Page 6 of 9 FirstFirst ... 45678 ... LastLast
Results 101 to 120 of 163

Thread: The US & Interrogation (catch all)

  1. #101
    Council Member tequila's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2006
    Location
    New York, NY
    Posts
    1,665

    Default

    If you meant that the GOs not getting more than a rushed retirement was a miscarriage of justice, we can agree but your point is then fallacious because, as I said and you should know, that doesn't happen in the US. It should but it generally does not and that is historical fact. You and I are not going to change that so you're living in a dream world on that score.
    The system did not work in the critical phase of meting out justice to the responsible. This only encourages further errors in the future. You regard this as a fundamental flaw(?) in the system, I regard it as a breakdown.

    , in that it punishes the misdeeds of the lower but allows the higher ranks to pass on to well-funded retirements? I guess you are just more cynical than I.

    Your last paragraph is essentially correct though your "Hollywood tough guy" comment is both telling and incorrect. It is also irrelevant.
    What is telling, incorrect, and irrelevant about it? Please explain.

    We can agree on what should not have happened, however we all have to live with what did and does happen -- mistakes are made in wars. Many have been made in this one, the whole interrogation effort is just one of them. Like many of the other mistakes, that one was rectified. You can disagree that the system worked but you'd be wrong.
    The system appears to have resolved the issue as far as military detentions go, but although it failed to properly allocate justice to the guilty. Yet continued justifications for waterboarding by civilian intelligence agencies seems to indicate that the system certainly has not fully resolved its interrogation issues across the government as a whole.

    It's also easy to take the moral high ground in hindsight and sitting here in CONUS, isn't it?
    Sure. I've never been the man in the arena tasked with getting intel out of a detainee. Then again, I'm sure every torturer who ever put hands on an American POW would say the same thing.

  2. #102
    Council Member Ken White's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2007
    Location
    Florida
    Posts
    8,060

    Default Different strokes on the water board...

    Quote Originally Posted by tequila View Post
    The system did not work in the critical phase of meting out justice to the responsible. This only encourages further errors in the future. You regard this as a fundamental flaw(?) in the system, I regard it as a breakdown.
    I too regard it as a breakdown but it it indeed also a fundamental flaw. You've identified the problem, now suggest a solution -- not one that would be nice but one that can realistically be applied and work.

    ...I guess you are just more cynical than I.
    Yep. Your turn will come...

    What is telling, incorrect, and irrelevant about it? Please explain.
    Telling is the choice of words; there was no 'hollywood' about it nor was there any question of 'tough guy' or any macho BS. Those are typical progressive or collegiate talking point words used in an attempt to belittle any non-metrosexual behavior in this touchy feely era.

    It was incorrect because the interrogation rules were a calculated response to an extant problem. People who have been trained to resist ordinary interrogation measures and who are aware of our normal methods (all available in open source as are 90% of our doctrinal pubs) can and will resist ordinary measures and harsher methods can be effective. The major error was in applying that ability to use harsher measures to DoD. We can probably agree that was dumb -- we can probably disagree on the use of harsher terchniques by non-DoD agencies. I have no problem with that (and my cynicism again comes out because we, the US of A, have been operating that way since long before I went in the Corps in 1949...). Rumsfeld and Miller were simply applying needed rule modifications in Guantanamo and they should never have been applied to Iraq. That was one error, one of many.

    Sanchez's error was in pushing too hard on Pappas for results when he knew or should have known the possible results of that push. I have no doubt about the culpability of all three but I submit that their goofs do not excuse the actual perpetrators who, as mentioned earlier, all acknowledged they knew what they were doing was wrong. Nor IMO, does their stupidity rise to the level of criminal activity; doing dumb things is not a crime -- may be grounds for action but not necessarily for criminal prosecution. Action has been taken in all cases. May not be what you or I would prescribe but it has been taken.

    All that is irrelevant IMO because it has happened, is history and we're unlikely to learn much more from the events than we have to date and I see little sense wasting thought or effort on bemoaning things that can't be changed.

    The system appears to have resolved the issue as far as military detentions go, but although it failed to properly allocate justice to the guilty...
    In your opinion? Possibly in the opinion of some others? I think it did all it could do within its own parameters (and would point out that some of the investigations are STILL ongoing). I suspect some of those adjudged guilty and serving time might not agree with you. Based on what I read, now Colonel Karpinski does not and obviously Sanchez thinks he got screwed. However, do recall I agree that too many SENIOR people got off too light -- it's the American way...

