Beheading Video

[KrustyKidd]

AL JAZEERA

The video showed the five men shouting "God is greatest" as one of them cut off 26-year-old Berg's head, drowning his screams.

Watched it, more like 'sawed' off his head.

What is even more disturbing is that these guys would love, even more, to do this to your five or six year old son or daughter on camera.

[Black Dog]

What is even more disturbing is that these guys would love, even more, to do this to your five or six year old son or daughter on camera.

Of course the response wil be predictable. "This is war" they will cry. Bombs wil fall, atrocity will be met with atrocity, and, in the end "these guys" and their ilk will win by dragging us down into the cesspool of the worst human behavior with them (which, for some, as the Abu Gharabi photos show, is a short trip).

Interestingly enough, Berg was held by coalitioon authorities for a period prior to his capture. It seems he was released just in time to get murdered.

Pa. family angry with American government over son's brutal death

[KrustyKidd]

No Black Dog, I believe that contrary to what you predict, the result will be a strengthening of the resolve of the US to do this right and not take revenge. Like a spurned lover and the best revenge being happy the US will carry out it's mission using the humane principals that they have said they represent. To fall into the trap of counter atrocities is counter to all the crap they are gong through with this commission on POWs. I believe that this is an opportunity for them to rise above the world's impression of them and carry on like they have except with a new outlook. Like an insult in an argument, this atrocity means that Al Queda is getting desparate as they know they stand to fall into irrelevency if Iraq becomes free.

As so many have said, Iraq will gt worse the closer to freedom it gets..

[Black Dog]

No Black Dog, I believe that contrary to what you predict, the result will be a strengthening of the resolve of the US to do this right and not take revenge.

I wish I could agree with you, but I've been reading too much of littlegreenfootballs.com to actually think that cooler heads will prevail.

To fall into the trap of counter atrocities is counter to all the crap they are gong through with this commission on POWs.  believe that this is an opportunity for them to rise above the world's impression of them and carry on like they have except with a new outlook.

On the contray, I fear there will be elements of American society and its leadership who will use Berg's death to justify the crimes in Abu Gharabi and call for more of the same. I can't wait to see what Ann Coulter will say about this... :barf:

[KrustyKidd]

On the contray, I fear there will be elements of American society and its leadership who will use Berg's death to justify the crimes in Abu Gharabi and call for more of the same. I can't wait to see what Ann Coulter will say about this... :barf:

No way. Catch the news on the commission, nobody is wavering from getting to the bottom of the abuse there. Nobody is connecting the two as justification. Privately, I can see people seething, but officially, any abuse will be dealt wit severely.

[Black Dog]

No way. Catch the news on the commission, nobody is wavering from getting to the bottom of the abuse there. Nobody is connecting the two as justification. Privately, I can see people seething, but officially, any abuse will be dealt wit severely.

I'm not talking about pronouncements from officialdom, who will no doubt condemn Berg's murder as they condemned the abuse at Abu Gharabi (even as they seek to scapegoat individuals and cover the brass' asses at every turn). I'm talking about the very real policies on the ground, policies carried out by the business end of an M-16 or Abrams tank. We've heard bits and pieces about various atrocities committed by American and British troops. Expect things to get worse.

[August1991]

Of course the response wil be predictable. "This is war" they will cry. Bombs wil fall, atrocity will be met with atrocity, and, in the end "these guys" and their ilk will win by dragging us down into the cesspool of the worst human behavior

BlackDog, you make an error also common during the Cold War. It's an error common to Western Liberalism. You apply a moral equivalence. In an effort to understand the other guy, you assume both sides are equally bad, or good.

That's an error. The Soviets were not the same as the West. And the guys on this video are not the same as the American soldiers in Iraq.

There will be no commission of inquiry, no court marshalls of these characters. More important, American soldiers do not wear masks and in cold blood deliberately behead people, film themselves in the act while declaring God's justice and making threats about more to come and then distribute the film for all to see.

