More Torture Pictures

Off Topic Politics and World Issues
41

Zap,

[quote]Zap Branigan wrote:
[…]

You are incredibly wrong.

Depending on the point in time the # 1 supplier was either Russia, Germany or France.

The US has NEVER been a major arms supplier to Saddam.

For the brief period in time the US actually tried to work with this asshole our major contribution was satellite intelligence.

The only reason we worked with him is that he was fighting Iran at the time and we were working under the theory that the enemy of our enemy is our friend.

We quickly realized the error of our ways and opposed his military plans at every turn.

Russia, Germany and France were happy to violate UN sanctions against him and continue to supply him weaponry right up until America, Britain and others deposed this tyrant.

[/quote]

gives a good account of who sold most weapons to Iraq. Quite interesting to see that Germany does not feature there. Russia (or mostly the Soviet Union and its satellites) did, as did France.

If you want a breakdown in numbers of weapons delivered (not the financial volume), Germany is miles away from having been the biggest supplier, look at the numbers: http://www.sipri.org/contents/armstrad/TIV_imp_IRQ_70-04.pdf/download

JeffR has last year continuously failed to prove an involvement of any German government in illegal arms trading with Iraq (at least since reunification), and hence I shall rest that argument. What indeed has happened is the delivery of dual use technology - and whenever there has been a clear military use, people have been prosecuted - as proven in earlier threads on the topic.

So, even if it were a valid point that Germany (as a collective) has no moral right to criticise US policies (or any other country’s) on human rights grounds (anyone has that right at any time), the argument that it has lost its right to do so because of involvement with Iraq is wrong.

As stated in my first post - I accept that those abuses (never said “torture” in this thread) are not the norm - and they have been followed up by prosecutions. But they are IMO the result of a questionable policy concerning the status of prisoners. And I am not alone - check the Economist’s view on this (hardly a left-wing media source).

It would be cool if posters could actually argue against that - that would be a valid debate. At the moment it is unfortunately only a pissing contest.

Makkun

42

[quote]nobody in those pics looked to bad to me. ohh nooo they got a bag on thier head, or they are naked and handcuffed, big deal. thats not torture. having your head cut off with a fukin steak knife is torture. bamboo under the finger nails is torture.

these guys have just benn hazed if anything. what passes for torture is hilarious. see what other countries do then call this torture. care to give it a whirl? check out www.ogrish.com but be careful, if you think naked dudes with a bag on their heads is bad, prepare to vomit. pussies.[/quote]

It’s psychological torture.

John McCain spent time in a prison camp and he was tortured. As John McCain said, he would prefer physical torture over psychological torture, any day of the week. Why is that? Because psychological torture is much more damaging and much more permanent.

The 2 main tactics in psychological torture (that were used at Abu Ghraib) are
-sensory deprivation. The bag over the head, for days at a time. It is possible to cause permanent psychosis with just 48 consecutive hours of sensory deprivation.

-stress positions, also known as self-inflicted pain. The body positioning, or weight of the subject’s own body, as a prolonged source of pain. This is more insidious than just beating the hell out of someone.

The idea that what went on at Abu Ghraib is not really torture, is either based on ignorance, or just repeating the talk radio spin. It is definitely psychological torture. Torture is a policy approved by the White House. The recent McCain anti-torture bill was edited by Bush’s people to remove prohibitions against psychological torture. The president also added a provision that he was entitled to use torture at his discretion if he thought it was necessary. And a provision was added that officers could not be prosecuted for abusing prisoners, if they were following orders.

Please realize that only a small fraction of people being detained at Abu Ghraib were insurgents or terrorists. The vast majority were picked up in sweeps and were simply in the wrong place at the wrong time.

In my opinion America can’t win the war on terror without winning the so-called Hearts and Minds. We are definitely not winning Hearts and Minds using psychological torture, we are just turning people against us.

43

having your head sawed off is torture. i’ll take the bag anyday.

44

Hey Makkun,

Didn’t see your post until now.

