What are you telling your children? (Warning: political)

[shereads]

It's not a loss of innocence, exactly. It's more like I'm suffering the loss of .003 percent of innocence.

(That's what was left after I plunged into porn.)



Now I'm confronted like everyone in the U.S. with these photographs and what they mean, and I realize that I still had an unspoken belief that "we" were inherently good. It was a feeling ingrained from childhood by reciting the pledge of allegiance and growing up in a military family and having friends who joined the Peace Corps and knowing a few who sacrifice personal safety and comfort to do some good. Call it pride or patriotism, whatever it is it survived Vietnam and Watergate. It took a beating during Iran-Contra, and was deeply shaken by the actions of Kenneth Starr and then by the Congress during the Clinton impeachment hearings. It was scraped raw by recent events. But it was there.

Then I saw those pictures from the prisons in Iraq, and felt this vague sense of loss. The last illusion.

I still know I'm lucky to live here. (Here is certainly better than there right now and for the foreseeable future.) And I don't think there's anything worse about us than anyone else. We just have the power that makes our weaknesses and character flaws more dangerous.

I wonder if children who are old enough to see and comprehend those torture photos will grow up better or worse for not having had the illusions earlier generations enjoyed?

What are parents - in the U.S. and elsewhere - telling their children about the torture of prisoners by American soldiers? Are they asking questions? Do they accept as a matter of course that Americans are capable of the same evil as anyone else?

 

[ABSTRUSE]

Thankfully my children are still too young to question that now, but later when they are old and all the facts are there, I will explain to them with honesty. It's always the best approach with kids.
It was difficult enough to explain the happenings of 9-11.

~A~

 

[shereads]

Thankfully my children are still too young to question that now, but later when they are old and all the facts are there, I will explain to them with honesty. It's always the best approach with kids.
It was difficult enough to explain the happenings of 9-11.

Thank you, A.

I'm reminded of why I don't have children: I'd just say, "People suck."

 

[ABSTRUSE]

"People suck."

Well, that works too!

 

[Pure]

The 'good side', the one God's on, has always been a bit unscrupulous. There were stories of 'vietcong' being pushed from helicopters during that war. (i.e., it would make the remaining ones 'talk'.)

In reading the history of 'terrorism', one early example cited is Cromwell's pacification of Ireland. One method being the total destruction of every man woman and child in certain 'example' villages. Apparently it worked.

J.

 

[Guest]

Just to say - I was not shocked by the Iraq photos. If American police have a history of torturing or merely beating up blacks and Hispanics, why should our military doing so surprise us.

Perdita

 

[Lou Nuttick]

There is something dehumanizing about being a prison guard (or perhaps only those with baser tendencies can tolerate being one). Thus, it is dismaying, but not inconceivable for such a thing to happen, even in American prisons.

That said, it seems to me that the vast majority of Americans are outraged that it *did* happen, even to those we associate with indiscriminate murder of innocent civilians, including women and children. How many peoples can say the same?

 

[ABSTRUSE]

Just to say - I was not shocked by the Iraq photos. If American police have a history of torturing or merely beating up blacks and Hispanics, why should our military doing so surprise us.

Perdita

Very true P. I have a friend who was involved in a prisoner abuse case in Iraq, he didn't even know what had happened but because he was an MP and part of the convoy, he was included in the group. There was a lot of conspiracy and dirty dealings that went on that no one knew about, the high ups were completely aware of the situation and did nothing about wanting to hear the truth. He was separated from his unit, treated like a criminal and had no legal rights what so ever. We had to get our congressman involved, with few results because of red tape. Not saying what occured in the news now is right, but the situation that my friend was in had different circumstances.
It's a shame all the way around how the military owns these soldiers.
~A~

 

[shereads]

For whatever reason, the fact of police brutality and the knowledge of the few extreme incidents of extreme brutality that make it to the newspapers, have never led me to expect this of ordinary U.S. soldiers. Not even My Lai and the recent "outing" of Bob Kerry as part of a smaller, similar incident in Vietnam would have prepared me for the cool-headed, calculated sadism displayed in these photographs.

