Navy Pride
DP Veteran
- Joined
- Jul 11, 2005
- Messages
- 39,883
- Reaction score
- 3,070
- Location
- Pacific NW
- Gender
- Male
- Political Leaning
- Very Conservative
Not that I agree completely with what NP said, I agree even less with you. Regardless of what we do, our captured servicemembers will be tortured and killed.
Sorry, but to this I say "Grow up and face reality".
Kindly name for me a single Allied soldier that is being held by the Taliban or al-Qaeda that has been given a single visit by the Red Crescent. Give me a report of a single Allied who was held POW who has not either dissapeared into a black hole with occasional videos surfacing with visible evidence of violence, or turned up as a mutilated corpse.
This stupid claim that "this will cause our men and women to be tortured" is just absolute nonsense. Because it has been going on for decades.
Col. Higgins, member of the UN Peacekeeping mission, was captured, held prisoner for over a year and constantly tortured, then his execution video taped and released to the media. And this kind of behavior has been going on for decades.
Tell me, what could they be doing that is worse? Can you name a single Prisoner that our enemies have held that has been visited by International Authorities? Has a single one of them been released? Have their bodies ever been turned over in appropriate ways (through neutral intermediaries), instead of being thrown into garbage dumps decapitated?
Grow up and face reality. They could not be doing much worse then they already are. I know guys who served in the grunts downrange. Generally it is a repeat of WWII in the Pacific, where they get promises from their buddies that they will be shot by their own comrades rather then be taken alive by that scum.
Moderator's Warning: |
So, they read about it too. Gotcha.
Here's what you miss, as the military has made the same argument he does. In the future we may fight a different enemy, one that had used proper restraint in the past. Now they don't have to as we have said such rule of law doesn't matter.
War for the Pathans [Pashtuns] was an honourable, exciting and manly exercise, in which each succeeding generation needed to prove itself, but war was also ruthless; no mercy was shown and none was expected. Neither side aimed to take prisoners. The Pathans customarily mutilated and then beheaded any wounded or dead who fell into their hands. Women often carried out these operations. A well-known torture was called the Thousand Cuts, whereby flesh woulds were newly made and grass and thorns pushed into them so that they would hurt horribly. A prisoner might be pegged out on the ground and his jaw forcibly opened with a stick so that he could not swallow, then women would urinate in his mouth until he drowned. Frank Baines, who served on the North-West Frontier and later with Masters in Burma, put it more crudely:* ‘If you got captured, you were not only killed in a lively and imaginative manner, you were carved up and quartered and had your **** cut off and stuffed in your mouth for good measure.’
Actually, the military makes the exact opposite case. They insist that everybody who goes downrange carefully follows each and every aspect of the Geneva and Hague conventions, and that we do not do a single thing wrong, or face Court Martial.
And one thing I tell everybody not to do is to read into what I am saying. I say things exactly as I see them, no hiding things between the lines. In no way am I saying that we should not follow all the Laws of Land Warfare. It is just that if a few of them are bent a bit, you will find no tears coming from me. And trust me when I say that soldiers fighting are going to generally follow the same behavior, reguardless of who their enemy is. However, during the conflict they will start to change their behavior to match what they are facing.
For an example, look at WWII. In the Pacific, the Japanese were known for almost never taking prisoners. They might take them when a unit surrendered, but did not take them as individuals. In the instances where they did they were pretty universally tortured for whatever could be extracted, then executed. And during and after battles, it was not unusual for the Marines to find mutilated bodies of their comrades inside of Japanese positions. So is it any wonder that they often formed suicide pacts, and would save one bullet for themselves in case they might end up captured?
Then compare this to those ifghting in Germany and Italy. Yes, there were some atrocities, but these were exceptions, not the rule. All side in that Theatre were generally very careful to follow all of the rules regarding POWs. And such "suicide pacts" were almost unheard of.
Then less then a decade later many of these sames Soldiers and Marines that fought in the Pacific and Europe were fighting in Korea. Here the enemy generally followed the rules, and such attrocities did not happen.
I am not talking about propaganda here, but historical facts. Yet the Taliban and the groups that make it up are pretty much acting the same way that they did against the Soviets before, and the British, and every other invader. If you look around there are plenty of graphic videos of Soviet soldiers being executed and beheaded in Afghanistan.
