![The Mohican Board! [Bumppo's Redux!]](images/wwwboard.gif "The Mohican Board! [Bumppo's Redux!]") |
|
| Author |
 Topic  |
|
|
Adele
The Huggy Merchant
Bumppo's Patron since [at least]:
May 17 2002
Status: offline
|
 Posted - May 15 2004 : 04:36:43 AM
|
As you are probably aware the British soldiers in Iraq have also featured in the press with regards to the mistreatment of Iraqi prisoners. The front page of one of our notorious tabloid newspapers ran a full front page photo of a British soldier urinating on a hooded prisoner. It was a shocking photo. It now appears that the photo was a fake, and Piers Morgan, the editor of the Mirror (and in my opinion, the slimiest, most arrogant, revolting excuse for a human being) has been fired. Whilst I have no doubt that prisoner abuse has taken place, and I strongly believe that those people responsible should be brought to justice, I also believe that the printing of this photo, and the subsequent acknowledgement that it was fake, have done irrevocable damage.
One thing in particular about this prisoner abuse scandal confuses me....why were ordinary soldiers guarding prisoners? These are people, who for the necessity of their job, are trained not to see the enemy has human beings...how could they be effective if they did? Surely, there should be trained specialists to take responsibility for captured prisoners? I also find the attitude of some of the public disturbing....the 'why should I care?' and 'they deserved it' comments are ridiculous. How can we stand and scream 'human rights' when it is our own soldiers in captivity being abused, and then turn a blind eye to the abuse of other prisoners?
HM
May 15 2004 at 09:18AM
Daily Mirror editor fired over fake photos
By Jeremy Lovell
London - The editor of one of Britain's most popular daily newspapers was fired on Friday for publishing faked pictures of British soldiers abusing Iraqi prisoners.
Piers Morgan, editor of the Daily Mirror, was kicked out by the board of Trinity Mirror, which said it was "inappropriate" for him to continue as editor.
Despite mounting expert criticism of the pictures, and a statement by the government on Thursday that they were fake, Morgan insisted his stories of abuse by troops were accurate.
'It's time that the ego of one editor is measured against the life of the soldier'
"The pictures accurately illustrated the reality about the appalling conduct of some British troops," he said.
But on Friday, newspaper owners Trinity Mirror threw in the towel and threw out their editor.
The statement by the board said the newspaper published the photographs "in good faith" and "absolutely believed" at the time they were genuine.
"However there is now sufficient evidence to suggest that these pictures are fakes and that the Daily Mirror has been the subject of a calculated and malicious hoax."
The Daily Mirror apologised and regretted damage done to the Queens Lancashire Regiment (QLR) and the Army in Iraq.
Morgan's ousting came hard on the heels of a full frontal attack by the QLR, accusing the newspaper of being a recruiting poster for al-Qaeda and urging Morgan to resign.
"It's time that the ego of one editor is measured against the life of the soldier," Brigadier Geoff Sheldon told reporters at the regiment's headquarters in Preston, northern England.
Senior officers from the regiment accused the Mirror of putting the lives of British soldiers at risk. One picture showed a soldier apparently urinating on a prisoner.
"That photograph was a mocked-up fake and it wasn't taken in Iraq. This is a deadly serious business because people's lives have been placed in jeopardy by what has turned out to be utter and complete nonsense," Sheldon said.
The Mirror pictures were published shortly after photos and revelations of abuse of Iraqi detainees by US troops at the Abu Ghraib jail near Baghdad.
Observers say the Mirror pictures have irreparably damaged the reputation of British troops.
Colonel David Black, the most senior officer at the regiment which was based in Basra in southern Iraq but no longer has
|
|
report to moderator
|
|
|
Dark Woods
Colonial Settler
USA
Bumppo's Patron since [at least]:
May 18 2002
Status: offline
Donating Member |
 Posted - May 29 2004 : 4:03:06 PM
|
I presume from the title of this thread that you mean that there has been relatively little activity in the Lion's Den.
Earlier in this thread the question was asked why ordinary soldiers were guarding prisoners, rather than specialists along the line of Military Police.