    ...Yet continued justifications for waterboarding by civilian intelligence agencies seems to indicate that the system certainly has not fully resolved its interrogation issues across the government as a whole.
    I suggest that it is in fact resolved but that you and some others do not agree with that resolution. Your prerogative. I have no hangups on it myself. Cynicism again...

    Been my observation that one can certainly have and state an opinion on anything but it's best not to go into prime judgment mode until one has all the facts and that one should always recall that if one hasn't had to do the job, it's probably too easy to judge excessively harshly. Wars tend to be brutal and messy and there's a whole lot of gray out there. Absolutes are rare indeed...

    Sure. I've never been the man in the arena tasked with getting intel out of a detainee. Then again, I'm sure every torturer who ever put hands on an American POW would say the same thing.
    Probably. Most of the rest of the world doesn't have all the luxuries that we do -- including the luxury to be nice to ones enemies. Even we don't always have that luxury in practice though it can be assumed we do -- if one just reads about it in air conditioned stateside comfort...

  3. #103
    Council Member Ken White's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2007
    Location
    Florida
    Posts
    8,060

    Default Your opinion and that of some others. However

    Quote Originally Posted by Sarajevo071 View Post
    How long? Did those punishments fit the crime? Abuse, torture and deaths!?

    No. They did not.

    Here (in U.S.) you can get more time if you steal pack of razor blades in 7-11 but what do they get for murder? Or rape? Or torture? Same!?
    the Abu Gharaib idiots all got jail time -- the Iraqis they maltreated -- not tortured -- were probably all out of jail before any of the abusers were and most of them will be in jail for some time. Every one caught torturing has been tried, those convicted got lengthy sentences and the murder convictions have ranged from 20 years to life -- about the European norm.

    ...Ah, yes... I forget. Victims are only Arab Muslims.
    What difference does that make? Other than in the minds of those Muslims (and others, a lot of others) determined to make an issue of it...

    . . .

    And some people are surprised with all this around us asking, "why they hate us"!?
    Some may be asking that. I'm not. I've been aware of everything from contempt to dislike to pure hatred directed at the US for over 50 years. Mostly centered in Europe. Nothing new in that.

    The last time you started this stuff on this board when I was around, we got to the point where you acknowledged, late or not, the US did more for Bosnia than anyone else did...

    What's your point?

  4. #104
    Council Member
    Join Date
    Oct 2005
    Posts
    3,099

    Default

    Here (in U.S.) you can get more time if you steal pack of razor blades in 7-11 but what do they get for murder? Or rape? Or torture? Same!?

    Sarajevo, in your frequent emotional outbursts on this board you have always failed to acknowledge that the United States is really relatively in unique in that it does try and convict its soldiers who are charged with these crimes. They are sentenced within the limits of the law, although that may not be severe enough for your tastes. But I ask you to look at and compare the conduct of nations around the world engaged in counterterrorism and counterinsurgency operations and observe how they treat their military members who are accused of similar - or worse - crimes.

    Really?! They can't go to the "private sector", torture and kill there, and make more money with even less supervision and responsibility?

    You do not understand the severity of the impact of a bad conduct discharge on a former soldier's future life. More and more private sector companies are conducting background investigations on their employees. Hell, even Wal-Mart conducts background checks and drug tests prior to hiring an hourly employee at a Supercenter. An individual with a Bad Conduct discharge may not be reduced to crack whore status for life, as RTK implied - but they are unlikely to advance far beyond mopping floors, picking up garbage, flipping burgers or cutting other people's grass.

    To repeat myself from above... Did those punishments fit the crime? Abuse, torture and deaths!? No. They did not.

    To repeat myself - you are being emotional and subjective. Try to address the subject in a substantive manner. Do you know what the exact sentences were for each of the individuals? Do you know what maximum sentences were possible for each crime? What sentence do you feel should have been imposed? If you are simply venting without being in possession of complete information, then you should probably not be doing it in public on this board.

    And some people are surprised with all this around us asking, "why they hate us!?

    Again, try to avoid emotional rants and contribute substantively to existing threads in The Information War section of the OIF forum or the Media and Information Warriors forum.

    Future posts consisting solely of emotional rants of this nature will be deleted.

