Our Brave Boys? Or Murdering Thugs?
Short Blunt Shock
Join Date: Jul 2003
Location: UK
Posts: 631
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Dave,
A thoughtful, considered and well constructed post. I'm afraid I must respectfully disagree with most of the opinions expressed, however.
Some Points Of Information:
Please explain how one can gain any idea about the reality of the war in Iraq without having served there.
Please present your evidence, newspaper reports aside, that this prisoner was beaten to death by his captors.
The subjects of this debate are not 'in civilian life' - they are serving soldiers in harms way on a daily basis.
I get EXACTLY what you mean, Dave. I have been an active contributor to these fora for some time now, and I am sure there are many here who would lend support to my credentials.
That is EXACTLY what the weapons inspectors WERE. They were there to inspect and report, publicly, on weapons systems that SH's regime wished to keep secret - if that is not espionage, I don't know what is. Again, with the much-vaunted 'due process' in mind, if you have evidence that the inspectors acted outside of their UN-sanctioned remit, please present it.
Our ONE point of agreement. I will add, however - what evidence do YOU have that they are guilty?
On which planet, exactly? Name me ONE british newspaper, besides the Sun, which is consistently pushing a pro-war line. All the rest seem highly critical most of the time.
Really? Let's examine:
Guardian - FIERCELY left-wing
Independent - Left wing
Times - Left wing (and Blair-loving)
Telegraph - Blatant and consistent pro-Tory bias, regardless of circumstance
...so how does this list give one "as good an overview as any other"?
And why the (double) mention of FOX News in the negative? It is not only the ONLY right-leaning major network in the US (AND UK for that matter, since it is broadcast here), it also allows the 'other side' airtime to express their views.
Your obvious reference to Israel is noted. This link:
www.middleeastnews.com/unresolutionslist.html
...will take you to a list of UN Resolutions passed against Israel between 1955 - 1992. Notice that the majority are 'condemnations' of actions that have already taken place. Some 'urge' Israel to take a particular course of action, others 'demand' that it does so. NOT ONE of them ORDERS Israel to take any specific action, with defined consequences for non-compliance. Israel, therefore, has arguably never been in 'Material Breach' of a SINGLE UNSC resolution. I am aware that this may be regarded as semantic trickery by some - so be it.
Food for thought.
16B
A thoughtful, considered and well constructed post. I'm afraid I must respectfully disagree with most of the opinions expressed, however.
Some Points Of Information:
I have to take a little exception to this notion that one must have served to have any idea of the realities of war or Iraq.
the morality of beating prisoners to death
a lot of people I served with are stuck in this mindset and it gets them nowhere in civilian life
I’m sure many if not most of the folks who use these forums may well have an experience of aeronautics and service life that extends no further than a homoerotic fascination with “Top Gun”. Sadly, behind the cloak of anonymity, one right-wing flow of indignation at apparent attacks on their beloved military doesn’t distinguish the impostor from the genuine article, if you get what I mean.
When it comes to violating these resolutions, we weren’t exactly helping when we used the teams as intelligence gathering units , completely outside their remit. If you want resolutions to be ignored, no better way to do it than use your teams as spies.
If these guys are guilty, is there ANY way this can be condoned? I say no.
the press pushes the right-wing, pro-military angle every bit as much as they push the left-wing, anti-military angle.
so long as we avoid FOX and the tabloids, wouldn't you agree a copy of the Guardian, the Independent, the Times and the Torygraph, perhaps chucking in a Spectator and New Statesmen for free, is probably going to give you as good an overview as any other?
Guardian - FIERCELY left-wing
Independent - Left wing
Times - Left wing (and Blair-loving)
Telegraph - Blatant and consistent pro-Tory bias, regardless of circumstance
...so how does this list give one "as good an overview as any other"?
And why the (double) mention of FOX News in the negative? It is not only the ONLY right-leaning major network in the US (AND UK for that matter, since it is broadcast here), it also allows the 'other side' airtime to express their views.
We are incredibly selective in which violations of UNSC we chose to take action over now aren’t we, when it concerns Middle Easter/Mediterranean countries.
www.middleeastnews.com/unresolutionslist.html
...will take you to a list of UN Resolutions passed against Israel between 1955 - 1992. Notice that the majority are 'condemnations' of actions that have already taken place. Some 'urge' Israel to take a particular course of action, others 'demand' that it does so. NOT ONE of them ORDERS Israel to take any specific action, with defined consequences for non-compliance. Israel, therefore, has arguably never been in 'Material Breach' of a SINGLE UNSC resolution. I am aware that this may be regarded as semantic trickery by some - so be it.
Food for thought.
16B
Join Date: Oct 2004
Location: England
Posts: 136
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
A leaf from history?