During the "War on Terrorism" (I have to put it in quotations because war can only be waged against political entities such as tribes, states, or nations. War cannot be meaningfully waged on a stategy or tactic--Imagine for example a "War on Artillery Bombardment" but I digress.) there has been a large percentage increase in prisoners held by the military, but to my knowlege no significant increase in the number of active duty servicemembers in the Prison Guard specialty. Part of the price we pay for rushing to war is the lack of this human infrastructure to deal properly with the consequences. The Gulf War of 1991 ended up with most prisoners being repatriated relatively quickly, so the magnitude of the long term military prison requirement may well have been underestimated for the Iraq occupation. |
report to moderator  |
|
|
Adele
The Huggy Merchant
Bumppo's Patron since [at least]:
May 17 2002
Status: offline
|
Posted - May 30 2004 : 07:19:44 AM
|
I agree with you Dark Woods, which does beg the question....why are lessons not being learned from previous experiences? If that was a problem during the Gulf War, why wasn't it addressed?
And yes...my comment about it being quiet in here did refer to the Lions Den!
Adele
quote:
Originally posted by Dark Woods
I presume from the title of this thread that you mean that there has been relatively little activity in the Lion's Den.
Earlier in this thread the question was asked why ordinary soldiers were guarding prisoners, rather than specialists along the line of Military Police.
During the "War on Terrorism" (I have to put it in quotations because war can only be waged against political entities such as tribes, states, or nations. War cannot be meaningfully waged on a stategy or tactic--Imagine for example a "War on Artillery Bombardment" but I digress.) there has been a large percentage increase in prisoners held by the military, but to my knowlege no significant increase in the number of active duty servicemembers in the Prison Guard specialty. Part of the price we pay for rushing to war is the lack of this human infrastructure to deal properly with the consequences. The Gulf War of 1991 ended up with most prisoners being repatriated relatively quickly, so the magnitude of the long term military prison requirement may well have been underestimated for the Iraq occupation.
|
| report to moderator |
|
|
SgtMunro
Soldier of the King
USA
Bumppo's Patron since [at least]:
September 23 2002
Status: offline
Donating Member |
Posted - June 07 2004 : 11:04:30 AM
|
quote:
Dark Woods states: During the "War on Terrorism" (I have to put it in quotations because war can only be waged against political entities such as tribes, states, or nations. War cannot be meaningfully waged on a stategy or tactic--Imagine for example a "War on Artillery Bombardment" but I digress.)
Well Dark Woods, it is easier to name the current conflict the War on Terrorism, than to call it the War on AlQueda, Hamaas, PLO, Bathist Hold-Outs, Islamic WMD's & Wahabist Islam. Terrorism may very well be a tactic (and a cowardly one at that), but the terrorist themselves do meet your criteria for "tribes" (albeit nomadic). As to the other subjects of this thread, I do find it humorous that we are still wringing our hands over a couple of terrorist forced to wear women's underwear on their heads, while a story of a young man who had his head sawed off by nazis in bedsheets, was quietly killed by the leftist media.
The animals in that prison were there for killing American soldiers, and yes folks I do believe the order to 'soften them up' came down the pieline (As it had in previous conflicts, believe me it is S.O.P.). Some humilation is not comparable to torture and death, that my friends is a fact of life. As to the complaints from the 'Arab Gutter', well I for one says "Who cares, we got a job to do and if inflicting a little humilation on muderous animals helps produce information that saves American lives, so be it". I know that it is not 'nice' or 'politically correct', but I do not care, there is no comparison between how we handle our prisoners compared to the rest of the "outraged" world. If you do not believe me, just ask the IRA prisoners in Portsmouth Naval Prison as to what 'humane' interigation techniques are...
Your Most Humble Servant,
|
Serjeant-Major Duncan Munro
Capt. Thos. Graham's Coy.
42nd Royal Highland Regiment of Foote
(The Black Sheep of the Black Watch)
"Nemo Me Impune Lacessit"
-Or-
"Recruit locally, fight globally." |
| report to moderator |
|
|
Adele
The Huggy Merchant
Bumppo's Patron since [at least]:
May 17 2002
Status: offline
|
Posted - June 08 2004 : 02:17:29 AM
|
Well, first of all we are not just talking about prisoners with underwear on their head....secondly, I remember reading an account from a British SAS soldier who had stated that the humiliation he had suffered as a prisoner was far worse than any physical torture he had received.
The point is...the double standards. We all cry out in horror when we see a beaten US/European soldier paraded on video, or the semi-naked body of a dead US soldier dragged through the streets of a foreign country to cheering throngs. Where are we different? The pictures of a pathetic Hussein being dragged from his hiding hole, or the Guantanamo Bay prisoners being held, have all been displayed in Western media to cheering TV viewers. What's the difference? That they are the baddies and we are the goodies? If only it were that simple.