[The video is quite something, but I suppose the Vietnam War generated the same. I genuinely believe this technology makes war less likely in the future. WWI might have been shorter if video cameras had been aropund. But maybe I'm an idealist.]

[Black Dog]

In an effort to understand the other guy, you assume both sides are equally bad, or good.

No, I basically assum etaht humans (especially humans exposed to the threats and violence and general inhumanity inherent in armed conflict) are universally capable of incredibly heinous acts against their fellow man. When you couple that tendancy with a sense of self-righteousness (which both sides have in spades), you have a recipe for tragedy.

There will be no commission of inquiry, no court marshalls of these characters. More important, American soldiers do not wear masks and in cold blood deliberately behead people, film themselves in the act while declaring God's justice and making threats about more to come and then distribute the film for all to see.

Tell me, did the threat of court marshal deter the jaolers at Abu Gharabi? Did the possibility of facing a commission of inquiry give them pause as they savaged prisioners with attack dogs and beat others nearly to death? No. Either they were following orders, or believed (as Berg's murders do) that the justness of their cause forgives any of their crimes (victor's justice).

Bottom line: there will be more crimes. To deny this is to deny the simple reality of war.

[KrustyKidd]

Tell me, did the threat of court marshal deter the jaolers at Abu Gharabi? Did the possibility of facing a commission of inquiry give them pause as they savaged prisioners with attack dogs and beat others nearly to death? No. Either they were following orders, or believed (as Berg's murders do) that the justness of their cause forgives any of their crimes (victor's justice).

Those in the prison never thought that what they were doing was wrong Black Dog. That is what all the forus is on with the hearings and all, to find out why they thought this was right. 'Threat of Courtmarshall' never entered their mind so there was no pause to take.

Were they following orders? Did they just take the acts as normalicy in war? Let's wait to see what the commision finds out before you presume to know everything, otherwise all arguments using this as a basis to theorise about US military mindset are crap.

[Black Dog]

Those in the prison never thought that what they were doing was wrong Black Dog. That is what all the forus is on with the hearings and all, to find out why they thought this was right. 'Threat of Courtmarshall' never entered their mind so there was no pause to take.

Were they following orders? Did they just take the acts as normalicy in war? Let's wait to see what the commision finds out before you presume to know everything, otherwise all arguments using this as a basis to theorise about US military mindset are crap.

There's no harm in looking at the past for clues as to how things will probably shake down. I have little faith that the hearings will expose any of the institutional elements that led to the torture and other acts in the prison. I expect some of the prominent players (particularily the GIs photographed) will be hung out to dry.

Consider the example of the My Lai massacre: 500 civilians slaughtered by 150 U.S. troops. After an extensive coverup, 25 soldiers were eventually charged, six tried and only one convicted.

Military justice is seldom about actual justice (particularily when it comes to correcting institutial flaws) and more about creating the perception that justice has been served. That goes for any military (as the Canadian coverup of the Somalia debacle shows).

[KrustyKidd]

at the past for clues as to how things will probably shake down. I have little faith that the hearings will expose any of the institutional elements that led to the torture and other acts in the prison. I expect some of the prominent players (particularily the GIs photographed) will be hung out to dry.

Watch out BD, you are actually starting to make sense here. I know when the Somalia affair came down that that is what happened there.

Military justice is seldom about actual justice (particularily when it comes to correcting institutial flaws) and more about creating the perception that justice has been served. That goes for any military (as the Canadian coverup of the Somalia debacle shows).

OMG! What is going on here? Another one!

In this case particularily this is being done as thes realizes that not only must it be beyond reproach, but make ever effort to appear to be beyond reproach. This is why they will get to the bottom and top of this and find out why this happened. Given the stakes, I don't think the usual Mai LAi and Somalia will take place. Too much to lose.

This here is yet another illustration of why I think the US is changing their ways in the world. The old ones no longer work.

