Did Rumsfeld ok the abuse?

[torifile]

I'm not sure where this will go in the new AO, but what the heck....


Recent allegations have that Rumsfeld not only knew about the abuse that was going on in Iraqi prisons, but that he okay'ed them, as well. The current story is that he agreed to use the same tactics employed in Afghanistan - where Bush denied being bound by the Geneva Convention, by the way - in Iraqi prisons.

The articles I've read have indicated that the CIA bowed out of doing these same types of intelligence gathering strategies because they disagreed with their use against "taxi drivers" etc. The allegations are that Rumsfeld approved of the sexual humiliation and physical abuse.

I wonder what people's opinions are and, if these allegations are true, what should happen to not only Rumsfeld, but others in the administration. This would go beyond just perjury but could also lead to war crimes charges - and they should. Will Bush say that he wasn't informed again?

edit: Link to story (http://www.nytimes.com/2004/05/16/international/middleeast/16CND-POLI.html?amp;ei=5062&en=94234f9fa4699b35&partner=GOOGLE&ex=1085371200&adxnnl=1&adxnnlx=1084763167-hMcq+zy8KIx14WKakgGOqA)

edit2: The New Yorker article (http://newyorker.com/fact/content/?040524fa_fact) in question.

[autodata]

probably.

[addabox]

In broad outline, it seems pretty clear at this point that there was a decision made (somewhere) to "Gitmo-ize" the Iraq interrogation process. I've always felt that there would be inevitable creep of the "beyond the law" tactics taken by the Bush admin post 9/11.

It seems unlikely that something as momentous as applying the extra-legal techniques of Guantanamo to the prison population of Iraq would happen without Rummy's tacit approval, if not design and implementation.

I've heard it rumored that the CIA is the source of the leaks, because they know what a feckless boob Bush is and they would rather get rid of him by some means other than assassination.

[HoTT RoDeR]

I'm not sure where this will go in the new AO, but what the heck....


Recent allegations have that Rumsfeld not only knew about the abuse that was going on in Iraqi prisons, but that he okay'ed them, as well. The current story is that he agreed to use the same tactics employed in Afghanistan - where Bush denied being bound by the Geneva Convention, by the way - in Iraqi prisons.

The articles I've read have indicated that the CIA bowed out of doing these same types of intelligence gathering strategies because they disagreed with their use against "taxi drivers" etc. The allegations are that Rumsfeld approved of the sexual humiliation and physical abuse.

I wonder what people's opinions are and, if these allegations are true, what should happen to not only Rumsfeld, but others in the administration. This would go beyond just perjury but could also lead to war crimes charges - and they should. Will Bush say that he wasn't informed again?

edit: Link to story (http://www.nytimes.com/2004/05/16/international/middleeast/16CND-POLI.html?amp;ei=5062&en=94234f9fa4699b35&partner=GOOGLE&ex=1085371200&adxnnl=1&adxnnlx=1084763167-hMcq+zy8KIx14WKakgGOqA)

edit2: The New Yorker article (http://newyorker.com/fact/content/?040524fa_fact) in question.
Again as I said in the other thread Link (http://forums.appleinsider.org/showthread.php?t=69) the liberals and democrats are doing everything in their power to get rid of Bush as they said they would after he won the election the way he did. It's mostly if not all BS propaganda to make the administration look bad. In every war we have had problems like this, just ask some vets and they might even tell you. It's human nature when your friend is killed to take you anger out on an innocent prisoner. Heck the same stuff happens in our own prisons here in the US. It's all being said to bring Bush down.

[autodata]

Yeah, that's exactly what it is.

[torifile]

Again as I said in the other thread Link (http://forums.appleinsider.org/showthread.php?t=69) the liberals and democrats are doing everything in their power to get rid of Bush as they said they would after he won the election the way he did. It's mostly if not all BS propaganda to make the administration look bad. In every war we have had problems like this, just ask some vets and they might even tell you. It's human nature when your friend is killed to take you anger out on an innocent prisoner. Heck the same stuff happens in our own prisons here in the US. It's all being said to bring Bush down.

