What about the troops?
POSTED BY: Causal
UPDATED: Wednesday, December 26, 2012 15:17
VIEWED: 12314
PAGE 5 of 7
Yes, because everyone knows that still images prove that everyone who's deployed to Iraq must have tortured their very own Iraqi! And furthermore, the intense scrutiny in the post-Abu Ghraib world hasn't turned up a thing on systemic torture because the military has a vast conspiracy in which everyone has a role! And we all know that photos can't be reproduced, doctored, faked, or anything else! Oh, wait. Those are from the roll of film from the Abu Ghraib scandal. The same peresonnel appear in photos throughout that list.
Look, what these people did was wrong, no question, and I hope they're crucified, if for no other reason than for besmirching the honor of the rest of us. But a parade of photos hardly establishes anything like "systemic" torture.
Oh, and your IHT article, while interesting, only establishes a your-word-against-mine situation. Even if true, it's also not evidence of systemic torture.
________________________________________________________________________
Grand High Poobah of the Mythical Land of Iowa, and Keeper of State Secrets
Captain, FFF.net Grammar Police
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Testimony is evidence.
My post I believe shows shit flows downhill. They were more comfortable with torture if it was ordered. Who would be ordering that? They were more comfortable with torture if they suffered from depression or PTSD, or especially both. Now who would be keeping them on extended tours? They were more comfortable with torture if a whistleblower was invovled. That sounds like seige mentality to me. How would that happen, I wonder?
I don't think the troops are to blame - it belongs at the top.
NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Yep, I totally agree with you. How's this for testimony: I, and three of my friends, served in Iraq (and Afghanistan, in my case). Neither I, nor any of my friends, tortured anyone, nor have any first-hand knowledge of torture being performed. In addition, I personally participated in the interrogation of a number of Iraqis, and not only did we not torture them, there was one instance in which we loosened a prisoner's flex-cuffs because it was obvious that they were cutting off circulation to his hands, and we didn't want that.
Now, I don't disagree that there is malfeasance going on. But to claim that torture is commonplace and de rigeur is pretty ridiculous. Let's apply the principle of parsimony: which is the more realistic explanation for a lack of evidence for widespread, systemic torture by the majority of American units? That there is no such systemic torture, or that there is a vast government- and military-wide conspiracy to bury the evidence of all that torture? Principle of parsimony (aka Ockham's razor) says do not multiply entities beyond necessity; and positing a vast conspiracy of the type that would be required to suppress what would have to be a mountain of evidence is most certainly multiplying entities.
Now here's the part that I don't think people comprehend: I don't condone torture. I think the Abu Ghraib folks should be hung from the f
ing yard arm. They did wrong. In doing so, they soiled the honor of the rest of us who served honorably in Iraq, and never tortured a soul (the vast, vast majority, I can assure you). Torture is wrong. It shouldn't be done. If it's done, it should be punished severely. But I also maintain that accusing the troops (en masse, as some seem intent on doing) of torture on a grand scale is just ridiculous. It's an insult to all of us who served our country (and, by extension, you) honorably.
For the record, Rue, I don't feel attacked by you. This is more a general purpose rant than anything else.
________________________________________________________________________
Grand High Poobah of the Mythical Land of Iowa, and Keeper of State Secrets
Captain, FFF.net Grammar Police
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
I think we all know where I stand in regards to this war. Frem pretty much says all that needs to be said about that, so I won't bother going there.
I do have an opinion on how the media says we should feel about the war though. I resent being told that we can be against the war, but we must support our soldiers.
I'm not even saying that this is necessarily untrue on the whole. My brother served in the millitary and I was really worried for him. He already had a college degree prior to enlisting. He was even one of the ones who signed up after September 11th and not one of the weekend warriors looking for a free ride to college who bitched and whined when they had to do their duty. I have nothing but the utmost respect for him and what he did for this country and I believe that his intentions were benevolent and that he did not partake and was not aware of any torture situations.
