0
   

US AND THEM: US, UN & Iraq, version 8.0

 
 
WhoodaThunk
 
  1  
Reply Sun 29 May, 2005 09:22 am
McTag wrote:
You are on the receiving end of a sausage-machine of propaganda ...


You and yours are not?

Methinks you are.

And you've developed a decided preference for your brand.
0 Replies
 
dyslexia
 
  1  
Reply Sun 29 May, 2005 09:24 am
Well I heard somewhere or maybe read somthing that it was over a million, yes that's right over 1 million. Damn, I wish I could remeber where I heard or read that but it doesn't really matter does it?
0 Replies
 
cicerone imposter
 
  1  
Reply Sun 29 May, 2005 09:51 am
Quote, "Not a few soldiers? Not a few commanders?

So, how many? Is it merely your opinion that the majority "connived" or do you have a reliable source to support your allegations?

Hundreds? Thousands?"

No allegations are needed when lower-ranking soldiers misbehave or break the laws repeatedly. That's what the military is all about; following orders. If misdeeds are repeated over and over, it means the higher-ups are responsible. If you believe otherwise, you've never served in the military. That's the bottom line.
0 Replies
 
cicerone imposter
 
  1  
Reply Sun 29 May, 2005 09:54 am
I would also say that "a million" is an under-estimate of the reality. If the higher-ups approve, it means most of them are capable of the same crime. Nay, I'd say most including Rummie are responsible. Pinnochio Bush is also responsible.
0 Replies
 
georgeob1
 
  1  
Reply Sun 29 May, 2005 10:13 am
I think you exaggerate Cicerone.

There is no doubt the "higher ups" are involved, at least to some extent. The Administration has openly claimed that "illegal combatants" it holds captive do not fit the Definition of Prisoners of War, and that therefore the Geneva Convention does not apply to them in a judicial sense. This is (from a legal perspective) a very defensible argument. Whether you accept it or not is essentially a political question.

Even accepting that point, abuses have occurred. However I know of no evidence suggesting that this was the knowing deliberate policy of the government or the military. I'll concede that there have been enough such incidences to suggest some laxity and error on the part of some commanders.

However you should also recognize that there is a double standard applied here. The Gulag of the late, unlamented Soviet Union, the policies of the French during the struggle in Algeria, and the practices of China today all drew and draw proportionately (to the crime) far less public attention than do the lapses in the US systems. Why is that?

McTag often gives me the impression that he knows nothing of the world or his own country before (say) 2003. There is a lack of proportion here and an absence of acknowledgment of the reality of historical norms in such situations that I find stunning.
0 Replies
 
McTag
 
  1  
Reply Sun 29 May, 2005 10:29 am
Certainly thousands. Soldiers do not live in hotel rooms, in isolation. They live together, train together, operate together. And, no-one acts without express orders. Thousands. Up and down the chain of command. To believe otherwise would stretch credulity too far.
0 Replies
 
Gelisgesti
 
  1  
Reply Sun 29 May, 2005 10:31 am
All that believe that the dog collars, leashes, hoods and other tools of the trade up to and including 'the abcs'of toture' were purchased at the local Iraqi Walmart raise your hand.
0 Replies
 
revel
 
  1  
Reply Sun 29 May, 2005 11:01 am
I bet I am not the only one who has never wondered where they got the tools they used. Interesting line of thought.
0 Replies
 
georgeob1
 
  1  
Reply Sun 29 May, 2005 11:18 am
McTag wrote:
Certainly thousands. Soldiers do not live in hotel rooms, in isolation. They live together, train together, operate together. And, no-one acts without express orders. Thousands. Up and down the chain of command. To believe otherwise would stretch credulity too far.


"... no one acts without express orders..."

McTag, I suspect you have never been a soldier, .... or been shot at..
0 Replies
 
Setanta
 
  1  
Reply Sun 29 May, 2005 11:21 am
Perhaps being a pilot, and therefore an officer, has skewed your perspect. Private soldiers and non-commissioned officers rarely act without express orders, except perhaps in the heat of combat. Certainly not in situations such as a prison. NCO's famouly practice CYA--cover your ass.

