Site Search:
 
Speak Korean Now!
Teach English Abroad and Get Paid to see the World!
Korean Job Discussion Forums Forum Index Korean Job Discussion Forums
"The Internet's Meeting Place for ESL/EFL Teachers from Around the World!"
 
 FAQFAQ   SearchSearch   MemberlistMemberlist   UsergroupsUsergroups   RegisterRegister 
 ProfileProfile   Log in to check your private messagesLog in to check your private messages   Log inLog in 

Firsthand Accounts of Torture of Iraqi Detainees
Goto page 1, 2  Next
 
Post new topic   Reply to topic    Korean Job Discussion Forums Forum Index -> Current Events Forum
View previous topic :: View next topic  
Author Message
Kuros



Joined: 27 Apr 2004

PostPosted: Sat Sep 24, 2005 4:04 am    Post subject: Firsthand Accounts of Torture of Iraqi Detainees Reply with quote

It would be irresponsible for me to post the whole thing. But here is the link.

Please refrain from anti-American troll baiting here.

Here are some excerpts:

PUCs are Persons Under Control

Human Rights Watch wrote:
According to their accounts, the torture and other mistreatment of Iraqis in detention was systematic and was known at varying levels of command. Military Intelligence personnel, they said, directed and encouraged army personnel to subject prisoners to forced, repetitive exercise, sometimes to the point of unconsciousness, sleep deprivation for days on end, and exposure to extremes of heat and cold as part of the interrogation process. At least one interrogator beat detainees in front of other soldiers. Soldiers also incorporated daily beatings of detainees in preparation for interrogations. Civilians believed to be from the Central Intelligence Agency (CIA) conducted interrogations out of sight, but not earshot, of soldiers, who heard what they believed were abusive interrogations.


Human Rights Watch wrote:
The acts of torture and other cruel or inhuman treatment they described include severe beatings (in one incident, a soldier reportedly broke a detainee��s leg with a baseball bat), blows and kicks to the face, chest, abdomen, and extremities, and repeated kicks to various parts of the detainees�� body; the application of chemical substances to exposed skin and eyes; forced stress positions, such as holding heavy water jugs with arms outstretched, sometimes to the point of unconsciousness; sleep deprivation; subjecting detainees to extremes of hot and cold; the stacking of detainees into human pyramids; and, the withholding of food (beyond crackers) and water.


Human Rights Watch wrote:
Soldiers said they felt welcome to come to the PUC tent on their off-hours to ��*beep* a PUC�� or ��Smoke a PUC.�� ��Fucking a PUC�� referred to beating a detainee, while ��Smoking a PUC�� referred to forced physical exertion sometimes to the point of unconsciousness. The soldiers said that when a detainee had a visible injury such as a broken limb due to ��fucking�� or ��smoking,�� an army physician��s assistant would be called to administer an analgesic and fill out the proper paperwork. They said those responsible would state that the detainee was injured during the process of capture and the physician��s assistant would sign off on this.


An NCO's account wrote:
I was an Infantry Fire Team Leader. The majority of the time I was out on mission. When not on mission I was riding the PUCs. We should have had MPs. We should have taken them to Abu Ghraib [which] was only 15 fucking minutes drive. But there was no one to talk to in the chain – it just got killed.


An NCO's account wrote:
On their day off people would show up all the time. Everyone in camp knew if you wanted to work out your frustration you show up at the PUC tent. In a way it was sport. The cooks were all US soldiers. One day a sergeant shows up and tells a PUC to grab a pole. He told him to bend over and broke the guy��s leg with a mini Louisville Slugger that was a metal bat. He was the fucking cook. He shouldn��t be in with no PUCs.


An NCO's account wrote:
But half of these guys got released because they didn��t do nothing. We sent them back to Fallujah. But if he��s a good guy, you know, now he��s a bad guy because of the way we treated him.


