NationStates Jolt Archive

"WASHINGTON (AP) -- The U.S. Army has investigated the deaths of 37 prisoners held by U.S. forces in Iraq and Afghanistan since August 2002, Pentagon officials revealed Friday.

Among the prisoner deaths, nine are still being investigated as possible homicides, eight by the military and at least one by the Justice Department because it apparently involved only CIA personnel.

In a 10th case, a soldier was punished and dismissed from the Army for using excessive force after shooting to death a man in Iraq who was throwing rocks at him in September 2003.

The rest are attributed to natural causes or considered justifiable homicides, in which a soldier had reason to use deadly force on a dangerously violent prisoner, officials said. Eight deaths, in four incidents in Iraq, were considered justified.

Even as the investigation into the abuse and humiliation of prisoners in Iraq goes forward, similar criminal inquiries are under way into the circumstances of prisoners who died.

The statistical breakdown was provided by a senior military official, who briefed reporters Friday on condition he not be identified.

Bryan Whitman, a Pentagon spokesman, said members of Congress were given the same information Friday.

The nine prisoner homicides apparently still under investigation:

# Abdul Jaleel, 46, who died January 9, 2004, at Forward Operating Base Rifles near Al Asad, Iraq. He died of "blunt force injuries and asphyxia."

# Maj. Gen. Abed Hamed Mowhoush, a former commander of Saddam Hussein's air defenses, who died November 26, 2003, during interrogation at Qaim, Iraq. His death may have involved a CIA officer who is an interrogator. Doctors attributed his death to "asphyxia due to smothering and chest compression."

# Manadel Al-Jamadi, who was being held at Abu Ghraib, the Iraqi prison in which the well-known abuse of prisoners took place. He died November 4, 2003, death of "blunt force injuries complicated by compromised respiration," doctors said. Two CIA personnel, an officer and a contract translator, were present when he died, and the agency and Justice Department are conducting inquiries.

# Abdul Wali, a prisoner at Asadabad, Afghanistan, who died June 21, 2003. The CIA's inspector general is conducting an inquiry into this death; it is unclear whether the Army still is.

# Dilar Dababa, who was being held near Baghdad. He died June 13, 2003, of what doctors determined was a head injury.

# An Afghan listed only as Dilawar, 22, held at Bagram, who died December 10, 2002. Doctors attributed his death to "blunt force injuries to lower extremities complicating coronary artery disease."

# Mullah Habibullah, about 28, an Afghan held at Bagram, who died December 3, 2002. Doctors attributed his death to "pulmonary embolism due to blunt force injuries to the legs."

# Two additional deaths of unidentified prisoners, at least one of which occurred in Iraq.

Military death certificates released Friday by the Pentagon also attribute two more deaths to "medical homicide," which means that the person died in connection with the actions or influence of another person. It does not necessarily mean a crime occurred. It was unclear whether these deaths are being criminally investigated.

They are:

# Fahin Ali Gumaa, 44, who died in Baghdad on April 28, 2004, several days after suffering multiple gunshot wounds.

# Abdul Wahid, who died Nov. 6, 2003, in Helmand province, Afghanistan. His death is attributed to multiple blunt force injuries that were complicated by a muscle condition.

The military also released the death certificate of prisoner Nagem Sadoon Hatab, a 52-year-old former Baath Party official, who was killed on June 6, 2003, when a Marine grabbed him by the neck, snapping a bone and mortally injuring him. Investigators believed the death was accidental, but two of the Marine's superiors face charges in connection with Hatab's treatment.

The 37 deaths under Army investigation are from 33 incidents, two of which involved more than one death. That is eight more cases than the Pentagon had publicly reported two weeks ago.

Of the 33 cases, 30 involve detainees who died inside U.S.-run detention facilities. Of the others, one involved a soldier who shot and killed an Afghani who had lunged toward a weapon, the senior military officer said.

Another was an Iraqi who drowned after he was forced off a bridge by a U.S. soldier. In the third case, a U.S. soldier shot and killed an Iraqi when he lunged at another U.S. soldier, the official said. It is unclear whether any of these three cases have been resolved.

Also, for the first time Friday, the Justice Department acknowledged that it has opened a criminal investigation into allegations of prisoner abuse in Iraq. Justice spokesman Mark Corallo said the probe involved an unidentified civilian contractor working for the Defense Department. It was unclear if the case being investigated by the Justice Department involved a death.

The Justice Department can prosecute such contractors for crimes committed overseas, including torture, if they are not already under military jurisdiction.

