Will Torture prevail? (by BigBadJohnny)
Christians, Jews, Muslims, nearly all the worlds major religions, now, and throughout history, have common elements. One such element is a belief in the power of prayer. I have said, and I truly believe, that "prayer changes things".
Because of the increasing brutality in Iraq, and Afghanistan, it seems proper to pray for our overseas troops, all who are "in harms way".
Search Underway for Missing U.S. Soldiers in Iraq
By Joshua Partlow and Jonathan Finer
Washington Post Foreign Service
Monday, June 19, 2006; 12:48 PM
BAGHDAD, June 19 -- More than 8,000 U.S. and Iraqi troops have been deployed to villages south of Baghdad in a massive search for two Army privates who have been missing since an attack Friday at a vehicle checkpoint, an American military spokesman said.
A statement posted to the Internet said the missing soldiers were abducted by an Islamic group. But Maj. Todd Breasseale, a Marine spokesman in Baghdad, said that the military has not been able to verify the authenticity of the statement.
Following is a repeat of my recent article regarding increasing brutality:
Early in the war with Iraq, Jessica Lynch was captured by the Iraqis. We were fearful that she would be killed, or humiliated, or mutilated. She wasn't. She was treated with respect. Some of our enemies placed themselves in jeopardy to protect her. She was rescued, and is safe and sound.
But the Americans aren't so moral.
We cut our teeth in Viet nam, with horrible deaths of that region's men and boys, women and children. It has been suggested over and over again that body parts were severed, that women and girls were raped. Our soldiers were coarsened.
Now, within the framework of the Iraqi conflict, suspected terrorists are tortured, not to divulge information, but merely for sport.
Now this:
From the Iraqi Sun:
" Nine dead in continuing violence in Iraq."
"... 22 Apr 2006 More --> Nine dead in continuing violence in Iraq ... bodies of seven Iraqi men who apparently had been kidnapped and tortured in captivity were found in three different ... "
Seven Iraqi men, taken in this ongoing civil war, have been tortured and killed. This must be frightening to our men and women in uniform. They have no way out, nowhere to run, no way home.
This suggests a hypothetical situation. Should the Iraqis commence a policy of torturing our forces to hasten our withdrawal, A policy of "Leave, or you may suffer", "A rag in the mouth to dampen your cries", how will we respond? In kind?
This could get ugly.
- BigBadJohnny's blog
- Login or register to post comments
- 413 reads
???
"This could get ugly."
I think we are already WAY past that point.
Also, Jessica Lynch's book claims she was raped. But even that begs the question, "Who is doing the torture?" See, she has no memory of it. The Iraqis have claimed they did not rape her, and got angry when it was even suggested. They said, "Who is saying this? In our culture, we protect women." Jessica and the Iraqi doctors both claim they sang songs to her and treated her very kindly. Furthermore, the doctors claim that in the state she was in, it would have killed her, and that she showed no signs of rape. So how is a girl with no memory of what happened claiming rape? Well, after she got back home, there was medical evidence discovered that suggested the rape. So, which one is believable? I don't know. Why I ask who is torturing her though is because she feels more used by the military for propaganda purposes than she ever felt by her captors.
And the more interesting part- most of the papers covering her condemnation of the Pentagon are NOT US-based media. Think about the implications of that and it boggles the mind. What else is being kept out of our attention?
But if you want to be like them, you'll have to emulate. -Ayria
Torture, propaganda and censorship
We have many reasons to be suspicious of the information being released by all sides of the present conflict. But we also have many reasons to think that this suspicion may be less warranted than at other points in our history.
We are rightly concerned about our keeping of political prisoners. But Abraham Lincoln did that - his suspension of the privilege of the writ of habeas corpus is one of the most famous cases in our history of national security vs. personal liberty.
We are rightly concerned about the manipulation of news. But we forget the degree to which all news was censored by American officials in earlier conflicts. For example, during WWII. Even individual soldier/sailor letters were subject to physical mutilation by military censors - to the point that letters did not get delivered, or were indecipherable if they made it home. I am sure that today's milbloggers have a far greater freedom of personal expression than was possible for the individual soldier in (say) 1944.
Moreover, if I remember correctly, both sides in WWII's European theatre listened to Swiss radio for the straight dope on what was happening.
But the Iraqi newspaperman's concern is very real, and very much to the point. There's a reason the Torah says "An eye for an eye". Read "ONLY an eye for an eye" - a famous early limitation on the principle of retaliation. Expanded in antiquity to include the Golden Rule - a reversal of the principle of retaliation that long antedates its most famous exponent, Jesus of Nazareth - and the New Testament command "If a man strikes you on the cheek, offer him the other cheek".
Because, without these rules, these codes, these mutually-agreed limitations, "retaliation" expands to fill all available territory. As it frequently did in antiquity - which is how the limitations came to be seen as necessary in the first place. As it does in our fiction - such as The Godfather and The Sopranos. As Americans have stood for since 9/11. And we have a global image problem. Gee. Duh.
To the cycle of escalating retaliation there is no logical end.
Except perhaps in radioactivity. Or pestilence.
I see that as true to a
I see that as true to a certain extent. I think there are more like three groups.
The first group never knew there were issues like this since the beginning of time. Actually, let me rephrase. There probably weren't issues such as this since the beginning of time. It was expected that if you were a soldier, you did not have much contact with home, and you certainly didn't speak to them about what is going on. Furthermore, torture was both more and less likely. I suspect that in, say, the Roman wars, if you were a lowly soldier, you were simply taken as a slave. It was in their best interest to keep you intact. And those higher up were tortured in extremely barbaric ways for information. It was known they would never accept slavery. I think this is the largest group. They simply never knew, and think that everything happening today is something unique. It's not.
