"isolated incident"
 

A few of you have probably already seen this: More photos of US troops abusing Iraqi prisoners.
Here
These ones date from before the main bunch that caused such a ruckus.

How do we know those are Iraqi prisoners?
How do we know they are being abused?
Every picture tells a story but lets not embellish the story with vivid imaginations. All we know is what we see. :eyebrow:

Well if a cop sat on you, you'd probably consider it abuse. If they (well in breach of the geneva convention) pointed a gun at you and took photos...and one of them is bloodied. jamming people into the backs of trucks isn't exactly best practice either.
most of it's been confirmed, there's another doc on cryptome, I'll dig it up when I get a minute. It's also backed by the (now public) investigation and the fact AP is carrying the story.

Did they behead the prisoners?

What's your point? UT? That until america sinks worse than anyone else on earth, it's all good?

That would depend on how and why but lets get first things first. They are not cops, repeat, they are not cops. They are soldiers (War Fighters) and they are not rounding up some neighborhood delinquents. Remember the pictures (many, many, many) of the guys with sneakers, hoods & RPGs?
Excuse me....it's against the Geneva convention for a soldier (War Fighter) to point a gun at an enemy combatant/prisoner? Taking pictures is a no-no, but we haven't determined just who these people are yet. As for one of them being bloodied, I work for a living and get bloodied probably 3 times a week. Shit happens and we have no idea what the shit was leading up to these pictures being taken. Why is that? Looks less crowded than a Jap subway train. maybe they are laying down so their buddies out there don't shoot them along with the Americans. They wouldn't think twice about it, you know. The particulars behind these pictures have been confirmed? When? Where? By whom? That must have been the fastest investigation ever performed by the US military/Government in history.

Look, I'm not saying these aren't pictures of American soldiers (War Fighters) abusing Iraqui prisioners. I'm saying that these pictures don't tell me a damn thing. It's not fair to draw conclusions from the pictures and call it history/fact. :eyebrow:

No jag, it's like this. War is fucking hell. You only have to look a few images down to see "insurgents" aiming RPGs at US AND IRAQI forces, so what kind of pussy, frankly, do you have to be to look at some pretty fucking innocent images above that and cry abuse?

War is hell. The "insurgents" would kill you too if they could. Do you know who the enemy is? This is no time to be such a whining, simpering, crying little baby. Pull your nappies off and put on some pants and be a man, for crying out loud.

Put me in that theoretical position and I'm doing the same goddamn thing. Put you in and I bet you are too - after you soil yourself multiple times, of course.

UT if you are going to be so righteous as to violate American principles, then please explain why we had the right to cause the death of 98,000 Iraqis in only two years. Clearly like in Vietnam, they were all gooks? At what point do you change from American to Stalinist?

Does not matter if their peers point nuclear bombs at us. We don't abuse prisoners. This is why so many Americans came home alive in WWII. They have the right to point RPGs at unwelcome invaders lead by an outright lying president who Pearl Harbored their country. That is war. We have no right to abuse those prisoners IF we want more of our people to come home. And you have no right to justify torture - if you are calling yourself moral.

We Gitmoized those people, in part, because most were not even guilty. Because innocent people cannot tell us what we want to know, then that is sufficient to justify torture? Please explain where your morality begins.

In WWII, often when they ran out of prison space for Germans they just shot them.

This is why so many Americans came home alive in WWII. And when they came home they were celebrated and called the greatest generation.

Oh...I thought that was just Tom Brokaw trying to hawk a book.

Is this also where you obtained facts about the aluminum tubes? It was well understood by Germans that one fights Russians to the death and do anything necessary to surrender alive to Americans. German civilians were relieved when their own were captured by Americans. That meant their family members would be seen again. Germans often did not fight Americans to the death resulting in far fewer American deaths.

Where is this long list of Iraqis working for Americans? Thank you Abu Ghraid and other UT approved torture. Tell me, UT? Where is light at the end of your tunnel - now that all who look ugly should be tortured? How many thousands of Americans will die throughout Central Asia because people like you are so moral as to even advocate torture? Do you also approve of the 98,000 dead Iraqis killed as a result of an illegal US invasion? That also is consistent with the morally you are promoting.

It would be hypocritical for you to have a magentic yellow ribbon (Support the Troops) on your car. Advocating torture as you do means you want more Americans to die. How moral.

BTW, I don't really care about pictures any more. Its a forgone conclusion that torture was authorized as the highest levels of government. That the decisions were withheld from both Rice and Powell under orders from Cheney. Rice was furious. Powell remained quiet as the good soldier. That we know. What we don't know is how extensive the torture was and how serious the fallout from all the torture will be.

Remember all those orange alert threats? Many of them came as a result of Guantanamo 'debriefings'. This is what happens with torture. They tell you anything you want to know. And so we had all these silly, mythical threats from another terrorist attack. The last time, Tom Ridge has enough of these intelligence debriefings and refused to go from yellow to orange. The confrontation between he and Ashcroft then went public.

All this torture. Where is all the intelligence? Instead we ended up releasing hundreds of Guantanamo prisoners who are no long considered a threat. Go figure.