Are the soldiers bad? No, I don't believe so. Not anymore so than I would say your average civillian is bad, which unfortunately isn't really saying all that much. They are doing a job and taking orders. If our soldiers stopped obeying orders, I don't know what makes anybody feel that we wouldn't have been invaded by any other country who has a much more diciplined army by now. Unfortunately, that's the nature of the beast.
My whole problem with the "If you don't support the war, you must support our troops", is that the overall sentiment among the sheeple is that very catch phrase. It makes it almost impossible to petition or picket the war without looking like an insensitive asshole to all of the Brave and Honorable Soldiers who put their lives on the line for you and me. I think this is the most sordid use of propeganda and doublethink I have ever been witness to in my life.
My closing thoughts are this:
If you have a loved one(s) serving in a hot zone, I suggest you pray to whatever God(s) you believe in that they make it home in one piece, physically and mentally, and show them that you support them, be it care packages or letters or whatnot. If you don't believe in any sort of higher power, just let them know that you love them and that you miss them and you long for their return. Otherwise, I see no problem with my statement that "I don't support the war or the soldiers". It is doublethink to believe that you could truly do both at the same time. I choose not to.
Let the crucification of 6SJ commence.......
"A government is a body of people, usually notably ungoverned." http://www.myspace.com/6ixstringjack
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
It's our current Commander-in-Chief I have issues with; not the men and women who serve in the Armed Forces of our country. In short, the troops aren't the bad guys, they just have "Curious George" leading them.
I will always respect the men and women in the Armed Forces, no matter what I think of the guy telling them what to do.
Fe'nos Tol
JOSSIS(Most Definitely)AGOD
Self appointed Forsaken! Been on the list for a while now!
98% of teens have smoked pot, if you are one of the 2% that haven't, copy this into your signature.
"Look at me, I'm STUPID!" The Doctor.
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Quote:
Originally posted by Causal:
Yes, because everyone knows that still images prove that everyone who's deployed to Iraq must have tortured their very own Iraqi! And furthermore, the intense scrutiny in the post-Abu Ghraib world hasn't turned up a thing on systemic torture because the military has a vast conspiracy in which everyone has a role! And we all know that photos can't be reproduced, doctored, faked, or anything else! Oh, wait. Those are from the roll of film from the Abu Ghraib scandal. The same peresonnel appear in photos throughout that list.
Look, what these people did was wrong, no question, and I hope they're crucified, if for no other reason than for besmirching the honor of the rest of us. But a parade of photos hardly establishes anything like "systemic" torture.
Oh, and your IHT article, while interesting, only establishes a your-word-against-mine situation. Even if true, it's also not evidence of systemic torture.
Exactly the response I expected - you attack the authenticity of the photos despite them being supplied by the US Military to the trial of US soldiers and that nobody's stories can be substantiated. Have you any idea how insulting that is to those who have been tortured? Put it this way, how insulted would you be if I said that you were lying about not torturing prisoners?
I'm just going to keep posting links to "one person's story" until the pile of dead bodies is so high that you can't ignore it.
Here's the Red Cross's report about US soldiers torturing Iraqi prisoners. Their verdict? Torture used as a modus operandi by certain parts of the military.
http://www.truthout.org/mm_01/4.rcr.iraq.pdf
If a thorough investigation by an independent source doesn't convince you, what will?
NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Well, I hope you're not busily replying to my old post right now, because that would only push this argument ahead.
Here's what I think we can agree with: torturing of detainees has occurred, it's wrong, and should be punished.
Here's what I think we disagree about: how widespread said torturing is.
My question to you is: you've entered the thread with information on torturing. Does that mean that you think that all the soldiers serving in Iraq are torturers? Are all our forces over their evil abusers?
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Quote:
Originally posted by 6ixStringJack:
My whole problem with the "If you don't support the war, you must support our troops", is that the overall sentiment among the sheeple is that very catch phrase. It makes it almost impossible to petition or picket the war without looking like an insensitive asshole to all of the Brave and Honorable Soldiers who put their lives on the line for you and me. I think this is the most sordid use of propeganda and doublethink I have ever been witness to in my life.