I have spent many months researching the Malayan Emergency, which stretched from 1945 until the 'peace treaty' (instrument of capitulation) of 1989. I have also spent many days with former Special Branch Officers in the UK, Malaysia and Singapore. None of the agent handlers claimed to have used violent means to turn guerillas ('CTs'); in fact, ASP Leong Chee Woh was able to interrogate couriers and persuade them to become agents, then release them on their travels without the guerilla leaders noticing them missing for those few hours. Violence, as Chee Woh says, was unproductive. Unfailingly kind handling was a sucessful strategy - in stark contrast with Army units operating in the peninsula that were competative in getting 'kills'. The former editor of the Daily Worker was even recruited by MI5 to turn 'stubborn' insurgents - he was able to persuade them that revolutionary communist dialectic was flawed; to fill the void he also converted a number of them to Catholicism.
In the mid 1960s the the FCO expressed grave concern about the use by the SAS of Dyak 'head-hunters' during the Konfrontasi when success was measured in the number of heads brought back. Again, in contrast the Director of Special Branch in Kuching personally ran a number of agents simply by persuading them that a better life could be had by cooperating with the authorities and accepting the payments for information. Unfortunately, he also lost several agents to the Dyak/SAS combination because these freebooting units would not clear their activities with the Director of Intelligence, ie, Hd of Special Branch.
The insurgency campaigns in Malaya/Malaysia were succesful because of a joint civil/military doctrine under civil control - and before I get accused of getting my history wrong, General Templer was appointed in 1952 as the Civil High Commissioner, ably supported by a reformed civil service in Malaya. Regrettably, military administration in 'post-conflict areas' is very, very rarely sucessful. In spite of what those in the military may think, the skills to run a counter-insurgency campaign are quite different from those need to fight an 'open' conflict.
This was recognised by the US State Department; in the Jan/Feb issue of Foreign Affairs, there is a call for 'London' to assist in establishing a civilian Special Branch in Iraq, based on the Malaya - and Northern Ireland - experience.
Let's allow the military to do the war-fighting, but also imbue them with the robust skills of peace-making, knowing that these skills will be needed in Phase IV ops. Our joint experience from the Balkans should have taught us that...
CC
In the mid 1960s the the FCO expressed grave concern about the use by the SAS of Dyak 'head-hunters' during the Konfrontasi when success was measured in the number of heads brought back. Again, in contrast the Director of Special Branch in Kuching personally ran a number of agents simply by persuading them that a better life could be had by cooperating with the authorities and accepting the payments for information. Unfortunately, he also lost several agents to the Dyak/SAS combination because these freebooting units would not clear their activities with the Director of Intelligence, ie, Hd of Special Branch.
The insurgency campaigns in Malaya/Malaysia were succesful because of a joint civil/military doctrine under civil control - and before I get accused of getting my history wrong, General Templer was appointed in 1952 as the Civil High Commissioner, ably supported by a reformed civil service in Malaya. Regrettably, military administration in 'post-conflict areas' is very, very rarely sucessful. In spite of what those in the military may think, the skills to run a counter-insurgency campaign are quite different from those need to fight an 'open' conflict.
This was recognised by the US State Department; in the Jan/Feb issue of Foreign Affairs, there is a call for 'London' to assist in establishing a civilian Special Branch in Iraq, based on the Malaya - and Northern Ireland - experience.
Let's allow the military to do the war-fighting, but also imbue them with the robust skills of peace-making, knowing that these skills will be needed in Phase IV ops. Our joint experience from the Balkans should have taught us that...
CC
Ecce Homo! Loquitur...
Every injustice committed against one individual is, in the end, experienced by humanity as a whole.
Peter Kropotkin (Prisons and Their Moral Influence on Prisoners)
Peter Kropotkin (Prisons and Their Moral Influence on Prisoners)
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: Under the clag EGKA
Posts: 1,028
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
OK forget humanity. Examine your goals. Do you want to leave Iraq with dignity and some sense of victory or do you want to be bogged down for the next thirty years then leave with your tail between your legs a la Vietnam? If you want the former then you have to get the population on your side. This is not done by offering them martyrs.
It is what, forty years since we left Aden? We are still hated in Crater. I sit in the pub with a couple of Argyles who have not got over what they did. Though admittedly one of them wishes he was still doing it but he is totally bolo. Unless you kill most of the population, all wars end in negotiation. If you have acted honourably then negotiation is easier.
It is what, forty years since we left Aden? We are still hated in Crater. I sit in the pub with a couple of Argyles who have not got over what they did. Though admittedly one of them wishes he was still doing it but he is totally bolo. Unless you kill most of the population, all wars end in negotiation. If you have acted honourably then negotiation is easier.
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: UK
Posts: 28
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
The answer to the exam question
To answer Beagles question:
They are brave boys and not murdering thugs.
