Iraqi Prisoners Abused, Humiliated, Tortured.

[Makalakumu]

I just found this letter written by a retired USMC General, Chuck Pitman. I think that it puts some prospective on the topic at hand from the point of view of a true combat tested warrior. I believe this is the viewpoint of many of us who serve in the military. I apologize if this has been posted somewhere else.

FW

Subject: FW: Letter of Apology from Chuck Pitman

Letter of Apology

This Letter of Apology was written by Lieutenant General Chuck Pitman, US Marine Corps, Retired

"For good and ill, the Iraqi prisoner abuse mess will remain an issue.

On the one hand, right thinking Americans will harbor the stupidity of the

actions while on the other hand, political glee will take control and

fashion this minor event into some modern day massacre.

I humbly offer my opinion here:

I am sorry that the last seven times we Americans took up arms and

sacrificed the blood of our youth, it was in the defense of Muslims

(Bosnia, Kosovo, Gulf War 1, Kuwait, etc.).

I am sorry that no such call for an apology upon the extremists came

after 9/11.

I am sorry that all of the murderers on 9/11 were Islamic Arabs.

I am sorry that most Arabs and Muslims have to live in squalor under

savage dictatorships.

I am sorry that their leaders squander their wealth.

I am sorry that their governments breed hate for the US in their

religious schools, mosques, and government-controlled media.

I am sorry that Yasir Arafat was kicked out of every Arab country and

high-jacked the Palestinian "cause."

I am sorry that no other Arab country will take in or offer more than a

token amount of financial help to those same Palestinians.

I am sorry that the USA has to step in and be the biggest financial

supporter of poverty stricken Arabs while the insanely wealthy Arabs blame the USA for all their problems.

I am sorry that our own left wing, our media, and our own brainwashed

masses do not understand any of this (from the misleading vocal elements

of our society like radical professors, CNN and the NY TIMES).

I am sorry the United Nations scammed the poor people of Iraq out of the

"food for oil" money so they could get rich while the common folk

suffered.

I am sorry that some Arab governments pay the families of homicide

bombers upon their death.

I am sorry that those same bombers are brainwashed thinking they will

receive 72 virgins in "paradise."

I am sorry that the homicide bombers think pregnant women, babies,

children, the elderly and other noncombatant civilians are legitimate

targets.

I am sorry that our troops die to free more Arabs from the gang rape

rooms and the filling of mass graves of dissidents of their own making.

I am sorry that Muslim extremists have killed more Arabs than any other

group.

I am sorry that foreign trained terrorists are trying to seize control of

Iraq and return it to a terrorist state.

I am sorry we don't drop a few dozen Daisy cutters on Fallujah.

I am sorry every time terrorists hide they find a convenient "Holy Site."

I am sorry they didn't apologize for driving a jet into the World Trade

Center that collapsed and severely damaged Saint Nicholas Greek Orthodox Church - one of our Holy Sites.

I am sorry they didn't apologize for flight 93 and 175, the USS Cole, the

embassy bombings, the murders and beheadings of Nick Berg and Daniel

Pearl, etc....etc!

I am sorry Michael Moore is American; he could feed a medium sized

village in Africa.

America will get past this latest absurdity. We will punish those

responsible because that is what we do.

We hang out our dirty laundry for the entire world to see. We move on.

That's one of the reasons we are hated so much. We don't hide this stuff

like all those Arab countries that are now demanding an apology.

Deep down inside, when most Americans saw this reported in the news, We were like - so what? We lost hundreds and made fun of a few prisoners.

Sure, it was wrong, sure, it dramatically hurts our cause, but until captured we

were trying to kill these same prisoners. Now we're supposed to wring our

hands because a few were humiliated?

Our compassion is tempered with the vivid memories of our own people

killed, mutilated and burnt amongst a joyous crowd of celebrating

Fallujahans.

If you want an apology from this American, you're going to have a long

wait!



You have a better chance of finding those seventy-two virgins.



Chuck Pitman

Lieutenant General

US Marine Corps (Retired)

Take this letter and read if after you have visited the holocaust museum in Washington DC. If you haven't lost your lunch by that point, this will be the straw that broke the camel's back.

 

[heretic888]

Your point is?

Unjustified rationalizations of quasi-fascist policies through a thinly-veiled veneer of fake reason and pseudo-science. Not to put too fine a point on it.

No, anything is OK as long as it generates the best possible result.

Machiavelli would be proud.

What particular advancement would that be?

Take your pick --- from the rise of industrial and informational technologies to democratic states to the advancement of human/animal rights to ecological awareness to secular humanism, separation of church and state (sorta), and the advancement of science and philosophy.

The kind of rationalizations you are giving, on the other hand, come from a reversal of the paragidms that developed most of these.

It is the opposite argument to the 'soldiers are terrorist distractors'. The bottom line is, no matter what we do people will be trying to kill us, just because we are western and non-islamic.

This is just silly.