"We remain committed to taking all appropriate action within our jurisdiction regarding allegations of mistreatment of Iraqi prisoners," Corallo said.

No further details were provided. The Justice Department has also received at least three referrals for possible prosecution from the CIA related to prisoner abuse allegations, but has not announced a full criminal investigation into those cases.

Whitman, the Pentagon spokesman, said records are still be examined, and that the number of cases could rise."

"WASHINGTON (AP) -- The U.S. Army has investigated the deaths of 37 prisoners held by U.S. forces in Iraq and Afghanistan since August 2002, Pentagon officials revealed Friday.

Among the prisoner deaths, nine are still being investigated as possible homicides, eight by the military and at least one by the Justice Department because it apparently involved only CIA personnel.

In a 10th case, a soldier was punished and dismissed from the Army for using excessive force after shooting to death a man in Iraq who was throwing rocks at him in September 2003.

The rest are attributed to natural causes or considered justifiable homicides, in which a soldier had reason to use deadly force on a dangerously violent prisoner, officials said. Eight deaths, in four incidents in Iraq, were considered justified.

Even as the investigation into the abuse and humiliation of prisoners in Iraq goes forward, similar criminal inquiries are under way into the circumstances of prisoners who died.

The statistical breakdown was provided by a senior military official, who briefed reporters Friday on condition he not be identified.

Bryan Whitman, a Pentagon spokesman, said members of Congress were given the same information Friday.

The nine prisoner homicides apparently still under investigation:

# Abdul Jaleel, 46, who died January 9, 2004, at Forward Operating Base Rifles near Al Asad, Iraq. He died of "blunt force injuries and asphyxia."

# Maj. Gen. Abed Hamed Mowhoush, a former commander of Saddam Hussein's air defenses, who died November 26, 2003, during interrogation at Qaim, Iraq. His death may have involved a CIA officer who is an interrogator. Doctors attributed his death to "asphyxia due to smothering and chest compression."

# Manadel Al-Jamadi, who was being held at Abu Ghraib, the Iraqi prison in which the well-known abuse of prisoners took place. He died November 4, 2003, death of "blunt force injuries complicated by compromised respiration," doctors said. Two CIA personnel, an officer and a contract translator, were present when he died, and the agency and Justice Department are conducting inquiries.

# Abdul Wali, a prisoner at Asadabad, Afghanistan, who died June 21, 2003. The CIA's inspector general is conducting an inquiry into this death; it is unclear whether the Army still is.

# Dilar Dababa, who was being held near Baghdad. He died June 13, 2003, of what doctors determined was a head injury.

# An Afghan listed only as Dilawar, 22, held at Bagram, who died December 10, 2002. Doctors attributed his death to "blunt force injuries to lower extremities complicating coronary artery disease."

# Mullah Habibullah, about 28, an Afghan held at Bagram, who died December 3, 2002. Doctors attributed his death to "pulmonary embolism due to blunt force injuries to the legs."

# Two additional deaths of unidentified prisoners, at least one of which occurred in Iraq.

Military death certificates released Friday by the Pentagon also attribute two more deaths to "medical homicide," which means that the person died in connection with the actions or influence of another person. It does not necessarily mean a crime occurred. It was unclear whether these deaths are being criminally investigated.

They are:

# Fahin Ali Gumaa, 44, who died in Baghdad on April 28, 2004, several days after suffering multiple gunshot wounds.

# Abdul Wahid, who died Nov. 6, 2003, in Helmand province, Afghanistan. His death is attributed to multiple blunt force injuries that were complicated by a muscle condition.

The military also released the death certificate of prisoner Nagem Sadoon Hatab, a 52-year-old former Baath Party official, who was killed on June 6, 2003, when a Marine grabbed him by the neck, snapping a bone and mortally injuring him. Investigators believed the death was accidental, but two of the Marine's superiors face charges in connection with Hatab's treatment.

The 37 deaths under Army investigation are from 33 incidents, two of which involved more than one death. That is eight more cases than the Pentagon had publicly reported two weeks ago.

Of the 33 cases, 30 involve detainees who died inside U.S.-run detention facilities. Of the others, one involved a soldier who shot and killed an Afghani who had lunged toward a weapon, the senior military officer said.

Another was an Iraqi who drowned after he was forced off a bridge by a U.S. soldier. In the third case, a U.S. soldier shot and killed an Iraqi when he lunged at another U.S. soldier, the official said. It is unclear whether any of these three cases have been resolved.

