MERGED - Prisoner Abuse

[Bifta]

Originally Posted by darkangel

i don't think anyone would try to justify something as blatant as this, u more than most people here should understand this isn't just an American problem.

In some respects yes, the RUC had a well documented reputation for physically torturing, demeaning and humiliating suspected terrorists, in that scenario it's almost similar. The IRA, UVF, UDA and LVF also had/have reputations for torturing "prisoners", the IRA generally reserved it for suspected touts, the UVF at one point delighted in torturing any catholic they could get their hands on (Shankill Butchers) but that's a little different, you almost expect this sort of behaviour from terrorists, you don't except it from the state.

[Xaccers]

Originally Posted by Julian

Ask yourself this - Why has there been more trouble with the Iraquis in those parts of the country that are "looked after" by the yanks?

Mainly because the yanks are in areas with a history of supporting Saddam, whereas us Brits are mainly in areas where the locals were oppressed by Saddam and are grateful that we got rid of him and are there supporting them.

[darkangel]

Originally Posted by Bifta

In some respects yes, the RUC had a well documented reputation for physically torturing, demeaning and humiliating suspected terrorists, in that scenario it's almost similar. The IRA, UVF, UDA and LVF also had/have reputations for torturing "prisoners", the IRA generally reserved it for suspected touts, the UVF at one point delighted in torturing any catholic they could get their hands on (Shankill Butchers) but that's a little different, you almost expect this sort of behaviour from terrorists, you don't except it from the state.

whats a terrorist?

[Bifta]

Originally Posted by darkangel

whats a terrorist?

I'm not quite sure of the point of that question or it's relevance to this thread, could you expand a little?

[punky]

Originally Posted by andygrif

Without wishing to in any way defend the mis-treatment of prisoners - I would think that there is a fine line between abuse and investigation.

Although this douesn't appear to be the work of military inteligence (if that's not a contradiction in terms) during conflict, sometimes you need to find out answers. And sometimes you don't get answers just by asking someone a question.

That doesn't give carte blanche to anyone who feels like abusing a prisoner, but I think we don't yet know the full story enough to comment properly.

That's true to a point, but not the case here. You don't extract information from an unwilling informant, by writing a rude word on him. Even the eletroc-torture/feigning sex/large amount of soldiers watching are all heavily tilted towards humilation. That is just not a viable method of interrogation. This seems like it is for their own amusement, and clearly should be punished severely.

Anyone else do a double-take when they read the ring-leader was a woman? I thought men were supposed to be the evil gender.

[darkangel]

Originally Posted by Bifta

I'm not quite sure of the point of that question or it's relevance to this thread, could you expand a little?

bit off topic there but the point i was makeing is at what point does a person become a terrorist?

[Bifta]

Originally Posted by darkangel

bit off topic there but the point i was makeing is at what point does a person become a terrorist?

Thats a question I'm not even going to attempt to answer, though I thought terrorism was a method used generally against governments, obviously the act of terrorism doesn't involve the actual government directly and 9 time out of 10 causes harm/death/disruption to the members of the general public. It's all semantics and the US government would probably have you believe everyone who's anti-american is some form of terrorist.

[punky]

Originally Posted by darkangel

bit off topic there but the point i was makeing is at what point does a person become a terrorist?

Yeah, but you can say that about a lot of things. A father becomes a terrorist when tries to warn his kids off drugs, or tell someone that they aren't welcome in the house again, etc.

The term "terrorist" is rather open. It basically means anyone that causes "terror" which can be virtually anything. You can even say Stephen King is a terrorist, and the definition still holds. I'm taking it to extremes, I know, but you can technically label anyone a terrorist if you want to.

[Pierre]

I've said it before on this forum and I'll say it again.

The American army is only great and mighty by sheer volume. The actual professionalism and standard of troops is poor.

When you read about this violation of the Geneva Convention it makes the heart sink. We are there supporting the US Army and this is how they repay us.

Land of the free, home of the brave??

[darkangel]

Originally Posted by Pierre

I've said it before on this forum and I'll say it again.

The American army is only great and mighty by sheer volume. The actual professionalism and standard of troops is poor.

When you read about this violation of the Geneva Convention it makes the heart sink. We are there supporting the US Army and this is how they repay us.

Land of the free, home of the brave??

u need to look in our own direction before u lump the whole american of troops as poor

[Pierre]

Originally Posted by darkangel

u need to look in our own direction before u lump the whole american of troops as poor

I haven't seen any photos of UK troops humiliating their POWs

[kronas]

the CBS show 60 minuties, aired footage of american soldiers attacking iraqis in abu ghriab prison, six american solders are possibly facing charges of abuse.

One photograph shows Iraqi prisoners, naked except for hoods covering their heads, stacked in a human pyramid, one with a slur written in English on his skin.

One picture shows an Iraqi prisoner who was told to stand on a box with his head covered and wires attached to his hands. CBS said the prisoner was told that if he fell off the box, he would be electrocuted.

source: guardian

http://www.guardian.co.uk/worldlates...033777,00.html


you call this retribution ?

to the US:

if your going to stop terrorism and then complain when soliders are being held captured tortured etc......and do the same, what does that make you ?

[andygrif]

Originally Posted by dr wadd

Ok then, can you suggest any possible scenario where it would be correct to treat prisoners in this manner while take photos of your army buddies standing around laughing and giving a thumbs up? Because unless you can explain how that can be a legitimate and useful part of interrogation then I don`t think we need to wait for the rest of the story.

Originally Posted by andygrif

Without wishing to in any way defend the mis-treatment of prisoners....

I think the good Doctor's point was that, despite starting your post by saying you did not wish to defend any inappropriate activity by US soldiers, their actions are so plainly wrong that in the remainder of your post you effectively ended up doing just that.

[andygrif]

Originally Posted by punky

That's true to a point, but not the case here. You don't extract information from an unwilling informant, by writing a rude word on him. Even the eletroc-torture/feigning sex/large amount of soldiers watching are all heavily tilted towards humilation. That is just not a viable method of interrogation. This seems like it is for their own amusement, and clearly should be punished severely.

Anyone else do a double-take when they read the ring-leader was a woman? I thought men were supposed to be the evil gender.

As I said before, this doesn't seem to be anything to do with interrogation, so what I have to say is largely off topic...but:

How do you extract information in a combat situation?

In my opinion you do this by breaking people down to the point where they tell you what you want. No soldier, Iraqi, Yank or Brit, is going to spend one night in prison and confess all.

You break people down by telling them lies (such as your government's not coming to save you), by humilation, by repetition - making the prisoner believe that there is no other way but to tell their captor the truth.

It ain't pretty, and we mere mortals in the real world rarely get to fully know what happens....but happens it does, and I imagine always will.

The other point to remember is the atrocioties that have been inflited on western troops by Iraqi inteligence over the years - which went a lot further than the story reported today. Two wrong don't make a right, of course, but if this kind of behaviour is intrinsic in the phsyche of the Iraqi forces, then surely it is the only language that has any impact.

But like I said, it looks like this was nothing to do with intel, just a bunch of good for nothing squadies with too much time on their hands - and should be punished accordingly.