Here’s Germany:

“In January 2003, two German businessmen were convicted of supplying weapons-making equipment to Saddam Hussein in violation of the U.N. embargo. Apparently, this was just the tip of the iceberg: according to an Iraqi weapons report to the U.N., over 80 German companies were involved in supplying Saddam’s military, some of which were still doing so just months before the war. “Of further embarrassment to Germany is that […] German companies make up more than half of the total number of institutions listed in the [Iraqi weapons] report,” the BBC noted.”

Here’s the Washington Post:

“Although U.S. arms manufacturers were not as deeply involved as German or British companies in selling weaponry to Iraq, the Reagan administration effectively turned a blind eye to the export of “dual use” items such as chemical precursors and steel tubes that can have military and civilian applications.”

Just for Makkun (who will probably be the only person to read this in full):

Here is an interview with “The Daily” reporter who broke the story in December of 2002 detailing that Germany was the number one supplier to the dictator.

http://dc.indymedia.org/newswire/display/4945

Good luck defending Germany’s role/non-role in the buildup/cleanup.

JeffR

45

JeffR,

[quote]JeffR wrote:
Hey Makkun,

Didn’t see your post until now.[/quote]

Happy new year to you, too.

[quote]Here’s Germany:

“In January 2003, two German businessmen were convicted of supplying weapons-making equipment to Saddam Hussein in violation of the U.N. embargo. Apparently, this was just the tip of the iceberg: according to an Iraqi weapons report to the U.N., over 80 German companies were involved in supplying Saddam’s military, some of which were still doing so just months before the war. “Of further embarrassment to Germany is that […] German companies make up more than half of the total number of institutions listed in the [Iraqi weapons] report,” the BBC noted.”[/quote]

The key word is - convicted. As I have stated before, lots of German companies were involved, especially in the sales of dual use technology, and people have been convicted for it, as it was against the law. Nothing new here.

[quote]Here’s the Washington Post:

“Although U.S. arms manufacturers were not as deeply involved as German or British companies in selling weaponry to Iraq, the Reagan administration effectively turned a blind eye to the export of “dual use” items such as chemical precursors and steel tubes that can have military and civilian applications.”

Just for Makkun (who will probably be the only person to read this in full):

Here is an interview with “The Daily” reporter who broke the story in December of 2002 detailing that Germany was the number one supplier to the dictator.

http://dc.indymedia.org/newswire/display/4945[/quote][/quote]

OK, that link lead me nowhere, could you repost it - I’d like to read it, but even when searching, I only find “UPDATE: The Iraqi Shoe Project” so far.

Well, if you are unhappy with the numbers of actual weapons delivered that I have posted, post otherwise.

As for dual use technology - ok. Point taken - again. But that’s the whole point - dual use. Did the Iraqis use it for civilian purposes - in most cases I assure you not. But when found, people were and are convicted. Makes some of our business people look bad, admittedly, but that shouldn’t come as a surprise.

But the point stays the same: No German government involvement - well, at least not since the Reagan era (and it would be quite a problematic argument to use that time, as you just admitted in a quote that the US government had knowledge of this); and to be specific since unification, as current Germany’s government is not responsible for the acts of the GDR’s (they’ve been far too busy convicting those fuckers, too).

[quote]Good luck defending Germany’s role/non-role in the buildup/cleanup.
JeffR[/quote]

Fazit: I see nothing to defend: No German government connections, people in breach of regulations being convicted and a nice quote acknowledging US knowledge and UK involvement. This is a good day. For the record, I never contested that German companies were involved big time - but I was expecting much bigger numbers in real arms sales myself. But I am quite glad that no German government has been involved (which would constitute a “German role”).

So you acknowledge that the US administration used to turn a blind eye on the sales of dual use technology? Good. And that British companies also played a big role. That makes them quite nice accomplices of “France” and “Germany” then. But, wait a minute, does that mean the US and the UK were both in on this “mess” then? Whose “mess” are they cleaning up then?

As my granny always said: “people in glass houses … will have to go the basement to masturbate.” :wink:

Makkun

46

Holy mother of God there are stupid people on this board…

steveo, stop looking into the past. Because Germany was a Nazi state more than half a century ago they have no right to “publish atrocities” about the US? Have you forgotten what WE have done? Slavery? Trail of Tears? The way we treated blacks and Indians in this country is so horrifying it can’t even be measured, it can’t even be said “it’s as bad as the Holocaust,” they were all crimes against humanity. EVERY COUNTRY has had a horrible past. And every country has had some nice events in their past. What matters is the present.

