Americans turned a blind eye to hundreds of reports of abuse, torture and murder by Iraqi police and soldiers, according to reports in nearly 392,000 documents related to the Iraq war and released Friday by WikiLeaks.
The documents say the detainees were whipped, punched, kicked or subjected to electric shocks. Six reports end with a detainee's apparent death.
In one case, Americans suspected Iraqi army officers of cutting off a detainee's fingers and burning him with acid, the New York Times reported. Two other cases produced accounts of the executions of bound detainees.
Several media organizations, including the Times, Le Monde, Der Spiegel and The Guardian, were granted early access to the files.
The Times said the reports indicate that while some abuse cases were investigated by the Americans, most were ignored. The reports released by WikiLeaks and dubbed "The Iraq War Logs," cover the period from Jan. 1, 2004, to Dec. 31, 2009. WikiLeaks said the files detail more than 109,000 deaths in Iraq, including 66,081 civilians. The reports also document the deaths of almost 24,000 people labelled as insurgents, more than 15,000 Iraqi government troops and almost 3,800 coalition forces.
U.S. Secretary of States Hillary Clinton slammed the release of the files.
"We should condemn in the most clear terms the disclosure of any classified information by individuals and organizations which puts the lives of United States and partner service members and civilians at risk," she said in Washington, D.C.
The Times said the reports indicate that while some abuse cases were investigated by the Americans, most were ignored.
Given than we didn't have authority over Iraq for much of the documented period, what exactly does this paper think we should have done? If this mistreatment took place in a prison that was run by Iraqis in a province under Iraqi control, how should the US have prevented it from taking place?
Also, I really don't understand what you think the bolded is proving. "In one case, Americans suspected Iraqi army officers of cutting off a detainee's fingers and burning him with acid." So? We suspected that some Iraqi did something bad. We could not prove it, nor did we have authority over him. Not sure how this is alarming.
The problem is that your goverment have spend hundreds of billions of dollars on the Iraq war. A war that also have cost over hundred thousand people their lifes. Their one of main selling point was helping the Iraq people and giving them democracy. The torture crimes of Saddams regim was often spoke about as a reason for the war. Then you could atleast expect that USA had some plan to handle the risk of torture still being a continued practice after the fall after the regime. That of course it can be hard to stop it all, considering the circumstances. But USA could still have done alot more to prevent torture amongst the Iraqies their trained and entrusted the roll as police and security forces. That it's very important to consider that it was USA that had the power of the country during most of this time. Also torture and brutality amongst the Iraqie security forces was a very god method for increasing the strength of insurgents and decreasing the support for the Iraqie goverment. That torture crimes should not only be a puff piece to use to start a war you want and then to be ignored.
The problem is that your goverment have spend hundreds of billions of dollars on the Iraq war. A war that also have cost over hundred thousand people their lifes. Their one of main selling point was helping the Iraq people and giving them democracy. The torture crimes of Saddams regim was often spoke about as a reason for the war. Then you could atleast expect that USA had some plan to handle the risk of torture still being a continued practice after the fall after the regime. That of course it can be hard to stop it all, considering the circumstances. But USA could still have done alot more to prevent torture amongst the Iraqies their trained and entrusted the roll as police and security forces. That it's very important to consider that it was USA that had the power of the country during most of this time. Also torture and brutality amongst the Iraqie security forces was a very god method for increasing the strength of insurgents and decreasing the support for the Iraqie goverment. That torture crimes should not only be a puff piece to use to start a war you want and then to be ignored.
Do you have a measure of the scope of torture and abuse now that can be compared to the period under saddam?
How many Germans were killed During WW2, by Allied Forces? I bet Germany is glad as hell that we removed Hitler and the Nazis. Wouldn't you agree?
How many Germans were killed During WW2, by Allied Forces? I bet Germany is glad as hell that we removed Hitler and the Nazis. Wouldn't you agree?
Well if this article isn't a biased piece of crap. Seriously we "ignored" it? what exactly are we supposed to do here?
Stop it maybe? That was after all one of the many many supposed reasons to go there in the first place.. to put an end to the torture regime of Saddam Hussien....
How exactly?
You tell me, it was your lot that wanted to stop it in the first place, so you must have had a plan on how to do so before you went in and ripped a country apart.
Oh I forgot you pine for the days of saddam hussein, and want to complain but not offer any answers. my bad.
Ahh cant answer the question so you instead attack me... grow up and answer the bloody question. Face it, you took out one mass torture leader to only replace it with another and now you dont have the guts to admit that you failed on one of many excuses to remove the initial mass torture leader.
Dood I asked you a question. Where is your answer again?
As I said.. you tell me. You must after all have some idea (as I pointed out) on how to stop such torture since that was one of the reasons that you lot went into Iraq in the first place. Hence.. you tell me, since you and people like you are supposedly the expert on such things...
So in otherwords, all you have is whining. :shrug:
In other words you have no answer to the question yourself, and admit your dear President Bush and his cronies yet again ****ed regarding Iraq.
Let me ask you this.. what would you rather have.. Saddam (or type) in place and a weak Iran or what you have now and a strong Iran?
Nah, What I would do, you would soil yourself. Then again, I think wars should be fought to be won.
I'd rather the weenies in europe stand up to folks like iran, you know since they are the ones in striking distance of thier missiles.
Oh, so when are you going to win the war in Iraq? After all, you went in to stop the torture regime of Saddam Hussien only to have it replaced by another .. one backed by you. So when will you remove said government and replace it with a non torture one?
Considering they have not threatened us, then why should we "stand up" against folks like Iran? Also it is not like the US is doing anything on the "standing up".. you after all help them constantly with your own brain-dead policies in the Middle East. Thanks you, they are a bigger threat than ever.. CONGRATS!
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?