I was in Vietnam during the My Lai incident. At first we tried to rationalize the actions of Cali ants came out I felt he should have spent life in prison.
The recent events are un-folding the same way. The more that is revealed, the less it looks like an isolated event I can no longer rationalize the actions. The pictures are and continue to do serious damage to our country yet the ghoules in the media continue to air them. IMNSHO everytime they show the pictures they do additional damage. We are no longer showing our integrity, we are displaying a weakness which will be exploited to the fullest by our enemies, foreign and domestic.
OTOH please don't preach the Geneva Conventions to me. Frankly neither I nor anyone I served with had any dilusions about being treated humanely if captured. In some respects, the GCs define "acceptable ways" to kill and maim one's enemy. Blow off their head but don't embarrass them.
The conventions were formulated in a different time. We no longer fight conventional troops in a conventional manner. Then the normal POW was a front line troop who after 24 hours had no information of tactical use. If you can't get information within one or two days you can send him to a POW camp where he will be treated properly until the war is over.
A reason for interrogating detainees so long today is not for tactical information but because they may give information concerning their organization and people involved in the organization.
That said, stow the pictures and let the prosecutions begin. However, let's not be so PC that we open the door for another 9/11 or worse. Let's don't end up "Dead Right"!!
Bill Harsey
05-05-2004, 07:57
I agree with damage being done and this being a tool used by enemies both foreign and domestic. The 4 am broadcast news featured those calling for congressional hearings on this abuse story. I imagine they have the sights set very high. This morning I also noticed the news (either or NBC or CBS) has a neat little intro logo for the abuse story using one of the now famous photos.
Roguish Lawyer
05-06-2004, 16:38
As usual, the Wall Street Journal's editorial page is spitting into the media hurricane:
http://www.opinionjournal.com/editorial/feature.html?id=110005044
REVIEW & OUTLOOK
Abuse and the Army
The military, not CBS, discovered the outrages at Abu Ghraib.
Thursday, May 6, 2004 12:01 a.m. EDT
As President Bush and everyone else in America has said, any abuse of Iraqi prisoners is "abhorrent" and should be punished. Yet it seems to us that an overlooked story here, and ultimately the most telling, is the degree to which the U.S. military is investigating itself and holding people accountable.
This isn't a popular thought just now, with the media and politicians in one of their bonfire phases. Every accusation against U.S. troops is now getting front-page treatment. Like reporters at a free buffet, Members of Congress are swarming to the TV cameras to declare their outrage and demand someone's head, usually Donald Rumsfeld's. "System of abuse" and "cover-up" are being tossed about without any evidence of either. The goal seems to be less to punish the offenders than to grab one more reason to discredit the Iraq war.
For a sense of proportion, let's rehearse the timeline here. While some accusations of abuse go back to 2002 in Afghanistan, the incidents at Abu Ghraib that triggered this week's news occurred last autumn. They came to light through the chain of command in Iraq on January 13. An Army criminal probe began a day later. Two days after that, the U.S. Central Command disclosed in a press release that "an investigation has been initiated into reported incidents of detainee abuse at a Coalition Forces detention facility." By March 20, Brigadier General Mark Kimmitt was able to announce in Baghdad that criminal charges had been brought against six soldiers in the probe.
By the end of January, meanwhile, Major General Antonio Taguba was appointed to conduct his separate "administrative" probe of procedures at Abu Ghraib. It is his report, complete with its incriminating photos, that is the basis for the past week's news reports. The press didn't break this story based on months of sleuthing but was served up the results of the Army's own investigation.
By February, the Secretary of the Army had ordered the service's inspector general to assess the doctrine and training for detention operations within all of CentCom. A month after that, another probe began into Army Reserve training, especially military police and intelligence. Those reports will presumably also be leaked and reported on, or at least they will be if they reach negative conclusions.
This is a cover-up? Unlike the Catholic bishops, some corporate boards and the editors of the New York Times or USA Today, the military brass did not dismiss early allegations of bad behavior. Instead, it established reviews and procedures that have uncovered the very details that are now used by critics to indict the Pentagon "system." It has done so, moreover, amid a war against a deadly insurgency in which interrogation to gain good intelligence is critical to victory--and to saving American lives.
None of this is to dismiss or rationalize the abuse reports. Accountability has to run beyond the soldiers immediately responsible and up the Army and intelligence chains of command. The Abu Ghraib procedures were clearly inadequate to a situation in which interrogators were given so much control over the fates of individual prisoners. Especially in a war on terror that will be long and require effective interrogation, this is unacceptable.
Reprimands have already been issued and careers ended, but courts martial can't be ruled out. President Bush's explanation to Arab media yesterday may help our public image, especially given that their own governments rarely admit mistakes. But the best way to impress Iraqis about U.S. purposes is to show that Americans guilty of abuse are being punished, and with more than letters of reprimand.
To start impugning the entire Army and Pentagon, however, is both wrong and dangerous. The majority of American soldiers are professional, disciplined and are risking their lives to win a war. (Note to those who want to revive the draft: If this could happen in today's highly trained volunteer force, imagine the risks in Senator Chuck Hagel's Army of conscripts.)
Another bizarre notion is that Abu Ghraib happened because the Pentagon decided to hold "enemy combatants" under other than "prisoner of war" status. Those detainees are still given Geneva Convention treatment, as well as visits by the Red Cross. The Pentagon has avoided formal Geneva Convention status because it doesn't want al Qaeda and Taliban prisoners to be able to hide behind "name, rank and serial number." As terrorists who attacked civilians and didn't wear a uniform, they also don't deserve the privileges of real soldiers. In any case, the soldiers who posed in those Abu Ghraib photos were clearly too thick to know any of this.
The military has its faults and bad actors, but over the decades it has shown itself to be one of America's most accountable institutions. The Abu Ghraib episode is another test of its fortitude. But the political class would do well to heed Democratic Senator Joe Lieberman, who said yesterday that "this immoral behavior in no way eliminates the justice of our cause in Iraq."
Roger RL. The problem, as I said all along is the GODDAM PICTURES. If they hadn't been released this would have bstayed on the back pages. The military is handling it properly. They need to find who released the pictures and "Hang 'Em High"!
I saw the parents of Pfc England on TV this morning. They say their sweet little girl was just in the wrong place at the wrong time. What an understatement. They should have added: "doing the wrong thing.":mad:
If I saw pictures like that of my daughter, I don't know what I would have done. I wouldn't defend her on world wide TV and I don't know if I would ever talk to her again.
BTW: You look a lot like Maj. Plaster.
Roguish Lawyer
05-06-2004, 17:03
Originally posted by QRQ 30
BTW: You look a lot like Maj. Plaster.
LOL That is an attempt to honor him while I read his new book. I am a huge fan of his writing, and of those he writes about. It is an honor to be able to interact with all of you.