Judge tells Army to release Abu Ghraib pictures

[butterfoot]

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/8078240/

NEW YORK - A federal judge has ordered the U.S. Army to release more than 100 photographs and several videos taken by an American soldier relating to prisoner abuse at the Abu Ghraib prison in Iraq, according to court documents.

This is rediculous. What good can come out of releasing photos that previously haven't been seen? This is only going to fuel the fire of hate against the US.


-cw

 

[ScottishJohn]

This is rediculous. What good can come out of releasing photos that previously haven't been seen? This is only going to fuel the fire of hate against the US.


-cw

Perhaps the army should have thought of that before they indulged in these activities?

 

[Nathan Poe]

This is rediculous. What good can come out of releasing photos that previously haven't been seen? This is only going to fuel the fire of hate against the US.


-cw

Amen. The full scope of the military's abuses and atrocities should be kep secret from the American public, otherwise some activist might get the notion to *gasp* do something about it!

Remember, boys and girls, if you don't see it, don't hear it, don't talk about it.... it never actually happened.

 

[butterfoot]

Amen. The full scope of the military's abuses and atrocities should be kep secret from the American public, otherwise some activist might get the notion to *gasp* do something about it!

Remember, boys and girls, if you don't see it, don't hear it, don't talk about it.... it never actually happened.

Thats not what I am saying at all. We know the attrocites happened at Abu Ghraib prison. We know those soilders who took part are being punished. So why is it that we must release more photos when we already know what happened?

-cw

 

[butterfoot]

Perhaps the army should have thought of that before they indulged in these activities?

The Army didn't. A few bad soldiers did these things. While they do represent the Army you can't group the entire Army with these people who commited these crimes.


-cw

 

[burrow_owl]

The Army didn't. A few bad soldiers did these things. While they do represent the Army you can't group the entire Army with these people who commited these crimes.

Of course we can. The Army clearly should've instituted measures and procedures to ensure this stuff didn't happen. Instead, they just allowed a bunch of young soldiers, all doubtlessly stressed out and none of whom were adequately trained for that kind of situation, to do whatever. And for good measure, the Pentagon announced that the Geneva Conventions were inapplicable.

What on earth did they think would happen?

If I give my 8 year-old child a hammer, tell him there's nothing wrong with smashing stuff, and then let him loose in a china shop, I should probably be considered culpable. I guess I could blame it on a "bad apple" or somesuch, but I doubt people would buy that.

 

[butterfoot]

Of course we can. The Army clearly should've instituted measures and procedures to ensure this stuff didn't happen. Instead, they just allowed a bunch of young soldiers, all doubtlessly stressed out and none of whom were adequately trained for that kind of situation, to do whatever. And for good measure, the Pentagon announced that the Geneva Conventions were inapplicable.

What on earth did they think would happen?

If I give my 8 year-old child a hammer, tell him there's nothing wrong with smashing stuff, and then let him loose in a china shop, I should probably be considered culpable. I guess I could blame it on a "bad apple" or somesuch, but I doubt people would buy that.

As an Army Veteran who has been deployed, the first thing the train you in is the Geneva convention and tell you what you can and can't do. Then they teach you in the Rules of Engagment (RoE). So to say that these soldiers were not trained is a farce.


-cw

 

[ScottishJohn]

Every commanding officer is responsible for the conduct of their troops. It is not like this was one isolated occurence - one misjudgement on one day. Like it or not the Army is responsible for what happened at Abu Graibh, and could have prevented it on any number of levels. They did not.

 

[butterfoot]

Every commanding officer is responsible for the conduct of their troops. It is not like this was one isolated occurence - one misjudgement on one day. Like it or not the Army is responsible for what happened at Abu Graibh, and could have prevented it on any number of levels. They did not.

The soldiers that were their could have prevented and those are the ones that are being prosecuted or have been senteced

-cw

 

[ScottishJohn]

The soldiers that were their could have prevented and those are the ones that are being prosecuted or have been senteced

-cw

Who was commanding those soldiers? Whose responsiblity were they? I've seen a lot of low ranking soldiers being prosecuted, but no commanding officers. It is pretty useless to scapegoat privates in favour of higher ranking soldiers, at the end of the day the privates could only be responding to an atmosphere where discipline was lax or non existant and they did not expect to be reprimanded for their behaviour, why else were they so relaxed that they took photos? The whole thing stinks and the army have not yet taken proper responsibility for their failings.