I have to say that I am getting pis*ed off with people who try and link warfighting from 10000 feet and war fighting face to face. You think that all of those chaps on the ground want to be there?
Accept that war is nasty, accept that war is unpleasant and accept that things happen in war that ordinarily would not happen. Accept it and move on. It has happened in the past, it happens now and guess what – will happen in the future.
Punishing the boss is not the answer. The Stash at Odiham didn’t get Courts Martialled because a pis*sed up Flt Lt couldn’t keep it zipped did he? Different level granted but the principle of responsibility for those under your command is the same!
Lord knows that the chaps on the ground have it hard enough what with going out on patrol with sub standard kit and the fear of being blown up, not to mention legal action if they screw up. Now they have to deal with Beagle and the other two-winged master race whose most dangerous mission was asking the receptionist for more tonic in their lovely snugly hotel room or sending their washing forward.
Sorry to speak out against the father of PPRune but really, the press and the politicians pick away at the Armed Forces, we don’t need to do it ourselves.
Now, I know that the loyal followers and other who don’t have a clue but do have a large opinion (on most things) will be queuing at the door to beat me down. But I am wearing my body armour, helmet and even a cricket box and so I can say – well done boys, I am proud of you. I wouldn’t like to have done what you had to.
Now looking for patriotic flag to wave.
They are brave boys and not murdering thugs.
I have to say that I am getting pis*ed off with people who try and link warfighting from 10000 feet and war fighting face to face. You think that all of those chaps on the ground want to be there?
Accept that war is nasty, accept that war is unpleasant and accept that things happen in war that ordinarily would not happen. Accept it and move on. It has happened in the past, it happens now and guess what – will happen in the future.
Punishing the boss is not the answer. The Stash at Odiham didn’t get Courts Martialled because a pis*sed up Flt Lt couldn’t keep it zipped did he? Different level granted but the principle of responsibility for those under your command is the same!
Lord knows that the chaps on the ground have it hard enough what with going out on patrol with sub standard kit and the fear of being blown up, not to mention legal action if they screw up. Now they have to deal with Beagle and the other two-winged master race whose most dangerous mission was asking the receptionist for more tonic in their lovely snugly hotel room or sending their washing forward.
Sorry to speak out against the father of PPRune but really, the press and the politicians pick away at the Armed Forces, we don’t need to do it ourselves.
Now, I know that the loyal followers and other who don’t have a clue but do have a large opinion (on most things) will be queuing at the door to beat me down. But I am wearing my body armour, helmet and even a cricket box and so I can say – well done boys, I am proud of you. I wouldn’t like to have done what you had to.
Now looking for patriotic flag to wave.
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: Scotland
Posts: 425
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
ZH,
"If the enemy is a signatory of the Geneva Convention, then treat them under those rules, if they are not a signatory, then treat them iaw the 10 commandments - do unto others, before they do you."
Is this an example of do what you like and justify it later?
Both the US and the UK are signatories of the GC, end of story.
It does not matter if they happen to fight someone who is not. The US and UK must abide by the GC.
For those like 16B who claim that the GC acts like a straitjacket on the actions of US/UK forces, I would say, GOOD!!!
The actions that are outlawed by the GC are banned for good reasons.
Already the US is attempting to re-write the GC with the "enemy combatant" title and then claiming they can do what they like to them.
Careful reading of the GC shows that there is no category of prisoner or combatant that it is acceptable to treat in this manner.
To the incidents at hand I do feel that they are isolated incidents involving bad apples. They exist in all forces. It has been the truth since time began.
As to the culpability of officers as opposed to squaddies, I feel that if the officers knowingly fail to discipline said offenders fully then said officers should be dealt with as condoning the actions a la Sunfish's post.
Cheers
BHR
"If the enemy is a signatory of the Geneva Convention, then treat them under those rules, if they are not a signatory, then treat them iaw the 10 commandments - do unto others, before they do you."
Is this an example of do what you like and justify it later?
Both the US and the UK are signatories of the GC, end of story.
It does not matter if they happen to fight someone who is not. The US and UK must abide by the GC.
For those like 16B who claim that the GC acts like a straitjacket on the actions of US/UK forces, I would say, GOOD!!!
The actions that are outlawed by the GC are banned for good reasons.
Already the US is attempting to re-write the GC with the "enemy combatant" title and then claiming they can do what they like to them.
Careful reading of the GC shows that there is no category of prisoner or combatant that it is acceptable to treat in this manner.
To the incidents at hand I do feel that they are isolated incidents involving bad apples. They exist in all forces. It has been the truth since time began.
As to the culpability of officers as opposed to squaddies, I feel that if the officers knowingly fail to discipline said offenders fully then said officers should be dealt with as condoning the actions a la Sunfish's post.
