The fate of the US soldiers who abused Iraqi prisoners?

Bryan330i · May 7, 2004

Well, I watched both of the meetings today in their entirety. OMG what a mess!!!!

There seems to be a consensus by all, Democrats and Republicans, that this has created damage of epic proportions. I cannot even believe this and don’t know what they are ever going to do that will ever undo the damage. I think this is probably the worst political mess I have ever seen in my life and I don’t think a lot of people outside politics can even comprehend what we are facing.

Fortunately, Bush, Kerry, and all others in politics seem to grasp the severity of what has happened and are willing to aggressively seek action.

Bryan330i · May 7, 2004

aNoodle said:

Funny how the WMD thing died off...now it's terrorism in Iraq??? Bush treats us like we are all stupid, Iraq has never previously been mentioned in ANY report as a center for terrorism. The only concern was that Iraq MAY SUPPLY terrorists with WMD at some point in the future. But lets see, Saddam cannot make a move without it being noticed as he lives his life under a microscope, yet Iraq becomes our priority? Like a few more months to secure RELIABLE information would have mattered? And what about Russia, they are missing a number of weapons, and it has been documented, so why are we not concerned about this?

The only thing I would say to Bush is please, I have a brain and I can read, don't treat me like I’m stupid!

But I guess this will not be an issue after the first of the year as I believe the issue voters, the smaller portion of the population that looks at facts not party, will swing enough Kerry’s way because of this war that Bush will not see a second term.

Wadula · May 7, 2004

bryan, we´ll see i guess...

Big Daddy · May 7, 2004

"Iraq has never previously been mentioned in ANY report as a center for terrorism."

Bryan that is just NOT true, this from a July 2002 report, two years ago:

"Interestingly, this program run by the State Department increases immigration from the seven countries that the State Department has declared "state sponsors of international terrorism:" Iran (768 visas this year), Iraq (71), Syria (62), Libya (61), Cuba (529), North Korea (four) and Sudan (1,297)."

Also read Albrights speech from 1998:Albright's Speech

Bryan330i · May 7, 2004

epj3 said:

Absolutely have be over there? You are smarter than that epj. I can tell you study the issues and there was absolutely no reason to be there at the time we did, not without accurate information, now all everyone can do is blame the other. Bush said is was the CIA’s fault the information was bad, the CIA said no its the FBI, and so on, and on, and on.

You present valid issues and back you position, you have no need to stand down, your poinions count and you can at least back your reasoning. Some people just vote a certain way because...well...i'm not sure they even know why.

Bryan330i · May 7, 2004

Big Daddy said:

Still, I have never seen it regarding the war with Iraq, only WMD as a reason for the war. Granted, they are listed, but again as far as I can tell they were not as big of a threat as others that we seemed to have ignored.

Wadula · May 7, 2004

that topic rewarmed now? i mean, what is the sense of it now? some "know" the wmd are/were there, some "know" they weren´t. some "know" it was all about oil, some "know" it wasn´t. i mean, no that the war is over/in progress to be over somewhen we shall concentrate on discussing the future.
the one who turns out to really have "known" will know that, but it would not change anything. now it is the time to come together and work together, isn´t it?

aNoodle · May 7, 2004

MyHarley said:

Okay, well it was only a question. I gather the answer is largely no, for now.

MyHarley said:

Good points.

Explains why nobody can take pictures of the coffins coming home and why Bush doesn't attend funerals.

Damn those pesky pictures.

MyHarley · May 7, 2004

Bryan330i said:

Because they have the right to vote..............

Not because they are smart, not so smart or even know the issues........because they are 18, citizen of the United States and have not committed a felony..........plain and simple...........what an amazing concept this country is based on............

aNoodle · May 7, 2004

Bryan330i said:

I suppose it's possible Sadam would help the Osma religious nuts who wanted to topple Iraq's secular dictatorship. It certainly sounded good at the time.

MyHarley · May 7, 2004

Wadula said:

you're killing me Wadula.......... [hihi]

Big Daddy · May 7, 2004

Bryan330i said:

Sorry Bryan you said, "Iraq has never previously been mentioned in ANY report as a center for terrorism." and that was not correct. Now you try and justify it witih something else. (And yes President Bush linked Iraq to supporting terrorists actions, in fact many liberals whined about that) I am not trying to be a jerk, but you cannot have it both ways. Did you read Albrights speech? Here we have a Democrat talking about Iraq having WMD's, forbiding the UN from checking on them, a violation of numerous resolutions, and she even talks about using military action if he does not comply! I mean darn, so he did not comply and Bush was President when the action was taken, had Clinton and Albright taken the action would it have been ok?

aNoodle · May 8, 2004

skandalous said:

Umm...did you miss the sadistic and homosexual parts of the photos already released? Americans! Rummy tells us more photos and videos are on the way. The "naked and pile em on top" occurred a few or so months before what you're talking about from what i saw in understanding what bush was sayin.