Did you even bother to read the articles linked? I even only mentioned Bush in passing. Hopefully, after you're read at least the NYT article, you'll come back and post a real opinion.

But, basically, you're willing to chalk up the abuse to some random acts of angry soldiers? Despite the evidence to the contrary and the quite damn admissions of some quoted in that article. Maybe it's better if you don't read it then.

[HoTT RoDeR]

Did you even bother to read the articles linked? I even only mentioned Bush in passing. Hopefully, after you're read at least the NYT article, you'll come back and post a real opinion.

But, basically, you're willing to chalk up the abuse to some random acts of angry soldiers? Despite the evidence to the contrary and the quite damn admissions of some quoted in that article. Maybe it's better if you don't read it then.
My apologies torifile, I hadn't read much of the article but my opinion hasn't changed much because I have followed other similar articles. Nor do I rely much on anything the NYT prints. I think it's terrible that we are seeing pictures of these actions. Who would be their taking pictures of this in the first place. On a second note to what I said earlier, Rumsfeld is going about everything that he feels or felt is essentially in the best interest of the country. If they found out some info that led to a certain mission that could have or maybe did save a few American lives or hundreds or even thousands how would we all feel about this situation then.

As for me chalking this up to a few angry soldiers I merely didn't elaborate on the point I would have liked to get across. Angry soldiers or forms of interrogation have happened to some extent in every war in some way or another. With today's technology the horrors of the war are more visible to you and me than ever before. This in turn can also work for the good as we all know but this case is surely not for the good.

[alcimedes]

If they found out some info that led to a certain mission that could have or maybe did save a few American lives or hundreds or even thousands how would we all feel about this situation then.


i would hope that we'd all feel that torturing and humiliating prisoners against the Geneva Convention would be deplorable.

there's no way some soldiers thought this would be fun and a great gag. i'm sure they had orders, and it sounds like they came from higher up, although the court martials will probably be a better source of info than the NYT.

[FFL]

I've heard it rumored that the CIA is the source of the leaks, because they know what a feckless boob Bush is and they would rather get rid of him by some means other than assassination.That is both the saddest and funniest thing I've read in a while (because it's most likely true).

[BRussell]

the liberals and democrats are doing everything in their power to get rid of Bush as they said they would after he won the election the way he did. Got any quotes to show that liberals said they would do everything in their power to get rid of Bush? I mean, of course they oppose him when they disagree, that's what political opposition does. It's a good thing. Republicans certainly opposed Clinton. But "do everything in their power to get rid of Bush" sounds like you're suggesting something more than just the expected political opposition. Like maybe they faked these abuse pictures or something. :eek:

Anyway, I hate to brag (nah, actually I love to brag), but I posted this thread (http://forums.macnn.com/showthread.php?s=&threadid=212811) at MacNN before this Hersh article came out. I said there that I thought the evidence suggested it was possible that the chain went Rumsfeld/Bush -> Miller -> Intelligence people -> MPs.

[torifile]

My apologies torifile, I hadn't read much of the article but my opinion hasn't changed much because I have followed other similar articles.

This is new information. I read an article that says Macs crash all the time a little while ago. Is that true now?


Nor do I rely much on anything the NYT prints.


Then read the Hersh article I linked. It was in the New Yorker. Or is that not okay either? :rolleyes:


I think it's terrible that we are seeing pictures of these actions. Who would be their taking pictures of this in the first place.


Terrible that we're seeing them?!? Are you fucking kidding me? It's terrible that they took place at all. I'm glad we're seeing them... You'd rather not know, I guess.


On a second note to what I said earlier, Rumsfeld is going about everything that he feels or felt is essentially in the best interest of the country.


I didn't elect Rumsfeld. You didn't elect Rumsfeld. I don't trust his judgment and he doesn't speak for me or the best interest of the country. He's a man on a mission and doesn't really care what the people of this country want or need. All that aside, we're not in a dictatorship. It's not up to one man to decide what's best for the country.