The trophy pictures taken by western soldiers have done irreparable damage because they have demonstrated that we are no better than anyone else. Be honest with yourselves...if those had been US or British soldiers being forced to masturbate in front of Iraqi soldiers for the purposes of a trophy picture...what would your reaction be?
Torture is an established means of saving and taking lives. It always was, and it always will be. If we use it, then we should have the guts to stop pretending that the section of the Geneva Convention that relates to prisoners of war is worth more than the paper it is written on.
If the US is to fight middle eastern terrorism, it needs middle eastern allies...and this surely isn't the way to get them.
HM
quote:
Originally posted by SgtMunro
quote:
Dark Woods states: During the "War on Terrorism" (I have to put it in quotations because war can only be waged against political entities such as tribes, states, or nations. War cannot be meaningfully waged on a stategy or tactic--Imagine for example a "War on Artillery Bombardment" but I digress.)
Well Dark Woods, it is easier to name the current conflict the War on Terrorism, than to call it the War on AlQueda, Hamaas, PLO, Bathist Hold-Outs, Islamic WMD's & Wahabist Islam. Terrorism may very well be a tactic (and a cowardly one at that), but the terrorist themselves do meet your criteria for "tribes" (albeit nomadic). As to the other subjects of this thread, I do find it humorous that we are still wringing our hands over a couple of terrorist forced to wear women's underwear on their heads, while a story of a young man who had his head sawed off by nazis in bedsheets, was quietly killed by the leftist media.
The animals in that prison were there for killing American soldiers, and yes folks I do believe the order to 'soften them up' came down the pieline (As it had in previous conflicts, believe me it is S.O.P.). Some humilation is not comparable to torture and death, that my friends is a fact of life. As to the complaints from the 'Arab Gutter', well I for one says "Who cares, we got a job to do and if inflicting a little humilation on muderous animals helps produce information that saves American lives, so be it". I know that it is not 'nice' or 'politically correct', but I do not care, there is no comparison between how we handle our prisoners compared to the rest of the "outraged" world. If you do not believe me, just ask the IRA prisoners in Portsmouth Naval Prison as to what 'humane' interigation techniques are...
Your Most Humble Servant,
|
| report to moderator |
|
|
SgtMunro
Soldier of the King
USA
Bumppo's Patron since [at least]:
September 23 2002
Status: offline
Donating Member |
Posted - June 08 2004 : 03:44:33 AM
|
quote:
Adele said: The point is...the double standards. We all cry out in horror when we see a beaten US/European soldier paraded on video, or the semi-naked body of a dead US soldier dragged through the streets of a foreign country to cheering throngs. Where are we different? The pictures of a pathetic Hussein being dragged from his hiding hole, or the Guantanamo Bay prisoners being held, have all been displayed in Western media to cheering TV viewers. What's the difference? That they are the baddies and we are the goodies? If only it were that simple.
First off Adele, if you insist on quoting the Geneva Convention perhaps you should know there is a difference between torture and humiliation. Torture would involve any action that carries the risk of serious bodily injury and/or death and therefore is not permissable. Humiliating a detaininee into speaking is another matter altogether, as Sgt. McNabb (That is the SAS soldier you are refering too, since he was one of the few SAS Troopers captured during the Gulf War) would agree with. That is why part of the training that soldier like McNabb went through involves dealing with not only humilation, but torture as well. The training that I went through many moons ago was called SERE (Survival-Evade-Resist-Escape) School, and I know that the SAS/SBS incorporated a similar program to train with.
Now you are telling me that there is moral equivallence between what causes or risks serious bodily injury/death and actions that humiliate? "They are the baddies and we are the goodies, if it were only that simple" you say, well it is that simple if you actually look at what is permissible in the Geneva Convention of which you are fond of refering too.
quote:
Adele also said: The trophy pictures taken by western soldiers have done irreparable damage because they have demonstrated that we are no better than anyone else. Be honest with yourselves...if those had been US or British soldiers being forced to masturbate in front of Iraqi soldiers for the purposes of a trophy picture...what would your reaction be?
First off, the fact that those kids were dumb enough to take pictures tells me that they are not as savy as previous generations of warriors were. Secondly, as someone who was quite aware of what happened to some of our prisoneers during the Gulf War I can tell you that they would have much rather been forced to do as you suggested, as opposed to how they were really treated.
The one who needs to honest with themselves is you. As I asked above; do you find equivallence with the above comparisons? If you do, then I am truly sorry for you.
quote:
Adele finished with: If the US is to fight middle eastern terrorism, it needs middle eastern allies...and this surely isn't the way to get them.