The only way i would modify what McT wrote would be: "Few soldiers act without express orders."
0 Replies
 
JustWonders
 
  1  
Reply Sun 29 May, 2005 11:28 am
The Military You Don't See

By Frank Schaeffer

Sunday, May 29, 2005; Page B07

I never served in the military, and before my son unexpectedly volunteered, I was too busy writing novels to give much thought to the men and women who guard us. To me the military was the "other." After my son joined the Marines, however, casualty reports from Afghanistan and Iraq were no longer mere news items but gut-churning family bulletins. And reports about prisoner abuse cut me to the quick. They also made me angry at the media. Sure, this was an emotional, don't-impugn-my-son's-honor reaction, but I wonder if there is also something fundamentally amiss with the way the media report on our military.

If most reporters, editors and publishers are like this writer before his son volunteered, they don't identify with members of our armed forces personally. Most members of our media are drawn from my privileged class. And we, the most privileged Americans, seem to believe that everyone but our children should serve. When members of the elite do volunteer -- as did the Harvard-graduate son of Richard and Doris Kearns Goodwin -- it's a news story in itself.


To be sure, if the children of our top reporters, editorial writers and columnists were proportionately represented in our military, we would still read the stories about prisoner abuse. But I think we might also read more stories like this one, forwarded to me by another Marine's father:

"February 19, 2004 Iraq Dear Mom & Dad, . . . . We were stopped in the desert outside of Fallujah. We had 3 detainees under our control that were captured in the act of [attacking our] Marines. Because we were in the open without any facilities around, the detainees were temporarily being held under the stars.

"Around 3:00 a.m., the wind started blowing hard and a sandstorm hit . . . . the sky opened and the flying sand was joined by a downpour of rain. . . . . In the back of a truck, 4 Marines were trying to stay dry and get some sleep. The lieutenant who was in charge of providing security for the detainees approached this truck and opened up the back hatch. He ordered the Marines out . . . . The Marines asked why and he explained to them that he had to put the detainees in the back of the truck to protect them from the rain and sandstorm.

"Word of this spread quickly and everyone was livid. We couldn't believe that our Marines were being kicked into the sandstorm/rainstorm so these detainees could stay dry. The next day I was still angry and everyone was still talking about what had happened that night. Later in the day, after having time to cool down and think about the situation, I switched from being angry to being proud. . . . I love you and miss you lots.

"Your son, Josh"

(Cpl. Joshua A. Mandel)

As a military parent, why do I read the most positive stories about our troops in a sort of military-family samizdat e-mail underground network and not on Page One? And how many times does the same type of editorial about the same handful of abused prisoners have to be repeated before an inaccurate impression of our military is given?

Maybe reporters and editorial writers think that reporting too often on the many selfless acts our troops undertake will reflect well on an undeserving president who likes to grandstand with our troops in photo ops. But is the truth about the character of our military being accurately, or should I say proportionately, reported? Does the public, which has woefully little personal contact with our military, know that most men and women in our services are not torturers but people like them trying to do the best they can with compassion and honor? Does the public know that acts of kindness are routine and acts of abuse are rare?

I treasure a photograph of my son cradling an Afghan child in his arms while standing outside a school he was protecting from fanatics who wanted to kill the teacher for the "crime" of teaching girls. That picture is far more typical of what my son and his fellow Marines did every day than are the pictures of mistreated prisoners.

My son humbled me. He taught me that our troops are not the "other." My son's brothers and sisters in uniform deserve better than to be mischaracterized if only by omission. Who they are and what they do should be accurately reported in a way that reflects the reality of what our selfless and extraordinary men and women do every day.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2005/05/27/AR2005052701281.html
0 Replies
 
dyslexia
 
  1  
Reply Sun 29 May, 2005 11:38 am
Quote:
Who they are and what they do should be accurately reported in a way that reflects the reality of what our selfless and extraordinary men and women do every day.

I feel the same way about our nations farmers, nurses, welders, teachers and the clerk who rings me out at the gorcery store, don't you?
0 Replies
 
JustWonders
 
  1  
Reply Sun 29 May, 2005 11:41 am
Is someone inaccurately reporting on the character of your grocery store clerk?
0 Replies
 
dyslexia
 
  1  
Reply Sun 29 May, 2005 11:46 am
Actually worse than that, they go unreported day after stinking day of serving the public. Ok, I grant that teachers and nurses are just glorified baby sitters who are immensely overpaid, but our nation's farmers?
0 Replies
 
Walter Hinteler
 
  1  
Reply Sun 29 May, 2005 11:51 am
Quote:
Hospital in Germany copes with heavy flow of wounded from Iran, Afghanistan

Sunday May 29, 2005
By MATT MOORE
Associated Press Writer

LANDSTUHL, Germany (AP) With its quiet, winding halls, Landstuhl Regional Medical Center at first looks like just another community hospital. But it has become a front line in the Iraq and Afghan wars thousands of miles away.