Another NCO's account wrote:
In Iraq, from the beginning, we messed up on the treatment soldiers had to endure while guarding prisoners. There are five ��S��s�� [Search, Silence, Segregate, Speed (to the rear), Safeguard] and we blew Speed and Security. Speed was the biggest problem. Speed means you get them to the rear to process them. You need to get them away from the troops they are trying to kill.

The Geneva Conventions is questionable and we didn��t know we were supposed to be following it. In Afghanistan you were taught to keep your head down and shoot��. You never thought about the Geneva Conventions. There was an ROE [Rules of Engagement] and it was followed, same in Iraq. But we were never briefed on the Geneva Conventions.


An Officer's account wrote:
So I went to JAG and �� he says, ��Well the Geneva Conventions are a gray area.�� So I mentioned some things that I had heard about and said, ��Is it a violation to chain prisoners to the ground naked for the purpose of interrogations?�� and he said, ��That��s within the Geneva Conventions.�� So I said, ��Okay. That is within the Geneva Conventions.�� And then there is the prisoner on the box with the wires attached to him, and to me, as long as electricity didn��t go through the wires, that was in accordance with what I would have expected US policy to be and that he wasn��t under the threat of death. And he said, ��Well, that is a clear violation of the Geneva Conventions.�� And I said, ��Okay, but I��m looking for some kind of standard here to be able to tell what I should stop and what I should allow to happen.�� And he says, ��Well, we��ve had questions about that at times.��

Then he said, ��There was a device that another battalion in the 82nd had come up with that you would put a prisoner in. It was uncomfortable to sit in.�� And he went to test it out by sitting in it and he decided that it wasn��t torture. I hear this and I am flabbergasted that this is the standard the Army is using to determine whether or not we follow the Geneva Conventions. If I go to JAG and JAG cannot give me clear guidance about what I should stop and what I should allow to happen, how is an NCO or a private expected to act appropriately?


An Officer's account wrote:
[In Afghanistan,] I thought that the chain on command all the way up to the National Command Authority14 had made it a policy that we were going to interrogate these guys harshly.

[The actual standard was] ��we��re not going to follow the Geneva Conventions but we are going to treat you humanely.�� Well, what does humane mean? To me humane means I can kind of play with your mind, but I cannot hit you or do anything that is going to cost you permanent physical damage. To [another officer I spoke with] humane means it��s okay to rough someone up and to do physical harm. Not to break bones or anything like that but to do physical harm as long as you��re not humiliating him, which was the way he put it. We��ve got people with different views of what humane means and there��s no Army statement that says this is the standard for humane treatment for prisoners to Army officers. Army officers are left to come up with their own definition of humane treatment.


An Officer's account wrote:
If you fail to enforce something, that��s the new standard. So I guess what I��m getting at is the Army officers have overarching responsibility for this. Not privates, not the Sergeant Jones, not Sergeant Smith. The Army officer corps has responsibility for this. And it boggles my mind that there aren��t officers standing up saying, ��That��s my fault and here��s why.�� That��s basic army leadership.


An Officer's account wrote:
[We need] to address the fact that it was an officer issue and by trying to claim that it was ��rogue elements�� we seriously hinder our ability to ensure this doesn��t happen again. And, that has not only moral consequences, but it has practical consequences in our ability to wage the War on Terror. We��re mounting a counter-insurgency campaign, and if we have widespread violations of the Geneva Conventions, that seriously undermines our ability to win the hearts and minds of the Muslim world.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message AIM Address
Hater Depot



Joined: 29 Mar 2005

PostPosted: Sat Sep 24, 2005 11:38 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

It doesn't really seem to matter what revelations come out, does it? About half the country has decided to stick by Bush and Co. no matter what they do or how badly they screw up. American conservatives used to crow about accountability and responsibility but they're certainly not demandng any from their leaders.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
supernick



Joined: 24 Jan 2003
Location: Seoul

PostPosted: Sat Sep 24, 2005 6:29 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

From what I remember reading on this board, is that the abuse stemmed from a few bad apples, and that those individuals have been dealt with by U.S. military justice, which is better than what would have happened if these events would have occured on Saddam's watch.