Cheers
BHR
Join Date: Aug 2000
Location: Norfolk
Posts: 1,966
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I don't condone any violence against prisoners but I am big enough to understand that isolated incidents will occur, presumably as a form of retaliation for acts committed or stress at being in theatre and a commensurate but limited breakdown of discipline.
I like a few other posters am aware that it has happened since time immemoriam and that it will always happen when there is conflict in our world.
Wasn't it Churchill during the Boer war who implied that truth is the first casualty of war?
My point of view - is that sensitive issues, such as alleged abuses, when made public serve no good whatsoever. We the occupiers feel very guilty and wring our hands publically. The natives get very pissed off, rightly so but all that the knowledge does is inflame further acts of terrorism and the whole circus descends further into lawlessness.
I am not for one second suggesting that the commanders turn a blind eye to atrocities, I feel that they should stamp them out at every opportunity. What I do propose is a blanket press ban on the reporting of this type of allegation.
The result - we'd not worry about it, we might suspect that it happen in limited occurences but that it was being managed and perpetrators disciplined. The Iraqis/Afghanis would not be made aware of it by sensational headlines although they too might suspect that it could be occuring and tension all round would reduce. For the guys in the field, well I believe that they know what is right and what is wrong and trial by media is not something else that they need to contend with.
Just my 2 dinars worth.
Stik
I like a few other posters am aware that it has happened since time immemoriam and that it will always happen when there is conflict in our world.
Wasn't it Churchill during the Boer war who implied that truth is the first casualty of war?
My point of view - is that sensitive issues, such as alleged abuses, when made public serve no good whatsoever. We the occupiers feel very guilty and wring our hands publically. The natives get very pissed off, rightly so but all that the knowledge does is inflame further acts of terrorism and the whole circus descends further into lawlessness.
I am not for one second suggesting that the commanders turn a blind eye to atrocities, I feel that they should stamp them out at every opportunity. What I do propose is a blanket press ban on the reporting of this type of allegation.
The result - we'd not worry about it, we might suspect that it happen in limited occurences but that it was being managed and perpetrators disciplined. The Iraqis/Afghanis would not be made aware of it by sensational headlines although they too might suspect that it could be occuring and tension all round would reduce. For the guys in the field, well I believe that they know what is right and what is wrong and trial by media is not something else that they need to contend with.
Just my 2 dinars worth.
Stik
Does not the Genevea Accords (Convention) actually work to outlaw the exact groups the "insurgents and terrorists" represent? Does not the living outside those accords then bar the outlaws from expecting such "gentle" treatment? If one wears uniforms and display unique badges....engage in "legal" combat actions....fair dinkum...treat them as required by the GC....otherwise....in my narrow assed view....do them in any way possible and treat them like the scum they are.
Explain to me please someone....why I should worry about how tight the handcuffs are on someone that will participate in the bombing of a school full of children? For all of you that moan about how we lose our moral rightousness by thumping a prisoner.....why is it the "bad" guys don't lose theirs by their vile tactics? In a comparison of wrong and evil....I dare say the "bad" guys in this affair are the terrorists and insurgents.....and they reap what they sow.
Where was the hollering about the beheadings then....and where is it now,when our brain dead friends get so worked up over Saddam being seen on the front page of the newspaper wearing only his y-fronts?
Spare me.....we are fighting some truly evil people here.
God Bless the troops that are doing the fighting.....if they break some eggs making this omelet.....I for one stand ready to forgive them their sins.
The Press needs to remember they are Brits and Yanks first....reporters second.....they keep on and they will be targets (and justifiably so in my book).
Explain to me please someone....why I should worry about how tight the handcuffs are on someone that will participate in the bombing of a school full of children? For all of you that moan about how we lose our moral rightousness by thumping a prisoner.....why is it the "bad" guys don't lose theirs by their vile tactics? In a comparison of wrong and evil....I dare say the "bad" guys in this affair are the terrorists and insurgents.....and they reap what they sow.
Where was the hollering about the beheadings then....and where is it now,when our brain dead friends get so worked up over Saddam being seen on the front page of the newspaper wearing only his y-fronts?
Spare me.....we are fighting some truly evil people here.
God Bless the troops that are doing the fighting.....if they break some eggs making this omelet.....I for one stand ready to forgive them their sins.
The Press needs to remember they are Brits and Yanks first....reporters second.....they keep on and they will be targets (and justifiably so in my book).
Short Blunt Shock
Join Date: Jul 2003
Location: UK
Posts: 631
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
A law or treaty becomes useless when one party is not a signatory, or chooses to ignore it. Remember, the various Geneva Conventions were enacted around 1948, 57 years ago.
At this time, supra-national terrorism hadn't even been imagined, let alone taken place. What use is a treaty, notionally designed to ensure that conflict does not get out of hand, which doesn't even take into account the current biggest threat to world security?