  5. #105
    Council Member Uboat509's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2006
    Location
    CO
    Posts
    681

    Default

    Anybody know what deaths he is talking about? To my knowledge the Abu G seven were not accused in any deaths. Other personnel elsewhere have been convicted of the deaths of detainees and they got even more severe sentences then these assclowns.

    SFC W

  6. #106
    Council Member tequila's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2006
    Location
    New York, NY
    Posts
    1,665

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Uboat509 View Post
    Anybody know what deaths he is talking about? To my knowledge the Abu G seven were not accused in any deaths. Other personnel elsewhere have been convicted of the deaths of detainees and they got even more severe sentences then these assclowns.

    SFC W
    Was not restricting myself to the Abu G seven. The loosening of restrictions combined with encouraging untrained MPs to "set the conditions" for interrogation has certainly resulted in the deaths of innocents elsewhere, however.

    Telling is the choice of words; there was no 'hollywood' about it nor was there any question of 'tough guy' or any macho BS. Those are typical progressive or collegiate talking point words used in an attempt to belittle any non-metrosexual behavior in this touchy feely era.
    Yes, there certainly is a question of Hollywood macho BS. None of the troika of Sanchez, Miller, nor Rumsfeld had any real-world experience with interrogation, coerced or otherwise. They simply believed that getting tougher would produce more good intel in the same way that the average viewer watching Jack Bauer shoot someone in the kneecap to gain accurate, actionable intelligence believes that Bauer's method works. The counterproductive and strategically disastrous results of this sort of "common sense" are plain for all to see and have been denounced by real-world professionals in the craft, including many on this very board.

    And did I just get accused of being a metrosexual? I've been accused of being a traitor, a secret Muslim, and a rabid right-winger on various internet message forums, but this is a first. Seriously, I've never even bought hair gel.

    People who have been trained to resist ordinary interrogation measures and who are aware of our normal methods (all available in open source as are 90% of our doctrinal pubs) can and will resist ordinary measures and harsher methods can be effective.
    Real world examples of reliable, actionable intel produced through such methods, please.

    I too regard it as a breakdown but it it indeed also a fundamental flaw. You've identified the problem, now suggest a solution -- not one that would be nice but one that can realistically be applied and work.
    A solution would have been for the Commander-in-Chief to man up and accept Rumsfeld's resignation when Abu Ghraib broke. A message of command responsibility would have been sent and the idea that the United States was not just going to punish the little fish while letting their enablers swim off to cushy retirement would have been banished forever. Not to mention that the armed forces could have had Bob Gates at the helm that much sooner. Unfortunately, as in many other instances, the CINC chose another path.

  7. #107
    Council Member Uboat509's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2006
    Location
    CO
    Posts
    681

    Default

    I was not replying to you Tequilla. I was replying to a post by Sarajevo that seems to have been deleted. You debate the issues. He has a tendancy to just post conspiracy theories and agitprop. This time he was going on about how the Abu G seven were not given enough punishment for the "torture and deaths" at Abu G. Jedburgh did a better job of calling him out than I did.

    SFC W

  8. #108
    Council Member tequila's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2006
    Location
    New York, NY
    Posts
    1,665

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Uboat509 View Post
    I was not replying to you Tequilla. I was replying to a post by Sarajevo that seems to have been deleted. You debate the issues. He has a tendancy to just post conspiracy theories and agitprop. This time he was going on about how the Abu G seven were not given enough punishment for the "torture and deaths" at Abu G. Jedburgh did a better job of calling him out than I did.

    SFC W
    Oops, roger.

    He may have been referring to this:

    Members of the Abu Ghraib 7, including Charles Graner and Sabrina Harman, posed with the corpse of Manadel al-Janabi, who was killed inside Abu Ghraib while undergoing "Palestinian hanging", otherwise known as the strappado. However they had no culpability in his death, which likely came about at the hands of a CIA interrogator, who appears to have gone unpunished.
    Last edited by Jedburgh; 11-30-2007 at 04:10 PM.

  9. #109
    Council Member Ken White's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2007
    Location
    Florida
    Posts
    8,060

    Default Alternative History 101 ???

    Quote Originally Posted by tequila View Post
    ...

    Yes, there certainly is a question of Hollywood macho BS. None of the troika of Sanchez, Miller, nor Rumsfeld had any real-world experience with interrogation, coerced or otherwise. They simply believed that getting tougher would produce more good intel in the same way that the average viewer watching Jack Bauer shoot someone in the kneecap to gain accurate, actionable intelligence believes that Bauer's method works...
    Still a telling phrase IMO. Sorry. Rumsfeld and Sanchez did not, Miller did. All nominally had access to knowledgeable advisors; in Sanchez case, Pappas -- whom I suspect got overruled in his advice to Sanchez...

