Judge tells Army to release Abu Ghraib pictures

[Alarum]

I am so grateful for the ACLU
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2005/06/03/AR2005060300477_pf.html

So am I.

 

[Nathan Poe]

36,000 pages and the government trying to cover it up...

I dislike that the government is trying to hide this information from us, but I don't agree with the ACLU's stance on the issue either; they "want the American people to know what is being done in their name". I don't buy that; we already know what is happening.

Do we?

The Military wasn't exactly going out of its way to release the original photos, now were they?

This is one atrocity done "in our name" that we know of. Shall we stop now and pat ourselves on the back for catching a few bad apples, or shall we press on and see if they've spoiled the bunch?

All they are doing is publicizing it, for whatever reason. I don't like the fact that these abuses occured, and I don't condone them at all, but I definitely do not think it's a good idea to lower our morale like this and to give something to our enemies that will get their blood boiling.

The alternative is to sweep it all under the rug.

Offending our enemies would appear to be the lesser of the two evils.

Besides, what makes you so sure they didn't already know?

 

[Nathan Poe]

I think that the fullness of what those few soldiers did has been exposed and honest to Jesus even as a soldier who has served in Iraq,

I hope so. But I, as a US citizen, want to be sure. Let's have all the facts, no matter how unpleasant.

I don't care if new pictures provide liberals at home new excuses to hate the American Soldier. Their going to do that anyway.

I don't see anyone here hating "The American Soldier." It's the American Officer, the American General, the American CIA, and the American Administration which we are now suspicious of.

Depending on the scope of the abuses, it may become harder and harder to believe that this was just a case of a few soldiers... but we need to know for sure.

My one and only concern is that this may be a matter of national security if it undermines our efforts in Iraq or brings harm to our soldier's there and around the world.

If our soldiers are concerned that bringing these actions to light will put them in jeopardy, perhaps then its best that they don't commit them. Then there's nothing to bring to light.

That’s all I worry about. But having my motives and integrity questioned by insincere people in my own country, that I could care less about.

Well, I'm not questioning your motives; I'm sure you didn't abuse anybody.

 

[EricCartman]

Yes, they are taught the Geneva Convention rules, but in this war the President (COMMANDER AND CHIEF OF THE ARMED FORCES) stated that the Geneva Convention did not apply.

When I went to Kuwait and later into Iraq on March 18th 2003 I was in the Third Infantry Division and we had to sit down about a month before the invasion and get lectured by JAG. I was speficifly told that if we used unnecessary force we would go to jail. And I stood up and asked what that meant and they told me shooting someone with no visible weapon would be unnecessary force, so I asked what about the homicide bombers and I was told just don't do it. I had a few close calls and honestly would have shot someone weapon showing or not if they continued to approach me after having been warned but I was told and so was everyone else point blank that unnecessary force would land us a life time in prision.... a hell of a thing to tell people right before they cross into Iraq but it did happen so I would very much challenge the validity of your statement.

 

[EricCartman]

If our soldiers are concerned that bringing these actions to light will put them in jeopardy, perhaps then its best that they don't commit them. Then there's nothing to bring to light.

It's already happened and it was just a handful of soldiers who did it, bad apples. Are you telling me in the most personal sense that should i get called back to Iraq tomorrow, that I should die for this mistake? This is going to be the end result, fellow citizens, friends and neighbors are going to die if we pour any more salt into this open wound.

 

[notto]

It's already happened and it was just a handful of soldiers who did it, bad apples. Are you telling me in the most personal sense that should i get called back to Iraq tomorrow, that I should die for this mistake? This is going to be the end result, fellow citizens, friends and neighbors are going to die if we pour any more salt into this open wound.

By this logic, we should leave Iraq immediatly.

 

[EricCartman]

By this logic, we should leave Iraq immediatly.

No it doesn't. Dying for your country or for the freedom of a man of another country means something, to me at least and to most of the military men and women serving in Iraq. Dying so that the ACLU can embarrase the United States or sling mud at the Bush administration is uncalled for. Just as uncalled for as that Quran story in Newsweek. If it were you, if for some reason you also believed in something like freedom and liberty enough to die for it, and you were in Iraq, would you want those photos released?

 

[notto]

No it doesn't. Dying for your country or for the freedom of a man of another country means something, to me at least and to most of the military men and women serving in Iraq. Dying so that the ACLU can embarrase the United States or sling mud at the Bush administration is uncalled for. Just as uncalled for as that Quran story in Newsweek. If it were you, if for some reason you also believed in something like freedom and liberty enough to die for it, and you were in Iraq, would you want those photos released?

We can't take the high road unless we take the high road.

I don't think that valuing something like freedom and liberty enough to die or it would have anything to do with my position on wanting those photos released.

Wanting the truth to be determined by an independent source, now that might be affected. That is something that I would want to see. If I was a soldier in the US army, I would want to know the truth. History has shown that this often times can only be determined from an outside source looking at the government and militaries own records.

I don't have much faith in a commander in chief who calls Amnesty International work 'absurd' especially when that commander in chief and his administration used Amnesty work in their case for war to begin with. We should trust the mechanisms that provided faulty intelligence in the first place to provide us with the truth about the abuse? I'll take a second opinion.

 

[Finella]

No it doesn't. Dying for your country or for the freedom of a man of another country means something, to me at least and to most of the military men and women serving in Iraq. Dying so that the ACLU can embarrase the United States or sling mud at the Bush administration is uncalled for. Just as uncalled for as that Quran story in Newsweek. If it were you, if for some reason you also believed in something like freedom and liberty enough to die for it, and you were in Iraq, would you want those photos released?