Oh, there's also that other tid-bit I remember; The insurgents are breaching international law all the time, while the U.S is in breach of it some of the time.

Anyway, these stories are nothing compared to what Saddam had done. Rememer he's the guy that through prisoners into wood chippers, according to another poster.

So just remember guys; it might be bad what has happened but it's OK because those who are responisible will be brought to justice, which is better than what would have happened in Iraq before the war.

And, for the question I was asked; Would you condone torture if it provided information that would possibly save the life of a family memeber or a loved one? Do you think the person who asked this question condones torture?

When these stories of abuse first surfaced, the world may have been outraged at first, but for me, I've just become accustomed to them as they have become the expected norm. What is shocking is that there are people who somehow try to defend or justify these abuses. Kind of sad, really.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
mithridates



Joined: 03 Mar 2003
Location: President's office, Korean Space Agency

PostPosted: Sat Sep 24, 2005 7:38 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

What's shocking is the ease in which it happened - I doubt that anyone in 2000 seriously would have thought that acts of torture would be condoned with nary a whimper a mere five years down the road. Well, actually three.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website
Kuros



Joined: 27 Apr 2004

PostPosted: Sat Sep 24, 2005 9:27 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

supernick wrote:
From what I remember reading on this board, is that the abuse stemmed from a few bad apples, and that those individuals have been dealt with by U.S. military justice, which is better than what would have happened if these events would have occured on Saddam's watch.

Oh, there's also that other tid-bit I remember; The insurgents are breaching international law all the time, while the U.S is in breach of it some of the time.

Anyway, these stories are nothing compared to what Saddam had done. Rememer he's the guy that through prisoners into wood chippers, according to another poster.


Smugness doesn't help prove your point. Go neener neener in another thread. Especially if this is such old news for you.

Hater Depot wrote:
It doesn't really seem to matter what revelations come out, does it? About half the country has decided to stick by Bush and Co. no matter what they do or how badly they screw up. American conservatives used to crow about accountability and responsibility but they're certainly not demandng any from their leaders.


To be fair, the American media doesn't help. 'Supporting our Troops' and reporting widespread mistreatment and torture and Iraq doesn't mesh well. But your point is well taken, when will there be outrage about these kinds of things? I know one thing, I'm losing faith in the officer corps of the American military.

Mithridates wrote:
What's shocking is the ease in which it happened - I doubt that anyone in 2000 seriously would have thought that acts of torture would be condoned with nary a whimper a mere five years down the road. Well, actually three.


Yes, but that means very little after all. The widespread killings of Germans and Japanese in WWII as well as the rape of French women by American soldiers has been overshadowed by more overt atrocities such as Dresden and Hiroshima/Nagasaki. The public of any nation will be shielded from what the reality on the ground is by the troops, especially in situations like this. But I think American military fatigue will turn into outrage as more American soldiers are lost and less progress has been made.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message AIM Address
mithridates



Joined: 03 Mar 2003
Location: President's office, Korean Space Agency

PostPosted: Sat Sep 24, 2005 9:41 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

I suspect that the 'neener neener' post comes from exasperation. Sometimes you can't help but laugh when you see some of the excuses we've seen for torture.

Like this:

Shocked Laughing Laughing Laughing Laughing Confused Mad Mad Mad Sad Sad Crying or Very sad
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website
Kuros



Joined: 27 Apr 2004

PostPosted: Sat Sep 24, 2005 9:49 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

mithridates wrote:
I suspect that the 'neener neener' post comes from exasperation. Sometimes you can't help but laugh when you see some of the excuses we've seen for torture.

Like this:

Shocked Laughing Laughing Laughing Laughing Confused Mad Mad Mad Sad Sad Crying or Very sad


I understand. But I don't want this thread derailed by people responding to somebody who wants to pick old fights. I don't want this to turn into 'just another Iraq thread,' where the same old fights from 2 or 3 years ago get hashed out again.