I call BS. I served, and if you want to picket and protest, be my guest. But don't do it outside the gate of a military base. Nobody there is in a position to do anything about. Don't do it by spitting on a soldier (which happened to my uncle)--he doesn't control US foreign policy. Don't do it by shouting slurs at military recruiters. If you want to protest the war, get your ass on a plane, and take your poster-board sign to 1600 Pennsylvania Ave and tell that guy how terrible you think the war is. He's the guy who has control over how this war thing goes. It's just pure bullshit to say that you can't protest the war without looking like a schmuck, because many of the people that I know that protest the war do so because they support the troops--and they think that the best thing that could be done to support them is to bring them all the hell home.
Quote:
I see no problem with my statement that "I don't support the war or the soldiers". It is doublethink to believe that you could truly do both at the same time. I choose not to.
Must be nice to think that "support the troops but not the war" is a doctrine for the "sheeple." That must make you feel all kinds of smart and special and different. Unfortunately, that's exactly what I want you to do. Claiming that it's impossible to separate the two is just asinine. What I'm asking you to do is exercise your power of discrimination. Can you detect a difference between the guy who gives orders and the guy who follows them? Between the civilian leadership of the military and the military itself? Can you distinguish between the person who ordered American forces into Iraq and the person that actually has to go there and carry a rifle? I'm sure that you can--you seem like a very bright chap. Now if you can do that, you can support the troops and not the war. Because supporting the troops is as easy as not blaming them for the situation we're in. It's as easy as saying, "Thanks for serving our country." As easy as not calling them monsters. If you can discriminate between a trigger-puller and the order-giver, you can support the troops. It's as easy as this: you hate the war, but you don't let that hatred extend to the people stuck fighting it.
________________________________________________________________________
Grand High Poobah of the Mythical Land of Iowa, and Keeper of State Secrets
Captain, FFF.net Grammar Police
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Quote:
Originally posted by Causal:
My question to you is: you've entered the thread with information on torturing. Does that mean that you think that all the soldiers serving in Iraq are torturers? Are all our forces over their evil abusers?
Of course not. But the fact you have to load the question that way (and indeed the title of this thread) shows how badly the soldiers in Iraq are perceived at the moment.
Amnesty International says that prisoner abuse is widespread. The Red Cross says prisoner abuse is widespread. The UN says prisoner abuse is widespread. This is systemic torture, not withstanding what's happening at Guantanamo.
The fish rots from the head of course and your President has made it quite clear that he's prepared to ignore international law and the Constitution. That's spread all the way down the government and the military, leading to exactly this situation: the US troops believe they are beyond the law which leads to incidents like this one:
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/americas/6384781.stm
So I guess my question to you is: traditionally soldiers have been hailed as heroes for the actions of the collective, regardless of individual deeds. Why should they not be collectively held responsible for their failure and atrocities committed under their banner?
NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
But they shouldn't be so hailed. Hero is a much abused term IMHO. I'm certainly no hero, and I don't want to be thought of that way. Furthermore, most people who really would fill the definition of a hero don't think they're heroes. So no, I don't think the troops should collectively be held responsible for the deeds of a few. Because even if every detention facility and every guard and every interrogator tortured--and I don't believe that's true--even if that's the case, guards and interrogators are a really small slice the American military presence in Iraq. Even if that were the case, why are you so intent on extending culpability to every soldier who is serving there? Your link to the BBC article is compelling--it would clearly seem that that guy should be locked away. But you are reasoning from single instances (like the murder of the girl, to global guilt (all serving in Iraq are guilty of war crimes). I din't commit any war crimes, nor did anyone I served with. So again, I ask you: am I a liar?
More on this later, I'm in class...
________________________________________________________________________
Grand High Poobah of the Mythical Land of Iowa, and Keeper of State Secrets
Captain, FFF.net Grammar Police
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME