Afghan prisoner abuse trial

[Argus]

True, but it is what we are supposedly fighting for.

Nonsense. We're fighting to keep them from becoming another nutcase state where people like Al Quaeda can establish huge bases from which they can attack our cities.

Carpet bombing the place from border to border would probably do that better, faster and cheaper, but the bleeding hearts won't hear of it.

[Argus]

Do you understand the concept of blow-back and what it imply's?

Yes, that's where you blow up a bunch of buildings in New York and then wind up with tens of thousands of western troops in your country. Right?

Edited November 28, 2009 by Argus

[eyeball]

Yes, that's where you blow up a bunch of buildings in New York and the wind up with tens of thousands of western troops in your country. Right?

It works both ways all right, and one's just as bad as the other.

Who's country though? It looks like the troops landed in a country who's people had little if anything to do with 9/11 compared to people from other countries.

[Argus]

It works both ways all right, and one's just as bad as the other.

Who's country though? It looks like the troops landed in a country who's people had little if anything to do with 9/11 compared to people from other countries.

The people directly responsible were in Afghanistan.

I would agree, however, that the US should have bombed Saudi Arabia instead, moved in, and taken over their oil fields. Without all that money the Saudi religious wackos would have had an immensely more difficult time propogating their hateful religious fanaticism around the world.

[Sir Bandelot]

Afghan teens allege abuse at U.S. prison

A timely article giving us a glimpse of what's going on here.

KABUL, Afghanistan - Two Afghan teenagers held in U.S. detention north of Kabul this year said they were beaten by American guards, photographed naked, deprived of sleep and held in solitary confinement in concrete cells for at least two weeks while undergoing daily interrogation about their alleged links to the Taliban.

Sexual misconduct is abhorrent to devout muslims. The prison interrogators know this and use it as a weapon.

When stuff like this gets out to the Afghanistan media, the people develop a deeper hatred for our troops and, us.

...

Edited November 28, 2009 by Sir Bandelot

[noahbody]

When stuff like this gets out to the Afghanistan media, the people develop a deeper hatred for our troops and, us.

...

That would be the strategy.

[capricorn]

That would be the strategy.

In the linked article, the complainants go to great lengths for maximum shock value to stir the sensibilities of the western population and, anger middle eastern folks there and abroad.

"Rashid said his interrogator forced him to look at pornography alongside a photograph of his mother."

"They touched me all over my body. They took pictures, and they were laughing and laughing," he said. "They were doing everything."

"He said he lived in a small concrete cell that was slightly longer than the length of his body. Food was tossed in a plastic bag through a slot in the metal door. Both teenagers said that when they tried to sleep, on the floor, their captors shouted at them and hammered on their cells."

"They treat us like wild animals."

And of course, the obligatory reference to their youth to further incense their rapt audience.

"I was just crying and crying. I was too young," Rashid said. "I didn't know what a prison looks like or what a prison is."

"The two teenagers — Issa Mohammad, 17, and Abdul Rashid, who said he is younger than 16..."

It's noteworthy that very few Afghans are registered at birth.

At the moment, Kabul is the only place in Afghanistan where every newborn baby is being registered, including those who are born at home.

The Afghan government, with United Nations help, hopes to do the same for newborns all over the country by the end of 2009. If they succeed, it will be the first time this has happened in Afghan history.

Currently, the government says less than 1 percent of Afghans have a birth certificate.

http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=91936836

Of course, the complainants could be within that 1% demographic who can substantiate their ages. Or, maybe they guessed it correctly. We don't know. Yet, if they were not teens but adults, it's safe to say their gloomy recounting of their experience would not be as compelling to sensitive and receptive ears.

[Oleg Bach]

Do you understand the concept of blow-back and what it imply's?

You would have to have a thing called vision to truely understand the term "blow back" - It means if you do this - that will take place - Intelligence agents like to use the term but don't know or care on how to stop blow back - For instance long term blow back is when invaders come in and kill your father and mother - then twenty years later you are wondering why some young son is setting a bomh off by the side of the road. Unless your intentions are good and honourable along with loving - you will always have blow back - Iraq for instance was destroyed via fraud..the whole nation is one huge blow back...You would think someone would have figure out that it would all come to a grinding hault - The day I watched the shock and awe game being transmitted to the world - I knew that America was screwed.. NATIONS are not a damned video game to be watched by fat cats drinking scotch.

[Sir Bandelot]

their gloomy recounting of their experience would not be as compelling to sensitive and receptive ears.

Perhaps, but still compelling nevertheless. Given the climate we are in, and evidence from recent past history, I find this whole issue believable enough to warrant at least an investigation. If we pass prisoners along to another nations control, and they are mistreated, at least we didn't do it. But if we knowingly continue sending people to a gulag to be tortured, well it makes no difference to me if the gulag belongs to us, or someone else. We know they will be tortured, and by continuing to allow it we show that it doesn't offend our sense of morality. And our belief in law, justice, due process is a matter of convenience.