Now, what do I think really happened? Simple. Senior Officers get given orders to keep prisoners on their toes and not to harm them.

Junior Officers get orders to do what it takes to ensure same and then are told to cooperate with interigators who want them stressed out as much as possible.

Senior NCOs get order to stress out prisoners and keep them that way, Junior Officers leave running of day to day activity to NCOs and write reports while NCOs experienced in prison work take their experience and knowlege for granted and don't supervise the juniors properly figuring they know what to do as it is common knowlege.

Over the period of months, this form of activity becomes more normal and accepted. 'Desensitizing' might be a good word here. The whole thing becomes normal to eveybody and guards forget that prisoners are actually human and also forget that they are only grocery store clerks on a NG callout rather than somebody from 'Cool Hand Luke' The juniors who are inexperienced in interogation and being prison guards take the 'stress out' part as a means to control and without proper supervision decide to make it as entertaining as possible.

Occasionally, a prisoner pisses one of them off and get's special treatment. All the while, the whole operation is unknown to everyone, degenerating into a desensitized normallicy. They even take pictures of each other to send home.

I think better supervision as clearly this was missing, rotation of personel as bordom and fimiliarity always breeds contempt and a clearer SOP would be in order to fix the main problems there. A review of the POW treatment standards and how to ensure that the line between day to day activity in a POW holding area and the activities of interrogators does not become so intermeshed.

I don't think this problem goes up the chain of command any further than the Divisional Commander. That said, it has become apparent that it is a common problem with more than one division and now that it is identified, it becomes a problem that has to be addressed by the Corps Commander with the Chief of Staff supervising the rectification of the matter.

As for it being the mind set of Amereica, I doubt there is a manual on how to have bare assed Arabs form a pyramid or the proper proceedure for getting a hooded naked guy on a box. This is from a military that has manuals on how to polish a button for crying out loud. It is desensitizing, improper supervision and dulling of sense of duty. Nothing more.

[Black Dog]

Now, what do I think really happened? Simple. Senior Officers get given orders to keep prisoners on their toes and not to harm them.

Junior Officers get orders to do what it takes to ensure same and then are told to cooperate with interigators who want them stressed out as much as possible.

Senior NCOs get order to stress out prisoners and keep them that way, Junior Officers leave running of day to day activity to NCOs and write reports while NCOs experienced in prison work take their experience and knowlege for granted and don't supervise the juniors properly figuring they know what to do as it is common knowlege.

Over the period of months, this form of activity becomes more normal and accepted. 'Desensitizing' might be a good word here. The whole thing becomes normal to eveybody and guards forget that prisoners are actually human and also forget that they are only grocery store clerks on a NG callout rather than somebody from 'Cool Hand Luke' The juniors who are inexperienced in interogation and being prison guards take the 'stress out' part as a means to control and without proper supervision decide to make it as entertaining as possible.

(etc.)

You're missing a vital part of the equation, and that is who is behind the orders to "soften up" prisoners in the first place.

Mr. Myers (the lawyer representing one of the 6 soldiers facing charges) said the accused men, all from an Army Reserve military police unit, had been told to soften up the prisoners by more senior American interrogators, some of whom they believe were intelligence officials and outside contractors.

"This case involves a monumental failure of leadership, where lower-level enlisted people are being scapegoated," Mr. Myers said. "The real story is not in these six young enlisted people. The real story is the manner in which the intelligence community forced them into this position."

So, we have a situation where senior intelligence officials (CIA, FBI, NSC and god knows who else) as well as private contractors (accountable to who?) are issuing orders to enilsted personnel. Now, it's possible some of the activities were not authorized by the interrogators in charge, but, then again, maybe they were.

Where things get extra dicey is when you see that there is a consistent pattern between the goings-on at Abu Gharabi (which were well-known to everyday Iraqis and the Red Cross) and similar reports of alleged torture at Guantanamo, in Afghanistan, and elsewhere.(Link)

I've gotta jet, but will expand on this later.