You don't suppose it has anything to do with the Western (more specifically, British) occupation and annexation of those regions historically, neh?? Or the unscrupulous situation surrounding the founding of Israel?? Or, our own hypocritical policies whereby we are publicly defaming governments like Iran and Saudi Arabia, but then turn around and make secret economic, oil, and weapons deals with them??

Sure, a lot of the people in question are just homocidal loonies. But, it may benefit your understanding to ask yourself why they are the way they are??

If our soldiers do not fight them in their countries, they will have to fight them in our countries. I know where I would rather the war be.

More skewed logic. The war in Iraq, as international agencies devoted to recording these sorts of things universally report, has exponentially increased the membership of Al Queda and similar organizations. America is less safe now than we were two years ago.

There is absolutely no reason to believe that fighting a war "over there" somehow prevents one from being ignited within our borders. In fact, given the steady incline in terrorist recruiting thanks to this administration's foreign policies, it is far more likely that a terrorist stike will be attempted than less so.

This, again, is typical of many threads within the Right (and some in the Left, I might add) --- that facts, statistics, and scientific data take a second fiddling to ideologies. We aren't going overseas to war because of "alarming data" about purported threats; we're going because of a quasi-theological imperialism. We aren't torturing others because torture has in any way been scientifically demonstrated to be effective (quite the contrary); we are doing so because of aggressive quasi-fascist philosophies that justify dehumanizing those "different" than us.

Remember, this is the same lot that think "the jury is still out" on gobal warming and evolution.

 

[heretic888]

According to whom? I'm actually quite skeptical that there can be any credibilty given to information derived from torture. So, what makes you think it works? What do you have to support your proposition? It seems to me that, given the nature of the act, one ought have fairly unwavering justification to use this technique, so, what is it?

According to ideologists that justify toture, of course.

There is no reputable scientific evidence to support the claim that any type of torture is effective in acquiring intelligence. While, on the other hand, there is an abundance of data demonstrating the kind of mentality and psychological context that is invoked in the torturer via the act of torture (sadism is closer to the surface than many would surmise).

The idea that there is "some" torture that is effective "some" of the time is not justified by science, plain and simple. There is about an equal chance that pure situational guesswork would be as about as effective in intel.

Rather, this is merely speculation supported by conscious or unconscious rationalizatons. Same ol', same ol.

 

[rmcrobertson]

One scarcely knows whether to be tickled more by the resurfacing of the good old domino theory, the recurrent goofy claim that anything is OK as long as it's useful, or the re-restating of Freud's good old bucket joke.

"Torture? What torture?"

"Well, OK, it was torture but not that bad and we needed to,"

and of course,

"OK, we really tortured them and it was pointless but anyway they did bad first."

Apparently, if one says this fast enough and over and over, it magically becomes a good example of pragmatic reasoning.

 

[raedyn]

I am frustrated that anyone would try to justify this sort of behaviour. It's bad when "they" do it, it's bad when "we" do it. And saying "they did it first" is pretty much equivalent to the kid mom caught pounding his little brother and when he gets in trouble whining "but he hit me first!". Just like Mommy told us when we were 4 years old; two wrongs don't make a right.

 

[raedyn]

*giggle* I got my first bad rep points on that post. I guess someone (anonymously of course) doesn't like being reminded what Mommy tried to teach us all.

 

[heretic888]

*giggle* I got my first bad rep points on that post. I guess someone (anonymously of course) doesn't like being reminded what Mommy tried to teach us all.

Apparently.

 

[RandomPhantom700]

*giggle* I got my first bad rep points on that post. I guess someone (anonymously of course) doesn't like being reminded what Mommy tried to teach us all.

Yeah, I got bad rep points for saying pretty much the same thing a while back. Similarly, without any signature.

 

[Adept]

Unjustified rationalizations of quasi-fascist policies through a thinly-veiled veneer of fake reason and pseudo-science. Not to put too fine a point on it.

Thats your opinion, which is clearly different from mine.

Machiavelli would be proud.

Perhaps. Not exactly relevant, however.

Take your pick --- from the rise of industrial and informational technologies to democratic states to the advancement of human/animal rights to ecological awareness to secular humanism, separation of church and state (sorta), and the advancement of science and philosophy.

How exaclty am I destroying said advancements?

Sure, a lot of the people in question are just homocidal loonies. But, it may benefit your understanding to ask yourself why they are the way they are?

The why of it is generally understood by most folk with an ounce of reason and motivation to learn. But as I thought you would be quick to point out, that doesn't make it right.

More skewed logic. The war in Iraq, as international agencies devoted to recording these sorts of things universally report, has exponentially increased the membership of Al Queda and similar organizations. America is less safe now than we were two years ago.

One point does not lead to the other.

There is absolutely no reason to believe that fighting a war "over there" somehow prevents one from being ignited within our borders. In fact, given the steady incline in terrorist recruiting thanks to this administration's foreign policies, it is far more likely that a terrorist stike will be attempted than less so.

More numbers does not equate to more attacks. This is not a fight that can be avoided through diplomacy. It is a fight that must be fought and won.

We aren't going overseas to war because of "alarming data" about purported threats; we're going because of a quasi-theological imperialism.