Well-said by both Bruce and TW, this one's a tough call.

Not to change the subject or anything, but I sure was hoping this would turn into a thread with some enlightening political commentary--as has been lacking recently on the Cellar. Wrong again. It's turned into yet another personal attack on someone because they have different point of view about something. What a shame, and how boring.

They didn't look dead to me. Your really stretching the definition of torture here. The use of the word abuse is open to question too. That can run the gamut from butt fucking to insults.
Abuse and torture are two words that get thrown around without definition, leaving it up to anyone that hears them to fill in with their imagination. It's as clear as mud but it covers the ground, syndrome.
If you are going to make accusations then,who-what-where-when-by whom-to whom. To throw out blanket charges is emotional not rational or logical. :p

Well, thank you for doing your part. If you're not part of the solution, you're part of the problem.
Hell, you don't have to be right, just post your opinion (that's all they are) on the topic at hand instead of critiques of the posters.
I don't wish to make you the whipping girl, but please follow the logic. ;)

And YOUR post about me is therefore doing exactly the same thing. Maybe you should try to follow that "logic" too. Thanks.

I read this thread before I opened the link, and I fully expected to see more photos of guards inside a prison, abusing prisoners.

I don't think that's what these pictures show. I think the pictures are of the nighttime raids performed by the US military on suspected insurgents' homes. I remember at the time when reading of those raids that I was concerned they would backfire. That a lot of innocent people were having their homes entered and that there was a growing animosity against the US military for these raids. At the time I viewed it as a possible strategic blunder, not as abuse. After seeing these pictures, I still think that it doesn't rise to the level of abuse. But I think history proves it was a blunder, just as the entire war was a blunder.

If I recall correctly, informants would tip off the military that a particular house contained insurgnets. We would go in and interrogate the suspects. Pictures were taken to keep track of the different players. Clearly some souvenir pictures were taken here. It's immature, but I don't think it's abuse.

These photos were clearly taken in "the field." The soldiers are fully outfitted with armor, helmets, and rifles. The prison guards in the other pictures were in t-shirts.

I am much more willing to forgive events that happen in the battlefield than events that happen in a controled environment like a prison. In Gitmo and Abu Grhiab the US military has time to write memos on prisoner treatment. Any abuse there was planned out and pre-meditated. In the field, the soldiers are all excited from battle, and much more likely to do questionable things in the heat of the moment. I'm much more likely to forgive the latter.

You know, I've been called a lot of things, innocent however is a new one. Firstly, go fuck yourself you goddamn red cheeked armchair warrior. I'm very, very aware of the realities of the situation on the ground, I have a friend who will be heading over next year with the Australian forces and a number of friends in the media who have gone, are going or work with those over there reporting how fucked up it is. Secondly, war it may be (though I could have sworn someone said something about major combat operations being over....no, oceania has always been at war with eurasia, silly me) when you go about 'liberating' countries from brutal dictatorships on the basis of moral authority you better fucking stick to some goddamn high standards of don't claim you have any moral authority to do anything, you're just as bad as those you claim to be liberating them from. Consistently, thoughout this invasion and occupation US forces have been shown to operate on an eye-for-an-eye basis, justice be damned. I wonder if you know who the enemy is? Depends where you go. It could be some splinter of someone that claims to be Al Queda, whatever that means now, it could be Iran-back militias, angry Sunnis, it could be radical Kurds who want a separate state.

The thing about an asymmetrical war in this day and age is the little guy can strike a real blow just by getting the enemy to sink to their level, score one of the insurgents.

Let's agree the war was a *ahem* bad idea but whether it was or was not, you still need imperfect men to imperfectly carry out the bloodiest and worst of duties on earth.

I'm sure the military has high standards but A) there will still, inevitably, be war crimes amongst 130,000 people of even the highest stripe carrying out this particular job, and B) no matter what, you will find some way to criticize whatever happens, even if in the long run it helps to save your sorry ass from getting blown up.

I mean look at this case. It's dumb on its face, but you have absolutely no context and yet you are seeking to describe it as "eye for an eye". What if you were in a firefight with these gentlemen for three hours, and at then end of it you had to patiently guard them for two days waiting for the paddy wagon, or you could give them a rifle butt to the head to get them to lie down in the truck while you transport them an hour to another unit? I know what I'd do.

"Sinking to their level" - OK, what's their level? What would they do with US prisoners?

Probably torture them. Sounds familiar.

This sorry mess has shown no sign of doing anything but create yet another focus point for anger and shows no sign of changing direction, it's made us all less safe, not more.

The eye for an eye is broader, the torture, the shooting of unarmed, possibly wounded in fallujah, the messages on the bridge, the way it's clear it runs all the way up the command chain. That's just the stuff that's surfaced.

Personally I'd probably keep a gun trained at them and load them into the truck? Of course that probably doesn't appeal to that badass warrior persona you seem keen to try on for size.