I hope the people who carried out the torture and those who turned a blind eye to it, are at least concerned that U.S. prisoners in the middle east will suffer for this. It's bad enough that we've used loopholes and double-speak to deny Geneva Convention rights to the Guantanamo prisoners, disregarding the effect our actions might have on future U.S. prisoners - and that apparently some prisoners in Iraq who had visible evidence of torture were hidden from Red Cross inspectors.

(Ironically, Saddam Hussein is the one Iraqi prisoner I know of who's been granted official P.O.W status. Big shots apparently respect other big shots, bar none.)

 

[Wildcard Ky]

The best thing that you can do is tell your kids the truth. That's what I do with mine. My 7 year old still asks why "those people flew planes into those buildings". I explain the the best I can in a way that she will understand. I try to walk the fine line between answering her questions, without being too graphic.

Kids are smart these days. They learn more at a younger age than we did. I think that if they are able to ask the question, they need to hear the truth on a level that they can comprehend. The truth is there are bad people everywhere. There are bad cops and good cops. Bad soldiers and good soldiers. We can't always tell the good from the bad just by looking at them.

Unfortunately atrocities and barbarism is a part of human culture. No race, creed or country is free from it.

 

[shereads]

The best thing that you can do is tell your kids the truth. That's what I do with mine.

You're not going to tell them about...you know...s-e-x. Are you?

 

[Boxlicker101]

I have seen some of the photos being discussed and I don't really see what the fuss is about.

First, let me say, the Iraqis have taken some prisoners also, and they are treated much worse than the Americans treat prisoners they take. Second, calling them "Prisoners of War" is a stretch because these are not soldiers we are referring to. Although they may have in mind "liberating their country" their methods are random murder of their own countrymen with bombs and bullets. In most places they would be treated as psychotic criminals.

The main thing I want to say, though, is that the photos I have seen are not such a big deal. I see prisoners being strip-searched, possibly even body-cavity searched. This is a very sensible idea, and the way American police treat criminal suspects.

The American soldiers are not dealing with people who are honorable and decent, at least not by American standards. They are dealing with people who are treacherous and deceitful and who will pretend to surrender in order to blow themselves up and kill some Americans at the same time. In order to prevent this, precautions must be taken, and that is what appears to be what is happening.

Some people may say that we should not impose our moral beliefs on others. Fine. If we treat them the way they they would treat others, and have treated others, that means torture them for whatever info they may have and then kill them. This would be, after all, treating them according to their standards.

I don't actually believe we should torture anybody but I also think we should deal with the prisoners as dangerous criminal suspects, rather than serving them cake and ice cream.

 

[KarenAM]

I must disagree, Boxlicker.

The main thing I want to say, though, is that the photos I have seen are not such a big deal. I see prisoners being strip-searched, possibly even body-cavity searched. This is a very sensible idea, and the way American police treat criminal suspects.

Keep in mind that this is a part of the world where sexual dignity is a major part of culture. By sexually humiliating one Iraqi, you can alienate a million. Second, American police are required to provide legal counsel to all suspects, even those accused of the most henious crimes. So far the only Iraqi prisoner we seem to have dealt with according to the law is Saddam. How does that make us look to Iraqis?

This incident is just another nail in the coffin of American policy in the Middle East. We've lost Iraq for certain, and other countries over there will probably follow.

 

[Boota]

The damage from these actions is irreversible. Part of this war had to be the winning of hearts and minds. In this we have failed miserably. Yes, there are scumbag motherfuckers over there that we are dealing with. That simply does excuse these abuses. You can't proclaim yourself the hero and then behave like a villain. Of course it's going to be harder on us to fight when we have to hold ourselves to a higher moral degree. But it should be hard. Doing the right thing isn't always easy. We just keep giving other countries reasons to hate us.