The patients young soldiers with faces lacerated by flying glass and shrapnel from exploding roadside bombs, others missing a leg or arm shuffle by, heading for an appointment or checkup. At this military hospital, there is a constant stream of new faces.

An average of about 23 patients arrive each day most from Iraq, where more than 12,350 soldiers, sailors, marines and airmen have been injured since the U.S.-led war began in March 2003. The flow can spike sharply, as it did during the battle for Fallujah: 537 over two days.

Fighting in Afghanistan adds more patients. Since troops arrived there in October 2001, 455 have been wounded in action through early this May, almost all of them coming to Landstuhl with injuries and wounds not normally found in a civilian hospital.

In civilian medicine, ``a blast injury is a very rare event,'' said Army Col. Rhonda Cornum, the hospital's medical director. ``Unfortunately, it's a very common thing here.''

It's not just common, it's a near daily diagnosis, said Cornum, a former POW in the first Gulf War who is wrapping up nearly two years as head of the biggest overseas U.S. military hospital and preparing to return to the United States.

There was a time, years ago, when Landstuhl had to justify its existence. No longer.

``Things have changed. We used to get as many trauma victims in a year from Europe and Africa as we now do a day,'' said Cornum.

Though major combat in Iraq was declared over in May 2003, daily attacks by a stubborn insurgency has kept the hospital, nestled among thick woods on a hilltop that overlooks this small town, busy day and night.

Troops from Iraq arrive with a host of injuries eyes damaged by roadside bombs or limbs shredded beyond repair along with maladies more common to a community hospital like heart attacks, hammer toes and kidney stones.

The staff doesn't expect a slowdown.

``This place is just not what it once was,'' said U.S. Air Force Col. Todd Hess, the chief deputy commander of clinical services.

He's spent nearly eight years at the hospital, and seen it go from having to justify keeping its doors open to becoming almost a household name. ``We've been in Doonesbury and we were on 'The West Wing' last night,'' he said, referring to the comic strip and television show.

For the 300,000 military personnel stationed in Europe, Landstuhl has been the top hospital since 1953. It provides cancer treatment, birth and neonatal care, as well as neurosurgery and burn units.

Iraq isn't the hospital's first crisis. In 1987, it treated 500 people injured at the Ramstein Air Show disaster. During the first Gulf War, more than 4,000 troops were brought in, and 800 from Somalia in the 1990s.

Overseas, Landstuhl is often the first stop for soldiers injured by bullets, bombs or exploding tires.

Since the invasion of Iraq, Hess, an ophthalmologist, said some 200 troops have been treated for eye injuries caused by roadside bombs.

Sgt. Steven Allen, a 22-year-old from Thawville, Ill., was getting ready to leave for Walter Reed Army Medical Center in Washington, D.C., after a five-day stay.

While traveling with his unit, the 57th Transport Company, he was hit by gunfire from insurgents that blew a hole in his right arm and shredded his right hand. It was amputated.

``I was out of the kill zone and on a bird within six hours,'' he said, his damaged arm swathed in white bandages and cradled in a sling. ``It was my second tour in Iraq.''

Others, like Spc. Jason Delfosse, of the 82nd Airborne Division, come to get treatment for non-combat related ills. ``I was here for kidney stones,'' he said, holding his crimson paratrooper beret. ``I'm going to Afghanistan to rejoin my unit.''

The hospital faced a severe test this past fall, handling a wave of casualties when coalition forces mounted assaults against insurgents in Fallujah.

Head Nurse Maj. Kendra Whyatt, of Greenwood, Miss., said it was massive. ``We woke up,'' she said. ``For two or three days, we were going 24 hours.''

Soldiers with severe injuries are sent to a combat support hospital for a maximum of three days. If more advanced care is needed, they go to Landstuhl and in some cases onward to Walter Reed or Brooke Army Medical Center in San Antonio, Texas.

In January, Dr. Atul Gawande wrote in the New England Journal of Medicine that the average time from the battlefield to the United States for American troops is less than four days, compared to 45 days during Vietnam.

Sgt. Benjamin McCarty, a 32-year-old soldier, was a Marine before rejoining the military the day after the Sept. 11 attacks. Wounded in his shoulder by a roadside bomb, he spent nearly five days at Landstuhl. On Wednesday he left for the United States for therapy and more treatment.