Also, for the first time Friday, the Justice Department acknowledged that it has opened a criminal investigation into allegations of prisoner abuse in Iraq. Justice spokesman Mark Corallo said the probe involved an unidentified civilian contractor working for the Defense Department. It was unclear if the case being investigated by the Justice Department involved a death.

The Justice Department can prosecute such contractors for crimes committed overseas, including torture, if they are not already under military jurisdiction.

"We remain committed to taking all appropriate action within our jurisdiction regarding allegations of mistreatment of Iraqi prisoners," Corallo said.

No further details were provided. The Justice Department has also received at least three referrals for possible prosecution from the CIA related to prisoner abuse allegations, but has not announced a full criminal investigation into those cases.

Whitman, the Pentagon spokesman, said records are still be examined, and that the number of cases could rise."

This list shows/proves that abuse was indeed systemic, although this was originally denied. Maybe Hersch's comments in the New Yorker will be given much more consideration?

It should be interesting to see what charges will arise out of this use of ultimate force?

hmmm

"WASHINGTON (AP) -- The U.S. Army has investigated the deaths of 37 prisoners held by U.S. forces in Iraq and Afghanistan since August 2002, Pentagon officials revealed Friday.

Among the prisoner deaths, nine are still being investigated as possible homicides, eight by the military and at least one by the Justice Department because it apparently involved only CIA personnel.

In a 10th case, a soldier was punished and dismissed from the Army for using excessive force after shooting to death a man in Iraq who was throwing rocks at him in September 2003.

The rest are attributed to natural causes or considered justifiable homicides, in which a soldier had reason to use deadly force on a dangerously violent prisoner, officials said. Eight deaths, in four incidents in Iraq, were considered justified.

Even as the investigation into the abuse and humiliation of prisoners in Iraq goes forward, similar criminal inquiries are under way into the circumstances of prisoners who died.

The statistical breakdown was provided by a senior military official, who briefed reporters Friday on condition he not be identified.

Bryan Whitman, a Pentagon spokesman, said members of Congress were given the same information Friday.

The nine prisoner homicides apparently still under investigation:

# Abdul Jaleel, 46, who died January 9, 2004, at Forward Operating Base Rifles near Al Asad, Iraq. He died of "blunt force injuries and asphyxia."

# Maj. Gen. Abed Hamed Mowhoush, a former commander of Saddam Hussein's air defenses, who died November 26, 2003, during interrogation at Qaim, Iraq. His death may have involved a CIA officer who is an interrogator. Doctors attributed his death to "asphyxia due to smothering and chest compression."

# Manadel Al-Jamadi, who was being held at Abu Ghraib, the Iraqi prison in which the well-known abuse of prisoners took place. He died November 4, 2003, death of "blunt force injuries complicated by compromised respiration," doctors said. Two CIA personnel, an officer and a contract translator, were present when he died, and the agency and Justice Department are conducting inquiries.

# Abdul Wali, a prisoner at Asadabad, Afghanistan, who died June 21, 2003. The CIA's inspector general is conducting an inquiry into this death; it is unclear whether the Army still is.

# Dilar Dababa, who was being held near Baghdad. He died June 13, 2003, of what doctors determined was a head injury.

# An Afghan listed only as Dilawar, 22, held at Bagram, who died December 10, 2002. Doctors attributed his death to "blunt force injuries to lower extremities complicating coronary artery disease."

# Mullah Habibullah, about 28, an Afghan held at Bagram, who died December 3, 2002. Doctors attributed his death to "pulmonary embolism due to blunt force injuries to the legs."

# Two additional deaths of unidentified prisoners, at least one of which occurred in Iraq.

Military death certificates released Friday by the Pentagon also attribute two more deaths to "medical homicide," which means that the person died in connection with the actions or influence of another person. It does not necessarily mean a crime occurred. It was unclear whether these deaths are being criminally investigated.

They are:

# Fahin Ali Gumaa, 44, who died in Baghdad on April 28, 2004, several days after suffering multiple gunshot wounds.

# Abdul Wahid, who died Nov. 6, 2003, in Helmand province, Afghanistan. His death is attributed to multiple blunt force injuries that were complicated by a muscle condition.

The military also released the death certificate of prisoner Nagem Sadoon Hatab, a 52-year-old former Baath Party official, who was killed on June 6, 2003, when a Marine grabbed him by the neck, snapping a bone and mortally injuring him. Investigators believed the death was accidental, but two of the Marine's superiors face charges in connection with Hatab's treatment.