Once the investigation/cover-up is over we can see if anything can be salvaged.

 

[shereads]

There is something dehumanizing about being a prison guard (or perhaps only those with baser tendencies can tolerate being one). Thus, it is dismaying, but not inconceivable for such a thing to happen, even in American prisons.

That's true. There's a book about the world inside maximum-security prisons, by a journalist who went undercover to train and work as a guard. The danger to the guards is significant, which is the main reason dangerous prisoners are "pampered" with TV and other recreation. The more bored and restless they are, the more inclined they are to plan revenge against the guards. Many of them are serving such long sentences that they have nothing left to lose.

I'm sure it's dangerous guarding POWs too. But the circumstances are substantially different than in U.S. criminal prisons. We went there, uninvited, to "liberate" Iraq from a man whose sins have been enumerated for us many times since the failure to find WMD - and chief among them was torture. The opinion of the U.S. was precarious enough, even in countries that haven't openly condemend the occupation. I don't see how it's possible to salvage anything now that there's not even the illusion of a moral mission.

 

[Edward Teach]

A six month tour of combat is a long tour. There are troops in Iraq who have been there for over a year with no break and little or no comfort. There are no front lines, they are surrounded by enemy or potential enemy all the time, day and night. Humans are very adaptable but the mind cannot withstand stress that constant and severe. Something has to give.

The chicken hawks who rushed into this war unprepared and ill planned are the ones to blame. Hell, when Rummy overruled the military and decided that he could get by with 20% of the troops some generals requested, he should have been fired.

The very fact that the Iraqi oil ministry was guarded, but not the hospitals, museums and banks indicates to me that the plan used was, at best, a modified, off the shelf, stock, emergency invasion plan designed for the quickest possible land war with the fewest possible troops, such as the Pentagon has for every country.

The troops are under too much stress. Many will suffer severe emotional problems for the rest of their lives. Suicide is up among returning troops and several returning soldiers have already murdered their spouses. Atrocities are going to occur.

There is no excuse for mistreating prisoners but the major fault lies with the administration.

Ed

 

[shereads]

I have seen some of the photos being discussed and I don't really see what the fuss is about.

We have evidence of prisoners held down and sodomized with broom handles, forced to have sexual contact with each other, beaten on the soles of the feet with metal rods. We have at least one photo of a prisoner hooked up to wires and threatened with electrocution while forced to balance on a narrow wooden box. We have accounts in a secret document leaked to the press, of prisoners in such bad shape that they were concealed from Red Cross inspectors - no details on what happened to them.

And we have an account of a prisoner who died from over-enthusiastic interrogation (body cavity search?) and of a cover-up that required making the body appear to have died during a medical procedure.

Box, you can't be serious.

 

[rgraham666]

First of all I have no kids and never will so this question is entirely hypothetical to me.

On what's happening in Iraq there are several thoughts that come to mind.

First, since Auschwitz and Belsen, the depths that human beings can sink to don't surprise me any more.

Second, I'm thinking of Socrates 'examined life'. One of the deadliest dangers of patriotism is that it often prevents you from examining yourself and the society you live in. It's just automatically assumed that what you and your society do is right and good.

A sock puppet I have on another website is a demon. Tanglefinger just loves this attitude.

Finally, the people in charge of Iraq are managers. The mangerial mind set is cold, sterile and extremely linear.

So to them, Iraq is just a series of situations to be managed. 'Do A, then B, then C and on this time table'. To them, the real world is essentially just numbers and things to be manipulated.

These managers aren't, and can't be aware of the very basic hypocrisy of what they are doing. They are trying to impose democracy on Iraq. But the managerial mind set is one of the least democratic on the planet.

This makes 'victory' in Iraq a very iffy propostion.

 

[shereads]

Thanks, rg, for providing a rational assessment of a situation that defies rational assessment.

