Should he stay or should he go.

[st8_o_mind]

BELOW IS FROM AN E-MAIL I RECEIVED THAT CALLS FOR RUMSFELD RESIGNATION. MY COMMENTS ARE IN CAPS TO AVOID CONFUSION.

iN ADDITION TO THE SCANDAL AT THE PRISON, IT IS BECOMMING INCREASING CLEAR THAT THE POST-WAR OCCUPLATION OF IRAQ WAS POORLY PLANNED AND POORLY IMPLEMENTED. THE OCCUPATION IS ON THE VERGE OF FAILURE. WHO IS RESPONSIBLE? ULTIMATELY, BUSH IS RESPONSIBLE, AND THE VOTERS WILL HAVE THEIR SAY IN NOVEMBER. IN THE MEANTIME, MANY ARE NOW CALLING FROM RUMMY'S RESIGNATION. SHOULD HE BE FIRED AS AN INCOMPETENT BAFOON OR RETAINED AS A LOYAL AIDE TO THE PRESIDENT?


As America learns more about the prisoner abuse scandal, it's becoming clear that the path to the crimes committed at Abu Ghraib prison began at Donald Rumsfeld's office in the Pentagon. According to an article in the New Yorker magazine, a policy put in place by Secretary Rumsfeld "encouraged physical coercion and sexual humiliation of Iraqi prisoners in an effort to generate more intelligence about the growing insurgency in Iraq." [1]

Despite this horrible scandal and the cascading failures of U.S.
military policy in Iraq, President Bush says that Rumsfeld is doing "a superb job."



High-level officials in the Pentagon were sent from Guantanamo Bay to Iraq to implement the more aggressive policies, and it appears that command of the prison was placed in the hands of military intelligence officers. Techniques that had been approved only for suspected al-Qaeda terrorists were suddenly applied to Iraqi prisoners ((up to 90% of whom were mistakenly detained, according to the Red Cross) ) [2]. EMPHASIS ADDED.


[1] http://www.newyorker.com/printable/?fact/040524fa_fact
THE GRAY ZONE, How a secret Pentagon program came to Abu Ghraib.
Seymour M. Hersh, 5/24/2004, New Yorker


[2] Red Cross: Iraq Abuse Widespread, Routine
Alexander G. Higgins, 5/10/04. For AP story on this report, see:
http://apnews.myway.com/article/20040511/D82G3F9G1.html
_______________

 

[Zhukov]

I'm finally prepared to say it. I don't care what they did to those prisoners, except insofar as it hinders our military's efforts to safely conduct this police action. This obsession with Abu Ghraib is out of control. One person has already been sentenced to prison, and anyone else found responsible will be too.

Sec. Rumsfeld is a patriot, an excellent Sec. of Def., and should be kept on as long as he is willing to serve.

 

[st8_o_mind]

Originally posted by Zhukov
I'm finally prepared to say it. I don't care what they did to those prisoners, except insofar as it hinders our military's efforts to safely conduct this police action.

Viet Nam was called a "police action," not Iraq.

With regard to your comments (1) I remind you of the comments of John McCain on the subject. He pointed out that the Geneva Convention and the Convention on Torture were put in place to protect Americans.

(2) Torture is vile and immoral. It may be okay with you, but not with me. This is not my America. We're supposed to be better than the terrorists.

(3) Ninty-nine percent of US soldiers in the field are serving with dignity and honor. The pigs in the prison (and those who gave them their orders) have smeared the honor and reputation of the soldiers who are serving with distinction.

(4) Anger over these abuses puts US military and civilian personnell in Iraq at far greater risk.

(5) What they did undermines the mission in Iraq and will likely increase the very thing we are supposed to be fighting -- terrorism.

 

[rtwngAvngr]

Anyone who is a terrorist. ie not part of the official Iraqi Army, is not subject to geneva convention protections.

 

[st8_o_mind]

Originally posted by rtwngAvngr
Anyone who is a terrorist. ie not part of the official Iraqi Army, is not subject to geneva convention protections.

Techniques that had been approved only for suspected al-Qaeda terrorists were suddenly applied to Iraqi prisoners ((up to 90% of whom were mistakenly detained, according to the Red Cross) )

It seems you are at least 90% wrong.