    ...The counterproductive and strategically disastrous results of this sort of "common sense" are plain for all to see and have been denounced by real-world professionals in the craft, including many on this very board.
    Strategically disastrous? Into hyperbole? Public relations disasters do not equal strategic disasters by a long stretch. True on the expressed disagreement. You did note there were other professionals who disagreed with the disagree-ers? People can disagree on things, that ought to be okay -- and it usually means the real truth is somewhere between the two...

    ...And did I just get accused of being a metrosexual? I've been accused of being a traitor, a secret Muslim, and a rabid right-winger on various internet message forums, but this is a first. Seriously, I've never even bought hair gel.
    Nah, you got charged with using cheesy metrosexual-like terminology, not the same thing. I also offered up collegiate (I thought that sounded better than juvenile -- remember I'm a dinosuar ).

    Real world examples of reliable, actionable intel produced through such methods, please.
    Heh. Ask for the impossible. Assuming I do have knowledge of such, should I post it here on an open forum? I will give you one arguable example -- KSM.

    A solution would have been for the Commander-in-Chief to man up and accept Rumsfeld's resignation when Abu Ghraib broke...
    We can agree on that. I would have, he did not. End of story.

    ... A message of command responsibility would have been sent and the idea that the United States was not just going to punish the little fish while letting their enablers swim off to cushy retirement would have been banished forever...
    That would have entailed turning over many years of tradition. While it would be nice, that's unlikely to happen in your lifetime. Ain't the American way...

    ...Not to mention that the armed forces could have had Bob Gates at the helm that much sooner. Unfortunately, as in many other instances, the CINC chose another path.
    Or someone else, perhaps far worse. We'll never know because it did not happen and I suggest it's completely futile to play 'what ifs' with the past.

  10. #110
    Council Member
    Join Date
    Sep 2007
    Posts
    14

    Default My worry is the long-term degredation

    in the effectiveness and capabilities of the services who use these techniques.

    This is not inevitable but it seems to happen fairly consistently with organizations that embrace the use of torture, or even just accept the "necessity".

    1. Its always easier to extract a confession via torture than it is to put together a solid case which proves guilt.

    2. Interrogators & Investigators who are unscrupulous and willing to quickly resort to torture will meet more performance benchmarks and generally be promoted more quickly and frequently than their more conscientious and professional peers.

    3. Over time these unscrupulous people can dominate the hierarchy where they will continue to promote people like themselves and hold back those whose personal sensibilities do not mesh with the priorities and sensibilities of their superiors. Competent professional investigators either quick, drop out, or get stuck in middling positions. Incompetent and unprofessional ones thrive.

    4. Eventually the entire organization becomes adapted, not to investigation of real threats, but a self-perpetuating cycle of forcing confessions out of subjects and then using these confessions as "evidence" of the immensity of the plots against us which justify the continued use of torture to stop. In reality, they become less and less able to find, much less stop, real threats to our country. In the end they become entirely odious - cruel, oppressive, and yet unable to do the job they are actually supposed to be doing.




    Finally, a question I often ask myself:

    Why are the people who most strenuously support the use of torture against "known terrorists with actionable intelligence" also the ones most opposed to the very safeguards that would protect innocent people from being tortured by mistake?
    Why do we let them get away with framing the discussion as a question of torturing guys like Khalid Sheik Muhammed while implementing a policy of torturing guys like Achmed the corner baker who knows nothing of Al Queda but has a cousin who might know some Jihadis and who once made a phone call to someone whose brother-in-law went to high school with Osama and who ..... (well, you get the idea)?

  11. #111
    Council Member Ken White's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2007
    Location
    Florida
    Posts
    8,060

    Default I'm not sure that your stated concern is truly valid

    in this country at this time. Things can change but are really unlikely to do so. We have a national tendency to go too far in one direction and then to over correct and go back too far in the opposite direction -- yet we generally end up after some oscillation in getting it about right. We don't torture -- some people may do so as an exception but we, as a nation don't buy it. The Armed forces certainly don't and punish where they can when it is discovered.

    I do not -- and do not know anyone who -- supports torture for all the reasons you state. I possibly would not agree with you on what constitutes torture but I might. Regardless, I do agree with harsh interrogation techniques short of torture -- and I use the US statutory description thereof. Anyone indulging in such torture IMO deserves the harshest possible punishment.

    Which leads to to your final paragraph. I'm not at all sure what you're trying to say? Are you implying that we have done that or is that merely a hypothetical based on some things you've seen on blogs written by people who have little real knowledge of the topic?

  12. #112
    Council Member
    Join Date
    Oct 2005
    Posts
    3,099

    Default

    tolsen, this ground has been tread before. Whether it is your intent or not, you appear to be conflating all interrogation conducted at various levels in support of the GWOT.

    Prior to posting again, please read existing threads on the subject, attempt to understand the differing situations, services and agencies, and then post a substantive response or query in the appropriate location. I have moved your most recent post into the rendition thread.

    A Lesson About Torture, Half Century On

    Army Interroation FM Put On Hold

    Republican Revolt Over Interrogation Techniques

    Interrogation Meets T.E. Lawrence

    Waterboarding: A Tool of Political Gotcha

    Extraordinary Rendition

  13. #113
    Council Member
    Join Date
    Sep 2007
    Posts
    14

    Default

    Allow me to explain a bit more:

    1. I am not referring to prisoners taken on the battlefield or even people detained in the course of operations in Iraq or Afghanistan. I am NOT advocating giving pows (both real and the Iraqi/Afghanis civilians who inevitably get detained during the course of counter-insurgency operations) lawyers. I'm referring to much smaller number of those taken outside of warzone during law-enforcement operations in the GWOT (even if the capture is effect by military forces) - especially citizens of the US like Padilla and those of close allies like David Hicks - and otherwise facing years of detainment in places like Gitmo.

    2. I do understand that each of the legal protections I mentioned (lawyers, no secret evidence) have inherent "dangers" that could result in a terrorist getting away or otherwise thwarting our efforts. However, I think its worth the small risk to achieve a radical reduction in the collateral damage we inflict on innocents. Do you disagree? Do you think we really wont hurt that many innocent people? I've yet to hear a supporter of harsh interrogation seriously address the concept of innocence (almost always they restrict their arguments to cases where guilt is assumed and give only token admissions that "of course I dont want to hurt innocent people, but lets assume the guy is guilty for now..."). My opinion is also based on assumptions though (one of which is that all large organizations and beauracracies screw up...a lot) and they may be wrong.

  14. #114
    Council Member
    Join Date
    Sep 2007
    Posts
    14

    Default

    I started writing that before you posted your message. Sorry, I thought we were talking about interrogation in all the circumstance. I guess you were focusing on military ones. Pardon.

  15. #115
    Banned
    Join Date
    Sep 2006
    Posts
    278

    Default Uboat509, for your education only:

    Quote Originally Posted by Uboat509 View Post
    Anybody know what deaths he is talking about? To my knowledge the Abu G seven were not accused in any deaths.
    Of course they didn't. Cover up, anyone!? BTW, since you never heard about deaths in U.S. custody here is couple of links...

    Iraqi Died While Hung From Wrists

    An Iraqi whose corpse was photographed with grinning U.S. soldiers at Abu Ghraib died under CIA interrogation while suspended by his wrists, which had been handcuffed behind his back, according to investigative reports reviewed by The Associated Press.
    ...
    http://www.commondreams.org/headlines05/0217-09.htm

    Trial Starts in Abu Ghraib Death

    An alleged Iraqi insurgent, Manadel Jamadi, died under intense CIA questioning at the notorious Abu Ghraib prison outside Baghdad about 19 months ago. On Tuesday, the government launched the first criminal trial in the case -- but none of the CIA agents who were involved is facing charges.

    Rather, the Navy court-martialed Lt. Andrew K. Ledford, a Navy SEAL whose platoon had captured Jamadi and delivered him -- alive, kicking and shouting, witnesses say -- to CIA interrogators on the night of his death.
    ...
    http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn...052401428.html


    Manadel al-Jamadi (Arabic: مناضل الجمادي) was an Iraqi prisoner who was tortured to death in United States custody during interrogation at Abu Ghraib prison in November 2003. His name became known in 2004 when the Abu Ghraib scandal made news—his corpse packed in ice was the background for widely-reprinted pictures of grinning United States Army Specialists Sabrina Harman and Charles Graner each offering a "thumbs-up" gesture.
    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Manadel_al-Jamadi

  16. #116
    Banned
    Join Date
    Sep 2006
    Posts
    278

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Uboat509 View Post
    I was replying to a post by Sarajevo that seems to have been deleted. You debate the issues. He has a tendancy to just post conspiracy theories and agitprop. This time he was going on about how the Abu G seven were not given enough punishment for the "torture and deaths" at Abu G. Jedburgh did a better job of calling him out than I did.