 

[PAUL C]

to be expected

When your government sanctions the removal of basic human rights from the detainees in that bit of Cuba for over two years and similar to the former leaders in Iraq then what do you expect.

Cromwell only pacified Ireland for a relatively short period of time. See the last century for the result.

The British Army is no better. I spent twenty-six years in it. They have raped and tortured their way through most countries of the world. Fortunately to the victor go's the right to write history.

It still goes on. In Africa where we are advising and in our own Garrison towns where girls are brought back to barracks to star in the friday night gang bang.

I'm sure the pushing out of helicopters in Vietnam did happen. It did in Aden in the sixties apparantly. There was a famous Gollies can't fly message from that time. It's probably filed somewhere out of harms way now.

Still, if it any consolation, a lot worse happened to the colilition members and contractors who fell into the hands of the Iraq forces, in the war and since.

 

[Pure]

OK so let's get down to brass tacks. The 'enemy', the Other is using a number of unconventional means, bombs at the roadside, exploding corpses, kids carrying weapons, trickery. They treat prisoners harshly, if indeed they aren't shot.

So, how far does one go in countermeasures:

1) No distance at all from the highest standards. One absolutely keeps the same standards as the police in Beverly Hills arresting a 'star.' Furnish holy books, and chaplain access. Furnish access to trained counsel. If it's hot, air condition the cells.

2) One make small compromises. Reducing contact with family and humanitarian agencies; harsh questioning for several-hour stretches (no counsel); metal platform for sleep, cement floor; food basics only. Limited exercise.

3) One make big compromises: some arbitrary arrest; some torture short of extreme pain and death-- e.g., hoods, white noise, sleep deprivation, sexual humiliation.

4) One fights fire with fire. Shoots prisoners who act up. Tortures others to get the goods on 'higher ups'. Sort of like the French 'paras' in Algeria.

 

[ABSTRUSE]

A six month tour of combat is a long tour. There are troops in Iraq who have been there for over a year with no break and little or no comfort. There are no front lines, they are surrounded by enemy or potential enemy all the time, day and night. Humans are very adaptable but the mind cannot withstand stress that constant and severe. Something has to give.

The chicken hawks who rushed into this war unprepared and ill planned are the ones to blame. Hell, when Rummy overruled the military and decided that he could get by with 20% of the troops some generals requested, he should have been fired.

The very fact that the Iraqi oil ministry was guarded, but not the hospitals, museums and banks indicates to me that the plan used was, at best, a modified, off the shelf, stock, emergency invasion plan designed for the quickest possible land war with the fewest possible troops, such as the Pentagon has for every country.

The troops are under too much stress. Many will suffer severe emotional problems for the rest of their lives. Suicide is up among returning troops and several returning soldiers have already murdered their spouses. Atrocities are going to occur.

There is no excuse for mistreating prisoners but the major fault lies with the administration.

Ed

There is so much truth in what you say, sir.
The extended tours are very stressful. Who is giving these soldiers help to cope with what they have gone through and when all is said and done will they be treated the way the viet Nam vets were treated when they came home?

It is a disgrace, but it is war. We are not there to know what really goes on, we are fed information from the media.

So, getting back to explaining it to our children, I've told mine, using 9-11 as an example, that there are bad people in the world, some hate us because of who we are and where we live. It will always be that way and we need to know that bad people can be found everywhere.
I explained at the begining of the war that there was a bad man who was very evil and he treated the people in his country unfairly, he had terrible weapons that we needed to find and get rid of so we would all be safe.
When you see your children learn respect for the flag and want to honor those involved with the safety and protection of our country, you almost seem like a hipocrite knowing what has gone down in the last year.
While they are too young to comprehend all that is going on we need to keep things basic, but when they become older, questions should be answered honestly and the correct facts should be given. The country will someday be in their hands, they will be the ones who will vote, the ones who will serve and they need to be educated about certain reallities. No propaganda or purple prose, but the cold hard facts that they can process and decide upon, how will they view this war in the future? Hard to say when today they are living a normal life during a volatile time.
This is their history and they need to learn from it, good and bad.