In case you don’t understand that though, and want to play the history game, do you remember the McCarthy trials? “Oooh, the US were on a massive witchhunt for communists and spreading nasty propaganda, therefore I will not listen to anything they say anymore because obviously they have no right to speak about political issues.” Jesus man, I thought Irish said you were a smart person.

thelaw,

What I said above goes for you too and your “I find it hilarious that the German is going to shake his finger in disgust at the Americans” statement. You have the honor of being double retarded with your statement about Iraqi decapitations. What in the sweet name of God does that have to do with the fucking point at hand? I am getting so pissed off at how much random crap liberals and conservatives throw at each other that has NOTHING TO DO WITH THE FUCKING POINT. Do you think the original poster doesn’t believe the Iraqi decapitations were bad? Do you think that because the Iraqi horribly decapitated US citizens that we should do the same? How the fuck does you bringing up that statement make the original topic, torture of Iraqi soldiers, any less relevant. See my point below. Just because it isn’t the most extreme torture doesn’t mean it isn’t torture. By your logic, unless a crime is the most extreme one possible, it shouldn’t matter. “Oh come on, Judge, it was only ATTEMPTED murder, just google search murder and see how many bad things are actually happening.” “Oh my God, great point, not guilty on all charges! Let’s go home and masturbate!”

mazilla,

I appreciate your calling BS on the amount of media attention and hysteria about this topic (I really dislike extreme leftist hype), but I don’t agree at all with your logic. Because this isn’t the most extreme torture, it isn’t of any importance? Listen, don’t think that the only “real” torture involves physical pain, the mind can be equally abused. And don’t counter with the bulletproof “Yeah but extreme physical pain can bring psychological distress as well,” I’ve heard that too many times, it’s true, I know, it’s besides the point though. What soldiers are doing to those prisoners is torture. Maybe it doesn’t warrant this much attention and hype, but it’s still torture.

And now that I read your other two/three posts, let me stop being nice. “I’d rather take the bag anyday?” Wow… I’ll just say this one thing, and if you can’t understand that, then we’re done here. By your logic, by you repeatedly stating that what is going on is not that bad, that it’s not torture, that real torture involves decapitations and the such, then it goes to follow that you believe that it should be forgiven because it is war, and therefore you believe that if you were a soldier in Iraq and were captured, and your capturers strapped you naked to a pole and covered you in shit and sent pictures of this to your families and friends, they should be forgiven because it is a) an act of war and b) not that bad, because they COULD’VE decapitated you. Way to go.

Headhunter,

Sweet holy God, I sure as fuck hope this is the last time I have to tell someone to stop making random statements. Out of what orifice did you pull the marvelous conclusion that “holding ourselves to a higher standard…than our enemies” means “giving them a little hug and asking them not to hurt us?” Your asshole needs to be sewn shut.

ARGH people piss me off. Liberals, conservatives, Christians, atheists, the US, Iraq, all of you. What the hell happened to intelligent arguments? We need to demolish this forum until everyone takes a course in logic.

47

[quote]Headhunter wrote:

Sure, that stuff at Gitmo is terrible. [/quote]

What about Gitmo is terrible.Those monsters were caught trying to kill our boys without a battle uniform on,which breaks all rules of the Geniva convention.So in turn,they don’t have the rights that normal POW’s have.In turn,what have we done so terrible to them,sleep deprivation,make them watch gay porn,strobe lights?Hows that terrible?We even put a fake leg on one of these bastards,let him go,then he gets caught trying to blow up our boys again.So I don’t feel one ounce of sorrow for those son of bitches.

48

[quote]singram wrote:
Those monsters were caught trying to kill our boys without a battle uniform on,which breaks all rules of the Geniva convention.[/quote]

Really?

Then it should be easy to charge them with something, and prosecute them with the full force of the law.

What we are doing is holding them without bringing any charges, without access to a lawyer (or anyone else). Nobody knows who most of these people are exactly, what their names are and what they are accused of doing wrong. Then they are being subjected to psycholological torture. What we are doing at Gitmo is un-American.