[August1991]

I basically assume taht humans (especially humans exposed to the threats and violence and general inhumanity inherent in armed conflict) are universally capable of incredibly heinous acts against their fellow man.

It's very hard to argue with that. My question is rather can we say the West is "right" in what it is doing? As evidence, are our practices more civilized?

Tell me, did the threat of court marshal deter the jaolers at Abu Gharabi? Did the possibility of facing a commission of inquiry give them pause as they savaged prisioners with attack dogs and beat others nearly to death? No.

IMV, there is no comparison between what happened to the Iraqi prisoners and what happened to this poor American civilian.

I heard a report on Radio-Canada today by a French journalist who made the comment that, given Arab culture, a naked man before a woman was worse than a beheading.

You no doubt have seen the quote of one Iraqi prisoner, "They wanted us to feel as though we were women, the way women feel, and this is the worst insult, to feel like a woman."

Ultimately, I disagree with an argument that goes in this direction. I feel that the ultimate insult, even among Arabs, is a beheading.

Consider the example of the My Lai massacre: 500 civilians slaughtered by 150 U.S. troops. After an extensive coverup, 25 soldiers were eventually charged, six tried and only one convicted.

The My Lai massacre is closer to what happened but that was almost 40 years ago. And Vietnam was not Iraq.

---

The Mark Steyn argument would be that these IslamoFascists are simply psychopathic nutters who want to kill us all. Reason? Logic? There is none.

I take a slightly different view. I'll make a comparison. Quebec has now the Hell's Angels. These guys are basically thugs. Imagine they get control of a country: that was the Soviet Union. I have never found another way to explain this. (OK, imagine the Hell's get control of the local Rotary and then country. Think Bush is like the Hell's? Then you don't know the Hell's Angels at all.)

Saddam Hussein was the same. And these characters on the video also. They are thugs. (These ones took over the local 4H club first. They got a "spirchal" approach to thugdom.)

I know the Hell's club house in Trois-Rivières that was recently raided. People in Trois-Rivières were afraid of it/impressed by it. Almost everyone in Trois-Rivières will vote BQ. What's the connection? Should Anglo journalists make one?

[Black Dog]

IMV, there is no comparison between what happened to the Iraqi prisoners and what happened to this poor American civilian.

You do realize that the abuse at Abu Gharabi went much further than a few humiliating photos and naked human pyramids, right?

Taguba's report detailed systematic abuse of detainess (keep in mind as well that by the Army's own estimates indicate between 70 and 90 per cent of the detainess held at Abu Gharabi are completely innocent of any wrong doing) that included breaking chemical lights and pouring the phosphoritic acid liquid on detainees, pouring cold water on naked detainees, beating detainees with broomhandle and a chair, threatening them with rape, sodomizing a detainee with chemical lights and a broomstick, sicking military dogs on detainees, threatening detainees with charged pistols. There also indications of at least two and possibly more unreported deaths, including an instance where a prisoner was beaten, died, packed in ice, and smuggled out of the prison under the guise of receiving medical treatment and dumped somewhere.

So, maybe they didn't go as far as sawing anyone's head off (yet), but the physical and mental scars left on these (predominately innocent) people will last a lifetime.

The Mark Steyn argument would be that these IslamoFascists are simply psychopathic nutters who want to kill us all. Reason? Logic? There is none

Meh. Mark Steyn knows a thing or two about the abscence of reason and logic.

[Black Dog]

I said I'd come back to the similarities between what happened at Abu Gharabi and what's happening at Gitmo, in Afghanistan and elsewhere.

But Seymour Hersh did it for me. So here ya go.

The new gulag.

[Black Dog]

This Berg thing is getting weird.

First we have the revelations that Berg was held by coalition authorities for some unknow reason, visited by the FBI several times and released after his family launched a lawsuit against Rumsfeld.only to disappear three days later and then murdered.