It's also worth noting that at the time the convention was enacted, homosexuality was still illegal in Britain, and we still owned most of the Empire. Why are the 'progressives' not demanding 'progress' in this area, I wonder??
Crash, I am sure you are aware of this, but Arab / Islamic culture is VERY different to Malayan culture. To show TOO much mercy, restraint or kindness to an enemy is seen as a major weakness and invites further attack. Arab culture respects only a show of strength from 'infidels'.
Happytruckin, shall I present a list of atrocities committed by their side, to compare and contrast? I'm sure I don't need to...
16B
At this time, supra-national terrorism hadn't even been imagined, let alone taken place. What use is a treaty, notionally designed to ensure that conflict does not get out of hand, which doesn't even take into account the current biggest threat to world security?
It's also worth noting that at the time the convention was enacted, homosexuality was still illegal in Britain, and we still owned most of the Empire. Why are the 'progressives' not demanding 'progress' in this area, I wonder??
Crash, I am sure you are aware of this, but Arab / Islamic culture is VERY different to Malayan culture. To show TOO much mercy, restraint or kindness to an enemy is seen as a major weakness and invites further attack. Arab culture respects only a show of strength from 'infidels'.
Happytruckin, shall I present a list of atrocities committed by their side, to compare and contrast? I'm sure I don't need to...
16B
Last edited by 16 blades; 24th May 2005 at 20:19.
Join Date: Sep 2000
Location: Cambridge, UK
Posts: 51
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Gainesy
Sorry I do remember that but was not including the Turks as I dont think they were involved with EOKA.
Enjoying this thread its quite amazing to read the cross section of opinions and thoughts on this subject.
Perhaps in the end Edwin Starr has the right words
War..huuh..what is it good for....absolutely nothing
best bent wire always best .- .-.
Sorry I do remember that but was not including the Turks as I dont think they were involved with EOKA.
Enjoying this thread its quite amazing to read the cross section of opinions and thoughts on this subject.
Perhaps in the end Edwin Starr has the right words
War..huuh..what is it good for....absolutely nothing
best bent wire always best .- .-.
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: 59°45'36N 10°27'59E
Posts: 1,032
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
2. It could make us lose the war (because it provides propaganda to our enemies, turns moderate Arab opinion against us and undermines support at home)
Sadly some don't get that part of 'war against terror'
Join Date: Oct 2004
Location: England
Posts: 136
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Hearts and Minds
16 B
The Malayan Emergency was overwhelmingly perpetrated by young Chinese ideologues; indeed this was a weakness in that the Malay population was not persuaded to join the anti-Imperialist revolutionary struggle.
It was a brutal and vicious struggle, but I agree at a lower intensity than Iraq, however, it prevailed because of efficient civil administration and the development of an effective intelligence organisation. The term 'Hearts and Minds' developed by Gen Briggs during the campaign was a key element. Those of the Min Yuen (Mass Executive) who gave up supporting the insurgents were rewarded - land, schools, etc. This tapped into cultural norms of the Chinese population and compounded defections.....but, the campaign took 12 years to come to an end. Excesses by British troops reversed the progress; indeed the unnecessary slaughter of Chinese villagers in 1949 by our kilted bretheren caused the flow of intelligence to dry up for many years in that state. The PRO, by the way, still retains the files on the investigation.
I think that most posters can understand, though not condone, actions that take place in the heat of battle, but as M609 has observed, the GWOT is largely about public opinion. The British and Malay government were sucessful in Malaya because they did not act in the way the communist leaders had predicted. It may be trite, but it is also true - the hardest battle is to win the peace...
CC, Baling, Malaysia
The Malayan Emergency was overwhelmingly perpetrated by young Chinese ideologues; indeed this was a weakness in that the Malay population was not persuaded to join the anti-Imperialist revolutionary struggle.
It was a brutal and vicious struggle, but I agree at a lower intensity than Iraq, however, it prevailed because of efficient civil administration and the development of an effective intelligence organisation. The term 'Hearts and Minds' developed by Gen Briggs during the campaign was a key element. Those of the Min Yuen (Mass Executive) who gave up supporting the insurgents were rewarded - land, schools, etc. This tapped into cultural norms of the Chinese population and compounded defections.....but, the campaign took 12 years to come to an end. Excesses by British troops reversed the progress; indeed the unnecessary slaughter of Chinese villagers in 1949 by our kilted bretheren caused the flow of intelligence to dry up for many years in that state. The PRO, by the way, still retains the files on the investigation.
I think that most posters can understand, though not condone, actions that take place in the heat of battle, but as M609 has observed, the GWOT is largely about public opinion. The British and Malay government were sucessful in Malaya because they did not act in the way the communist leaders had predicted. It may be trite, but it is also true - the hardest battle is to win the peace...