Adele, the only "allies" that would be offended by our actions are ones that are not worth having. One thing abour warfare, it lets you know who your friends really are...
Your Most Humble Servant,
|
Serjeant-Major Duncan Munro
Capt. Thos. Graham's Coy.
42nd Royal Highland Regiment of Foote
(The Black Sheep of the Black Watch)
"Nemo Me Impune Lacessit"
-Or-
"Recruit locally, fight globally." |
| report to moderator |
|
|
SgtMunro
Soldier of the King
USA
Bumppo's Patron since [at least]:
September 23 2002
Status: offline
Donating Member |
Posted - June 08 2004 : 03:53:41 AM
|
P.S.- Happy Birthday Adele!!!!
|
Serjeant-Major Duncan Munro
Capt. Thos. Graham's Coy.
42nd Royal Highland Regiment of Foote
(The Black Sheep of the Black Watch)
"Nemo Me Impune Lacessit"
-Or-
"Recruit locally, fight globally." |
| report to moderator |
|
|
Adele
The Huggy Merchant
Bumppo's Patron since [at least]:
May 17 2002
Status: offline
|
Posted - June 09 2004 : 01:45:04 AM
|
quote:
First off Adele, if you insist on quoting the Geneva Convention perhaps you should know there is a difference between torture and humiliation. Torture would involve any action that carries the risk of serious bodily injury and/or death and therefore is not permissable. Humiliating a detaininee into speaking is another matter altogether, as Sgt. McNabb (That is the SAS soldier you are refering too, since he was one of the few SAS Troopers captured during the Gulf War) would agree with. That is why part of the training that soldier like McNabb went through involves dealing with not only humilation, but torture as well. The training that I went through many moons ago was called SERE (Survival-Evade-Resist-Escape) School, and I know that the SAS/SBS incorporated a similar program to train with.
Now you are telling me that there is moral equivallence between what causes or risks serious bodily injury/death and actions that humiliate? "They are the baddies and we are the goodies, if it were only that simple" you say, well it is that simple if you actually look at what is permissible in the Geneva Convention of which you are fond of refering too.
Article 14 of the Geneva Convention covers the respect of prisoners and their honour.
quote:
First off, the fact that those kids were dumb enough to take pictures tells me that they are not as savy as previous generations of warriors were. Secondly, as someone who was quite aware of what happened to some of our prisoneers during the Gulf War I can tell you that they would have much rather been forced to do as you suggested, as opposed to how they were really treated.
The one who needs to honest with themselves is you. As I asked above; do you find equivallence with the above comparisons? If you do, then I am truly sorry for you
It is not about moral equivalence. It is about right and wrong. Just because one may be considered worse than the other, doesn't make either of them right!! I feel sorry for you if you don't understand that.
quote:
Adele, the only "allies" that would be offended by our actions are ones that are not worth having. One thing abour warfare, it lets you know who your friends really are...
I would have to completely disagree with that...war doesn't let you know who your friends are...it lets you know who you have political power over, or who you are politically bound to. That is not friendship.
Incidentally, the point that I was trying to make was the point about 'double standards' and the recently leaked memo from the Pentagon is a point in case (See Below). The US obviously feels it is no longer bound by US and international law (the treatment of Guantanmo Bay prisoners has shown us that), so it should stop pretending that those laws have any relevance to them.
HM
Ban On Torture Overruled in Pentagon
By David Rennie in Washington (from the Daily Telegraph)
(Filed: 08/06/2004)
A leaked Pentagon memo cast serious doubt yesterday on the Bush administration's insistence that its treatment of prisoners was bound by laws and treaties banning torture.
A secret document disc |
| report to moderator |
|
|
Adele
The Huggy Merchant
Bumppo's Patron since [at least]:
May 17 2002
Status: offline
|
Posted - June 09 2004 : 02:18:37 AM
|
quote:
Originally posted by SgtMunro
P.S.- Happy Birthday Adele!!!!
Thank you!! |
| report to moderator |
|
|
SgtMunro
Soldier of the King
USA
Bumppo's Patron since [at least]:
September 23 2002
Status: offline
Donating Member |
Posted - June 09 2004 : 03:24:07 AM
|
quote:
Adele said: Article 14 of the Geneva Convention covers the respect of prisoners and their honour.
That is a somewhat subjective and nebulous article of the third convention of 1949, since it does not take into account lawful interrorgation techniques (You remember, ones that do not risk disfigurement, serious bodily injury or death).
quote:
Adele also stated: It is not about moral equivalence. It is about right and wrong. Just because one may be considered worse than the other, doesn't make either of them right!!