As an American I am seriously disturbed by these reports. I think a lot of others who might have been defensive against allegations of widespread torture might be disturbed, too.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message AIM Address
mithridates



Joined: 03 Mar 2003
Location: President's office, Korean Space Agency

PostPosted: Sat Sep 24, 2005 9:53 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Out of curiosity, what would happen to you personally if this status quo we have now were to continue for another two terms for example? Say Jeb or someone else like Bush were to get into power and nothing was ever done about it. I think that a lot of people are just putting up with it for the time being in the hopes that the next administration will make things right again.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website
Kuros



Joined: 27 Apr 2004

PostPosted: Sat Sep 24, 2005 10:04 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

mithridates wrote:
Out of curiosity, what would happen to you personally if this status quo we have now were to continue for another two terms for example? Say Jeb or someone else like Bush were to get into power and nothing was ever done about it. I think that a lot of people are just putting up with it for the time being in the hopes that the next administration will make things right again.


Ewww. You know, Mith, it's sad. I sent this article out as a mass-email and just got a response from my uncle. I am called naive, and he expresses agreement with torture of the terrorists. He says:

Quote:
LET THE FUCKING TROOPS DO THE FUCKING JOB THEY NEED TO DO and let them come home. I am sick to death of this war with honor crap. Kill all of the insurgents including their families, strike terror in their hearts by killing their families in reprisal, and let's quit fucking around with this. We do not need to armchair the war. There is no honor in war if you think so, rerun the Nick Berg Beheading for your viewing pleasure. We need to adopt a stance like the Israeli's. Kill the terrorists, and their families. Mussed knows how to deal with this human offal. Let's start worrying about our way of life and quit the bullshit. OIL is important. If you don't think so, come visit me on your mule next time.


WTF is going on here?
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message AIM Address
mithridates



Joined: 03 Mar 2003
Location: President's office, Korean Space Agency

PostPosted: Sat Sep 24, 2005 10:23 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

I'd say it's time for a new uncle. He's wrong on so many levels.
1)I doubt that he's extrapolated far enough to realize that teaching a few hundred thousand young troops that torture is okay if necessary is not, and will not be good for the whole of society once they come home
2)Israel would probably balk at his comparison
3)One glimpse at Iceland shows what a country can do if they really want to get off the oil addiction

What was the name of that gunman that terrorized the northeast for a number of days by just killing random people? He was a soldier in the Gulf War, and that one didn't even last long let alone condone torture.

Someday a real rain will come and wash all this scum off the streets....I suspect we'll be getting a bit of that once the war's over.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website
rapier



Joined: 16 Feb 2003

PostPosted: Sun Sep 25, 2005 8:11 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

supernick wrote:

And, for the question I was asked; Would you condone torture if it provided information that would possibly save the life of a family memeber or a loved one?.


Remember the arrest of Al Quaeda's top man Khalid sheikh Muhammad- suspected of bringing in nukes into the U.S: clearly any method to extract information from him was permissable- although there are questionmarks over the effectiveness of torture in producing correct information.


"we now know that the United States has intentionally used (with the sanction of the highest levels of government) torture tactics to pry open the mind of Khalid Sheik Mohammed, alleged to be one of al-Qaida's top masterminds. According to the Times, "C.I.A. interrogators used graduated levels of force, including a technique known as 'water boarding,' in which a prisoner is strapped down, forcibly pushed under water and made to believe he might drown." Gen. Peter Pace, the vice chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, described such tactics as a violation of the Geneva Conventions. And the FBI has instructed its agents to steer clear of such coercive interrogation methods, for fear that their involvement might compromise testimony in future criminal cases."
http://slate.msn.com/id/2100543/
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
bucheon bum



Joined: 16 Jan 2003

PostPosted: Sun Sep 25, 2005 10:12 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Kuros wrote:


Quote:
LET THE *beep* TROOPS DO THE *beep* JOB THEY NEED TO DO and let them come home. I am sick to death of this war with honor crap. Kill all of the insurgents including their families, strike terror in their hearts by killing their families in reprisal, and let's quit *beep* around with this. We do not need to armchair the war. There is no honor in war if you think so, rerun the Nick Berg Beheading for your viewing pleasure. We need to adopt a stance like the Israeli's. Kill the terrorists, and their families. Mussed knows how to deal with this human offal. Let's start worrying about our way of life and quit the *beep*. OIL is important. If you don't think so, come visit me on your mule next time.


