![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
I have rather slacked off on the running in the last few weeks for a number of reasons; being on client site all day, laziness, minor injuries. If I am going to be at the office all day I have to run first thing in the morning or I will not get around to it and the weather hasn't been very co-operative. Today, however, it was 17C at 0600 in Toronto and i finally got off my ass and went for a run. I love the early morning (with or without the smell of napalm).
May. 11th, 2004
Iraq and torture
May. 11th, 2004 07:50 amAm I the only one who thinks that Bush is digging himself into a hole over the Iraq prisoner abuse stories? He seems to be pushing the ‘few bad apples’ line pretty hard and I’m not convinced it is sustainable.
As I see it, there are three (at least) more or less distinct types of prisoner abuse going on in Iraq. The first is the kind that the Queen’s Lancashire Regiment has been accused of; namely beating up prisoners in the immediate aftermath of combat. OK, that’s wrong but if you have just been ambushed and one of your mates is dead or wounded smacking the culprit with a rifle butt is fairly understandable. It has happened in combat zones since the dawn of time.
The second kind is the one that I think may be going to undo Bush. It seems that the Americans are routinely preparing prisoners for interrogation using softening up techniques that include sleep deprivation, sensory deprivation, verbal humiliation and keeping people naked for extended periods of time. The chain of command knows all about this and clearly considers it to be OK despite the fact that it is a blatant infringement of the third and fourth Geneva conventions and has been described by the ICRC as ‘tantamount to torture’.
Lastly, there is the blatantly illegal stuff like rape, beatings and murder. I don’t think the US command has authorized that kind of behaviour and is probably genuinely shocked by it.
The issue then is that Bush appears to be condemning all these types of abuse while in practice condoning the second type. Are people too stupid to see this and how sustainable will the position be once the court martials start and the defence argues that ‘they were just obeying orders’?
As I see it, there are three (at least) more or less distinct types of prisoner abuse going on in Iraq. The first is the kind that the Queen’s Lancashire Regiment has been accused of; namely beating up prisoners in the immediate aftermath of combat. OK, that’s wrong but if you have just been ambushed and one of your mates is dead or wounded smacking the culprit with a rifle butt is fairly understandable. It has happened in combat zones since the dawn of time.
The second kind is the one that I think may be going to undo Bush. It seems that the Americans are routinely preparing prisoners for interrogation using softening up techniques that include sleep deprivation, sensory deprivation, verbal humiliation and keeping people naked for extended periods of time. The chain of command knows all about this and clearly considers it to be OK despite the fact that it is a blatant infringement of the third and fourth Geneva conventions and has been described by the ICRC as ‘tantamount to torture’.
Lastly, there is the blatantly illegal stuff like rape, beatings and murder. I don’t think the US command has authorized that kind of behaviour and is probably genuinely shocked by it.
The issue then is that Bush appears to be condemning all these types of abuse while in practice condoning the second type. Are people too stupid to see this and how sustainable will the position be once the court martials start and the defence argues that ‘they were just obeying orders’?
I can read Compact Flash again.
May. 11th, 2004 12:55 pmI just bought a new Compact Flash reader so I can use the digital camera again.
( So, naturally, here are cat pics )
( So, naturally, here are cat pics )