    SFC W
    Yeah. Jedburgh did a great job... Like always when I start posting and asking real and true question, someone will swoop in to calm my "emotions" and hush all that talk so you can go back to patting each others back for "great jobs" and "knowledge". Another thing to sweep under the rug?

  17. #117
    Banned
    Join Date
    Sep 2006
    Posts
    278

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Jedburgh View Post
    Future posts consisting solely of emotional rants of this nature will be deleted.
    Who ever said that you don't have sense of humor was wrong. You are funny !


  18. #118
    Banned
    Join Date
    Sep 2006
    Posts
    278

    Default

    Abu Ghraib torture and prisoner abuse
    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Abu_Ghraib_prisoner_abuse

    Iraqis furious at 'lenient' Abu Ghraib abuse sentence

    Iraqis have reacted furiously to the three-year jail sentence imposed on Lynndie England, the US soldier pictured holding a naked Iraqi inmate on a leash at Abu Ghraib prison, provoking outrage across the world.

    England, 22, was convicted on six counts of abuse while working as a prison guard, but was acquitted of a charge of conspiracy.

    Last night she was jailed and dishonourably discharged from the US Army, but ordinary Iraqis said that it was not enough. They said the sentence exposed American hypocrisy, as it would have been more harsh had she been convicted of abusing Americans....
    http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/new...icle572264.ece

    Reprimand Is Sentence For Officer at Abu Ghraib

    Army Lt. Col. Steven L. Jordan, the only officer to face trial over the Abu Ghraib detainee-abuse scandal, was issued a reprimand yesterday by a military jury, a punishment that spares him all prison time after he was convicted this week on one count of disobeying an order....
    http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn...082900391.html

    Abu Ghraib sentence: 90 days of hard labor

    Letting a dog get within inches of an Abu Ghraib prisoner's face means 90 days of hard labor and a reduction in rank for an Army dog handler.

    What is hard labor? When a 2004 article in Army Lawyer examines the punishment, it first looks at what it's not. Unlike the Bobby Fuller Four song says, it's usually not breaking rocks in the hot sun. But the article makes the case that such work is permissable.

    The best definition of the punishment comes midway through the report, quoting Army materials: "Hard labor without confinement is performed in addition to other regular duties and does not excuse or relieve a person from performing regular duties. Ordinarily, the immediate commander of the accused will designate the amount and character of the labor to be performed. Upon completion of the daily assignment, the accused should be permitted to take leave or liberty to which entitled."
    http://blogs.usatoday.com/ondeadline...raib_sent.html

    Abu Ghraib officer acquitted of failing to control soldiers

    The only US Army officer to be tried over the Abu Ghraib scandal was today acquitted of failing to control soldiers who abused inmates at the infamous Baghdad jail.

    But Lieutenant Colonel Steven Jordan still faces up to five years in prison after being found guilty of guilty of disobeying a general's order not to discuss the investigation into the abuses....
    http://www.guardian.co.uk/Iraq/Story/0,,2157741,00.html

    Second prison sentence in Abu Ghraib trials

    A U.S. military court in Baghdad sentenced an American soldier to eight months in prison after he pleaded guilty to abusing inmates at the notorious Abu Ghraib prison in Iraq.

    Specialist Armin J. Cruz is the first military intelligence soldier to stand trial. The spotlight in the prisoner abuse scandal so far has been on prison guard reservists....
    http://www.cbc.ca/world/story/2004/0...ruz040911.html


    8 years for Abu Ghraib soldier

    The highest-ranking U.S. soldier charged in the Abu Ghraib prison abuse scandal in Iraq has been sentenced to eight years in prison.

    Staff Sgt. Ivan "Chip" Frederick, a U.S. Army reservist from Virginia, also was sentenced Thursday to a forfeiture of pay, a dishonorable discharge and a reduction in rank to private.