CC, Baling, Malaysia
Short Blunt Shock
Join Date: Jul 2003
Location: UK
Posts: 631
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
2. It could make us lose the war (because it provides propaganda to our enemies, turns moderate Arab opinion against us and undermines support at home)
I refer you back to what I said earlier about fundamentally misunderstanding Arab-Islamic culture.
Don't misunderstand me - I am not advocating 'gloves off' when it comes to prisoner interrogation - but we NEED the leeway to apply pressure to achieve the aim. The GC does NOT give us the leeway required, being 57 years out of date. It needs reviewing. I do not consider 'roughing up' (NOT 'beating up'), intimidation, sleep deprivation, 'white noise', humiliation, stress positions, or similar techniques, to be 'torture' - they have all been used for years and found to be effective.
Here is the problem - interrogators 'rough up' a suspect, deprive him of sleep, make him stand/sit in stress positions, subject him to white noise, etc etc. Western newspaper gets hold of it and carries the headline "Prisoners tortured at Al-****hole". The Arab world equates 'torture' to the kind of techniques employed by their own leaders and governments (electric shock, boiling alive etc) - from here on out, it DOES NOT MATTER what you say or do, or who is court-martialled for any offence. The Arab world will read it as "coalition cutting off peoples bollocks and jabbing electrodes up their arses". The report may not even be TRUE (as some have not been) - that is immaterial to them as well.
If the report is TRUE - Mass protests throughout the Arab world, lives lost, increase in attacks on our troops.
If the report is UNTRUE - Mass protests throughout the Arab world, lives lost, increase in attacks on our troops.
Regardless of the accuracy of the report, what good comes of it, for us OR them? ZERO.
You cannot reason with the unreasonable. These terrorists are not driven by money, politics, regional power or any of the 'traditional' motivators. You cannot negotiate with them. Their aim is to destroy western society, and Israel, and set up a worldwide fundamentalist Islamic government to enslave us all. They will kill us, our colleagues, our friends, our neighbours, our wives and our children, in cold blood and in some of the most horrible ways imaginable given half the chance, and film it and broadcast it across the world. They are indistinguishable from the ordinary citizens of Arab / Islamic countries, who just want to get on with their lives.
We CANNOT win this war by being 'nice' to them. We will NEVER win the hearts and minds of Islamic terrorists. If causing them some temporary discomfort gives us the intelligence we need to fight this war, and the GC prevents us from doing that, we need to look at the GC again very carefully. After all, after 57 years, I think it's due a review, don't you?
16B
Thread Starter
16B, after much consideration, I conclude your last post to be complete and utter nonsense.
What on earth is to be gained by 'roughing up' or 'intimidating' prisoners? Apart from guaranteeing sullen resentment, that is?
What on earth is to be gained by 'roughing up' or 'intimidating' prisoners? Apart from guaranteeing sullen resentment, that is?
Last edited by BEagle; 25th May 2005 at 08:33.
!6 Blades, now I will simply assume that you are Airforce and have NO IDEA what or why the rules are what they are.
I'm still stuck with the OSA and this is a public forum, so I cannot and will not quote chapter and verse.
The rules for handling prisoners are clear, they are to be removed, with their posessions as quickly as possible for debrief, as this is the most efficient way of getting information of immediate tactical value from them.
There is no point in interrogating for long term information by roughing them up because the battle situation will have changed by the time you have that information. You may in time wheedle out some order of battle information.
Secondly, as others have alluded to, the only way of winning this war is to get Arab opinion on our side, so either you are saying the war is unwinnable, or you are advocating tactics that will make it unwinnable.
As for "applying pressure" to achieve the aim. You are simply demonstrating why you are unfit to be a member of any military force, if in fact you are one at all. Military law does not allow it. Civil Law does not allow it. Expereince and common sense indicates that the information provided is not, and never has been reliable, accurate, or timely. Do you even understand the definition of "reliable" and "accurate" in a military intelligence context? Obviously not!
Furthermore, you have conveniently ignored my post explaining to you the doctrine of condonation and why there must already be an ironclad case to Court Martial a CO no less, so I assume you simply have never been taught military law and therefore you are a troll.
Furthermore your comments about not being "nice" to the enemy and rewriting the Geneva convention are as contemptible as you are. I do not believe you are military at all, and if you are, then you are a pathetic excuse for a service person who does not deserve to wear the uniform of any country.
Finally there is the question of discipline which you have conveniently ignored. I won't try and explain to you what this means in a military context since you obviously have no %^$%#$ idea.
I could go on, if you are indeed RAF (which I doubt), you are a disgrace.
I'm still stuck with the OSA and this is a public forum, so I cannot and will not quote chapter and verse.
