I'm Still Tortured by What I Saw in Iraq

[Chris]

I'm Still Tortured by What I Saw in Iraq

by Matthew Alexander

I should have felt triumphant when I returned from Iraq in August 2006. Instead, I was worried and exhausted. My team of interrogators had successfully hunted down one of the most notorious mass murderers of our generation, Abu Musab al-Zarqawi, the leader of al-Qaeda in Iraq and the mastermind of the campaign of suicide bombings that had helped plunge Iraq into civil war. But instead of celebrating our success, my mind was consumed with the unfinished business of our mission: fixing the deeply flawed, ineffective and un-American way the U.S. military conducts interrogations in Iraq. I'm still alarmed about that today.

I'm not some ivory-tower type; I served for 14 years in the U.S. Air Force, began my career as a Special Operations pilot flying helicopters, saw combat in Bosnia and Kosovo, became an Air Force counterintelligence agent, then volunteered to go to Iraq to work as a senior interrogator. What I saw in Iraq still rattles me -- both because it betrays our traditions and because it just doesn't work.

I'm Still Tortured by What I Saw in Iraq - washingtonpost.com

 

[rayboyusmc]

This is what happens when people like Cheney see the world in their own dark view. In the past the torturers were always the bad guys like Russia, China, Korea. Now Bush & Company have put US in their league.

 

[Anguille]

.

 

[Tech_Esq]

This is what happens when people like Cheney see the world in their own dark view. In the past the torturers were always the bad guys like Russia, China, Korea. Now Bush & Company have put US in their league.

Dem-bot, you should have read the article rather posting your typical drivel, you might have learned something.

 

[Tech_Esq]

I'm Still Tortured by What I Saw in Iraq

by Matthew Alexander

I should have felt triumphant when I returned from Iraq in August 2006. Instead, I was worried and exhausted. My team of interrogators had successfully hunted down one of the most notorious mass murderers of our generation, Abu Musab al-Zarqawi, the leader of al-Qaeda in Iraq and the mastermind of the campaign of suicide bombings that had helped plunge Iraq into civil war. But instead of celebrating our success, my mind was consumed with the unfinished business of our mission: fixing the deeply flawed, ineffective and un-American way the U.S. military conducts interrogations in Iraq. I'm still alarmed about that today.

I'm not some ivory-tower type; I served for 14 years in the U.S. Air Force, began my career as a Special Operations pilot flying helicopters, saw combat in Bosnia and Kosovo, became an Air Force counterintelligence agent, then volunteered to go to Iraq to work as a senior interrogator. What I saw in Iraq still rattles me -- both because it betrays our traditions and because it just doesn't work.

I'm Still Tortured by What I Saw in Iraq - washingtonpost.com

The article shows three very important points:

1. The Army Field Manual, which represents the The Policy of the US government as it relates to interrogation, did not support torture.

2. Good, but perhaps ill-trained men attempted to do what was not permitted under US policy to get information. Though well intentioned (trying to get the information they needed to protect US troops and provide information, their tactics were ineffective.

3. Even in the wake of a dominant culture of rule-breaking, good men can rise above this and use their ingenuity to develop better methods and tactics. This is why the US fighting forces are superior to those in other countries. We provide for the ability of troops to think. (We like to say we don't, but we do.)

 

[Chris]

The article shows three very important points:

1. The Army Field Manual, which represents the The Policy of the US government as it relates to interrogation, did not support torture.

2. Good, but perhaps ill-trained men attempted to do what was not permitted under US policy to get information. Though well intentioned (trying to get the information they needed to protect US troops and provide information, their tactics were ineffective.

3. Even in the wake of a dominant culture of rule-breaking, good men can rise above this and use their ingenuity to develop better methods and tactics. This is why the US fighting forces are superior to those in other countries. We provide for the ability of troops to think. (We like to say we don't, but we do.)

You missed the point entirely.

The manual was being ignored, and people were being tortured.

And torture doesn't work.

 

[Mr. President]

You missed the point entirely.

The manual was being ignored, and people were being tortured.

And torture doesn't work.

Did you just skip over 2

 

[Tech_Esq]

You missed the point entirely.

The manual was being ignored, and people were being tortured.

And torture doesn't work.

See point 2.

 

[Lycurgus]

The article shows three very important points:

1. The Army Field Manual, which represents the The Policy of the US government as it relates to interrogation, did not support torture.

2. Good, but perhaps ill-trained men attempted to do what was not permitted under US policy to get information. Though well intentioned (trying to get the information they needed to protect US troops and provide information, their tactics were ineffective.

3. Even in the wake of a dominant culture of rule-breaking, good men can rise above this and use their ingenuity to develop better methods and tactics. This is why the US fighting forces are superior to those in other countries. We provide for the ability of troops to think. (We like to say we don't, but we do.)

Well said.