``I feel bad about the guys I left behind,'' the Batesville, Miss., native said, as he waited for a bus to take him Ramstein Air Base and the flight home.

All but the most severely injured stay only about two weeks at Landstuhl before heading back to the United States. Most stay just two days before heading off for more treatment, Cornum said.

That leaves little time for staffers to connect with patients, although Cornum said soldiers have written the hospital to thank them, and that's helped the staff keep their perspective.

``The bilateral amputee who was seconds from bleeding to death who went home and got married. The captain who had an amputation, who is running marathons and is back in command in the Army,'' she said. ``The letters we get from the moms will kill you 'Thank you for what you did.' We probably get one or two a week.''
Source
0 Replies
 
Lash
 
  1  
Reply Sun 29 May, 2005 11:52 am
They DO cast an evil pall over the many wonderful service personnel because the behavior of a few.

Many here prefer to do this--rather than single out individuals and their specific crimes. They want another stick to beat the US with, and they don't mind that it smears good military soldiers.

The omission of these and other facts does constitute an inaccuracy.
0 Replies
 
dyslexia
 
  1  
Reply Sun 29 May, 2005 11:54 am
Yeah prolly so Lash but perhaps I only agree because I was such a lousy soldier.
0 Replies
 
Setanta
 
  1  
Reply Sun 29 May, 2005 12:21 pm
And the right wants to sing the patriotic song, all the while ignoring responsibility. Were one to suppose, for sake of argument and only for sake of argument, that no one but the NCOs and private soldiers were responsible, then why the hell doesn't anyone consider the responsibility of Rummy and the Shrub for the culture of the military? The idea that a handful of low ranking soldiers, and one scape-goat general officer are the only responsible parties completely ignores the concept of executive responsiblity. It is an absurdity, however, to contend that the problems were not very much more wide-spread than DoD will admit.

And that is the biggest slur on the millions of fine service personnel in our nation--that such things are allowed and condoned, to the eternal shame of the good people who make up 99% of the military.
0 Replies
 
Lash
 
  1  
Reply Sun 29 May, 2005 12:32 pm
Setanta wrote:
And the right wants to sing the patriotic song, all the while ignoring responsibility.

Please translate this. Who wants to ignore responsibility? The innocent? Don't you think they SHOULD ignore responsibility? After all, THEY AREN'T RESPONSIBLE FOR WHAT THEY DIDN'T DO.

Were one to suppose, for sake of argument and only for sake of argument, that no one but the NCOs and private soldiers were responsible, then why the hell doesn't anyone consider the responsibility of Rummy and the Shrub for the culture of the military?

Why don't we hold them responsible for EVERYTHING? A rape in the DoD parking lot, dirty bathrooms at the Pentagon...? That is ludicrous. ...the culture of the military... Blame George Washington, Genghis Khan,... Prove their blame for what individual soldiers do.

The idea that a handful of low ranking soldiers, and one scape-goat general officer are the only responsible parties completely ignores the concept of executive responsiblity. It is an absurdity, however, to contend that the problems were not very much more wide-spread than DoD will admit.

Blame human nature. Crime, assaults, rape, theft, racism, sexism...take place naturally in every walk of society. Trying to force the crimes of humankind on two men is a bit much.

And that is the biggest slur on the millions of fine service personnel in our nation--that such things are allowed and condoned, to the eternal shame of the good people who make up 99% of the military.

Prove it was condoned.

There is a lot of very irresponsible fast and loose play with facts and people's reputations here.
.
0 Replies
 
Setanta
 
  1  
Reply Sun 29 May, 2005 12:42 pm
Prove Lizzie Borden killed her parents. When you are through being willfully obtuse, and suggesting that i meant what i did neither mean nor write, i might feel moved to respond.
0 Replies
 
 

Related Topics

Obama '08? - Discussion by sozobe
Let's get rid of the Electoral College - Discussion by Robert Gentel
McCain's VP: - Discussion by Cycloptichorn
Food Stamp Turkeys - Discussion by H2O MAN
The 2008 Democrat Convention - Discussion by Lash
McCain is blowing his election chances. - Discussion by McGentrix
Snowdon is a dummy - Discussion by cicerone imposter
TEA PARTY TO AMERICA: NOW WHAT?! - Discussion by farmerman
 
Copyright © 2024 MadLab, LLC :: Terms of Service :: Privacy Policy :: Page generated in 0.04 seconds on 10/06/2024 at 02:26:35