You know what’s funny?

Guys who say they are Conservatives or Libertarians, who think it’s okay for the federal government to seize people and imprison them indefinitely and psychologically torture them, without telling anybody in the world who they are, or what they are supposed to be guilty of.

49

[quote]Brad61 wrote:
nobody in those pics looked to bad to me. ohh nooo they got a bag on thier head, or they are naked and handcuffed, big deal. thats not torture. having your head cut off with a fukin steak knife is torture. bamboo under the finger nails is torture.

these guys have just benn hazed if anything. what passes for torture is hilarious. see what other countries do then call this torture. care to give it a whirl? check out www.ogrish.com but be careful, if you think naked dudes with a bag on their heads is bad, prepare to vomit. pussies.

It’s psychological torture.

John McCain spent time in a prison camp and he was tortured. As John McCain said, he would prefer physical torture over psychological torture, any day of the week. Why is that? Because psychological torture is much more damaging and much more permanent.

The 2 main tactics in psychological torture (that were used at Abu Ghraib) are
-sensory deprivation. The bag over the head, for days at a time. It is possible to cause permanent psychosis with just 48 consecutive hours of sensory deprivation.

[/quote]

Unless you’ve actually experienced said psychological torture and physical torture, you don’t really have any authority on the subject. Stop pretending you do. That is to say, it’s basically just a guess which is worse, and because it’s immoral to do studies, I don’t know how you’d have any numbers to back you up.

And do you have any proof of this permanent psychosis? 48 hours of sensory deprivation causing permanent psychosis is pretty difficult to believe.

Honestly when you have a president who says by the year 2015 (i don’t remember exactly) we will be off/have reduced use of foreign oil, and then his press secretary comes on the next day to say the president didn’t mean it literally, how can you be surprised at anything? My point isn’t that Bush is an evil man either. My point is that the political process is so far out of the hands of the average American that caring is pointless, because you don’t have any power to change things.

50

[quote]Brad61 wrote:
singram wrote:
Those monsters were caught trying to kill our boys without a battle uniform on,which breaks all rules of the Geniva convention.

Really?

Then it should be easy to charge them with something, and prosecute them with the full force of the law.

What we are doing is holding them without bringing any charges, without access to a lawyer (or anyone else). Nobody knows who most of these people are exactly, what their names are and what they are accused of doing wrong. Then they are being subjected to psycholological torture. What we are doing at Gitmo is un-American.

You know what’s funny?

Guys who say they are Conservatives or Libertarians, who think it’s okay for the federal government to seize people and imprison them indefinitely and psychologically torture them, without telling anybody in the world who they are, or what they are supposed to be guilty of.
[/quote]

This post is a perfect example of what happens when the ACLU rules the world.Is this the kind of world you want to raise your children in,when we’re the bad guys and the terrorist are so misunderstood.

51

[quote]singram wrote:
Brad61 wrote:
singram wrote:
Those monsters were caught trying to kill our boys without a battle uniform on,which breaks all rules of the Geniva convention.

Really?

Then it should be easy to charge them with something, and prosecute them with the full force of the law.

What we are doing is holding them without bringing any charges, without access to a lawyer (or anyone else). Nobody knows who most of these people are exactly, what their names are and what they are accused of doing wrong. Then they are being subjected to psycholological torture. What we are doing at Gitmo is un-American.

You know what’s funny?

Guys who say they are Conservatives or Libertarians, who think it’s okay for the federal government to seize people and imprison them indefinitely and psychologically torture them, without telling anybody in the world who they are, or what they are supposed to be guilty of.

This post is a perfect example of what happens when the ACLU rules the world.Is this the kind of world you want to raise your children in,when we’re the bad guys and the terrorist are so misunderstood.[/quote]

NOBODY here is saying that. Again, like the earlier poster said, you’re throwing logic out the window and just making shit up. Can you try to make a real argument, or just not bother posting?

52

[quote]Brad61 wrote:
singram wrote:
Those monsters were caught trying to kill our boys without a battle uniform on,which breaks all rules of the Geniva convention.

Really?

Then it should be easy to charge them with something, and prosecute them with the full force of the law.
…
[/quote]

We should have done what every Army has ever done (including ours) through out recent history, execution.