You're only looking at the short-term. Wouldn't it do democracy better to demonstrate that we are willing to investigate ourselves, to look at our own faults and correct them? Wouldn't that show nations like Iraq that Americans can question their leadership and not be killed for it? That this is really what democracy is about?

 

[Nathan Poe]

It's already happened and it was just a handful of soldiers who did it, bad apples.

We don't know that yet.

Are you telling me in the most personal sense that should i get called back to Iraq tomorrow, that I should die for this mistake?

Certainly not. I'm telling you that those bad apples, be they a handful or a batallion, have made your your life that much more dangerous.

This is going to be the end result, fellow citizens, friends and neighbors are going to die if we pour any more salt into this open wound.

But we can't treat the wound until we know how big it is.

And this is one wound that won't get better by just "covering it up."

 

[Nathan Poe]

No it doesn't. Dying for your country or for the freedom of a man of another country means something, to me at least and to most of the military men and women serving in Iraq.

And I don't see anyone, not even the ACLU, arguing with you on this.

Dying so that the ACLU can embarrase the United States or sling mud at the Bush administration is uncalled for.

Nobody's dying so that the big bad liberals can bash Bush. They're dying because their enemies hate them with a passion.

But at least you know why.

Just as uncalled for as that Quran story in Newsweek. If it were you, if for some reason you also believed in something like freedom and liberty enough to die for it, and you were in Iraq, would you want those photos released?

It is because of freedom that these photos must be made public. Secrecy begets tyranny,

 

[EricCartman]

We just have to agree to disagree, especially with the poster who said my fear for my friends life as well as my own was too short sited. I think secrets are necessary during war time. If every time an American had 'unjustly' abused a Nazi it became world news it would have favored Hitler and broken the will of the american people which I believe the whole point of this exercise has become.

 

[MidnightBlue]

I think secrets are necessary during war time. If every time an American had 'unjustly' abused a Nazi it became world news it would have favored Hitler and broken the will of the american people which I believe the whole point of this exercise has become.

You think if decent people knew the truth, they wouldn't support this war or this administration? So do I!

 

[Finella]

We just have to agree to disagree, especially with the poster who said my fear for my friends life as well as my own was too short sited. I think secrets are necessary during war time. If every time an American had 'unjustly' abused a Nazi it became world news it would have favored Hitler and broken the will of the american people which I believe the whole point of this exercise has become.

It's not about "breaking the will of the American people" , it's to do justice to the people of the nation we're occupying, and to clear the name of the soldiers who are NOT doing wrong. Fear for your friends' lives is going to be there whether or not these pictures are disclosed -- sheesh, there's enough regular violence over there as it is.

 

[enlightenment]

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

The evils that are done should be made known rather than hid. For example, in the Air Force, crimes against women are pushed under the rug...until these women speak up about it. If they never did, nothing would ever get done.

So, yes, let the whole world know.

 

[Ninja Turtles]

The truth shall set you free.

Release the photos, it is important that everyone knows what goes on there and demand that changes be made so that it doesn't happen again.

 

[nathanel]

That's really interesting. I'm not sure if anyone else has brought this up, but did anyone else wonder over the apparent contrast over what the current president recently stated about the transparent (1) way in which investigations were handled, and the difficulty the ACLU has had in geting these pictures released?

(1) ""The United States is a country that ... promotes freedom around the world. When there's accusations made about certain actions by our people, they're fully investigated in a transparent way." (spoken by the current President of the United States as of June 4th 2005 - but the year isn't over.
http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,158555,00.html

 

[quantumspirit]

How does the Geneva convention not apply? It was designed to govern conduct in combat. But how I forget! This is America, we can't let something like the Geneva convention override our sovereignty.

I do not see how a Christian can defend such activity, expecially since the Bible itself has a humanitarian chapter (Deut 24), as well as passages about conduct in combat, not assaulting unarmed civilians, not torturing captives. But again I am forgetful! That was OT, and Jesus did away with OT law!

If you want to know the word of God, then you need to understand the WHOLE BIBLE, not just selected passages.

 

[Machjo]

No it doesn't. Dying for your country or for the freedom of a man of another country means something, to me at least and to most of the military men and women serving in Iraq. Dying so that the ACLU can embarrase the United States or sling mud at the Bush administration is uncalled for. Just as uncalled for as that Quran story in Newsweek. If it were you, if for some reason you also believed in something like freedom and liberty enough to die for it, and you were in Iraq, would you want those photos released?

It would seem to me that those who are pushing for a deeper investigation into the military here are doing the same thing many soldiers in iraq are. Just as many soeldiers might be fighting to bring freedom to Iraq, so many in the US are fighting to bring human rights to the prisoners. So now it's a two-front war for the military.

 

[nathanel]

My own personal christianity has nothing to do with the facts as stated. Keep the two separate.

Your right but it has everything to do with the opinion stated:

"95% of the military is support. You really only need 5% to be monsters occasionally. But without the cold-blooded to do the dirty work, nations would be overrun. Believe - don't believe it. agree with it - don't agree. It's fact."

But seeing as it states in the rules that we shouldn't question eachothers christianity, it would probably be a good idea to just drop the question and publicly and encourage that conversation to be taken privately. Which if the initial question was sincere why turn down the opportunity to help another understand your point of view? Just take it to a private table where the two of you can "talk" so as to keep the peace here eh?

Shalom.