The second group knew that there were times when information was kept from the public, but they either see it as different than it is now, or they have forgotten about those situations. They think the world has vastly changed since then and become much more civilized. In reality, we are probably less civilized. People then had a much higher level of communication, IMO. Now, people talk all day long, but they rarely communicate. And when they did communicate then, they knew what should be said and what should not.
The third group has not forgotten about previous incidents in history.
Me? I'm somewhere between the second and third groups. I know about them, but I'm not sure how to incorporate those incidents into the current landscape, or whether they even belong. Sure, history MUST be studied, and the same events keep repeating themselves. But what makes it interesting are the new, inventive ways that they combine to make fresh events out of things that have already happened. What happens this time when we cross the Rubicon? Does Pompey win? Is Pompey even in it this time, or did Hitler climb into a time machine and stumble into the great Roman history?
And about "The Sopranos". Even the lawless recognize the senselessness of escalating violence. Just this last season, Tony Soprano talked about how he didn't want to "go to the mattresses" because then, nobody is earning. In other words, he cannot enjoy his wealth and rest easy on top if nobody is paying him because they are all fighting. He put aside an attack that everyone agreed was deserved, because it would have been a bad move. Fascinating. A popular tv show quite possibly shows more wisdom than my own government.
But if you want to be like them, you'll have to emulate. -Ayria
bodies found
Someone recently asked me, "How can we believe anything we read in the media?" It occurred to me, that's a good question. Good, and basic.
My response was something to the effect of, "If we can't believe the media, or at least devise some interpretation of what we read, what shall we write about... the garbage, in the alley?"
In recent years, I think we have been lucky. the media has been fair and accurate. With some of the corruption in government being uncovered, and with elections coming, the prevailing trends make actually improve.
Here, in Chicago, a major TV station, and a major newspaper are changing hands. Maybe I'm just being optimistic.
So, I'm sure you,vie read the news, but here is a brief summery:
This from Reuters:
Two US soldiers in Iraq found dead
Tue Jun 20, 2006 9:12am ET
BAGHDAD (Reuters) - Two U.S. soldiers who went missing after an attack on their checkpoint have been found dead and were tortured before being killed, an Iraqi defense official said on Tuesday.
U.S. military spokesman in Baghdad Major General William Caldwell refused to confirm or deny the report, saying the military would not make any announcement before next of kin were informed.
Iraqi Defense Ministry official Major General Abdul Aziz Mohammed told Reuters the bodies of Privates Thomas Lowell Tucker, 25, and Kristian Menchaca, 23, were found by a joint U.S.-Iraqi force on Monday near an electricity plant in Yusufiya, the area in which they were abducted on Friday.
He said the bodies showed signs of "barbaric torture".
Intricate Girl suggests...
Intricate Girl suggests torture during times of war, and hatred amoung cultures may be basic to our human race.
It's been a while since I've said anything good about religion, organized or otherwise, but in fact, religion is an effort to set some rules, at the level of "There's a God above".
Maybe if great philosophers had just suggested some standards, these guidlines might have been accepted. But, if theres an enforcer, with reward capacity, so much the better.
Consider this, the early philosophers may have been "inspired" (by God, that is)
to handle matters in that fashion.
In any case, a set of rules brings civilization to all of us. When a once great nation, America, tramples on the rules, when religions kill over depictions of Mohammed, then, what shall we do?
It's late in the day. I do go on.
BBJ
Not exactly.
I am going to be very vague here intentionally, because this could turn into a 500 page essay on torture, human nature, and the effects of religion on society.
"Intricate Girl suggests torture during times of war, and hatred amoung cultures may be basic to our human race."
Not my position at all. I believe that oppression is basic to our human race, and it most often is involved in a cycle of hatred of other cultures. But I believe that it has little to do with torture of these same people. I can point to a half dozen examples without even thinking, of people who engaged in various forms of torture, but did not do so out of hate. I believe this to be relatively recent.
"religion is an effort to set some rules"
True. That's what religion is all about. If that helps someone, good for them. I think by and large, religion is both necessary for a society, and also often its undoing. Many wars have been fought in the name of religion, and cartoons depicting Mohammed are simply the newest incarnation. It's the same war that has been fought since the beginning of time. It's the war of "You aren't following the same God as I am."
"In any case, a set of rules brings civilization to all of us."
Almost true. A shared set of rules brings civilization, but in this world where we commonly interact with people from other countries, nothing short of a world government with agreed upon rules will suffice. And sadly, the world isn't even close to being ready for that. Because even when the US agrees upon its rules, which we don't, we still have to interact with others who do not share the same rules and laws.
But if you want to be like them, you'll have to emulate. -Ayria
One world gov't
As to world government, or a the Senior george bush suggested, "new World Order", it is something that, barring the unforeseen, will eventually come about. Remember, "manifest destiny".
But it won't happen overnight. it may occur, naturally, with a little help from good men.
Bush, and his Halliburton cronies (Halliburton has been linked to the bush family for THREE GENERATIONS; VP Cheney is a past executive officer of Halliburton)are not "good men".
They are profiteers, whose social programs are necessary to present a facade, to keep them in office.
BBJ
If you doubt my voracity, I can give you links to substantiate all this.