ophelia wrote:

littlepockit wrote:i know this a little off the subject, but i like being from a country where i can speak my mind freely and not be shot, stoned to death or buried from the neck down in the desert where buzzards could peck out my eyes and eat at my flesh. although, i guess being female i would receive a different sort of punishment.

Yeah, but what about being from a country famed for our lust for violence, where a little old lady can walk out her front door and be the victim of a drive by shooting, and I can't walk alone in Tyson Park for fear of being raped? Are we that civilized by comparison?

I think part of the problem is the picture that the US incessantly paints of Iraqi culture.

true dat, primarly the US MEDIA - i have many iraqi friends i would do just about anything for.

abreeskye wrote:The government/media tries to brainwash the American people...I mean....the way they portray the Iraqis is totally incorrect. They portray them as some sort of wild, violent people....that have violence "in their blood". They are people just like us.

this is totally correct and i agree 100%

abreeskye wrote:There was NO FUCKING REASON for us to invade Iraq, other than the fact that there are people in our government that want global domination. THAT is what they are after. They are not trying to free the Iraqi people. They couldn't control Sadaam anymore, he was tired of their shit, so they formed a plan YEARS ago to invade Iraq, and replace him with someone they could control.

i disagree - maybe the reasons were not the same ones that the american public were told, but thats doesnt mean there wasnt a reason - among them, liberating the oppressed may have been one, granted the fact that it is an oil rich country does help, but that also helps that country be a more high profile in general.
this is a touchy subject. at no time do i mean any disrespect to anyone.
if we were going after global domination, i dont think we would start with iraq. kuwait is a much better choice.
i think the idea was to try to settle the unrest in the country that supplied grand portions of the worlds oil. not that we wanted to control it all, hell the plans we were working with called to get those refinaries operational again so that the country would have a stable enough econmy to rebuild itself. not to line our pockets, again this is just my opinion.

abreeskye wrote:And, this war is not just about oil.....Its about POWER. These people think that if we take over every part of the world, and mold it to their liking....it would mean safety for them. They want to christianize the entire world....get rid of the "heathen" muslims!

then why are we spending so much time and money helping rebuild the schools, government buildings, infrastructure, and preserving the culture and ideologies native of that area?

abreeskye wrote:Why are our troops still there? Because that will be our base of operations for world domination. We will invade the rest of the middle east through Iraq. They already know which country they are attacking next....It will be either Syria or Iran....

troops are still there, but if it were a base for global domination wouldnt there be a build up of troops? instead of removing the entire 101st Division from northern iraq (closest to the syrian, turkish, and Iranian borders) with the stryers, a brigade sized element.

abreeskye wrote:Does this shit not scare the hell out of anyone else? That our government is doing all this shit, and most people in America could care less? The American people could CARE LESS WHY other countries frown upon our actions! It seems noone wants to listen to all the things we've done....we only listen to what we are TOLD to listen to!!

Everyone else can see the truth! They see what our government is doing! And they laugh at us for being so daft! They think we're just idiots! And most of us are!

People will still vote for Bush, the terrorist, in the coming election. I bet if you ask these people why they voted for him......they would be like, well, he was president before, or maybe he took out Iraq for what they did on 9/11! YES! There are people who think that Iraq was responsible for the 9/11 attacks! And, they look at you like you are an idiot if you try to say otherwise!

:::breathes::::

Sorry.....just a little frustrated here.....I'm sick of our soldiers dying for NO GOOD REASON, other than to push PNAC's dreams of world domination.....

i dealt with MANY nationalities while i was there, none seemed to express these types of opinions to me -
is this stuff your getting from the media? (i must admit i watch very little news while i was there or now that i am back home, i get my reports from the people that are there)

yes there are a lot of soldiers ready to come home, and a lot that dont want to go, but there were a lot , just like me, that were chomping at the bit to go over there and make a difference in our own way, no matter how the public thought of us, fortunately most of the time the individual soldier was supported even if the conflict is not.

disclaimer: im not saying your thoughts are wrong, i am just saying that mine are different.

btw - POWs are american prisoners of war, EPW is the correct term meaning enemy prisoner of war

just an fyi

tat2jay wrote:btw - POWs are american prisoners of war, EPW is the correct term meaning enemy prisoner of war

just an fyi

D'oh. I'd forgotten all about that. Just curious Jay, what is your MOS?

Onibubba wrote:

tat2jay wrote:btw - POWs are american prisoners of war, EPW is the correct term meaning enemy prisoner of war

just an fyi

D'oh. I'd forgotten all about that. Just curious Jay, what is your MOS?

25V - combat photographer , so i got to go on tons of missions with all kinds of soldiers and all kinds of units, i was able to see a lot of things from a lot of different angles

and you were psyops? is that i right?

ophelia wrote:
Yeah, but what about being from a country famed for our lust for violence, where a little old lady can walk out her front door and be the victim of a drive by shooting, and I can't walk alone in Tyson Park for fear of being raped? Are we that civilized by comparison?

