GostHacked Posted April 16, 2014 Report Posted April 16, 2014 Are you saying we had proof that the US was torturing inmates, while we were handing them over.....Because what i've read is that is the very reason we stopped handing over prisoners to the US and started with the Afghanis.....And while those same prisoners said they had been tortured by Afghanis officals that story was proven false.....So i'll ask again what war crimes has the entire nation of Canada been complict in. Attacking a foreign country without a declaration of war. Illegal by our own laws. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Canada%27s_role_in_the_Afghanistan_War Afghan detainee abuse scandal Main article: Canadian Afghan detainee abuse scandal In 2007 allegations arose that the Canadian military was handing detainees over to the Afghan military without first making sure that they would not be abused. This evolved into a political scandal in Canada that eventually resulted in Defence Minister Gordon O'Connor being demoted. Quote
Army Guy Posted April 17, 2014 Report Posted April 17, 2014 There has not been enough time that has elapsed for anything to do with this war to have been "proven". It took ten years for the disclosure of rule breaking in Somalia. The nature of war is a series of atrocities, usually on both sides. The intent is to destroy your enemy and if/when you are backed into a corner or feel that the end justifies the means then no "rules" apply. I have no doubt that in time there will be new disclosures of how individuals from all sides have broken the "rules". Perhaps you are right Big Guy, perhaps in the future a new light will expose something different and secrets will be exposed. And those that are guilty are held accountable we could only hope. But today, all we have is accusations made by known enemies , which may or may not be designed to hurt NATO nations. Nothing has been proven, That the Canadian government knew that prisoners were being handed over to be tortured or they would be abused while in another nations custody. Despite serveral investagations, by the military MP's, government appionted team, and by NATO even the UN. None of them have proven with out a doubt that Canada has commited any war crimes. Canada has changed it's policies on POW's during this conflict serveral times, to reflect changes that became known at the time, it was presured to change once it became known that US may have abused it's prisoners it held....then once again when it came to light that Afghanis may be doing the same. I will admit our policies may not have been the best, or covered all the things that could have gone wrong....but i believe we did not do them with the intention of abusing prisoners, be it to retrieve vital info, intel or etc.... When i first glanced at your comment "The nature of war is a series of atrocities, usually on both sides" i thought the word Atrocities was a bit harsh, normally used to discribe things such as the Holocaust, but when i thought about the bombings in germany i'm sure the german public would have used the same word to describe the allied action. I have constantly struggled with articulating what war is, and what it is like....your explaination sums it up very well... Like everything war is governed by rules, rules crafted in a room by men that for the most part that had no first hand experience of war.....Those rules were designed to control the insanty of warfare, to appease those back home, to give them the illusion of standing on the high ground..but on the ground in a soldiers boots, there is no high ground...every where you look is death and destruction....you pray that every decision is the right one, that you can keep your guys alive another day, that you don't break any rules, that you don't kill innocent civilians, that you use only enough force to get the job done....all of this in most cases is done in milli seconds.....and your right sometimes it does not work out in your favour.. All that being said most of the times the Canadian public do not understand war, what they understand is the high ground, sometimes the high ground is not achievable.... Like sharing info, why would we expect any dept not to use any info that has been tainted by torture....In defending our nation, why would we not atleast look at it, validate it.... Or pass on info to our allieds, vital info in ref to threats why should we be held accountable if that nation chose to take it and torture someone over it ....How would we know what their intentions are before hand.....I would understand if we had did it to intentional have someone tortured....But if our intention was to save lives....then why not.... Quote We, the willing, led by the unknowing, are doing the impossible for the ungrateful. We have now done so much for so long with so little, we are now capable of doing anything with nothing.
Shady Posted April 17, 2014 Report Posted April 17, 2014 So Canada cannot even trust the US in proper treatment of prisoners because of GITMO. Prisoners at GITMO are treated better than most prisons anywhere else. Have you seen the million dollar soccer field they put in for the inmates? It's quite nice. Most local neighbourhoods would love such a field. Quote
eyeball Posted April 17, 2014 Report Posted April 17, 2014 (edited) Canada has changed it's policies on POW's during this conflict serveral times, to reflect changes that became known at the time, it was presured to change once it became known that US may have abused it's prisoners it held....then once again when it came to light that Afghanis may be doing the same. Canada abandoned it's principles because it got sucked into the same moral swamp our staunchest allies were floundering in. Maybe a better analogy would be that Canada was like a hapless would be hero following our buddies down a well only to succumb to the same lack of air that suffocated them. I will admit our policies may not have been the best, or covered all the things that could have gone wrong....but i believe we did not do them with the intention of abusing prisoners, be it to retrieve vital info, intel or etc.... Go tell that to Maher Arar and Omar Khadr. Don't forget to bring your tiny violin. Like sharing info, why would we expect any dept not to use any info that has been tainted by torture.... Because it would be against the law. In defending our nation, why would we not atleast look at it, validate it.... Or pass on info to our allieds, vital info in ref to threats Because the methods used to obtain that info are against the law. why should we be held accountable if that nation chose to take it and torture someone over it.... Because we would be accomplices. How would we know what their intentions are before hand..... By simply looking at the number of very similar laws they were breaking very similarly. Edited April 17, 2014 by eyeball Quote I said now watch what you say they'll be calling you a radical, a liberal, oh fanatical criminal