I'm not really a badass warrior but I'm glad we pick only the badass warriors to go. In reality I too would probably soil myself multiple times before doing something that got the rest of my unit killed. In light of that factor I do expect badass warrior behaviour from the badasses that actually do sign up and go. In the long run it probably saves a lot of time and trouble.

As for what we've seen indicating that the entire situation is eye for an eye, I suppose if the only war coverage you see is of the worst events of it, you would come away with such a narrative. It's kind of like seeking through a sack of rice, finding a stone, and declaring that the entire bag is stones. But in this case the [reflexively anti-war, anti-US] media does the seeking for you. Look! Look at the stone!

i think you are both arguing valid points, but UT has struck upon something important. *this is not about media bias* journalists are paid to tell a story. ratings = $$$ and the outlet that provides the most compelling story gets the best ratings and most money.

*newscaster voice*

Today in Iraq, 2 more schools have opened in the previously insurgent controlled area of Sadr City. 83 Children are now able to continue their education...
this isn't going to make it into the nwes rotation.

16 Marines were killed in Baghdad today as insurgents...
will lead.

both stories are true, but one will cause people to put the remote down and pay more attention. the danger is that some people only pay attention to one aspect of day to day operations in Iraq. the world isn't as black and white as we would like it to be, both good and bad things are happening over there.

The thing is I don't rely on media reports, I get to hear what doesn't make the news - on both sides - the positive stuff, gradual rebuilding and the really ugly stuff, the GIs missing half a face and the 3 year-olds losing limbs to shrapnel. In the end this is what I'm hearing. If anyone has come out of this mess well it's the British troops, don't think I'm any kind of patriot for this country or that they should be there but their actions have done more to pacify the country than anything else despite their shitty treatment by blair.

that being said Jag - having worked with British troops under the auspices of the UN, i can tell you part of why they are coming out a bit more cleanly. better control of the media that is with them and they haven't forgotten the primary rule of combat - holding the moral high ground is particularly irrelevant to a corpse.

in another country a couple of years ago, the british commander who had immediate authority over US troops literally tore up a certain young US soldier's ROE card and laughed saying that he'd rather take the heat for being un-PC than be shot. standing orders for clearing houses were to drop a few mortars into a house before going in. US troops don't generally do that. if you were standing outside a door and had to clear the room - grenades first, then go in.

not one of our guys got smoked during that timeperiod. media types were not present during these raids. to the best of my knowledge british troops are maintaining better control of the media than US troops are in Iraq as well.

edit: i'm not saying that we should start indescriminately taking people out. i am saying that it is extremely difficult to win battles and accomplish goals and maintain your "nice guy" image in front of cameras that only report snippets of the whole story.

Yes and no, this is a rough synopsis of what I've been getting.

British troops have been using a carrot/stick system, they've moved into areas comparatively softly and tried to interact with the local community, then when shit has hit the fan they've gone in hard and it's gone away, partly because of greater local support of their presence.

Images are weapons. Insurgents, terrorists use the gruesome images of beheadings, carnage to scare the opposition into behaving as they wish. Its played for horrid, evil effect. The images here are not all media images, they are taken as souvenirs by the soldiers there. That has its own creepiness and the real debate is "how do these play?" Image control and interpretation is a front of this war. Its journalists' jobs to reveal what we may not want to know or what may not be convenient- that might be an insurgent begging for his life in a "cowardly" way or a US soldier beating a kid. Its the perps job to be accountable. Its tricky when one cultural group seeks to rule through the power of perceived horrific God given force and the other by embracing God given human rights and freedoms. You can see how it can become confusing, message-wise.

I do think these images, however spun, however less evil, are ammo for the bad guys. Our culture is based on an assumption of critique! We are strong enough to deal with them, thats the check. And when it works, that the beauty and power.

And how would you spin this image? :confused:

I know that this is one of those "images seen round the world" and all ... but does anybody else think that the cigarette looks photoshopped?

Nope, looks real enough to me. Besides, cigarette or not, I think it's a great image representative of the true grit and resolve of our soldiers doing a tough, exhausting job, yet ever vigilant and alert.

It does to me. It's too clean and way too bright compared to the rest of the lighting in this photo.

That's what I meant. The lighting seems different, and the damn thing is pristine.

I don't spend my days crawling around getting shot at, and my cigs tend to be crumpled. It should at least be smudgy, slightly crinkled, something.

The way it's hanging in his mouth also looks odd.

Uh, crush-proof box? Or the camera man just handed him a fresh one from his pack? :confused:

I think it's washed-out by sunlight (unlike his face, which is shaded by his helmet.) You can see a similar whiteness along the top edge of his helmet.

The spin might be "vigilant and alert" or "sick and tired". Either way, very human.

It's a fake! Kill the bald man!
 

Yep, photoshopped. In addition to what you mentioned, there's no smoke near the cigarette, though the thing has been lit. There is smoke on the right side of the picture. If the cigarette were overexposed due to the sun, there would be a shadow on it somewhere (where it was shadowed by the soldier's face) -- there isn't.

Wrong- interview on TV with the wife or mother saying they gave him shit about smoking and he promised to quit when he leaves Iraq.

If he leaves Iraq. :(