Abuse of Prisoners

Posted on by

There’s been a lot of back and forth all over the net about the abuse of Iraqi prisoners by Allied forces. I figured it’s time I chimed in with my $0.02 worth.
There should be trials, not by Army Courts Martial, but by an International War Crimes Tribunal. The soldiers involved should be held accountable to the world at large for their violations of the Geneva Convention. They should be subject to punishments up to and including the death penalty, just as other war criminals have been held accountable in the past (think Nuremberg).
But that will never happen. Why? Because the United States refuses to sign the treaty that makes its soldiers liable under the war crimes tribunal. In other words, we as a country believe we have the right to demand that Milosevic is held accountable for what he does to innocent people, but that we ourselves should be held above the rule of law.
The only way to get an American soldier before the tribunal would be for some United Nations unit to “capture and detain” them to “bring them to justice” — to treat them like you would a citizen of any other country who needed to be brought before international justice.
So, I say it plainly: I would have no problem if I read a news article that went something like “Russian troops, operating under a UN mandate, captured list of US soldiers, to bring them before a trial at the international war crimes tribunal, for their alleged actions with regard to Iraqi prisoners.”
We cannot try to hold other countries to international law, and try to be above that law ourselves. It is the height of hypocrisy.

16 thoughts on “Abuse of Prisoners”

  1. Which is right in line with what I was thinking… that if we were any other country on Earth, Rummy, et al, would be dragged in front of a tribunal in The Hauge by now.
    It’s a pity we’re not.

  2. Ahh yes, the parallels are clear.
    Milosivic: Genocide, ordered the murder of tens of thousands of people.
    US Troops: Made Iraqi prisoners parade around in women’s underwear. A couple of prisioners killed during specific instances. No orders to engage in this activity from the upper levels of leadership.
    Honestly, I think the US should court martial these guys and not have them strung up in front of a “world tribunal”. Have you guys seen how well the Milosivic trial is going? This guy might just walk out a free man if the Hague can’t get its act together.
    Besides Derek, there is no way that anyone would be given the Death Penalty seeing as how the “world” views it as a barbaric punishment.

  3. “No orders to engage in this activity from the upper levels of leadership.”
    Given that we’ve been known to hand over prisoners to agents of other countries who “had stronger stomachs about certain interrogation techniques”, you’ll pardon me if I wouldn’t be totally shocked to see that there were people being told to do these sorts of things (or at least being given leading statements like , “Well, Cpl. KnowNothing, I’ve heard that our friends the [blank] have had a lot of success getting information out of prisoners by [blank]. Too bad we can’t do that, eh? Oh, look, I gotta go get me some lunch, I’ll be back in about four hours…”
    The world may view the death penalty as a barbaric punishment, but it’s still on the list of things the Hague can hand down if it sees fit. I’m simply saying that there should not be any artificial ceiling put on how badly these guys can get smacked around.
    And I say it should be the Hague and not a Court Martial, because you cannot trust the military to do the right thing. There’s still no talk, that I can see, of a Court Martial. Only of “people being reprimanded”.
    Yeah, that’s great… you can torture people and you’ll get a “black mark on your permanent record.” I bet the people of Iraq now feel a whole lot safer that THAT will never happen again… not.

  4. “….There’s still no talk, that I can see, of a Court Martial. Only of “people being reprimanded”…”
    Oh really?
    http://news.google.com/news?q=iraq%20court%20martial&hl=en&lr=&ie=UTF-8&oe=UTF-8&c2coff=1&sa=N&tab=wn
    Do you really think that the DoD is going to let something like this just blow over? Seeing as how the process is just starting, I would be highly surprised if we didn’t see any further court martials over the next couple of months.

  5. And what happens if the Court Martial says “ah, dishonorable discharge, and that’s it”
    This needs to be decided by folks who are truly impartial, e.g., not the US Military.

  6. Getting a dishonorable discharge is pretty serious. You’ll never have a long list of jobs (cop, fireman, anything in the government, and most government contractors). It’s like a serious felony conviction in many quarters. And in many cases, that dishonorable discharge is rendered only after time in the stockade/brig.
    If you had no aspirations, it’s no big deal, I guess, but to me (holder of an honorable discharge), it seems like a fate I’d rather not have.

  7. “This needs to be decided by folks who are truly impartial…”
    Uh, you mean someone impartial like you?

  8. No, not at all, Scott. I mean truly impartial people, who are neither prejudiced against them (as I am), nor for them (as their peers are).
    I have my suspicions as to what truly impartial people would come to as a conclusion, but that’s a completely different story.

  9. “nor for them (as their peers are)…”
    I thought that was the whole point of a trial: to be tried before your peers. Believe me, if these guys are found guilty they will be punished to the fullest extent of the military justice system (which still counts among its punishments death by hanging and confinement at “hard labor” — much to the consternation of civilian lawyers and labor activists). You can bet that their “peers” are none too happy about this mess — the reputation of an entire group of mostly honorable professionals has been destroyed by a small group of “alleged” criminals (remember, here you’re innocent until proven guilty, unlike in many other parts of the world). They’re not going to get any special treatment (and certainly not now — in fact, I suspect things will go overboard in the other direction).
    But, I suspect nothing I or anyone else says will convince you to have faith in the American justice system.

  11. Yikes!
    I can assure you that military “juries” are treated (and paid) much better than that.

  12. “(remember, here you’re innocent until proven guilty, unlike in many other parts of the world). ”
    Try telling that to the detainees, a majority of whom havn’t even been charged with anything. Of course I guess “Iraq” does qualify as “other parts of the world”, but it’s still our doing.

  13. There will be no consequences to the US military, as in the Gulf War, where US troops killed more Britsh troops in Blue-on-blue incidents, than Irakis did.
    Don’t hear a lot on that do we?

  14. The difference in judging under the UCMJ and the international war crimes tribunalis that the US has established laws specific for the military. These charges against the soldiers are mild in comparison to Milosevic’s. Compare it to the drug war, spank the small timers, go after the big cheese. If a Colonel or higher ranking military leader gave the orders, then seek the war crimes tribunal. The soldiers being brought to justice are the little mice, what of the un-named military intelligence people in the photos?

  15. To follow up on the last comment. I have a passion for bashing liberals. Only the extremists. Chew on this for awhile:
    These soldiers paraded the prisoners around nude. So what. Ok, a couple did die. So what. The information we extracted from these soldiers may have saved tens or hundreds of soldiers lives.
    Remember at the beginning of the invasion? (Liberals need not answer this for they have no reasoning) A US military convoy is ambushed, soldiers are either found dead or or MIA. Days later, in a cramp little room, stacks of US soldiers body lay on top of one another. Shot execution style. Here’s the kicker for all you liberals. If you scream human rights’ violations for the prisoners, whom can file a grievance, what of our dead soldiers?
    Chew on that!

  16. For the record, I find it funny that “since I oppose the war, I must therefore be liberal” considering I’m a gun-toting freak. šŸ™‚
    “Ok, a couple did die. So what. The information we extracted from these soldiers may have saved tens or hundreds of soldiers lives.”
    Who cares if we become the monster we’re allegedly trying to destroy, right?
    As to your “stacked up executed soldiers” story, if you can find the folks who did it, you could probably make a case against them, but just because you can’t find Peter doesn’t mean you get to beat the crap out of Paul instead.
    But, bear in mind, that if you start trying to hold the Iraqis accountable for what they did whilst being invaded, they may turn that right back around on you and point out the illegality of the invasion in the first place, etc. Might be a larger can of worms than you really want to dig into…

Comments are closed.