 

[rtwngAvngr]

Originally posted by st8_o_mind
Techniques that had been approved only for suspected al-Qaeda terrorists were suddenly applied to Iraqi prisoners ((up to 90% of whom were mistakenly detained, according to the Red Cross) )

It seems you are at least 90% wrong.

It seems your st8_o_mind is degraded.

Shut up with this stupid story. This was not even real torture. It was ok to show on primetime tv. Shut up about it. Why don't you focus on helping the nation instead of bringing down our president during war. You're a traitor, in your heart, where it matters most.

 

[Zhukov]

Originally posted by st8_o_mind
Viet Nam was called a "police action," not Iraq.

I am calling it a police action because the war is over and we are securing the peace until power is turned over.

(1) I remind you of the comments of John McCain on the subject. He pointed out that the Geneva Convention and the Convention on Torture were put in place to protect Americans.

And John McCain is an authority on how well Americans were protected under it.

(2) Torture is vile and immoral. It may be okay with you, but not with me. This is not my America. We're supposed to be better than the terrorists.

I don't consider it torture, and if you equate this with the behavior of terrorists then you are a moral fool.

(3) Ninty-nine percent of US soldiers in the field are serving with dignity and honor. The pigs in the prison (and those who gave them their orders) have smeared the honor and reputation of the soldiers who are serving with distinction.

They have smeared their own honor, and no one else's.

(4) Anger over these abuses puts US military and civilian personnell in Iraq at far greater risk.

Has it? Most Iraqi's don't seem too concerned with our treatment of the people responsible for either abusing or terrorizing them. The terrorists need no additional impetus.

(5) What they did undermines the mission in Iraq and will likely increase the very thing we are supposed to be fighting -- terrorism.

Maybe, maybe not. I think the liberal media's obsession, and assinine calls for the Defense Secretary's resignation are more likely to embolden terrorists than these stupid pictures will.

What's more, how much respect for our soldiers do you show by supporting the movement for the resignation of the man the majority of them hold in great esteem and have a great deal of confidence in?

 

[DKSuddeth]

Originally posted by rtwngAvngr
Anyone who is a terrorist. ie not part of the official Iraqi Army, is not subject to geneva convention protections.

but they are subject to basic human rights, are they not? well, maybe not the terrorists, but the ones who aren't terrorists deserve their human rights.

 

[DKSuddeth]

Originally posted by Zhukov
I And John McCain is an authority on how well Americans were protected under it.

In case you don't remember it, the vietnamese ALSO declared that americans weren't protected under the geneva convention because they WEREN'T POW's......much like we've done with gitmo.

I don't consider it torture, and if you equate this with the behavior of terrorists then you are a moral fool.

the intentional infliction of physical or mental pain/anguish is torture

They have smeared their own honor, and no one else's.

but as american soldiers they are representatives of america to the world.

Has it? Most Iraqi's don't seem too concerned with our treatment of the people responsible for either abusing or terrorizing them. The terrorists need no additional impetus.

this is correct

 

[Zhukov]

Originally posted by DKSuddeth
In case you don't remember it, the vietnamese ALSO declared that americans weren't protected under the geneva convention because they WEREN'T POW's......much like we've done with gitmo.

I trust our soldiers won't treat the prisoners at Gitmo with even close to the level of brutality that the North Vietnamese showed us, or that terrorists would show a captured U.S. soldier.

We haven't circumvented the Geneva Conventions because we wish to sadisitically beat people for no reason and you know it.

the intentional infliction of physical or mental pain/anguish is torture

I take a much more limited view of what is torture, what is permisible to gain information and save lives, and what is just stupid.

These acts were just stupid.

but as american soldiers they are representatives of america to the world.

If the rest of the world chooses to believe that is how all American's are, so be it. I couldn't care less what the world thinks about this country. They are determined to hate us because we have taken a moral stand, and they find it insulting. It's far easier to take no stand at all than to risk being called a hypocrite for the misdeeds of a few.

We are the world's moral superior, and there isn't anything we can do placate them. I don't see that we should even try. Lead by example is what I say, and when people in our country commit acts we find reprehensible, we punish them.

Let the world think what it will. The world is an awful place. I know these few soldiers don't represent all our soldiers, and that's enough for me.

 

[Zhukov]

You have a valid point there but I believe that more Americans were killed in April than during "the war." Calling it a police action sounds a little too sanitized for my taste. Could we agree on something like "military operations"?