bleeding heart Posted April 17, 2014 Report Posted April 17, 2014 (edited) All good points...and if anybody has an objection to the argument--that is, an objection to the laws that we are all mandated to follow--they should take it up with their representatives, and ask if they might give us more leeway on an act that civilized people consider abhorrent...while the "realists" try to define what is and is not "acceptable torture." (I await their ethical acrobatics on this subject with anticipation.) Edited April 17, 2014 by bleeding heart Quote “There is a limit to how much we can constantly say no to the political masters in Washington. All we had was Afghanistan to wave. On every other file we were offside. Eventually we came onside on Haiti, so we got another arrow in our quiver." --Bill Graham, Former Canadian Foreign Minister, 2007
Army Guy Posted April 17, 2014 Report Posted April 17, 2014 Canada abandoned it's principles because it got sucked into the same moral swamp our staunchest allies were floundering in. Maybe a better analogy would be that Canada was like a hapless would be hero following our buddies down a well only to succumb to the same lack of air that suffocated them. Go tell that to Maher Arar and Omar Khadr. Don't forget to bring your tiny violin. Because it would be against the law. Because the methods used to obtain that info are against the law. Because we would be accomplices. By simply looking at the number of very similar laws they were breaking very similarly. If that was true that we had abandoned our princples then why go through all the effort to change the policies....i think we were caught unprepared, and had to act.... I will give you mahar arar, RCMP made a major mistake....Omar should not of been tortured, but i won't be playing any violin for him.... Like i said taking the high ground is costly, both action and inaction have a price....If the US gave us info on a threat to say toronto sub way, dates and timings according to you we should bury that info because it was tainted by torture....and we let it all happen, because to act would be using that info "that would be against the law" ...sorry i find that hard to swallow.....even harder to explain to the victims.... I do agree with the law that we do not solicite info from countries that torture....or do we activily particapate in torture.... So to hold the high ground we would have to invest in our own intel gather network and appratus if we were not to be realiant on other SUSPECT nations....we can't even equip our military, how do accomplish this great feat.... Quote We, the willing, led by the unknowing, are doing the impossible for the ungrateful. We have now done so much for so long with so little, we are now capable of doing anything with nothing.
eyeball Posted April 17, 2014 Report Posted April 17, 2014 If that was true that we had abandoned our princples then why go through all the effort to change the policies....i think we were caught unprepared, and had to act.... Caught doing what? We weren't in anyone's gun sights until we decided to join our buddies in the swamp. Like i said taking the high ground is costly, both action and inaction have a price... Not as high a price as eschewing it and just walking away from it. Quote I said now watch what you say they'll be calling you a radical, a liberal, oh fanatical criminal
Big Guy Posted April 17, 2014 Report Posted April 17, 2014 Perhaps you are right Big Guy, perhaps in the future a new light will expose something different and secrets will be exposed. And those that are guilty are held accountable we could only hope. But today, all we have is accusations made by known enemies , which may or may not be designed to hurt NATO nations. ... Thank you for your very thoughtful reply. I do agree that it is the non-combatants who try to set the rules. Years ago I remember discussing the various provisions of the Geneva Conventions with an informed colleague. While the conventions have been referenced often by people commenting on behaviour of combatants they always cherry pick what they want to use as their argument. I doubt if too many people have either read or understood them. We found the conventions to be overly optimistic, naive to the core and impossible to implement - typical of civilians trying to draw up parameters of how combatants should kill and treat each other. I believe it is the winners who draw up the unwritten rules depending on the culture and nature of the combatants. Quote Note - For those expecting a response from Big Guy: I generally do not read or respond to posts longer then 300 words nor to parsed comments.
eyeball Posted April 17, 2014 Report Posted April 17, 2014 (edited) We found the conventions to be overly optimistic, naive to the core and impossible to implement - typical of civilians trying to draw up parameters of how combatants should kill and treat each other. I believe it is the winners who draw up the unwritten rules depending on the culture and nature of the combatants. So if might makes right who even needs conventions? Maybe Canada would be a better place if we just let our combatants draw up the parameters of how us naive civilians should treat each other. Edited April 17, 2014 by eyeball Quote I said now watch what you say they'll be calling you a radical, a liberal, oh fanatical criminal
Army Guy Posted April 17, 2014 Report Posted April 17, 2014 History has shown us through hundrds of examples that the victor does make the rules....like it or not.... You miss the piont...Be like me making up the rules for the fishing industry....not knowing anything about it.... Quote We, the willing, led by the unknowing, are doing the impossible for the ungrateful. We have now done so much for so long with so little, we are now capable of doing anything with nothing.
eyeball Posted April 17, 2014 Report Posted April 17, 2014 History has shown us through hundrds of examples that the victor does make the rules....like it or not.... You miss the piont...Be like me making up the rules for the fishing industry....not knowing anything about it.... It should come as no surprise to you that the people who do make up the fishing rules.are the very same one's who send you into battle without adequate kit and yet you seem to blame ordinary civilians for causing that. I think there's pretty good reason to believe combatants are even more naive than civilians. Quote I said now watch what you say they'll be calling you a radical, a liberal, oh fanatical criminal
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.