MyHarley said:

How many 1000s of iraqis have been killed since the invasion? Does anyone know? I know our casualties are at something like 700...wounded are a couple thousand or so....correct me if I'm wrong. Anybody know? Are we allowed to know?

aNoodle · May 9, 2004

Just so you know, I'm one of these staunch, far out, fierce…moderates! I'm one of those fence-sitting independent swinger voters. I find both parties full of crap, at times. It just amazes me the contortions of reason one must go through to speak the party line. When it comes to this prison issue, my god, the justifications people want to give simply boggles my mind!!!

Certainly much is at stake and I'm personally troubled what sort of signal we'll be sending to our enemies if we change administrations when troops are in the field of action. I wish I could better understand how that might play out. Would they take that as an opportunity to restart or as a signal of weakness (on par with Spain)?

At the same time, I don't get why this administration keeps feeding us phony bait and switch. Fair enough, we're there now, but don't talk to me like I'm a drunkard Joe sick pack and will vote for ya cuz you're a cowboy. Wanted dead or a live…great…nice swagger. Are you doing your job? Where's the anthrax mailer? How the hell do we get out of the Middle East and stop playing God around the world so people don't hate us?

Bryan330i · May 9, 2004

Big Daddy said:

I don’t think you are being a jerk.

I guess the key would be "center" for terrorism and the context in which you took "center" and what would be classified as a "central" or “pivotal” terrorist stronghold, that which must surely be destroyed to win a war against terrorism.

I watched several UN hearing prior to the war and I do not recall this being an issue, the only issue I recall is WMD’s.

Why, if Iraq was indeed a central terrorist threat, was it not mentioned and substantiated in more detail? I think that would have surely been a stronger argument for war than WMD’s.

I don’t think in terms of liberal and conservative. There is really not that much leeway in the capacity of president, or at least I don’t think so.

I have no doubt that Clinton would have faced the same scrutiny that Bush is facing, the only difference being the loyal party voters would simply switch sides. Those that support it now would be against it because he was a Democrat, and those against would support because he was not a Republican. Make no sense to me but that’s the way it works.

As for myself, had Clinton taken the same action my opinions would be the same. It is a fact, there are more and more independent voters that do not believe that one party does it all correctly. The thought that one does is absolutely uncontainable to me.

Abdoman · May 9, 2004

Give me a freakin break! I think there a lot worse thing someone could do to me. The problem is is that the media should never have released those photos. We are at WAR, not some game. The media should be censored in times of war. We Americans are soooo sadistic. We make guys get naked and pile on top of each other. Oooowwww.

Bryan330i · May 9, 2004

Wadula said:

that topic rewarmed now? i mean, what is the sense of it now? some "know" the wmd are/were there, some "know" they weren´t. some "know" it was all about oil, some "know" it wasn´t. i mean, no that the war is over/in progress to be over somewhen we shall concentrate on discussing the future.
the one who turns out to really have "known" will know that, but it would not change anything. now it is the time to come together and work together, isn´t it?

Very good point!

Bryan330i · May 9, 2004

Abdoman said:

We all call it war but I think the term being used also is liberation.

Not all photos were taken by US personnel. Others were taken by other nation’s personnel as well. And sorry, but we are not talking about repressive nations, and here we have laws about censorship, as do many of our allies.

MyHarley · May 9, 2004

May I ask an itty bitty question, and believe me this is not to minimize what has happened...........

Were any of you outraged with the report that Jessica Lynch was raped and sodomized during her captivity? Do you hate the Iraqi people more because of what a few people did to her? Do you think this treatment is representative of the majority of the Iraqi people or its military? Just thinking out loud folks......

Abdoman · May 9, 2004

The pics in which the Iraqi prisoners were naked were taken by US Soldiers.

Notice that I said the MEDIA should not have release the photos. There comes a time in which the media should do what is right for the country. I don't think that the Lewinsky - Clinton things should have been released either.

The fate of the US soldiers who abused Iraqi prisoners?

2

2

1

Senior Member

2

2

1

1000 Post Club

2

1000 Post Club

2

Senior Member

1000 Post Club

1000 Post Club

2

2

2

2

2

2