The 37 deaths under Army investigation are from 33 incidents, two of which involved more than one death. That is eight more cases than the Pentagon had publicly reported two weeks ago.

Of the 33 cases, 30 involve detainees who died inside U.S.-run detention facilities. Of the others, one involved a soldier who shot and killed an Afghani who had lunged toward a weapon, the senior military officer said.

Another was an Iraqi who drowned after he was forced off a bridge by a U.S. soldier. In the third case, a U.S. soldier shot and killed an Iraqi when he lunged at another U.S. soldier, the official said. It is unclear whether any of these three cases have been resolved.

Also, for the first time Friday, the Justice Department acknowledged that it has opened a criminal investigation into allegations of prisoner abuse in Iraq. Justice spokesman Mark Corallo said the probe involved an unidentified civilian contractor working for the Defense Department. It was unclear if the case being investigated by the Justice Department involved a death.

The Justice Department can prosecute such contractors for crimes committed overseas, including torture, if they are not already under military jurisdiction.

"We remain committed to taking all appropriate action within our jurisdiction regarding allegations of mistreatment of Iraqi prisoners," Corallo said.

No further details were provided. The Justice Department has also received at least three referrals for possible prosecution from the CIA related to prisoner abuse allegations, but has not announced a full criminal investigation into those cases.

Whitman, the Pentagon spokesman, said records are still be examined, and that the number of cases could rise."

This list shows/proves that abuse was indeed systemic, although this was originally denied. Maybe Hersch's comments in the New Yorker will be given much more consideration?

It should be interesting to see what charges will arise out of this use of ultimate force?

And they are defending this too!
This is a total fiasco. Where I come from "accidentally" snapping someones neck has consequences.

And they are defending this too!
This is a total fiasco. Where I come from "accidentally" snapping someones neck has consequences.

Who is defending such actions? Where I come from, such disregard for human life, is also punishable to the fullest extent of the law. There is no such thing as justifiable homicide in a truly democratic society.

And they are defending this too!
This is a total fiasco. Where I come from "accidentally" snapping someones neck has consequences.

Who is defending such actions? Where I come from, such disregard for human life, is also punishable to the fullest extent of the law. There is no such thing as justifiable homicide in a truly democratic society.

The army and those courts... They say those instances are "being investigated"...And then go on to say it's allright to break a mans neck (in other words: kill him).
A year in prison for that s&m crazed rapist girl, Lynndie England? Or maybe even no time at all.
This whole thing is a joke...

Not that I would be one to ever add fuel to the fire but....[/sarcasm]

Look at this report from the Washington Post. (http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A48229-2004May22.html)

A military lawyer for a soldier charged in the Abu Ghraib abuse case stated that a captain at the prison said the highest-ranking U.S. military officer in Iraq was present during some "interrogations and/or allegations of the prisoner abuse," according to a recording of a military hearing obtained by The Washington Post.

The lawyer, Capt. Robert Shuck, said he was told that Army Lt. Gen. Ricardo S. Sanchez and other senior military officers were aware of what was taking place on Tier 1A of Abu Ghraib. Shuck is assigned to defend Staff Sgt. Ivan L. "Chip" Frederick II of the 372nd Military Police Company. During an April 2 hearing that was open to the public, Shuck said the company commander, Capt. Donald J. Reese, was prepared to testify in exchange for immunity. The military prosecutor questioned Shuck about what Reese would say under oath.

Still look like a handful of rogue soldiers anyone?

Funny thing--a couple of days ago, I caught El Rushbo on the radio saying that we--and I quote--"need to move on from this whole fiasco." Now some of you may know that the group Moveon.org took their name from the call to move on from the Clinton investigation once it became clear that all they were going to get was a case of lying about a blowjob, so it seems a touch comical that El Rushbo would use that particular turn of phrase when describing something far more serious and damaging to the country in the long term. It would seem comical, that is, if we weren't talking about what sounds like murder and torture.

Not that I would be one to ever add fuel to the fire but....[/sarcasm]

Look at this report from the Washington Post. (http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A48229-2004May22.html)

A military lawyer for a soldier charged in the Abu Ghraib abuse case stated that a captain at the prison said the highest-ranking U.S. military officer in Iraq was present during some "interrogations and/or allegations of the prisoner abuse," according to a recording of a military hearing obtained by The Washington Post.

