This is supposedly a highly trained, well-disciplined, “elite” division.
They make me physically ill to think I once wore the same uniform.
I didn’t support going to war in the first place, but once we were in it, I supported a “staying the course” agenda on the theory that if we left, we’d have done more harm than good.
Not any more.
Mr. President, bring those sick fucks home before they hurt, maim, or enrage any more Muslims into driving more airplanes into our cities, or anything else along those lines. These “elite soldiers” aren’t helping, and God only knows what “regular” units are doing if the 82nd is any example.
How in the fuck can we preach civilization if our best and brightest conduct themselves this way?
Goddamnit, is there any chance this time we’ll see senior officers up on charges, instead of just enlisted men? Why the Hell does Rumsfeld still have his job?
I hate to say it nut the Airorne haven’t been our best and brightest in a long, long time. I’d have to place that label on SF troops. I don’t recall seeing any articles about atrocities committed by them.
I agree also with Baldwin in that I sincerely hope that this time someone besides the lowly peon enlisted people get charged.
This is just one more story to add to the list. It’s wrong and it’s sick. I refuse to believe any possible claims that those in charge didn’t know. If they did know, I ask why was it allowed. If they did not know (which is bullshit) I ask why the hell not. There have been too many claims, too many reports, for anyone to claim it was just a “poorly trained enlisted person”. It’s just happening too much for that.
Meanwhile, I’m not seeing this story on CNN or on NYTimes. Why? This seems pretty big–or are the media so jaded now that a story about an overhyped hurricane is going to draw more ink?
I make no excuses for the 82nd, but it’s not all that surprising. I don’t believe they have much if any training on how to act as prison guards. And, as things like the Stanford prison experiment show, it doesn’t take much to induce a lot of inhumane treatment amongst people in this sort of setting. Humane treatment of prisoners is something that has to be imposed from the top down by means of strict policies and careful training of personel. Instead we have the command structure seeming to want prisoners tortured. Blame those fuckers, all the way up to the top.
There are many factors that will degrade and corrupt one’s sane and compassionate humanity. Greed will do it, lust, certainly, pride, anger, any of the Big Seven. But none so effectively, so certainly, as fear. Atop that, like a poisoned cherry atop a turd sundae, is their inability to judge who is the enemy, and who is merely another bystander.
We knew this already, by dint of a previous debacle. When you can’t pick out your enemy from a crowd, the crowd becomes the enemy. When Achmed is handed over to you as an “enemy combatant”, you instantly know that he is not to be believed, not to be trusted. His denials are lies, he has vital information. Besides which, even if he does not sympathize with our enemies, he knows someone who does: a neighbor, an acquaintance, a brother-in-law. And so it goes.
It is not enough to disapprove, “tut-tut!” doesn’t get it. To overcome this perfectly normal human reaction to threat and fear, rigid and relentless supervision and training is crucial. Every time our soldiers brutalize an innocent “civilian”, we make at least one new enemy, and more likely ten: his father, his brother, his sons…
It not about dissuading or neutralizing our enemy, its about not making new enemies.
Huh–how did you find this? I couldn’t find it on their main page; I looked through their Washington section and their International section and didn’t find the link under either. Is this a story you can only find if you search for it specifically–in other words if you already know it exists?
I first read about it on political blogs last week. The links were provided there, along with some others. You mentioned the NY Times and I remembered the link to it, so I posted it for you.
I hardly ever read the Times in printed form anymore, so I don’t know how prominent the story was in that form. And I no longer depend on cable tv news so I don’t know if CNN covered it. I’d bet not - it has been all Rita, all the time.
It’s reprehensible and there is no defense for the actions of these sick fucks. They should be tried and punished to the fullest extent of military law and for the human rights they so carelessly violated.
However… I don’t think they are a reflection of the military as a whole and terrorists and fundamentalist require very little encouragement to fly planes into buildings and detonate bombs in public places. Saying that these incidents somehow add to the justification of terrorist acts is just plain wrong. It may in the minds of an extremist but that’s not the perspective we should be operating from.
Disclaimer: Above statements not declaration of author’s position on the war in Iraq or support (implicit or explicit) of current administration.
My understanding is that the Pentagon sees three levels of approach to terrorism, roughly approximating three concentric circles:
-The Terrorists. These are folks who have already committed to bloody terroristic violence against the US and others. There’s no propaganda war likely to work against them; a military or police response is the only thing likely to be effective.
-The Fence-sitters. These are folks who think the US sucks, but who are still uneasy with terrorist violence. There’s about ten times as many of them as there are of the first circle (or maybe it’s a hundred times–I forget). These are folks who are the most susceptible to propaganda, from either side. An event like the torturing of prisoners is a propaganda gift to the Terrorists.
-The Community. This is the larger community in the Middle East, uncomfortable to varying degrees with both the Terrorists and the US. It takes a lot to move them into the Terrorist camp, and almost as much to move them into the US camp. This group is about 100-1000 times larger than the Fence-Sitters. They’re most influenced by broad policy decisions and by scandals.
I don’t think it’s accurate to say that atrocities like this are going to motivate a Terrorist to move into action. I do think it’s accurate to say that atrocities like this are going to motivate Fence-Sitters to sign up with the terrorists.
We should be doing everything possible to persuade the fence-sitters that we’re not so bad. Torturing POWs is not a good means of persuasion.
I wouldn’t bet on that either. Unless the court rules to release those photos.
I think the public in general has “torture fatigue”. It’s so sad and horrifying to think about, and we feel powerless to do anything about it. People would like it to just go away. IMO, only those photos will bring it to another level, and force people to deal with it.
It was on the front page, above the fold, leftmost article, 2 columns.
But is was the Saturday edition, which is read less. (Thus, all the juicy stuff gets published on that day.)
Readers of the New Yorker (and Seymour Hersh) will be unsurprised by these revelations. Military intelligence, who operate under “secret” Presidential protection, encourage certain behaviors by army regulars, who don’t.
Lost in this story is the amateurish nature of these interrogation techniques. Discussion with the best big city law enforcement interrogators, Israeli intelligence, or a look at the memos by Sherwood Moran, shows the bankruptsy of our intelligence strategy. I say hand the job back to the professionals.
Experience trumps feel-good tough guy uninformed inclinations. I’m talking to you Dick Cheney (though he isn’t explicitly mentioned in the link).