Your initial statements gave the impression that is was about moral equivalence, to wit:"The point is...the double standards. We all cry out in horror when we see a beaten US/European soldier paraded on video, or the semi-naked body of a dead US soldier dragged through the streets of a foreign country to cheering throngs. Where are we different? The pictures of a pathetic Hussein being dragged from his hiding hole, or the Guantanamo Bay prisoners being held, have all been displayed in Western media to cheering TV viewers."
When you compare the obvious torture/mutilation of American or allied soldiers to the capture of lawful and unlawful combatants, that is an excercise in moral equivalence. Which is a 'non-starter' for any intellectual debate.
quote:
Adele then said: I would have to completely disagree with that...war doesn't let you know who your friends are...it lets you know who you have political power over, or who you are politically bound to. That is not friendship.
Well Adele, that is international relations, it is not always based on trust, friendship or even respect. But is is always based on mutual need. Sort of like the relationship between our country and yours, it was not always based on noble ideas but it always benifited both parties.
quote:
Adele finished with: Incidentally, the point that I was trying to make was the point about 'double standards' and the recently leaked memo from the Pentagon is a point in case (See Below). The US obviously feels it is no longer bound by US and international law (the treatment of Guantanmo Bay prisoners has shown us that), so it should stop pretending that those laws have any relevance to them.
As I had stated above, there is no 'double-standard', and no comparison between our treatment of prisoners and the conduct of our enemies. I am still waiting to hear of the "torture" that is going on, and I will probably be waiting a long time, because it isn't. My whole point was that we shouldn't wringing our hands over such a non-issue, while allowing the stories of the massacared contractors and the decapitated Mr. Berg die early and quietly by an agenda-driven leftist media.
Your Most Humble Servant,
|
Serjeant-Major Duncan Munro
Capt. Thos. Graham's Coy.
42nd Royal Highland Regiment of Foote
(The Black Sheep of the Black Watch)
"Nemo Me Impune Lacessit"
-Or-
"Recruit locally, fight globally." |
| report to moderator |
|
|
SgtMunro
Soldier of the King
USA
Bumppo's Patron since [at least]:
September 23 2002
Status: offline
Donating Member |
Posted - June 09 2004 : 08:59:19 AM
|
P.S.- Just a few thoughts on Mr. Rennie's 'impartial' observations:
quote:
Mr. Rennie observed: The official said: "People were trying like hell to ratchet up the pressure." Techniques then used at Guantanamo included drawing on a prisoner's body and placing women's underwear on prisoners' heads.
Not exactly the rape rooms of Sadaam's regime or the 're-education camps' of Stalinst Russia. Nope, doesn't sound like torture to me...
quote:
Mr. Rennie was also outraged by: An intelligence officer told the Journal that methods now used at Guantanamo included limiting prisoners' food, subjecting them to body searches, depriving them of sleep for up to 96 hours and shackling them in stress positions.
I wonder if Mr. Rennie is aware that these 'special' treatments are usually reserved for those 'guests' who decide to assault the staff. But to someone like Mr. Rennie, I'm sure he would rather see some U.S. soldiers get hurt or killed rather than to insult those who wage war on the Western World.
quote:
Mr. Rennie noted: America and Britain issued a fourth draft last night of a United Nations resolution granting Iraq sovereignty as they pressed for a vote at the Security Council as early as tonight. It ignores French demands for an explicit Iraqi veto over military operations but pledges "close co-ordination" between coalition forces and the new interim administration.
First off, I don't think the U.N. should have much to say, since they chose to operate their "Iraq Headquaters" out of Crete. Secondly, who cares what France demands! Those folks haven't had a warrior spirit since the time of Napoleon.
These are just some of my views, and I do not expect many here to agree with them. I will not change them either, unless there is evidence to the contrary.
Your Most Humble Servant,
|
Serjeant-Major Duncan Munro
Capt. Thos. Graham's Coy.
42nd Royal Highland Regiment of Foote
(The Black Sheep of the Black Watch)
"Nemo Me Impune Lacessit"
-Or-
"Recruit locally, fight globally." |
| report to moderator |
|
| |
Topic |
|
|
|
| The Mohican Board! [Bumppo's Redux!] |
© 1997-2025 - Mohican Press |
|
|
| Current Mohicanland page raised in 0.33 seconds |
 |
|
It's been WAY too quiet in here.....