No one ever goes to war over a threat. Countries go to war not because it is right, but because they think it will generate the best possible result. War is, after all, an extension of politics. If you look like the biggest, baddest kid on the block, no one will mess with you.

We aren't torturing others because torture has in any way been scientifically demonstrated to be effective (quite the contrary)

Legitimate interrogations are being carried out and information is being gathered. Of course, the entire campaign in Iraq could be based on lucky guesses, but I find that unlikely.

we are doing so because of aggressive quasi-fascist philosophies that justify dehumanizing those "different" than us.

the actions at Abu Ghraib are not torture with the intent to gather intelligence. They are just torture for its own sake. I dont consider the things done to the inmates to be overly 'wrong'.

 

[Adept]

the recurrent goofy claim that anything is OK as long as it's useful

What criteria do you use to decide whether something is the appropriate course of action?

 

[Adept]

By the by, I always sign any rep points I hand out, and I havent handed out any for this thread. Just in case you were wondering.

 

[rmcrobertson]

"...the actions at Abu Ghraib are not torture with the intent to gather intelligence. They are just torture for its own sake. I dont consider the things done to the inmates to be overly 'wrong'."

Well, that pretty much takes the biscuit.

 

[raedyn]

the actions at Abu Ghraib are not torture with the intent to gather intelligence. They are just torture for its own sake. I dont consider the things done to the inmates to be overly 'wrong'.

So... let me see if I understand this correctly. You are now justifying the humilitation of the prisonsers because it was done without purpose, and just purely to satisfy the sadistic streak in the people carrying it out? Seriously?

 

[heretic888]

So... let me see if I understand this correctly. You are now justifying the humilitation of the prisonsers because it was done without purpose, and just purely to satisfy the sadistic streak in the people carrying it out? Seriously?

Actually, I've done a bit of reading the past few weeks and I have come to the conclusion that the "pure sadism" claims of intent don't really seem to be backed up by evidence.

All acts of violence or malevolence against another human being seem to be rooted in justifications or rationalizations of some kind --- even in the sickly perverted form we see in serial killers. There doesn't seem to be much, if any, cases of human harming solely for the purpose of harming.

In this case, the rather flimsy rationalization was "I was just following orders" --- fundamentally the same justification given by Nazi soldiers on trial for war crimes.

A good source for all of this is Evil: Inside the Human Violence and Cruelty" by Roy Baumeister.

Laterz.

 

[ghostdog2]

"But most people in the know readily admit that torture *doesn't work* - it is not a "useful tool" Posted in some form or other by numerous

Drivel. Who are "most people"? Where's the scientific study of modern torture so many of you rely on? "In the know.." about what?

Aimlessly torturing random subjects certainly would lessen your chances of getting reliable info. But selectively torturing specific individuals screened for access to desired info....I bet that would work just fine. And quickly, too.
Come on, be fair. If it didn't work, they wouldn't do it.

 

[PeachMonkey]

Skipping, of course, the mere fact that having to debate the effectiveness of torture is a betrayal of everything that makes America great, and what we should value about ourselves as martial artists...

A director of the CIA under the Reagan Administration, had the following to say:

"Physical abuse or other degrading treatment was rejected, not only because it is wrong, but because it has historically proven to be ineffective," said Richard Stolz, Deputy Director of Operations of the Central Intelligence Agency in 1988.

... the problem with physical torture, being, of course, that people will typically say anything to make it stop. Psychological abuse, including sleep deprivation, tends to be far more effective.

Physical torture is more effective than other forms in that it is a tool to punish, to silence, and to frighten.

This article by a retired USMC interrogator and intelligence instructor who served in Vietnam lists specific instances demonstrating why torture is not only not effective, if can be counterproductive:

http://www.americanthinker.com/articles.php?article_id=3892

This article references both Vietnam-era CIA interrogation manuals and even WWII-era Japanese interrogation manuals that caution against physical torture:

http://www.americanprogress.org/site/pp.asp?c=biJRJ8OVF&b=134740

 

[ghostdog2]

Well, are we against torture because it's a betrayal of American values or because it's ineffective.
I'm fine with the former. I completely agree with it, in fact.
As for the latter, I think it's a stretch (pun intended). Believe me, I could take the sleep deprivation, standing on boxes, posing naked stuff for quite a while. Break out the rubber hoses and lead pipes and I'd sing like a canary. Right now. That's just me, of course.

 

[PeachMonkey]

Well, are we against torture because it's a betrayal of American values or because it's ineffective.

Yes.

As for the latter, I think it's a stretch (pun intended). Believe me, I could take the sleep deprivation, standing on boxes, posing naked stuff for quite a while. Break out the rubber hoses and lead pipes and I'd sing like a canary. Right now. That's just me, of course.

So would I -- but would we really be guilty? So many of the examples we've seen show that people under duress will confess simply to end torture -- regardless of actual guilt. How effective is that?

 

[michaeledward]

There Are Four Lights!

 

[Bester]

Damn you Picard.



Hey, we have a guilty verdict!