New Abu Ghraib Images (WARNING: very disturbing)

Originally posted by moonofthekeith
They have videos of torturing American soldiers that are ten times as worse than this. They behead us, rape us, beat us until were dead, and other unimaginable acts that would blow your mind.

Some of them are barbaric and savage, But..... that still does not mean we have to do the same in turn. If we emulate them, then how are we any better? We may be far worse it makes us the worst kind of hypocrites. If we cannot even live up to and respect our constitution then we are no better than those we decry.

Wake up, see the big picture, and stop going against your own country. Being united as a country is the only way we can win this war.

Pretty sure we have lost it already. Also, we took the administration at its word the first time we went in, its proven to have been utterly false. So if the adminstration decides that invading Iran next is in our best interest, do we as good boys and girls just "go with it" Its one thing to be united its another to show blind faith and alliegence.

reply to post by moonofthekeith


a country is not a big bunch of people.

it is an ideal, too. the ideals of civilised western culture see torture for what it is. barbaric, evil and USELESS. unless your whole purpose is to institute generational hate from the enemy.

a victorious war is one where the enemy agrees to be beaten. anything else is just more battles. the Hatfields and the McCoys. endless blood feuding.

repeat history if you like repeating the mistakes of our ancestors. enjoy the endless strife, hardship and hatred.

reply to post by billybob


The enemy doesn't have to agree to being beaten. That is nonsense, unless you never use the overwhelming force to where there's no doubt in their minds, that they've lost. The way you win a war is to -
A- destroy the enemies' ability to wage war(materiel, attrition, real estate loss, etc..)
B- destroy the enemies' will to continue to wage war(destroy their morale, hope, and that of their supporters).

Once the war is over, then reconciliation can begin, and that's how you avoid the Hatfield v. McCoy scenario.

reply to post by BlueRaja


Brutal and inhuman approach...crush, destroy, obliterate and then crow about your victory when you have in fact debased yourself. This is the problem with the US now. Anyway, I'm surprized you are not saying that you have already attained victory. Just do a body count: you killed hundreds of thousands of Iraqis, and only lost a few thousand soldiers. Doesn't that make you the big winner?

You say: Once the war is over, then reconciliation can begin...
are you serious. ONce you have destroyed the lives of millions and ruined their country to get at their oil the reconciliation can begin? Are you serious? Total lunacy.






[edit on 10-3-2008 by Silenceisall]

reply to post by Silenceisall


It seemed to work on the Germans and Japanese, but what do I know?

reply to post by BlueRaja


You know what your government tells you apparently.

Originally posted by Silenceisall
reply to post by BlueRaja

 

You know what your government tells you apparently.

Alright. I'm ready to accept your tutelage. What should I think, as apparently thusfar I've been completely misinformed?

reply to post by BlueRaja


Sarcasm noted, but...You certainly don't need me to tell you what to think. Neither I nor George Bush can give you an awareness of your inner voice or tell you what the facts of the world are. I'm sure you are bright enough to find the answers for yourself and within yourself.

reply to post by Silenceisall


And if I come to different conclusions than you have, will you still consider me bright, or a sheeple? Do you concede that intelligent people can arrive at 2 completely different conclusions? Do you disagree that post WWII a lot of reconciliation occurred between the USA and its former Axis enemies?

reply to post by BlueRaja


I never questioned your intelligence, only your acceptance of cruelty for the sake of a cause--no matter what cause it be. That is the only difference in our outlooks that I care about. Otherwise I have no further comment to make on your opinions.

reply to post by Silenceisall


Do you define cruelty as the use of military force, or the use of force beyond what is allowed by Convention/Treaty agreements? If you're saying that I condone the latter, you are very much mistaken. If you think military force in general is unacceptable under any circumstances, then we'll just have to agree to disagree.
I think where we differ is that you(and correct me if I'm mischaracterizing your view) believe that military force is never the solution to a problem, whereas I believe that sometimes military force is the only solution to a problem.

Originally posted by BlueRaja
reply to post by Silenceisall

 

Do you define cruelty as the use of military force, or the use of force beyond what is allowed by Convention/Treaty agreements? If you're saying that I condone the latter, you are very much mistaken. If you think military force in general is unacceptable under any circumstances, then we'll just have to agree to disagree.
I think where we differ is that you(and correct me if I'm mischaracterizing your view) believe that military force is never the solution to a problem, whereas I believe that sometimes military force is the only solution to a problem.

The use of a military force can be cruel in deed (such as when torture is used by the militarty) and it can be cruel in its application simply because it was used for corrupt reasons. Both apply in the case of Iraq.

[edit on 11-3-2008 by Silenceisall]

reply to post by Christian Voice

What gives you the right to say they are not criminals?

Unless the current administration has changed the laws regarding US military prisons, everyone, including POWs during wartime, are innocent until proven guilty in a court of law. The concept of presumed innocence, placing the burden of proof of guilt on the accusatory party. In a US court, defendants are called defendants, not criminals, because they have not (possibly yet) been found guilty. This presumed innocence is a cornerstone of the American justice system. In fact, it is part of the foundation of the modern civilized world.

I have not read anything from a legitimate news source that proves that prisoners are being tortured that are just innocent individuals that we just want to punish.

The concept of presumed innocence along with a handful of laws making torture of anyone illegal make that statement a moot point. By law, they are innocent, there is no proof required. To the contrary, proof is required to validate any suspicion of their guilt. Torturing anyone who has not been found guilty in a fair court has two purposes: elicit a (false) confession and/or break their spirit. You chose to use the word "punish", implying that you indeed believe that these men are guilty of a crime, regardless it is obvious in context that "harm" would suffice instead. Our government wishes to "harm" these people and will do so regardless of the law. Their innocence (or guilt) is completely irrelevant to our government because they are young to middle-aged middle-eastern, Muslim men: they fit the demographic of Islamic terrorists created by our government. You have been sold on the lie that all such people are your enemy and it your patriotic duty to see them destroyed.

My Heart Goes out too Them Prisoners. Thats Messed up what we did. Why would anyone think thats Funny? I didn't not even one Inch. Honestly. Its getting too the point that im Sort of Embarrassed too be an American. I miss the old America where a CEO or someone decides too Change the Taste of Coke, and WE have a March over it too get back what we Love. This Garbage today is Getting on my Last Nerve.