I think part of the problem is the picture that the US incessantly paints of Iraqi culture.

i wasn't neccessarily speaking of iraq. i know that the iraqi people are not as we are lead to believe. but what about honor killings? i don't think christopher would want you brutally killed because you spoke to another male.

yes, our country has violence, but there are communities, cities, regions that are safe. no, i wouldn't walk dowtown alone at night, but i can say that i feel safe walking in our neighborhood alone at night. i have been to other countries, i wouldn't live anywhere else but here on american soil. and am also very grateful for our military and our government. they may not be perfect, but neither am i.

tat2jay wrote: and you were psyops? is that i right?

I worked with psyops some. I was 97E, russian linguist / interrogator. What I did most was force protection. We'd go to camps and do reports on their security, talk with locals to get the population's feel for the US. Remember those guys who were picked up by Serbia several years ago on border patrol who had crossed over into Serbia? They were basicly doing the same kind of thing I did.

littlepockit wrote: but what about honor killings? i don't think christopher would want you brutally killed because you spoke to another male.

That, too, is played up way too much in the media. Our ideas about the liberation of Muslim women is very different from their beliefs. The majority of the murders of women in the US are domestic situations. Yes, even in America, men kill women for the same reasons.

As unpolitical as I usually am, I have a strong opinion on this matter. Whether the country is at war or not, whether drastic measures have to be taken or not, this woman crossed the line. A slap in the face to gain cooperation is one thing, but to do the things she did is another. In my opinion, she got too personal on a basic human level and I think her actions were nothing short of sexual abuse. Not only is this individual a disgrace to the military she is also a disgrace to the American public and the human race. If an Iraqi national would have inflicted these atrocities on an American, we wouldn't see it as a justice or an amusement.

IMO, u can deb8 this 4ever & make no difference ... War iz war ... we (here at home) hav NO control over POW treatment or much else rel8ed ...

As I have not seen a final report, I am making a lot of assumptions. As I see it, these photos were taken for the purpose of "softening" prisoners up for interrogation. Why would that need to be done? Usually, it doesn't. During the first Gulf War, the need for any sort of coersion in an interrogation was less than 2%! Studies showed that 98% of prisoners interrogated broke under the "direct" approach. In other words, questions were asked and answers were given.

Things have been different this time. Attacks on our troops are racking up more casualties since the great nipplehead announced our victory than before. We need to know who is attacking, where they are, what motivates them and any number of questions to end hostilities and protect civilian lives and the lives of our troops. Obviously, the "direct" approach is not working.

So, how could these photos fit into an interrogation? Why would humiliating another person produce desired results? First, I have not heard of ANY sort of physical torture used that I would consider improper or immoral. Sleep deprivation, stress positions? We got that in basic training. What kind of torture do you think Hussein allowed? What kind of torture do you think is administered in other countries? I can gaurantee that is much more "abhorrent" than anything being done by our military.

The interrogator needs to be a prisoner's way out of a bad situation. "The guards are mean to me." "I'll see what I can do, but you need to work with me first." "The guards took humiliating pictures of me and say that they will send them to my family!" "If you work with me, I'll see what I can do to get those pictures back."

Have we forgotten that the same mobs that howl for blood for the humiliation that their brothers suffered under US containment are the same that ran gleefully through the streets after burning and murdering civilians that were there to restore order to their country?

I understand why people are shocked and offended by these pictures, but calling these atrocities like the Mai Lai massacre (Which members of congress have said) is really streching it. War is not pretty. There is no way to make it pretty.

just seems kinda funny to me that in war we can kill people hell thats fine and dandy but god forbid we humiliate them.

I can see some of the points made, but the fact remains that the treatment of Iraqi POW's violates the accords of the Geneva Convention, of which the US is an assignatory nation. In particular:

Article 13

Prisoners of war must at all times be humanely treated. Any unlawful act or omission by the Detaining Power causing death or seriously endangering the health of a prisoner of war in its custody is prohibited, and will be regarded as a serious breach of the present Convention. In particular, no prisoner of war may be subjected to physical mutilation or to medical or scientific experiments of any kind which are not justified by the medical, dental or hospital treatment of the prisoner concerned and carried out in his interest.

Likewise, prisoners of war must at all times be protected, particularly against acts of violence or intimidation and against insults and public curiosity.

Measures of reprisal against prisoners of war are prohibited.

And also:

Article 17

...

No physical or mental torture, nor any other form of coercion, may be inflicted on prisoners of war to secure from them information of any kind whatever. Prisoners of war who refuse to answer may not be threatened, insulted, or exposed to any unpleasant or disadvantageous treatment of any kind.

I actually quoted all this from http://www.unhchr.ch/html/menu3/b/91.htm which has the entire text of the Geneva Convention regarding the Treatment of Prisoners of War ... very interesting reading.

THANK YOU!!!