The rules for handling prisoners are clear, they are to be removed, with their posessions as quickly as possible for debrief, as this is the most efficient way of getting information of immediate tactical value from them.
There is no point in interrogating for long term information by roughing them up because the battle situation will have changed by the time you have that information. You may in time wheedle out some order of battle information.
Secondly, as others have alluded to, the only way of winning this war is to get Arab opinion on our side, so either you are saying the war is unwinnable, or you are advocating tactics that will make it unwinnable.
As for "applying pressure" to achieve the aim. You are simply demonstrating why you are unfit to be a member of any military force, if in fact you are one at all. Military law does not allow it. Civil Law does not allow it. Expereince and common sense indicates that the information provided is not, and never has been reliable, accurate, or timely. Do you even understand the definition of "reliable" and "accurate" in a military intelligence context? Obviously not!
Furthermore, you have conveniently ignored my post explaining to you the doctrine of condonation and why there must already be an ironclad case to Court Martial a CO no less, so I assume you simply have never been taught military law and therefore you are a troll.
Furthermore your comments about not being "nice" to the enemy and rewriting the Geneva convention are as contemptible as you are. I do not believe you are military at all, and if you are, then you are a pathetic excuse for a service person who does not deserve to wear the uniform of any country.
Finally there is the question of discipline which you have conveniently ignored. I won't try and explain to you what this means in a military context since you obviously have no %^$%#$ idea.
I could go on, if you are indeed RAF (which I doubt), you are a disgrace.
Last edited by Sunfish; 25th May 2005 at 09:00.
Join Date: Apr 2005
Location: Lincolnshire
Posts: 39
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Just a thought here
The minority who are stupid enough to illtreat prisoners, be they US or UK need to think about those who come after them.
The press love to sensationalise this type of story (and I have no idea if it is true or blown out of proportion since Soldier magazine/the RAF/Navy news or Defence magazine are not daily papers and therefore cannot balance the hype in the mirror/telegraph etc)
Those troops who allow themselves to get in the spotlight make it more and more dangerous for the guys who replace them and only ensure that the average civvy, who has no military background and can't even imagine what it's like to have a weapon pointed at you, can sit at the breakfast table and say "tut tut, glad those nasty soldiers don't live here"
It is hard but we need to get a grip and that has to come from the top down! Officers and SNCO's need to have a proper grip on young, scared, full of adrenaline Toms, until that day I fear this will happen again.
The press love to sensationalise this type of story (and I have no idea if it is true or blown out of proportion since Soldier magazine/the RAF/Navy news or Defence magazine are not daily papers and therefore cannot balance the hype in the mirror/telegraph etc)
Those troops who allow themselves to get in the spotlight make it more and more dangerous for the guys who replace them and only ensure that the average civvy, who has no military background and can't even imagine what it's like to have a weapon pointed at you, can sit at the breakfast table and say "tut tut, glad those nasty soldiers don't live here"
It is hard but we need to get a grip and that has to come from the top down! Officers and SNCO's need to have a proper grip on young, scared, full of adrenaline Toms, until that day I fear this will happen again.
I think the balance here is simple....one photo of Saddam in his undies...and the Arab world takes offense. Hundreds of suicide bombings....murders of hundreds of people by death squads....and not a peep out of the Arab world. Their news media show full videotapes of terrorists beheading hogtied victims but refuse to show Saddam in his undies because it is offensive.
If you cannot see the mindset we are up against then you need to get your spectacles checked. Pardon me if I fail to equate someone getting his butt whacked with a broomstick and a hostage getting his head hacked off on TV.
Since most of you here are serving in the military....do you recall how the Iraqi's treated our POW's during Gulf One? Did you hear any outrage from the Arab world over that? I guess the Geneva Convention did not apply to the Iraqi military?
When I begin to hear the "moderate" Muslims taking exception to terrorist acts then I will be more inclined to consider our "mistreatment" of them to be more of an issue.
The mistreatment handed out is relatively mild and limited in scope considering the numbers of people involved. Only because our press is so quick to air our dirty laundry in public is it such an issue. If our (the American and British) media was as dedicated to depicting the bombings and murders as the evil they are then maybe the world's opinions could be influenced in a postive manner.
Instead of spending hours and hours of broadcast time on bombings and showing the horrorific results....they show a quick blast of video....quickly tell you the body count and move on the horrors of Al Grahab or some other "horrible" act by our side.
I have a close friend who was a supervisor of interrogators in Gitmo.....and have had several discussions with him about what was going on down there. We both agreed the "hard line" was not the way to obtain good results but rather the "soft line" was the preferred method. The US Navy SEALS used the soft line during the Vietnam War and were very successful in obtaining useful and timely intelligence for the conduct of follow-up operations.