The lawyer, Capt. Robert Shuck, said he was told that Army Lt. Gen. Ricardo S. Sanchez and other senior military officers were aware of what was taking place on Tier 1A of Abu Ghraib. Shuck is assigned to defend Staff Sgt. Ivan L. "Chip" Frederick II of the 372nd Military Police Company. During an April 2 hearing that was open to the public, Shuck said the company commander, Capt. Donald J. Reese, was prepared to testify in exchange for immunity. The military prosecutor questioned Shuck about what Reese would say under oath.

Still look like a handful of rogue soldiers anyone?

Funny thing--a couple of days ago, I caught El Rushbo on the radio saying that we--and I quote--"need to move on from this whole fiasco." Now some of you may know that the group Moveon.org took their name from the call to move on from the Clinton investigation once it became clear that all they were going to get was a case of lying about a blowjob, so it seems a touch comical that El Rushbo would use that particular turn of phrase when describing something far more serious and damaging to the country in the long term. It would seem comical, that is, if we weren't talking about what sounds like murder and torture.
What are the penalties in the US for possession of an illegal drug?
How about DUI?
Rape?
Sexual assault?
Cruelty towards an animal?

I am willing to bet that those domestic crimes will carry lengthier penalties than what will be meted out in Iraq for far worse crimes????

I notice that this thread is remarkably free of the apologists that usually can't wait to come up with a 'justification'. I guess thats only because they have realized that there really is no justification possible. Not unless you want to show yourself as a some sadist without consience. Not unless you want to move aside the fact that the US is supossed to be a democracy and freedom loving nation.

I notice that this thread is remarkably free of the apologists that usually can't wait to come up with a 'justification'. I guess thats only because they have realized that there really is no justification possible. Not unless you want to show yourself as a some sadist without consience. Not unless you want to move aside the fact that the US is supossed to be a democracy and freedom loving nation.In all fairness, it is late here in the US--I'm on the west coast and it's after 1 in the morning. I'm sure they'll come up with some kind of crap to try to justify it tomorrow.

And they are defending this too!
This is a total fiasco. Where I come from "accidentally" snapping someones neck has consequences.

Who is defending such actions? Where I come from, such disregard for human life, is also punishable to the fullest extent of the law. There is no such thing as justifiable homicide in a truly democratic society.

The army and those courts... They say those instances are "being investigated"...And then go on to say it's allright to break a mans neck (in other words: kill him).
A year in prison for that s&m crazed rapist girl, Lynndie England? Or maybe even no time at all.
This whole thing is a joke...

Well it's not that easy. Military prision is pretty nasty. It's not the federal or state system and thus does not abide by many "questionable" rules.

But you are right. They can't make her a sacrificial lamb because she can talk.....

Systemic?..hardly..while any deaths are tragic....but out of literally thousands of prisoners we have 37 deaths, of those, some of those were justified....and Canuck...no justified homicide eh...there are lots of cases for justified homicide..our legal books are full of precendents...but that is neither here nor there...

I found more deaths in our civilian corrections system...does that mean there is a conspiracy by civilian prison guards to kill the criminals in our state and federal prison system?

Listen...even by the article any death is being investigated, people have and will receive prison time...court-martials are being conducted. We are far from perfect..but Gods....this obsession with this negativity you guys have..I can certainly understand the anti-war crowds pouncing on this issue..but it is not the end-all there...New Auburnland has taken pains to give you guys an alternate picture...that of over 120,000 troops that are trying to help Iraq in a hundred different ways..of reaching out to local leaders, employing local laborers on construction projects..the training of the police and the new Iraqi Army...the updating of their oil drilling/refining infrastructure....just once I'd like you guys to acknowledge that not every American soldier over there is a sadistic thug out to torture poor Iraqis...that mebbe..just mebbe there are some soldiers over there trying to help forge a new nation...one free of the taint of the old regime.

Yes...rightly point out our faults...by all means..it's right and proper to do so, be horrified at the conduct of some of our people....it's tragic..just once I'd like you to give credit for the good things we are doing there.

Salishe--if this goes all the way up the chain of command, if the commanding officer in Iraq is shown to have been personally present at some of this as the Washington Post alleges, will you then admit that the problem is endemic, not to the general forces, but to the people in charge?

No one here is suggesting that all the US forces are guilty, but we're also not buying the administration line that this was the work of a handful of rogue soldiers. I just want the investigation to continue, and I want everyone responsible to answer for it.

Salishe--if this goes all the way up the chain of command, if the commanding officer in Iraq is shown to have been personally present at some of this as the Washington Post alleges, will you then admit that the problem is endemic, not to the general forces, but to the people in charge?