These bastards should have never made it off the battlefield.

Unfortunately some of them had information regarding terrorists cells so we had to keep them alive to question them.

This is a huge complication. This does not mean they should get a trial in an American court. Perhaps a military tribunal would be the best course of action, unfortunately as soon as they start the ACLU will file lawsuits to stop them and demand these terrorsist get trials in American courts.

They are in limbo because we do not have a method to deal with them.

There are two things we should avoid at all costs. Letting the bad ones go and trials in American courts.

53

Zap,

[quote]Zap Branigan wrote:
[…] We should have done what every Army has ever done (including ours) through out recent history, execution.[/quote]

Let me say this and someone will draw the Nazi-German card on me. The US army is better than this.

[quote]These bastards should have never made it off the battlefield.

Unfortunately some of them had information regarding terrorists cells so we had to keep them alive to question them.[/quote]

A quick Wikipedia quote on the Combatant Status Review Tribunals shows that: “The tribunal determined that thirty eight of the detainees had never been combatants, and never should have been held. Four of those thirty eight detainees have been released.” http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Combatant_Status_Review_Tribunal

That’s quite a high percentage of innocents you would like to have killed there.

That’s what inalienable human and legal rights are for. Sometimes I ask myself what the US administration is fighting for when they speak of the spreading of democracy and freedom.

[quote]They are in limbo because we do not have a method to deal with them.

There are two things we should avoid at all costs. Letting the bad ones go and trials in American courts.[/quote]

For the first I see no danger, as it seems to be quite hard for the innocent ones to leave as well. As for trials in American courts - they are the US’s prisoners; so they are the US’s courts responsibility.

Zap - I don’t get it; you’re not a stupid man, but think about what you say here. The US and you are better than this.

Makkun

54

[quote]GDollars37 wrote:
singram wrote:
Brad61 wrote:
singram wrote:
Those monsters were caught trying to kill our boys without a battle uniform on,which breaks all rules of the Geniva convention.

Really?

Then it should be easy to charge them with something, and prosecute them with the full force of the law.

What we are doing is holding them without bringing any charges, without access to a lawyer (or anyone else). Nobody knows who most of these people are exactly, what their names are and what they are accused of doing wrong. Then they are being subjected to psycholological torture. What we are doing at Gitmo is un-American.

You know what’s funny?

Guys who say they are Conservatives or Libertarians, who think it’s okay for the federal government to seize people and imprison them indefinitely and psychologically torture them, without telling anybody in the world who they are, or what they are supposed to be guilty of.

This post is a perfect example of what happens when the ACLU rules the world.Is this the kind of world you want to raise your children in,when we’re the bad guys and the terrorist are so misunderstood.

NOBODY here is saying that. Again, like the earlier poster said, you’re throwing logic out the window and just making shit up. Can you try to make a real argument, or just not bother posting?[/quote]

Fuck off.So not caring about terrorist and the bad guys having to be in jail and having to watch gay porn is throwing logic out the window?These are the bad guys,who dress as civilains and then attack our soilders,they aren’t American citizens,so they don’t get their day in court.The military will deside their fate in tribunals,and if these fuckers have to wait 40 years,thats 40 years thier not out trying to kill my and your family.Get your GED before talking to me agian you dumb bitch.

55

[quote]singram wrote:
GDollars37 wrote:
singram wrote:
Brad61 wrote:
singram wrote:
Those monsters were caught trying to kill our boys without a battle uniform on,which breaks all rules of the Geniva convention.

Really?

Then it should be easy to charge them with something, and prosecute them with the full force of the law.

What we are doing is holding them without bringing any charges, without access to a lawyer (or anyone else). Nobody knows who most of these people are exactly, what their names are and what they are accused of doing wrong. Then they are being subjected to psycholological torture. What we are doing at Gitmo is un-American.

You know what’s funny?

Guys who say they are Conservatives or Libertarians, who think it’s okay for the federal government to seize people and imprison them indefinitely and psychologically torture them, without telling anybody in the world who they are, or what they are supposed to be guilty of.

This post is a perfect example of what happens when the ACLU rules the world.Is this the kind of world you want to raise your children in,when we’re the bad guys and the terrorist are so misunderstood.