Now it seems like Al Q'eada may not even have been responsible:

O'BRIEN: Interesting. All right, now one final thought here. You did a very careful translation of your own, of the statement. And in it, you see no reference to al Qaeda. And yet the official U.S. government translation does. Explain how that happened.

NASR: Oh, I find it very interesting, because out of the blue, there is a mention of al Qaeda on the U.S. government translation. It says: "Does al Qaeda need any further excuses?" Any speaker of the Arabic language is going to notice a difference between the word al Qaeda, which means "the base," and al qaed, which means "the one sitting, doing nothing."

My translation says: "Is there any excuse for the one who sits down and does nothing?" Basically they're telling people, you have no excuse for not doing anything, for not acting and defending Islam and so forth. Whereas the U.S. government translation has this factual error, I'm sure it's an honest mistake, but basically it sort of adds al Qaeda to the statement, which is not on the statement.

Link

Curioser and curiouser...

[August1991]

You do realize that the abuse at Abu Gharabi went much further than a few humiliating photos and naked human pyramids, right?

Did I miss the video? The one with an American soldier hacking through an Iraqi head, saying that he did it for Jesus and that there would be many more?

This Berg thing is getting weird.

BD, don't go conspiracy wobbly on me.

Tell me, did the threat of court marshal deter the jaolers at Abu Gharabi?

If the old, court-marshalled American jaolers didn't feel deterred before, the new jaolers certainly feel deterred now. (Better question: Do the video balaclava guys feel deterred?)

I think better supervision as clearly this was missing, rotation of personel as bordom and fimiliarity always breeds contempt and a clearer SOP would be in order to fix the main problems there.

Yadda, yadda. But I agree with you KK. An ordinary jerk with power is a big asshole. But what these ordinary jerks did was a really, really stupid, out of control joke.

Upside? Nobody died.

[My Gawd! The Economist compared the Iraqi guy standing on a box holding wires to the Vietnamese girl running naked from napalm. WTF? The girl was physically scarred for life. The guy was emotionally scarred for life. Is this 21st century morality? Your choice: napalm or box.]

So, we have a situation where senior intelligence officials (CIA, FBI, NSC and god knows who else) as well as private contractors (accountable to who?) are issuing orders to enilsted personnel.

Clueless bureaucrats tell white-trash jerks what to do. OK. BD, I like your "god knows who else", "out-sourcing" twist.

Looking through this thread, I have a question: do we Westerners occupy the Moral Highground?

We all know Galileo suffered the inquisition. We know about the witch hunt at Salem. We know that sometimes what appears to be true is often false. We question authority. We apply the "scientific method" to doubtful assertions.

Isn't our approach worth defending? Voltaire defended it. Shouldn't we also?

BD, you defended two women kissing in a Red Deer bar. Would you defend two men kissing in a Baghdad bar or Riyadh bar? (Riyadh bar? How about Mecca Bar?)

Or, BD, are you a hypocrite?

[Black Dog]

Did I miss the video? The one with an American soldier hacking through an Iraqi head, saying that he did it for Jesus and that there would be many more?

You did, apparently, miss Taguba's report, which chonicled an array of physical and mental abuse that went well beyond the boundaries of human conduct. But I guess if the victim lives, there's nothing wrong with alittle brromstick sodomy, eh?

My Gawd! The Economist compared the Iraqi guy standing on a box holding wires to the Vietnamese girl running naked from napalm. WTF? The girl was physically scarred for life. The guy was emotionally scarred for life. Is this 21st century morality? Your choice: napalm or box

Is this the new moral reletavism of the right? Are we now reduced between simply choosing between lesser evils?

BD, don't go conspiracy wobbly on me

Never said it was a conspiracy, just that the official line doesn't jibe with what our eyes see.

If the old, court-marshalled American jaolers didn't feel deterred before, the new jaolers certainly feel deterred now. (Better question: Do the video balaclava guys feel deterred?)