No one here is suggesting that all the US forces are guilty, but we're also not buying the administration line that this was the work of a handful of rogue soldiers. I just want the investigation to continue, and I want everyone responsible to answer for it.

Of course..but even General Takuba has stated that in his investigation, one that is pretty well in depth gives no indication that higher ups were aware, gave orders too, alluded too, hinted at..etc.to conduct abuse of prisoners.

Oh..and I beg to differ there have been several posters on here who have basically stated that all American soldiers are murderers, sadists, etc..that they have such a hatred on for us that even if the liberation of Iraq had gone smoothly without problems they would still seek to criticize it.

General Taguba has also said that his investigation was limited in scope, and he made sure to emphasize that point in his Senate testimony, so as not to give the impression that the responsibility for these actions was limited to the 7 soldiers in custody. There's a link in an earlier post of mine on this thread, to an article in the Post that deals with the potential that this goes as high as Sanchez in Iraq, and I've read other reports that talk about the possibility that Rumsfeld and Bush himself were briefed on it. I just want the investigation to continue and to get to the bottom of it, because I do respect the military as a general rule, and I don't want the bastards who authorized this to get away with it, civilian or military.

I suppose I shouldn't have said "no one." There are idiots who will blame the whole for the actions of some. But most aren't blaming the entire military for these problems. I just happen to think that the disease runs pretty high in the chain of command. But I don't think it's endemic to the service as a whole.

General Taguba has also said that his investigation was limited in scope, and he made sure to emphasize that point in his Senate testimony, so as not to give the impression that the responsibility for these actions was limited to the 7 soldiers in custody. There's a link in an earlier post of mine on this thread, to an article in the Post that deals with the potential that this goes as high as Sanchez in Iraq, and I've read other reports that talk about the possibility that Rumsfeld and Bush himself were briefed on it. I just want the investigation to continue and to get to the bottom of it, because I do respect the military as a general rule, and I don't want the bastards who authorized this to get away with it, civilian or military.

I suppose I shouldn't have said "no one." There are idiots who will blame the whole for the actions of some. But most aren't blaming the entire military for these problems. I just happen to think that the disease runs pretty high in the chain of command. But I don't think it's endemic to the service as a whole.

This is going to surprise you...but I'm not sure the idea came from up top...but I do believe there is a desire to obtain intel at any price, especially if it'd lead to the saving of American lives.

I can point out to the CIA's Operation Phoenix...the deliberate targetting and assasination of VietCong political and military leaders....same mentality..the idea was to save American lives..and the CIA went to great lengths and determination in Phoenix...now..while there is no such operation in Iraq...I can definitely see the "get the info, however we can" mentality.

Salishe, as you know, I have no experience in the military. All I have to go on are news reports. But those reports have been coming in hot and heavy over the last few weeks, and they're pointing the fingers pretty high. Pictures that have come out have already shown that there were more than just the 7 soldiers involved. I've seen them. they were posted prominently on the MSNBC website. Military intelligence people are in there and are actively directing the abuse.

And the link I posted earlier suggests that the people being rolled up now are willing to roll on their superiors in order to save their own asses. Sanchez has been directly implicated on the record. I'm not making this stuff up. It's a feeding frenzy out there right now and it's not going away.

just once I'd like you guys to acknowledge that not every American soldier over there is a sadistic thug out to torture poor Iraqis...that mebbe..just mebbe there are some soldiers over there trying to help forge a new nation...one free of the taint of the old regime.

I get what your saying Sal, but let me ask you this...
why are we still there, especially when they so very clearly dont want us to be?
You can say that Im mistaken, and that they do ...but deep down you know thats not the case.

As for the incidents, the fact that they happened at all is wrong.
Period.
These are the people that we are trying to help..not "terrorists"..or some alleged boogeymen.
Theyre Iraqi citizens...maybe some of them worked for Husseins regime, and thats a bad choice to make certainly.....but if they commited crimes..then they should be given a trial..or put through the Iraqi criminal justice system...preferably.

Why are we still there...fighting the people were trying to help?
What sense does that make?

just once I'd like you guys to acknowledge that not every American soldier over there is a sadistic thug out to torture poor Iraqis...that mebbe..just mebbe there are some soldiers over there trying to help forge a new nation...one free of the taint of the old regime.

I get what your saying Sal, but let me ask you this...
why are we still there, especially when they so very clearly dont want us to be?
You can say that Im mistaken, and that they do ...but deep down you know thats not the case.