If they found out some info that led to a certain mission that could have or maybe did save a few American lives or hundreds or even thousands how would we all feel about this situation then.


The exact same as I do now. Did you know that 70-90% of those detained in Iraq were mistakenly picked up? I'm of the opinion that I'd rather a criminal go free than have 10 people wrongly incarcerated. Luckily, many people agree with me.


As for me chalking this up to a few angry soldiers I merely didn't elaborate on the point I would have liked to get across. Angry soldiers or forms of interrogation have happened to some extent in every war in some way or another. With today's technology the horrors of the war are more visible to you and me than ever before. This in turn can also work for the good as we all know but this case is surely not for the good.

You, sir, are unbelievable. How old are you again? BTW, war now is more like a game than it ever has been. You'd rather have the wool pulled over your eyes and bend over and take it. Fine, bend over. I'm not.

[HoTT RoDeR]

This is new information. I read an article that says Macs crash all the time a little while ago. Is that true now?



Then read the Hersh article I linked. It was in the New Yorker. Or is that not okay either? :rolleyes:



Terrible that we're seeing them?!? Are you fucking kidding me? It's terrible that they took place at all. I'm glad we're seeing them... You'd rather not know, I guess.



I didn't elect Rumsfeld. You didn't elect Rumsfeld. I don't trust his judgment and he doesn't speak for me or the best interest of the country. He's a man on a mission and doesn't really care what the people of this country want or need. All that aside, we're not in a dictatorship. It's not up to one man to decide what's best for the country.



The exact same as I do now. Did you know that 70-90% of those detained in Iraq were mistakenly picked up? I'm of the opinion that I'd rather a criminal go free than have 10 people wrongly incarcerated. Luckily, many people agree with me.



You, sir, are unbelievable. How old are you again? BTW, war now is more like a game than it ever has been. You'd rather have the wool pulled over your eyes and bend over and take it. Fine, bend over. I'm not.
I think I have made a new friend.

[HoTT RoDeR]

i would hope that we'd all feel that torturing and humiliating prisoners against the Geneva Convention would be deplorable.

there's no way some soldiers thought this would be fun and a great gag. i'm sure they had orders, and it sounds like they came from higher up, although the court martials will probably be a better source of info than the NYT.
I totally agree and never meant to imply that I think harming or torturing the prisoners is OK. Although my point is a said fact that it does tend to happen but hopefully for a good reason at least. Yes, I would rather hear the facts then believe what the NYT print.

[HoTT RoDeR]

That is both the saddest and funniest thing I've read in a while (because it's most likely true).
Thats what I'm trying to say. I'm not saying I wish I never saw the pictures and that I'm not happy that we are seeing them. I'm saying we shouldn't have ever seen them because the reason we are seeing them is for the wrong reasons. (that being to harm Bush's administration)

[torifile]

I think I have made a new friend.

Is that all? You've got nothing to say about my post? I guess I win then ;)

[HoTT RoDeR]

Got any quotes to show that liberals said they would do everything in their power to get rid of Bush? I mean, of course they oppose him when they disagree, that's what political opposition does. It's a good thing. Republicans certainly opposed Clinton. But "do everything in their power to get rid of Bush" sounds like you're suggesting something more than just the expected political opposition. Like maybe they faked these abuse pictures or something. :eek:

Anyway, I hate to brag (nah, actually I love to brag), but I posted this thread (http://forums.macnn.com/showthread.php?s=&threadid=212811) at MacNN before this Hersh article came out. I said there that I thought the evidence suggested it was possible that the chain went Rumsfeld/Bush -> Miller -> Intelligence people -> MPs.
Yes your bragging! :D

It has been almost 4 years so no I don't have any links but it was not read on the internet in the first place. When all the BS about who won the election was going on and afterwards things were said. You don't need to hear or read someone say we are going to do everything in our power to get him out but you can get the idea from what they say and what they intend on doing. As I can say many things implying I'm going to kill someone without actually saying I'm going to kill someone. The point is you know what my intentions are. After Bush won the election by the courts votes there were more statements and comments made then probably any other time in history.