Excesses have occurred....and they serve up grist for the propaganda mill used by the Terrorists. In my opinion however, we need to cease our hand wringing over it and move on. These excesses fall far short of the murder, torture, and other evils being done by our enemies. War is not a perfect science and mistakes will be made.
I refuse to hang those on my side while the enemy are doing what they are. I might suggest as Disreali said one time...."The British Navy did not change until we shot a few Admirals." (or words to that effect)
If you cannot see the mindset we are up against then you need to get your spectacles checked. Pardon me if I fail to equate someone getting his butt whacked with a broomstick and a hostage getting his head hacked off on TV.
Since most of you here are serving in the military....do you recall how the Iraqi's treated our POW's during Gulf One? Did you hear any outrage from the Arab world over that? I guess the Geneva Convention did not apply to the Iraqi military?
When I begin to hear the "moderate" Muslims taking exception to terrorist acts then I will be more inclined to consider our "mistreatment" of them to be more of an issue.
The mistreatment handed out is relatively mild and limited in scope considering the numbers of people involved. Only because our press is so quick to air our dirty laundry in public is it such an issue. If our (the American and British) media was as dedicated to depicting the bombings and murders as the evil they are then maybe the world's opinions could be influenced in a postive manner.
Instead of spending hours and hours of broadcast time on bombings and showing the horrorific results....they show a quick blast of video....quickly tell you the body count and move on the horrors of Al Grahab or some other "horrible" act by our side.
I have a close friend who was a supervisor of interrogators in Gitmo.....and have had several discussions with him about what was going on down there. We both agreed the "hard line" was not the way to obtain good results but rather the "soft line" was the preferred method. The US Navy SEALS used the soft line during the Vietnam War and were very successful in obtaining useful and timely intelligence for the conduct of follow-up operations.
Excesses have occurred....and they serve up grist for the propaganda mill used by the Terrorists. In my opinion however, we need to cease our hand wringing over it and move on. These excesses fall far short of the murder, torture, and other evils being done by our enemies. War is not a perfect science and mistakes will be made.
I refuse to hang those on my side while the enemy are doing what they are. I might suggest as Disreali said one time...."The British Navy did not change until we shot a few Admirals." (or words to that effect)
How's this for fairness....?
How many times do we see some terrorist group video broadcast "Death to Infidels" or some such rhetoric after they show a beheading, murder, or car bomb attack? If we continue to do things as shown by the following article from Reuters....we are doomed to defeat as a culture and society. (In my view)
ROME (Reuters) - A judge has ordered best-selling writer and journalist Oriana Fallaci to stand trial in her native Italy on charges she defamed Islam in a recent book.
The decision angered Italy's justice minister but delighted Muslim activists, who accused Fallaci of inciting religious hatred in her 2004 work "La Forza della Ragione" (The Force of Reason).
Fallaci lives in New York and has regularly provoked the wrath of Muslims with her outspoken criticism of Islam following the Sept. 11, 2001, attacks on U.S. cities.
In "La Forza della Ragione," Fallaci wrote that terrorists had killed 6,000 people over the past 20 years in the name of the Koran and said the Islamic faith "sows hatred in the place of love and slavery in the place of freedom."
State prosecutors originally dismissed accusations of defamation from an Italian Muslim organization, and said Fallaci should not stand trial because she was merely exercising her right to freedom of speech.
But a preliminary judge in the northern Italian city of Bergamo, Armando Grasso, rejected the prosecutors advice at a hearing on Tuesday and said Fallaci should be indicted.
Grasso's ruling homed in on 18 sentences in the book, saying some of Fallaci's words were "without doubt offensive to Islam and to those who practice that religious faith."
ROME (Reuters) - A judge has ordered best-selling writer and journalist Oriana Fallaci to stand trial in her native Italy on charges she defamed Islam in a recent book.
The decision angered Italy's justice minister but delighted Muslim activists, who accused Fallaci of inciting religious hatred in her 2004 work "La Forza della Ragione" (The Force of Reason).
Fallaci lives in New York and has regularly provoked the wrath of Muslims with her outspoken criticism of Islam following the Sept. 11, 2001, attacks on U.S. cities.
In "La Forza della Ragione," Fallaci wrote that terrorists had killed 6,000 people over the past 20 years in the name of the Koran and said the Islamic faith "sows hatred in the place of love and slavery in the place of freedom."
State prosecutors originally dismissed accusations of defamation from an Italian Muslim organization, and said Fallaci should not stand trial because she was merely exercising her right to freedom of speech.
But a preliminary judge in the northern Italian city of Bergamo, Armando Grasso, rejected the prosecutors advice at a hearing on Tuesday and said Fallaci should be indicted.
Grasso's ruling homed in on 18 sentences in the book, saying some of Fallaci's words were "without doubt offensive to Islam and to those who practice that religious faith."