That remains to be seen, depending on the results of the investigation. We're in full bureaucrat coverup mode now.

Unless you actually buy the whole "bad apples" excuse?

Upside? Nobody died.

Do you just skim the headlines?

“Since December of ‘02, there have been a total of 35 CID (Criminal Investigation Division) investigations into allegations of detainee misconduct, across the theater, Afghanistan and Iraq,” said General George Casey, the vice chief of staff of the army.

The cases were in addition to the abuse cases at Abu Ghraib, said Major General Don Ryder, the army’s chief law enforcement officer. He said 25 investigations were underway into deaths of prisoners while in custody, and 10 into assaults and other abuse of prisoners since December 2002. In one case, a soldier was found guilty of homicide, reduced to the rank of private and discharged from the service, army spokesman Colonel Joe Curtin told AFP. Curtin said the soldier “shot an Iraqi throwing rocks at him at a forward detention location,” in September. The death involving the CIA-contracted interrogator occurred at Abu Ghraib on November 3, he said. That investigation is still underway.

BD, you defended two women kissing in a Red Deer bar. Would you defend two men kissing in a Baghdad bar or Riyadh bar? (Riyadh bar? How about Mecca Bar?)

Of course. I don't play favorites. (But I doubt there's any bars in Mecca). What does this hav eto do with anything?

[theloniusfleabag]

Dear all,

The beheading of a person (on video, no less) is nothing less than murder. It cannot be associated with, nor justify, any cause or religion. Many, many muslims agree. With the murders in the prison by US soldiers, the atrocities do not differ. Listed in the news were some of the methods that were used to murder Iraqi prisoners, including strangulation. It takes way longer to strangle than to behead (or is that de-head?). I doubt too many people could even sit through the approx 5-10 min it takes to strangle or asphyxiate someone. Many, many westerners agree.

Dear KK,

Were they following orders? Did they just take the acts as normalicy in war? Let's wait to see what the commision finds out before you presume to know everything, otherwise all arguments using this as a basis to theorise about US military mindset are crap

It is the US military mindset, starting with the brainwashing in bootcamp, that all humans apart from those trained in the US military are inferior. Even their own civilians. All women are referred to as "Suzie Rottencrotch", for example.

[KrustyKidd]

It is the US military mindset, starting with the brainwashing in bootcamp, that all humans apart from those trained in the US military are inferior. Even their own civilians. All women are referred to as "Suzie Rottencrotch", for example.

I think that I explained wilitary brainwashing awhile ago, I also think the thread had you included in it as well, or maybe it was Riff. You have to have this brainwashing otherwise soldiers will know that they are same as everybody else. That works well in Penn State Cafeterias but on a battlefield it can make the difference between death and life for you and many of your comerades.

To have young soldiers in a hostile situation not thinking they are superior is a potential death sentence for them. The brainwashing is the reason why we don't simply use guys that are picked out of local gun clubs and slap a uniform on them and make them an army overnight I experienced this brainwashing in the Airborne and grew out of it in a few years. It is designed for the soldier who is entering his carreer and does not last past a certain point. That point is prior to when he reaches supervisor status as to be an effective supervisor you have to understand the human traits of your subordinates.

If, in your theory, you are saying that this brainwashing may have had something to do with prisoner abuse, yes, I would agree. It is quite possible. It happened with the CAR in Somalia partly for this reason and one of the other crieria fell apart in the same way; inadiquate supervision and muffled (and possibly ambiquous orders to say the least) orders form higher.

If you are saying that brainwashing of troops is wrong, picture a prizefighter going into the ring with an inkling of doubt as to the outcome in his mind. He might win a few but he will never be the best he can be. On the battlefield, we want the best, not nice guys that are passable in battle.

Now before you go thinking these guys are ticking time bombs remember what I said about growing out of it, you do. Us Sergeants and up kept the bravado up for the troops but in our dealings with other arms and trades we realized we were all equals. When with uor men we were all one unit, second only to ourselves. We kept control with disipline, if a soldier couldn't handle the disipline he was booted out of the unit or the military as a whole. The two have to go together.