NOBODY here is saying that. Again, like the earlier poster said, you’re throwing logic out the window and just making shit up. Can you try to make a real argument, or just not bother posting?

Fuck off.So not caring about terrorist and the bad guys having to be in jail and having to watch gay porn is throwing logic out the window?These are the bad guys,who dress as civilains and then attack our soilders,they aren’t American citizens,so they don’t get their day in court.The military will deside their fate in tribunals,and if these fuckers have to wait 40 years,thats 40 years thier not out trying to kill my and your family.Get your GED before talking to me agian you dumb bitch.[/quote]

Way to raise the level of discourse on the forum. Nice job. Everyone’s aware that Islamic terrorists are the bad guys. No one is claiming they’re misunderstood, or they don’t want to kill all of us. Some of us just think maybe America should be above torturing our enemies, that’s all. Crazy, huh?

56

[quote]GDollars37 wrote:
singram wrote:
GDollars37 wrote:
singram wrote:
Brad61 wrote:
singram wrote:
Those monsters were caught trying to kill our boys without a battle uniform on,which breaks all rules of the Geniva convention.

Really?

Then it should be easy to charge them with something, and prosecute them with the full force of the law.

What we are doing is holding them without bringing any charges, without access to a lawyer (or anyone else). Nobody knows who most of these people are exactly, what their names are and what they are accused of doing wrong. Then they are being subjected to psycholological torture. What we are doing at Gitmo is un-American.

You know what’s funny?

Guys who say they are Conservatives or Libertarians, who think it’s okay for the federal government to seize people and imprison them indefinitely and psychologically torture them, without telling anybody in the world who they are, or what they are supposed to be guilty of.

This post is a perfect example of what happens when the ACLU rules the world.Is this the kind of world you want to raise your children in,when we’re the bad guys and the terrorist are so misunderstood.

NOBODY here is saying that. Again, like the earlier poster said, you’re throwing logic out the window and just making shit up. Can you try to make a real argument, or just not bother posting?

Fuck off.So not caring about terrorist and the bad guys having to be in jail and having to watch gay porn is throwing logic out the window?These are the bad guys,who dress as civilains and then attack our soilders,they aren’t American citizens,so they don’t get their day in court.The military will deside their fate in tribunals,and if these fuckers have to wait 40 years,thats 40 years thier not out trying to kill my and your family.Get your GED before talking to me agian you dumb bitch.

Way to raise the level of discourse on the forum. Nice job. Everyone’s aware that Islamic terrorists are the bad guys. No one is claiming they’re misunderstood, or they don’t want to kill all of us. Some of us just think maybe America should be above torturing our enemies, that’s all. Crazy, huh?[/quote]

The only point I’m making is that we’re not torturing Gitmo prisoners.As soon as you show me hard evidence of true torture,not sleep depravation or having to watch gay porn,I’ll be right there with you trying to shut it down.Until then,I’ll continue to defend Gitmo.Nothing personal aginst you,but when you accuse me of making shit up,I’m gonna respond harshly.

57

[quote]makkun wrote:
… As for trials in American courts - they are the US’s prisoners; so they are the US’s courts responsibility.

…

Makkun[/quote]

They are the militarys prisoners. They are not US citizens nor were they captured on US soil.

They do not belong in US court rooms.

They may be deserving of military tribunals.

Don’t forget some have been let go.

58

[quote]Zap Branigan wrote:
makkun wrote:
… As for trials in American courts - they are the US’s prisoners; so they are the US’s courts responsibility.

…

Makkun

They are the militarys prisoners. They are not US citizens nor were they captured on US soil.

They do not belong in US court rooms.

They may be deserving of military tribunals.

Don’t forget some have been let go.

[/quote]

Yeah, you can’t put them through the criminal court system, all kinds of problems (from evidence to national security risks) there. They should be handed over to military tribunals though.

59

with complete respect to every one of the intelligent posts and replies to this captivating thread, Gdollars you my friend are an Intellectual Douchebag,

60

[quote]Splinter36 wrote:
with complete respect to every one of the intelligent posts and replies to this captivating thread, Gdollars you my friend are an Intellectual Douchebag, [/quote]

OK, care to explain why…