As for the incidents, the fact that they happened at all is wrong.
Period.
These are the people that we are trying to help..not "terrorists"..or some alleged boogeymen.
Theyre Iraqi citizens...maybe some of them worked for Husseins regime, and thats a bad choice to make certainly.....but if they commited crimes..then they should be given a trial..or put through the Iraqi criminal justice system...preferably.

Why are we still there...fighting the people were trying to help?
What sense does that make?

You ask why we are there...because I believe your opinion that they don't want us there is wrong as you believe my opinion is..every anti-war person on this forum has consistently and constantly made omissions bout the Kurds in the north of the country...granted they may be at best 15% of the population but that is only because many of their brethren are located across the Turkish border...but the Iraqi Kurds do control 1/3 of the nation...they are flourishing..they are prospering..they have welcomed our liberation from day one. Because I believe that the anti-war crowd must in order to support their position deny the Kurds and their situation..that any progress toward a stabilized regime must be denied..

The Shiites are not in uprising across the country, the initial reports were indeed shown to be false. Their own clerics are at odds with Sadr, so it's not like the Shiites across their territory have supported Sadr, many are just trying to renew their lives in peace..but just like the Western World has stupidly lumped in all muslims in this War on Terror..it would be a mistake to lump all Iraqi Shiites in with Sadr's mixed group of foreign fighters and those linked to his army..which both him and his army are backed by Iran....this much has been proved..Iran would like nothing better then to have another Iranian style theocracy right next door to them and as a buffer against Russia.

We are fighting in one section of the country where we knew we'd have problems....(1)former Sunnis/Baathist who of course are now low dog on the totem pole whereas with Saddam they were on top, (2)Iraqi Shiites backed by Iran intent on destabilizing any chance for a democractic Iraq, and (3)Al-Queda or one of it's splinter groups which stands to lose bigtime if Iraq is stabilized and democratic.

everyone pretends they are so concerned that "life is cheap"
OH, NO! People are violent towards other people!!!
News flash: there wouldn't ever even be war if people cared as much as they say they do.

I wonder at times if maybe the muslims are right and we are infidels. I have a difficult time believing that a senior offficer would command "fondle the natives and have group intercourse in front of them". This was obviously the result of sick-minded individuals. The trouble is that there were so many. Leads me to believe there is something wrong with the military-age poeple of America for it to be so common.

As much as I support the idea of liberating the people of Irag, I wonder about the morality of the generation doing it.

everyone pretends they are so concerned that "life is cheap"
OH, NO! People are violent towards other people!!!
News flash: there wouldn't ever even be war if people cared as much as they say they do.

The consequences for "accidentally" breaking a mans neck is what bothers me...

Besides...My country hasn't been in a war for a long long time.

I wonder at times if maybe the muslims are right and we are infidels. I have a difficult time believing that a senior offficer would command "fondle the natives and have group intercourse in front of them". This was obviously the result of sick-minded individuals. The trouble is that there were so many. Leads me to believe there is something wrong with the military-age poeple of America for it to be so common.

As much as I support the idea of liberating the people of Irag, I wonder about the morality of the generation doing it.

So many..really...there are over 100,000 troops in Iraq..and that is just we Americans...not counting 45,000 British and something along the lines of 18,000 internationals..what do you regard as "so common"..of 120,000 us troops at best even if I want to go way out on a limb here and say every member of the 800th Military Police Brigade which equals roughly 5000 officers and enlisted...that's still far from "so common" because we're not even going to include US forces worldwide.

I wonder at times if maybe the muslims are right and we are infidels. I have a difficult time believing that a senior offficer would command "fondle the natives and have group intercourse in front of them". This was obviously the result of sick-minded individuals. The trouble is that there were so many. Leads me to believe there is something wrong with the military-age poeple of America for it to be so common.

As much as I support the idea of liberating the people of Irag, I wonder about the morality of the generation doing it.

So many..really...there are over 100,000 troops in Iraq..and that is just we Americans...not counting 45,000 British and something along the lines of 18,000 internationals..what do you regard as "so common"..of 120,000 us troops at best even if I want to go way out on a limb here and say every member of the 800th Military Police Brigade which equals roughly 5000 officers and enlisted...that's still far from "so common" because we're not even going to include US forces worldwide.

And now...Back to the topic:

Considering your weird obsession with the US army and how it is always right and basically "good kids", do you think that the court martial is appropriate in this instance?

What about the punishment? Should someone be absolutely free from consequence because he "accidentally" snapped someones neck? And shooting prisoners? No consequence?
Are the sentences fair?