I will make only one post on this thread.....to defeat the animal; you must become the animal. My opinions are NOT popular....one reason I keep them to myself for the most part.....OUR military only put the prisoners in humiliating position....whoop-de-fuck-de-doo!!!! WE DID NOT BRUTALLY TORTURE AND MUTILATE THEM!!!!!!! BIG FUCKING DEAL THAT THEY WERE HUMILIATED!!!!!! GODDAMMIT!!!!! THEY TORTURED AND MURDERED OUR SOLDIERS!!!!! Yes, I believe alot of good can be achieved by our intervention in Iraq....NO! I do NOT agree with HOW it's being achieved....but just because they are Iraqies doesn't mean that they are not human....after the pix that I seen from Jay and Magilla, no, I no longer believe Iraq should have been turned into a glass parking lot.....I will only say that I believe the passifist(sp?) view and the Genieva(sp?) convention go waaaaaaayyyyyy toooooo far.....the 'so-callled' word of god(i.e. the bible) says an eye for an eye, does it not???? Yes, I know, it also says turn the other cheek.....sorry, but I'm inclined to the eye for an eye....no, I am NOT horrified by what the soldiers did. Humiliation???? Big fucking deal!!




*this will be my ONLY post concerning this as I, as a general rule, do NOT get into political discussions*

It seems to me that war has become a funny creature. I don't know what it is like to fear for my life day in and day out, but it seems to me that it would create somewhat of a helplessness. I think that many people in that situtation would feel the need to lash out in some form or another to demonstrate dominance over those people whom they associate with the threat.

Sitting here at home, I cannot imagine what it is like. In this situtation, I am quite pleased with my ignorance. But it seems to me that this difference between here and there has made war very strange. Before television this sort of thing went on and nobody really said anything. Now the pictures come back here to people whose biggest worry is paying their credit card bills on time are shocked and dismayed by what they see. The military has a new challange of seeming strong and effective without seeming brutal. And not seeming brutal is not an easy thing to accomplish when you are killing people.

Back to the topic at hand.

Lets face it: this is minor abuse. Major abuse consists of things far more gruesome. Should it have happened? Absolutely not. I have a desire to thump each one of them in the head and say "What were you thinking?" But is there reason for the sort of outrage we are seeing? Only in an election year.

abreeskye wrote:Does this shit not scare the hell out of anyone else? That our government is doing all this shit, and most people in America could care less? The American people could CARE LESS WHY other countries frown upon our actions! It seems noone wants to listen to all the things we've done....we only listen to what we are TOLD to listen to!!

Everyone else can see the truth! They see what our government is doing! And they laugh at us for being so daft! They think we're just idiots! And most of us are!

People will still vote for Bush, the terrorist, in the coming election. I bet if you ask these people why they voted for him......they would be like, well, he was president before, or maybe he took out Iraq for what they did on 9/11! YES! There are people who think that Iraq was responsible for the 9/11 attacks! And, they look at you like you are an idiot if you try to say otherwise!

I have to comment on this.

I agree that most people are stupid and don't pay attention, but there are two things very wrong with your statement. First of all, people who don't pay attention rarely vote. They don't care and that is why they do neither.

Second, it is not unique to Bush supporters. I hear things falling out of Democrats mouths that completely burn away under the harsh light of logic. If Ted Kennedy says it then it must be true.

I get very tired of reading on this board how I am a moron for my political views. You can disagree with me, but if you can't respect that I have a valid and well thought out point of view, then I would say you are the one who is closed minded and should go reexamine your views of the world.

After my last post on Iraq went so well I decided to stay out of this one, but here I am.

If some 'humiliating' photos are all that happen to them then I say they're doing pretty good.

Jessica Lynch was anally raped. And this could have happened 2 way. Either she was unconcious and had numerous broken bones from when her vechicle was attacked THEN she was raped. Or they took her from her vechicle while she was unconcios, raped her, then broke her bones. So you do the math on that one.

But I don't need a slide rule to figure out that 'humiliating photos' are better than anally raped.

http://www.smh.com.au/articles/2003/11/ ... m=storyrhs

creapyrob wrote:After my last post on Iraq went so well I decided to stay out of this one, but here I am.

If some 'humiliating' photos are all that happen to them then I say they're doing pretty good.

Jessica Lynch was anally raped. And this could have happened 2 way. Either she was unconcious and had numerous broken bones from when her vechicle was attacked THEN she was raped. Or they took her from her vechicle while she was unconcios, raped her, then broke her bones. So you do the math on that one.

But I don't need a slide rule to figure out that 'humiliating photos' are better than anally raped.

http://www.smh.com.au/articles/2003/11/ ... m=storyrhs

And I don't think anyone here is going to say that's acceptable. Of course, there are also plenty of people saying it didn't happen.... http://talkleft.com/new_archives/004327.html

But you're saying that even if that happened, it's ok to treat prisoners of war that we hold badly? Aren't we supposed to be the "good guys" here?

ahhh politically correct war what a concept.