~A~

 

[shereads]

We are not there to know what really goes on, we are fed information from the media.

And it's about time.

I can't recall a period during my lifetime when the press has been so timid about reporting a crisis. The fear of being labeled "unpatriotic" after 9/ll seemed to drain the blood out of the American press. What fourth estate?

We're seeing the three branches of government merged into one. One or two swing votes on the Supreme Court are all the remains of the checks and balances that keep government somewhat accountable. There's never been more of a need for aggressive journalism. The people who bring these less-than-flattering stories to light - from the MP who reported the torture to the journalists who remain in Iraq at enormous risk, and particularly the few who refused to be "imbedded" with the military during the invasion - are heros, in my book. They're our only source of information that hasn't been filtered through Public Relations.

 

[Guest]

Sher, re. the quote you use above, did you see this? (I want Walter Cronkite back.) P.
--------

CBS News says it held prison abuse story - David Bauder (salon.com)

May 3, 2004 | NEW YORK (AP) -- CBS News delayed reporting for two weeks about U.S. soldiers' alleged abuse of Iraqi prisoners, following a personal request from the chairman of the joint chiefs of staff.

Gen. Richard B. Myers called CBS anchor Dan Rather eight days before the report was to air, asking for extra time, said Jeff Fager, executive producer of "60 Minutes II."

Myers cited the safety of American hostages and tension surrounding the Iraqi city of Fallujah, Fager said, adding that he held off as long as he believed possible given it was a competitive story.

With The New Yorker magazine preparing to run a detailed report on the alleged abuses, CBS finally broadcast its report last Wednesday, including images taken last year allegedly showing Iraqis stripped naked, hooded and being tormented by U.S. captors at the Abu Ghraib prison near Baghdad.

Fager said he felt "terrible" being asked to delay the broadcast.

"News is a delicate thing," he said. "It's hard to just make those kinds of decisions. It's not natural for us; the natural thing is to put it on the air. But the circumstances were quite unusual and I think you have to consider that."

Bob Steele, a journalism values scholar at the Poynter Institute for Media Studies, said there should be an "exceptional principle and argument" to justify withholding news of such magnitude.

"You'd have to be convinced that these other American lives are truly on the line," he said. "I would want to have a very specific and short time period (to withhold the news). If CBS believes it was justified, to hold back two weeks seems like an awful long time. Perhaps a day or two. But two weeks is a long time, particularly with the nature of the allegations in the video."

Steele said he was troubled that CBS did not disclose during the show that the images had been withheld. "This is very important," Steele said. "There should have been a disclosure at the time of the broadcast."

Fager said he believed the story was better because of the delay; CBS was able to interview Brig. Gen. Mark Kimmitt about the alleged incidents because the network waited.

Myers, speaking on ABC's "This Week" on Sunday, confirmed that he asked CBS for the delay.

"You can't keep this out of the news, clearly," Myers said. "But I thought it would be particularly inflammatory at the time."

Fager knew that CBS had to consider safety issues in deciding when to run the story. "We can't just be acting in a void," he said. "There's a war going on and Americans are at risk, especially the ones that are being held hostage. It concerns us."

Although one American hostage recently escaped and others may have been killed, at least one hostage is still believed held in Iraq.

Steele pointed out that Iraqi prisoners could have been at risk, too.

"Allegations of this nature, the violation of the rights of the enemy prisoners, should not be taken lightly in the slightest," he said. "It's possible that their lives could be in jeopardy as well. ... it's not impossible to consider that at least their health, if not their lives, were at risk."

 

[rgraham666]

Thanks, rg, for providing a rational assessment of a situation that defies rational assessment.

That's one of the few nice things about having been insane.

You can then spot insanity and work your way through it.