WTF is going on here?


He is right you know. Thats the only way we can win in Iraq. On the flipside:

a) that makes us no better than them. So uh, ideologically speaking, we lose. It also ruins our reputation and puts us on a slippery slope to god knows where.
b) assuming, for argument's sake, that both he and I are correct; that is the only way to victory. Would that victory be worth it??

One lesson George Washington learned while a general, and few others have (including notables such as Napoleon and Hannibal), is sometimes it is better to lose than win. As long as you survive, still have men, and have some type of resources, you can still win in the long run. The irony is the insurgents know this but apparently we don't.

Torture them? No, just kill them. Figure out where the problem areas are, put 500,00 troops into Iraq and just go all out. Similar to what Israel is doing in gaza right now Wink.

It's a lost cause folks. History is repeating itself. While I don't think the comparison to Vietnam is accurate, it probably will be in one way. People will look back and two points of view will develop, just like with the Vietnam War:

1. It was a mistake from the beginning. We blew the "threat" out of porportion, we were ignorant, didn't know what we were getting into, yada yada yada.

2. It was winnable if we had the political will to do it. The damn politicians got in the way. Had we gone all out and let the military done its job, we would have won the war.

I definitly agree with #1. I also think #2 has some validity. Thing is, we'll never know if #2 is correct. I think that's the draw to it: there is some romantic notion that we could have won. It shifts the blame to one source: the politicians. But anyway, sorry if I'm hijacking your thread kuros and getting off the topic of torture.

I guess what I'm saying is, like your uncle, I really don't care about the torture itself. What i care about is it symbolizes what is wrong with our foreign policy and our leaders. If we were doing things properly, the soliders or whoever did the torturing would not have been in those positions. They would not have had to face the frustration of trying to get intelligence out of someone who truly might know nothing. I don't mean to shift the blame here, but I honestly believe it is a lot easier to figure out what's right and wrong when you're above it all and not knee deep in the *beep*. And who is in that position to do so? The generals and our civilian leadership. Instead of stepping up to the plate they let it go on. That's just plain disgusting.

Bush and morals, give me a break. I think that's one reason I find him so disgusting: he's a hypocrite and he doesn't even know it.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
mithridates



Joined: 03 Mar 2003
Location: President's office, Korean Space Agency

PostPosted: Sun Sep 25, 2005 10:39 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

I suspect that your not caring about torture itself is only in a scholarly, distant and general sort of way. You might find yourself caring a bit more when you find out that the guy sitting across the bar that decides he doesn't like you is a dude that spent the last six months in Iraq bludgeoning prisoners unconscious for amusement and perhaps the odd tidbit of information. On your tax dollars too.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website
bucheon bum



Joined: 16 Jan 2003

PostPosted: Sun Sep 25, 2005 10:58 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

yup, pretty much.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
mithridates



Joined: 03 Mar 2003
Location: President's office, Korean Space Agency

PostPosted: Sun Sep 25, 2005 11:34 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Hey, was that big protest yesterday close to where you live?
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website
Display posts from previous:   
Post new topic   Reply to topic    Korean Job Discussion Forums Forum Index -> Current Events Forum All times are GMT - 8 Hours
Goto page 1, 2  Next
Page 1 of 2

 
Jump to:  
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum


This page is maintained by the one and only Dave Sperling.
Contact Dave's ESL Cafe
Copyright © 2018 Dave Sperling. All Rights Reserved.

Powered by phpBB © 2001, 2002 phpBB Group

TEFL International Supports Dave's ESL Cafe
TEFL Courses, TESOL Course, English Teaching Jobs - TEFL International