 

[Nathan Poe]

Thats not what I am saying at all. We know the attrocites happened at Abu Ghraib prison. We know those soilders who took part are being punished. So why is it that we must release more photos when we already know what happened?

-cw

Because we don't know what happened.

We know a few soldiers were punished, and we've seen a few atrocities take place.

But do we know the real extent of the problem?

 

[Nathan Poe]

The Army didn't. A few bad soldiers did these things. While they do represent the Army you can't group the entire Army with these people who commited these crimes.


-cw

And what makes you so sure that this was limited to "a few bad soldiers?"

 

[Farouche Exegete]

Thats not what I am saying at all. We know the attrocites happened at Abu Ghraib prison. We know those soilders who took part are being punished. So why is it that we must release more photos when we already know what happened?

-cw

We need some heros--people willing to risk their necks to bring those guilty of perpetrating these war crimes to justice. Every little bit of evidence is a booster to
someone thinking of blowing the whistle. We need someone who saved that scrap
of paper telling them to torture someone. We need someone who participated in
the event and is willing to go down for us as long as they can be assured they are
taking down the whole hornet's nest with them. These photos will give courage
to those who are convinced our government has gone off its rocker and needs
to get fixed.

 

[butterfoot]

We need some heros--people willing to risk their necks to bring those guilty of perpetrating these war crimes to justice. Every little bit of evidence is a booster to
someone thinking of blowing the whistle. We need someone who saved that scrap
of paper telling them to torture someone. We need someone who participated in
the event and is willing to go down for us as long as they can be assured they are
taking down the whole hornet's nest with them. These photos will give courage
to those who are convinced our government has gone off its rocker and needs
to get fixed.

But in the mean time we also spark off more crazy extermist muslims and they kill more americans.


-cw

 

[Alarum]

Thats not what I am saying at all. We know the attrocites happened at Abu Ghraib prison. We know those soilders who took part are being punished. So why is it that we must release more photos when we already know what happened?

-cw

Yeah. What is with this entire freedom of information and free speech thingy? I like my information secret and my speech uninformed and limited.

 

[ScottishJohn]

But in the mean time we also spark off more crazy extermist muslims and they kill more americans.


-cw

And the fault will be with the US army and not any judge.

 

[butterfoot]

Yeah. What is with this entire freedom of information and free speech thingy? I like my information secret and my speech uninformed and limited.

Freedom of Information and Free speech are two seperate issues. There are somethings I would consider not needing to be released due to National Security which heavily outways my need to know. Today we tell stuff about us way before it happens and then we wonder how the other side knew. Come on people do you not see the effects of just the littlest thing can have worldwide implications.


-cw

 

[MichaelFJF]

War is a dirty business. People do bad things to accomplish goals. If we keep badgering the military, we won't have a military and we'll be sitting ducks for any wacko out there with one nuke and a dozen guns. You need people capable of terrible acts to watch and kill the enemy. The average person really doesn't want to know how war is won. They just want to know that there are people who take care ofit so they can sleep at night. There are some things the general public just flat-out doesn't need to know.

 

[ScottishJohn]

War is a dirty business. People do bad things to accomplish goals. If we keep badgering the military, we won't have a military and we'll be sitting ducks for any wacko out there with one nuke and a dozen guns. You need people capable of terrible acts to watch and kill the enemy. The average person really doesn't want to know how war is won. They just want to know that there are people who take care ofit so they can sleep at night. There are some things the general public just flat-out doesn't need to know.

This is a horrible statement - basically it seems that you are saying anything is excusable in war, as long as you and I don't have to do it. I cannot disagree more.

The end DOES NOT justify the means and never will.

The inmates in Abu Graibh were mostly common criminals, the majority of them had started their sentence during Saddams regime. The only thing to be gained from the kind of behaviour we see in the Abu Graibh pictures is some perverted soldiers getting their kicks.

I want to know how war is won, I want to know because it is being fought in my name on my behalf. I would rather lose than have someone commit these kinds of acts, at least then when I am killed I can meet my maker and on that count have a clear conscience that I have not required someone to sin on my behalf.

 

[butterfoot]

This is a horrible statement - basically it seems that you are saying anything is excusable in war, as long as you and I don't have to do it. I cannot disagree more.

The end DOES NOT justify the means and never will.

I don't think that is what he is saying at all. But somethings are going to happen in war time that is why we have military courts and they are pretty good about policeing themseleves without having the public badger them. 99% of the U.S. Soldiers are good people and that 1% gives a bad name to the rest. Don't blame the entire Army over something the 1% did.


-cw