Rumsfeld Supports, Backs Iraq Interrogation Methods

Sam:

Quote:

I hope he is no longer your husband.

Nope, she's my husband now.

Quote:

That sort of behavior is never acceptable in a relationship. You're worth more than that.

I agree on both counts.

Quote:

I think your characterization of these neocon thugs is as good a one as I've ever heard. They are evil, and completely amoral.

McGentrix wrote:

Everyone has a choice in what they do. If you choose to be a coward who uses ambush techniques while hidding then you must be prepared for the consequences.

Granted, I removed a few words, but with reason. Those that verbally snipe at others must be prepared for counter-attack or defense by their victims.

Quote:

PDiddie and others will have you believe that the people in Guantanamo are all innocent civilians who have never been put through any sort of process and have never even picked up a gun, much less actually attacked any US military members.

Then why are they being held for months without being formally charged, eh? (Canuckism for blatham and others from that wonderful country.)

The law is written for reasons.

Quote:

Soldiers are protected by the Geneva Convention.

.

Guess you don't understand the situation. POWs are protected under the Geneva Convention. Soldiers of countries signing it are to follow it, as are their countries. However some countries and some soldiers don't. That's wrong.

Quote:

Guerilla fighters are not. That is to discourage people from using guerilla tactics during times of war

Funny, the US trains all Special Warfare personnel in guerilla warfare. Ask any member of the Green Berets, US Marine Force Recon, US Navy SEALS, Airborne Rangers, Long Range Recon Patrol (LRPP)and don't forget Pathfinders. That's why it's called Special Warfare!(These are just from the US, not allied forces. Sorry, if it appears to be elitist, but McG may not recognize foreign units.)

Quote:

So many people here pretend that US is somehow stooping to the same level as the terrorists and that is simply not true.

No, we do it on a larger scale like invading an entire country.

Quote:

If it were we would be much more devastating and destructive. we would have shoot on sight orders and have declared martial law in Iraq.

We haven't? Obviously the Iraqis invited us to bomb their country and install all of this into their lives? Silly me for not undstanding.

Quote:

If we were interested in Iraqi oil, we would simply cordone off those area and put them under strict military law. BUT, we haven't done any of this because that is not the way the US does things.

You're right. The oil companies did it and still do. They have just hire gentle, grandfatherly types to be security guards, right? They never tried to recruit anyone with Special Warfare training for these jobs. Dearie me, no! I must have misundertood that letter I recieved just prior to my ETS. I though that it was addressed to me, when it was meant for the grandfather I was named after!

Quote:

Would we really be having these investigations into the incidents at Abu Ghraib if we didn't care?

McGentrix wrote:

Everyone has a choice in what they do. If you choose to be a coward who uses ambush techniques while hidding then you must be prepared for the consequences.

Granted, I removed a few words, but with reason. Those that verbally snipe at others must be prepared for counter-attack or defense by their victims.

Quote:

PDiddie and others will have you believe that the people in Guantanamo are all innocent civilians who have never been put through any sort of process and have never even picked up a gun, much less actually attacked any US military members.

Then why are they being held for months without being formally charged, eh? (Canuckism for blatham and others from that wonderful country.)

The law is written for reasons.

Quote:

Soldiers are protected by the Geneva Convention.

.

Guess you don't understand the situation. POWs are protected under the Geneva Convention. Soldiers of countries signing it are to follow it, as are their countries. However some countries and some soldiers don't. That's wrong.

Quote:

Guerilla fighters are not. That is to discourage people from using guerilla tactics during times of war

Funny, the US trains all Special Warfare personnel in guerilla warfare. Ask any member of the Green Berets, US Marine Force Recon, US Navy SEALS, Airborne Rangers, Long Range Recon Patrol (LRPP)and don't forget Pathfinders. That's why it's called Special Warfare!(These are just from the US, not allied forces. Sorry, if it appears to be elitist, but McG may not recognize foreign units.)

Quote:

So many people here pretend that US is somehow stooping to the same level as the terrorists and that is simply not true.

No, we do it on a larger scale like invading an entire country.

Quote:

If it were we would be much more devastating and destructive. we would have shoot on sight orders and have declared martial law in Iraq.

We haven't? Obviously the Iraqis invited us to bomb their country and install all of this into their lives? Silly me for not undstanding.

Quote:

If we were interested in Iraqi oil, we would simply cordone off those area and put them under strict military law. BUT, we haven't done any of this because that is not the way the US does things.

You're right. The oil companies did it and still do. They have just hire gentle, grandfatherly types to be security guards, right? They never tried to recruit anyone with Special Warfare training for these jobs. Dearie me, no! I must have misundertood that letter I recieved just prior to my ETS. I though that it was addressed to me, when it was meant for the grandfather I was named after!

Quote:

Would we really be having these investigations into the incidents at Abu Ghraib if we didn't care?

Yep

COOPER: You think -- Taguba basically said this doesn't go above brigade level. But I was only looking at the military police side of this. You think the can of worms may be on the military intelligence side and that investigation is still ongoing.

HACKWORTH: It's definitely there. And I think his charter to just look at the MP side, was the kind of the old dodge game on the part of the army. We hope this will make it go away. But bottom line is, for example, just before I came on the show, I got a report from a military intelligence colonel, a guy that really is in the know, and he said that this system of abuse was organized, planned for, the top generals knew about it. The commanding general out there of military intelligence, General Fast knew about it, probably General Sanchez. And it probably went right up the line to the Pentagon.

COOPER: But let's just play devil's advocate. Today Taguba said Sanchez put out orders about what are the established guidelines, and these people down low weren't following those orders. You don't buy that?

HACKWORTH: No, I don't. And the colonel also said that it was a program designed to instruct the military police by the military intelligence folks. And there was this thing that you mentioned earlier, who was in command?

You know, you can only have one captain of a ship. You can't have two. And if you and I were running that prison, look, buddy, Anderson are you running it or am I running it?

We'd be on the phone to Sanchez and say who's in charge here.

COOPER: Taguba said he found no evidence of actual paper orders saying military intelligence was in charge.

HACKWORTH: But he just looked at the military police side. I think once you dig in, and according to my source today, a very reliable source, he alleges that General Fast was very much involved in this. Even training films were made, and sent back to the intelligence school to be used for training. And that both the MPs and the military intelligence folks were told to ignore the Geneva Convention. It didn't count. So you can bet your boots there's a whole bunch more going to come out on this, and it's going to go all the way to the Pentagon.

The Times' trick last October, in echoing Neier and the Red Cross, was to spread a counterfeit version of the Geneva Conventions, designed to cripple America's prosecution of the War on Terror, and empower her enemies. The counterfeiting starts with the notion that the Conventions are somehow "international law" and universally, unconditionally binding, though when one reads between the lines, one sees that in the Neier/Red Cross counterfeit version, the Conventions are unconditionally binding on the U.S., but not on her enemies. In fact, the Geneva Conventions have the character not of international law, which is a fiction, but of a treaty, even if this particular treaty has 188 signatories. Thus, the actual Geneva Conventions apply only to military conflicts between High Contracting Parties, say America and France; they do not apply to conflicts between a High Contracting Party and "illegal combatants," of whom terrorists are the classic example. Some of the characteristics of illegal combatants are the lack of a uniform or the equivalent ("insignia"), identifying them as soldiers; the refusal to openly carry arms; the lack of a commanding officer responsible for combatants' actions; and the refusal to follow the laws and customs of war. Illegal combatants do not receive the status or rights of prisoners of war.