*bump*

What I also find troubleing and sad is the partisian outrage over the sexual humiliation of Iraqi prisoners. Every day prisoners in America are sexually assaulted and it is accepted and even joked about. Prisoners in other Islamic nations are tortured and killed.

Where is the world and domestic outrage over these other incidences?

Absent - because it cannot be twisted to server anyones political agenda.

Too sad.

What I also find troubleing and sad is the partisian outrage over the sexual humiliation of Iraqi prisoners. Every day prisoners in America are sexually assaulted and it is accepted and even joked about. Prisoners in other Islamic nations are tortured and killed.

Where is the world and domestic outrage over these other incidences?

Absent - because it cannot be twisted to server anyones political agenda.

Too sad.
Sexual assault should not be tolerated in either scenario. However there is a major difference between what is happening in Iraq and what is happening in America.

In America, most sexual assault is prisoner to prisoner. In Iraq, the sexual assault is by US guards to their Iraq prisoners, by means of torture. Hence the political outrage.

In regards to other Islamic nations torturing and killing their prisoners, to which nations are you referring?

I wonder at times if maybe the muslims are right and we are infidels. I have a difficult time believing that a senior offficer would command "fondle the natives and have group intercourse in front of them". This was obviously the result of sick-minded individuals. The trouble is that there were so many. Leads me to believe there is something wrong with the military-age poeple of America for it to be so common.

As much as I support the idea of liberating the people of Irag, I wonder about the morality of the generation doing it.

So many..really...there are over 100,000 troops in Iraq..and that is just we Americans...not counting 45,000 British and something along the lines of 18,000 internationals..what do you regard as "so common"..of 120,000 us troops at best even if I want to go way out on a limb here and say every member of the 800th Military Police Brigade which equals roughly 5000 officers and enlisted...that's still far from "so common" because we're not even going to include US forces worldwide.

And now...Back to the topic:

Considering your weird obsession with the US army and how it is always right and basically "good kids", do you think that the court martial is appropriate in this instance?

What about the punishment? Should someone be absolutely free from consequence because he "accidentally" snapped someones neck? And shooting prisoners? No consequence?
Are the sentences fair?

Weird obsession?...no..obligation..Never said the US Military was always right, nor do I think you can even pull up one post of mine that says that. And the majority of them are "good kids"....but I can pull up a post of yours basically stating we are all murderers. Quit your dramatics..it's not impressive.

As for snapping someone's neck..I can point to more then one incident where a perp/criminal/whatever legal term you choose has resisted the police/and or military provost marshal..I'm not familiar with the specifics of the case you're referring too. I'd have to see the context of the events you stipulate too..I saw a situation where a VietCong had managed to elude his Marine security detail, and was on the verge of strangling another Marine before one of my Marines pulled his .45 and pistol-whipped him because the VC wouldn't let go...the VC later died due to a blood-clot brought on by the pistol-whipping. In this case..it was justified as another Marine's life was in danger..I have no context yet..if you can please provide a link for me to peruse I can give you a better answer.

This is going to surprise you...but I'm not sure the idea came from up top...but I do believe there is a desire to obtain intel at any price, especially if it'd lead to the saving of American lives.

I can point out to the CIA's Operation Phoenix...the deliberate targetting and assasination of VietCong political and military leaders....same mentality..the idea was to save American lives..and the CIA went to great lengths and determination in Phoenix...now..while there is no such operation in Iraq...I can definitely see the "get the info, however we can" mentality.

But surely that desire, no matter how well-intentioned, is tragically defeated by the use of torture? Torture will produce vast quantities of information, but the information will be utterly worthless. People under torture will say anything, incriminate anybody, to make the torture stop. This might explain why the Red Cross was told by US soldiers that between 70% and 90% of the prisoners held in Iraq are there in error. And let's not be in any doubt, this was systematic -- and apparently endemic -- torture. Calling it "abuse" is pure sophistry, like arguing over what "is" means.

So the US gets its intel, but it isn't worth the paper it's written on -- and lousy intel will save no-one's life. Worse, the extensive use of torture has, after its inevitable exposure, hugely escalated anti-Coalition feelings in Iraq and around the world, further endangering the lives of our troops.

What the hell were they playing at? These torturers, these "interrogators" have set back the chance for any sort of democracy in Iraq and have put the lives of our soldiers at greater risk -- to say nothing about breaking international law, the Geneva convention and basic rules of human behaviour. Either they were just plain stupid, and thought that information from a torture victim would in some way resemble reality; or they did it because they wanted to. I don't know which option is worse.