BTW, long time friend. Where you been?

[kaper1999]

Murder, rape, torture, biting by dogs of naked inmates, sexual assault on underage male prisoners is nothing serious. They are just harsher tactics to get time senstive information from prisoners in a occupied country that was inavded by america becuase Saddam had a human rights abuse problem. Rest easy all--its all good.

[KrustyKidd]

Good one Kaper! So true.

I have to laugh at all this as it is BS in a big way. The US steps on it's dick but then who wouldn't have? I dare to have some proof that France, Germany, Italy, Britain and so on and forth never used these tactics in a modern war. I also have to hear theories on what Saddam would have done if he was trying to extract information from anyone in his shere of influence.

Hey, let's take it a bit further, how would Iran, Syria, Saudi do it? Any theories like 'skip the sandbags and cut off their heads instead and let the others watch and talk?'

Now, back to perfection and HBO for prisoners (Anti US comments) The US must provide an example, they have. They have faltered and are dealing with it as they have gotten caught trying to take a shortcut. It is a shortcut of their own ideals, not the world's as the world's standards are far lower than theirs. They still occupy the moral high ground against any other military force.

[kaper1999]

America promised prosperity, gave $86 billion of tax payer money to Halliburton yet everything is destroyed in Iraq. America promised Real freedom, but we see people in Iraq Afghanistan and Guantanamo bay tortured, murdered, raped and you name it in the name of freedom. New picture images shown to members of congress on May 12 include images of a man banging his head into a wall over and over, until the man collapses and passes out to escape torture. And that another picture reportedly showed an Iraqi boy being raped by a private contractor hired by the U.S. military. If this is the moral high ground you are talking about I am very proud we have it. All this is not a shortcut of ideals but an old policy already used in Afghanistan and Guantanamo bay. I just love the term “harsh tactics”. It has such a sweet vibe with it.

[Argus]

America promised prosperity, gave $86 billion of tax payer money to Halliburton yet everything is destroyed in Iraq.

No, everything is destroyed on your TV set, because reporters gravitate towards areas of violence, explosions, etc. Much of Iraq, even most of it, is fairly peaceful, and rebuilding is well underway. It's just not showing up on your television.

America promised Real freedom, but we see people in Iraq Afghanistan and Guantanamo bay tortured, murdered, raped and you name it in the name of freedom.

Whenever you have war, especially violent guerilla/terrorist type activities, you are going to see instances of human rights abuses. Just check out some of the things the Brits did in Northern Ireland, or the French in Algeria. The abuses commited by the yanks have been comparatively minor and few, and generally much more focused on people who are very strongly suspected of being members of terrorist/guerrila groups. Remember that there are a lot of allegations - there are always allegations directed towards every police force and military group. But what we have seen is fairly low level stuff as compared to the hideous tortures which take place daily throughout the Muslim world. The Yanks might be humiliating people by stripping them naked but they're not gouging their eyes out with spoons or using garden sheers to castrate them. Let's get real here.

Absent the extremists and their damned bombs and murders rebuilding would be well underway everywhere and the US miltary would have been reduced to half their present numbers.

[Argus]

It is the US military mindset, starting with the brainwashing in bootcamp, that all humans apart from those trained in the US military are inferior. Even their own civilians.  All women are referred to as "Suzie Rottencrotch", for example.

Don't get your entire understanding of military culture from one documentary (I bet we saw the same one, with Gwynn Dwyer). Yes, all militaries do kind of break down their recruits in order to instill an instant obedience to orders and a group mentality of strength and superiority. No reason to single out the Yanks.

As for "suzie rottencrotch" that was a shorthand lingo among Marines at one time arising from anti-VD films and lectures. I doubt it's widespread even among Marines past the recruit stage, and certainly not throughout the US military, which has a growing number of females in its ranks.