More Americans were killed in April, during this police action, because our soldiers were not trained to conduct a police action.

Some were trained to operate tanks, or to conduct artillery bombardment, or to kill indiscrimanately.

A police action is what it is, and yes that is more and more commonly becoming a type of military operation.

St8=> We're supposed to be better than the terrorists.

Me=> if you equate this with the behavior of terrorists then you are a moral fool

St8=> Not worth responding to.

Or incapable of responding to.

It does not repflect well on the chain of command who were either asleep at the switch or complicit. A recent article by Hirsh writing for the New Yorker magazine reports that Rummy himself issued the orders to turn up the pressure. We'll have to wait and see who ultimately takes, or is assigned, responsibility.

Well, you originally said it smeared everyone's honor. I disagree. It does not reflect well on those who ordered it, those who commited it, and those who were complicit too it. It does not apply to the 99% of our soldiers who knew nothing about it.

It seems very unlikely that the Iraqis don't care about the abuses in that prison.

Some do I'm sure, but the day after the pictures were released only about 500 people showed up to protest. U.S. officials apologised, promised to take action, and we haven't heard to much unrest over there since have we? The point is our own media is making a much bigger deal of this than anyone else.

Seems unlikely to me.

Well, they sawed off Nick Berg's head didn't they? A man they captured a week before, and then said they were doing in response to Abu Ghraib, knowing our media would run with it. The fact is the liberal media in this country is dancing to the terrorist's music. Don't think the terrorists will miss that.

The highest respect we can show the folks in the field is to demand full accountability for those in the chain of command that disgraced the uniform. If that includes the Sec'y of Defense although he's never worn a uniform), so be it. The investigation should go where the evidence leads, no matter what the political consequences.

If Sec. Rumsfeld ordered the sexual humiliation of prisoners, ordered soldiers to perform sexual acts with each other in front of the prisoners, and this can be proven then he is a weirdo and should be fired.

Somehow I doubt that's the kind of man the Secretary is.

 

[freeandfun1]

I correspong via email with several soldiers in Iraq. What I keep hearing from them all is that they are actually seeing very little combat. Most of the deaths are being caused by IED's not from actual confrontational combat with the enemy!

 

[Doc Holiday]

With regard to your comments (1) I remind you of the comments of John McCain on the subject. He pointed out that the Geneva Convention and the Convention on Torture were put in place to protect Americans.

If it was put in place to protect Americans, then it is definitely time to get rid of them. After all, the North Koreans tortured our soldiers, the Chinese tortured our soldiers, the Vietnamese tortured our soldiers and the Arabs have tortured our soldiers. If it's supposed to protect, it's been failing miserably and it's time to DITCH THE SHIT, IT DOESN'T WORK!

 

[JIHADTHIS]

Calls for Rummy's resignation are just a ploy by the Dems to hurl more shit at the current admin. It's really really sad how screwed up this country has become.

st8_o_mind's reactionary crap plays right into our enemies hands.

 

[nycflasher]

Rummy should prob. go. Because of his leadership, other countries will likely not feel obligated to follow rules laid out by the Geneva Convention. It's a distinct possibilty, anyway.

 

[dilloduck]

Other countries believe that Americans get what they deserve when they are captured. They thought we deserved the WTC attack. They love to see us fail because we are king of the hill. It's simply the result of being the best country and they are envious.

To replace Rummy would scapegoating him and would not alter the opinion of the world or the liberals in America. They would just look for the next victim. Rummy has an incredible amount of experience that our troops respect. We should too! Who would we replace him with? John McCain is getting flakey on us here. If the Dems want him for VP, I find his views subject to scrutiny at this time

 

[nycflasher]

I like McCain. I think I heard him say something yesterday along the lines of "I'll get to the bottom of this."

I kinda doubt Rummy loses his office, but I wouldn't cry if he did. Anyone read Seymour Hersch's New Yorker article this week? VERY interesting reading!

 

[dilloduck]

Why?

 

[nycflasher]

Originally posted by dilloduck
Why?

Regarding the subject of this thread...

 

[JIHADTHIS]

Again,

While we are busy cannibalizing ourselves, the rest of the wrold laughs at us and plans it's next move. Who need's enemies when we enjoy falling on our own sword so much.....

The ABB crowd is obviously going to milk this for all it's worth.