But war is so inconvenient... sigh

[capricorn]

But war is so inconvenient... sigh

That's a pretty soft statement coming from a person who has such strong feelings about our treatment of the enemy. What I would have expected was something like "war is hell".

[myata]

It goes back to "your freedom to swing your fist ends where my nose begins", if you're going to allow organizations within your boarder to attack foreign powers,

Would that wisdom also extend to "influencing" foreign powers? Like giving friendly regimes massive amounts of cash and arms to keep them in power (and our understaing of what "order" should be there, for them, in place)? Would that also qualify as a "swing of fist" that would justify a "retaliatory action"?

and go even one step further actually protect them, then you have to accept retaliatory actions. If they were truly interested in order they would not have allowed this threat to exist with in their boarders to begin with, thereby ensuring their security needs were met.

No, it still does not explain why it has to be us who'll take care of creating order for them (and coincidentally, the one that suits us)

Again understanding of the hierarchy is immaterial. It's not an idea that was created, it's a description of the reality of existance. If you don't have food to eat, all your energy is bent on somehow getting food to eat. You can't worry about anything else until that need is met. Feedom of speech doesn't fill an empty stomach, and democracy doesn't keep rain off of you.

And if your understanding of "reality of existence" happens to be different from mine, does it imply that one of us has to impose their "correct" model on the other, ultimately decided by, let me guess, the size of the fist of the righteous winner?

No, wrong: if one walks, talks, and behaves like a bully, that is what they are, forget explanations and justifications, look at what they do instead.

[Sir Bandelot]

That's a pretty soft statement coming from a person who has such strong feelings about our treatment of the enemy. What I would have expected was something like "war is hell".

This war has become merely an inconvenience, for most Canadians. The mission has gone adrift, and the reasons for why we are there fighting keep going around in circles.

Thats the problem when you start a war, you know? Wars are much easier to start than finish. And once they're in place, they're real hard to get rid of.

So, yeah, war IS hell...

Edited November 30, 2009 by Sir Bandelot

[blue]

So, why are we in Afghanistan? We should just GTFO, right?

[blue]

the real problem with Afghanistan is, if we even stayed until the last terrorist was killed,

the day after we left it would start all over again but this time we would never go back to that hellhole.

I know it sounds defeatist but it is the truth, this has been going on for the last 3000 years and a few thousand

soldiers are not going to change one thing. women will never be respected in Afghanistan or the middle east until they decide it's wrong not us. And if i may say this, Harper continuously stated the liberals were the first party to send in the troops in the first place, he has to stop that it is just not true they were sent with instructions to be peace keepers Harpers orders were to be aggressors. it all in the books now. maybe Peter McKay will spin it his way again. he should be put to bed without supper.

[Michael Hardner]

the real problem with Afghanistan is, if we even stayed until the last terrorist was killed,

the day after we left it would start all over again but this time we would never go back to that hellhole.

I know it sounds defeatist but it is the truth, this has been going on for the last 3000 years and a few thousand

soldiers are not going to change one thing. women will never be respected in Afghanistan or the middle east until they decide it's wrong not us. And if i may say this, Harper continuously stated the liberals were the first party to send in the troops in the first place, he has to stop that it is just not true they were sent with instructions to be peace keepers Harpers orders were to be aggressors. it all in the books now. maybe Peter McKay will spin it his way again. he should be put to bed without supper.

That's ridiculous. Why will it never change ? Is there something inherent in the geography or people that makes them warlike, or unlike any other people ?

[capricorn]

Harper continuously stated the liberals were the first party to send in the troops in the first place, he has to stop that it is just not true they were sent with instructions to be peace keepers Harpers orders were to be aggressors. it all in the books now. maybe Peter McKay will spin it his way again. he should be put to bed without supper.

I wonder how much you know about the NATO initiatives in Afghanistan...

NATO’s main role in Afghanistan is to assist the Afghan Government in exercising and extending its authority and influence across the country, paving the way for reconstruction and effective governance. It does this predominately through its UN-mandated International Security Assistance Force.

http://www.nato.int/cps/en/natolive/topics_8189.htm

...or the Afghanistan Compact

http://unama.unmissions.org/Portals/UNAMA/Documents/AfghanistanCompact-English.pdf

The aims of the Afghanistan Compact have not changed either under the Liberals or the Conservatives. But it was the Liberals who decided to divert our troops from the more stable region of Kabul to the hell hole that is Kandahar, as a compromise not to commit Canada to the Iraq war.

It's all in the books. You just have to do proper research.