    Frederick pleaded guilty Wednesday to five charges of abusing Iraqi detainees. Under a plea agreement, he admitted to conspiracy, dereliction of duty, maltreatment of detainees, assault, and committing an indecent act....
    http://www.cnn.com/2004/WORLD/meast/10/21/iraq.abuse/

    Abu Ghraib soldiers plead guilty

    Two of those charged in the Abu Ghraib prison scandal in Iraq entered guilty pleas as part of plea agreements that were accepted Tuesday by a military judge at Fort Hood, Texas, an Army spokesman said.

    Sgt. Javal Davis pleaded guilty to three charges while Spc. Roman Krol pleaded guilty to two charges stemming from an October 25, 2003, incident, said Army spokesman Tom Whitmire.

    Krol was immediately sentenced to 10 months in military prison; the sentencing process for Davis will begin Wednesday....
    http://www.cnn.com/2005/LAW/02/01/ab...eal/index.html

    Abu Ghraib Dog Handler Gets 6 Months

    An Army dog handler was sentenced Wednesday to six months behind bars for using his snarling canine to torment prisoners at Abu Ghraib.

    The military jury handed down the sentence a day after convicting Sgt. Michael J. Smith, 24. He could have gotten 8 ˝ years in prison....
    http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2006/...n1430842.shtml

    Abu Ghraib Sentence: Six Months

    An Army reservist who appeared in several of the most infamous abuse photos taken by guards at Abu Ghraib prison was sentenced Tuesday to six months in prison for her role in the scandal that rocked the U.S. military's image at home and abroad.

    The sentence for Spc. Sabrina Harman came a day after she was convicted on six of the seven counts she faced for mistreating detainees at the Baghdad lockup in late 2003. She faced a maximum of five years in prison, though prosecutors asked the jury to give her three years.

    With credit for time served, Harman's actual sentence will be just more than four months.
    ...
    Whoa!? Such a harsh punishments for the murder, torture and abuse of jailed human beings... For those who are defending all this, can you tell me what is punishment for SAME crimes by U.S. criminal and/or military law? When victims are americans, of course. And. isn't true that they will serve only 1/3 of sentence?
    Last edited by Jedburgh; 12-01-2007 at 09:01 PM. Reason: Edited for content.

  19. #119
    Council Member
    Join Date
    Oct 2005
    Posts
    3,099

    Default

    I had to edit your post; I only refrained from deleting it because you did include links to articles on specific sentencing information. However, consider this your second warning on posting inflammatory commentary and accusations without substance.
    Quote Originally Posted by Sarajevo071
    Whoa!? Such a harsh punishments for the murder, torture and abuse of jailed human beings... For those who are defending all this, can you tell me what is punishment for SAME crimes by U.S. criminal and/or military law? When victims are americans, of course. And. isn't true that they will serve only 1/3 of sentence?
    None of the sentences you linked to were given for a charge of murder.

    Your accusation that different punishments would be handed out if the prisoners would have been American is pure conjecture on your part, and completely unfounded.

    That different punishments are handed out for similar offenses by officers and enlisted is a different story, and has been discussed elsewhere on this board.

    I am not going to lay out UCMJ and US Criminal law for you. Look it up yourself. You are obviously able to search the internet. Thus far it appears you only look for things that support your personal biases and judgments.

    I am tired of your rants. Make a point, make it brief and back it up with substance. Or refrain from posting. The other option is to push it to a point where your posting priviledges are taken away. Your choice.

  20. #120
    Small Wars Journal SWJED's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2005
    Location
    Largo, Florida
    Posts
    3,989

    Default Sarajevo071

    In all fairness, we have tolerated politically driven posts by you that in the past we have not tolerated from many of our U.S. and coalition partner as well as non-Muslim Council members. That said, and we have been through this before, you have a one-month "time-out". Use that time for reflection on how to best contribute to a true dialogue on this site. Thanks, Dave.
    Last edited by SWJED; 12-02-2007 at 04:50 PM.

Similar Threads

  1. Venezuela (2006-2018)
    By Stratiotes in forum Americas
    Replies: 91
    Last Post: 01-03-2019, 07:47 PM
  2. Interrogation in Afghanistan
    By dritalin in forum RFIs & Members' Projects
    Replies: 39
    Last Post: 02-10-2010, 03:42 PM
  3. Screening for Interrogation
    By William F. Owen in forum Intelligence
    Replies: 4
    Last Post: 08-31-2009, 11:12 AM
  4. Don't Send a Lion to Catch a Mouse
    By SWJED in forum Futurists & Theorists
    Replies: 23
    Last Post: 03-15-2007, 11:46 AM

Tags for this Thread

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •