everybody. If you enjoy gagging, the French in Algeria were particularly good.

Why does it happen? First, because it’s practical. Knowledge is power. Knowledge is lives. You capture a guy at the bomb factory. You want to know where the bomb will go off because you know it will kill all sorts of people you don’t want killed. He doesn’t want to tell you because he hates you. You squeeze it out of him. You do whatever you have to do. You crush joints, fire up the propane torch, chop off fingers an inch at a time and move up the arm. Don’t believe me? Pick your war and do some careful reading.

Second, soldiers come to hate the enemy, to regard him as subhuman, especially if he differs from them. When you have seen the remains of a friend who burned to death in an APC hit by Iraqi RPGs, philosophy departs. Our alleged common humanity takes fifth place behind a desire to kill the bastards any way possible. Torture? Why not? They’re worse than dogs.

Third, jobs involving torture attract people who like it. Would you crush a man’s testicles because the lieutenant ordered you to? Probably not, or not without misgivings. You might understand the reasoning: “Look, this guy is IRA and he knows where five hundred pounds of Semtex is hidden in downtown London. We have to find out.” The arithmetic is hard to argue. And the terr can stop the proceedings simply by talking. You might see no choice.

But you would probably prefer to leave it to someone else, for when you were out of earshot.

So you need specialists. Always there are people around who are comfortable with torture and degradation, who just flat enjoy hurting people. They are called “sadists.” They are useful. Note the smile on the face of the little minx who is making the Iraaqi man masturbate for her. She is getting off. It’s fun. Note the expressions of the guys in the pictures. These are special people.

How surprising is any of this? Not very. War brutalizes people. It provides opportunities to people who are already brutal. This is no secret. The various Moslem groups torture prisoners. The Afghans are famous for it. Democracies lie about it, but they do it. Wars do not bring out the Emily Post in us. Torture is what we do.

Morals? Nobody has any. The Iraqi resistance doesn’t hesitate to car-bomb targets in downtown Baghdad, killing large numbers of civilians. The US forces don’t hesitate to bomb cities, killing large numbers of civilians. I get email from Americans revolted that GIs could engage in torture. But…that’s because we think our people should be above such things.

Some wars are necessary. Some aren't. Why are we in Iraq? After WWII, the French occupied Vietnam (again) by force of arms; in 1954, after years of bloody war, they lost at Dien Bien Phu and left. In the late forties, the Jews occupied Palestine by force of arms; after years of bloody war, that one is still undecided. A bit later, the French, having learned nothing, did the same thing in Algeria; they lost again and left again.

Meanwhile the Americans, having learned nothing from all of this, occupied Vietnam by force; after years of bloody etc, they leaped off the top of the Embassy and fled. The Israelis, sigh, occupied southern Lebanon, and ….The Russians occupied Afghanistan and after years of bloody etc, got whipped. Is there a pattern here? Or did someone put something in my tequila?

Presumably having noticed none of this, America is occupying both Afghanistan and Iraq. We send our soldiers to preside over torture and humiliation. I doubt it's what they enlisted for.

fredoneverything.net



To: FaultLine who wrote (131074)5/3/2004 10:44:47 AM
From: Rascal  Respond to of 281500
 
All wars are crimes.



To: FaultLine who wrote (131074)5/3/2004 6:08:52 PM
From: Bilow  Respond to of 281500
 
Hi FaultLine; Re: "No kidding. I am beside myself with anger over this. In the future, every time I say something about how we try to be the good guys ..."

Do you have any knowledge of any guerilla war ever fought, throughout thousands of years of recorded history, between a foreign (in the sense of different religion, language and ethnic type) invader and a local insurgency, where the foreign invaders treated the locals like "good guys"?

If you do, I'd like to hear it, because I don't believed it's ever happened or ever will.

I was telling you before this war started that having our guys patrolling the streets of Iraq would piss off the locals. It always does and it did it again this time.

-- Carl