And if you question this, I welcome anybody to read up on John Masters, a British Army Officer who wrote extensively of the region, including the 3 Anglo-Afghan Wars. There is a great biography of him, written by author John Clay.
Amazon.com: John Masters: A Regimented Life (9780718129453): John Clay: Books
So no, the Taliban are simply following their culture on the treatment of prisoners, and nothing we or anybody else do will ever change that. And no amount of nonsense propaganda will change that. Now if they treated prisoners well then only changed after things were done to them, I might think there is something there. But as I said, we have held hundreds of prisoners, and released hundreds of them. We give access to International Authorities, including the Red Crescent to those we hold. Do they do the same?
So if some are made to wear panties on their head, I will not shed any tears, nor call it a "war crime". And when people can't tell the difference between these actions and real war crimes, I have to wonder at their humanity.
I also apologize for the graphicness of the quote above, I did not write it, that is directly out of the book.
You may have misunderstood what I said the military argues. I said they argue to follow the rules.
And while it's depraved and sad that anyone would put panties on someone's head, that isn't what we're talking about. We're talking about waterboarding, which has always been called torture and illegal. And other more harsh treatment which did take a at least a couple of lives. So, trying to pretend that there is only something that is mildly degrading is disingenueous.
And if somebody might have key intelligence upon which acting on it in a timely manner might save lives, I say stick them in the water.
As I said, I do not care much if the rules are bent a bit on occasion, when the opposition we are fighting has no compulsion to follow the rules whatsoever. If we were fighting the Iranian Army (which believe it or not generally were very careful to follow the rules), then I would agree that such behavior is not appropriate. But against the Taliban and their ilk, I have very little sympathy, consideration, or even care. And they only themselves to blame in this.
May, might, if, words that all too often mean, don't know and infringe on the rights of the innocent. Odds of having such a person are nearly nonexistent. And what we do here will effect what happens when and if we do battle with any nation's army. It's not that we can follow the rules with one and not the other. Actions have consequences.
Not that I agree completely with what NP said, I agree even less with you. Regardless of what we do, our captured servicemembers will be tortured and killed.
What DD fails to understand is our enemies don't play by the same rules we do.....I don't understand why he just does not get it when they show terrorists cutting off our soldiers heads.........
Can you prove that? No, you can't. Sorry, but I debate based upon facts and past events, not conjecture. And that is all you have.
Imagine we got into a war with the Soviets next year. Do you believe they will generally follow the rules? I do, because they are professionals and know how the game is played. Will they worry about us following the rules? Not really, because they know that we also are professionals and follow the rules.
However, in this case we are not fighting a professional force. Not only that, but a force that actually accepts such behaviors as what they do as "routine". So do you really think they believe waterboarding to be "torture"? If anything else, it is probably more effective because they can't understand why on earth we would even bother to keep them prisoner in the first place, since they would not do so if the tables are turned.
I have provided sources, can you do the same for your claims?
More than that. But, you have offer nothing that matches even reading about it.
Other than going through it, personally knowing the people that teach it, and personally knowing people that have been POWs? Guess ya got me :roll:
Yeah, I do. If you're correct, than you should be able to present something verifable. If you can't, the odds are great that you merely think you know.
Well, I'm not going to post a transcript of the last 23 years of my life so, you go on thinking you know better.
Well, I'm not going to post a transcript of the last 23 years of my life so, you go on thinking you know better.
Funny how those who can prove no evidence alway think they know more than those who do. At the end of the day, I'm the one who produced evidence.
I don't really care if I can prove it. I've lived it. And I disagree that it is "torture" as a result of my personal exp. I also disagree that it should be continued to be used, you should be happy with that.
All you've produced is a regurgitation of someone else's opinion. Subjective X2.
And you can get away with that sitting in your living room. But you spoke up here. Outside of your own mind, others need actual evidence. And no, my source is far less subjective than you, with far more to base their opinion on. You just don't want to see it.
I can get away with "sitting in my living room" because I served my country for 23 years in uniform, and continue to do so out of uniform. Phux your source.
It's torture because the Left said so.I think you should give it a try on yourself and tell us if it feel's like torture. What better way to know than experience?
Doesn't change anything.
Sure it does.
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?