I hate George Bush. Go waste someone else’s money. Idiot. Too little, too late, Geo.
I’m not certain I see your frustration in this. Please explain further.
This does not erase the misconduct of U.S. troops in any way, but it is a step forward. Hopefully, a new prison will have better facilities for both inmates and staff. This is part of our obligation to Iraq.
Personally, I don’t have a problem with this. Quite the contrary. It strikes me as a positive step.
Not answering for Davidd because maybe he feels different, but it has a little bit of a feel like, “we aren’t owning up to this (the higher ups that is), but we’ll tear it down and rebuild you a new one.”
It feels like Bush is just throwing money at it - but ultimately will the abuse stop? Sure, these people who were on film will be punished, but will it happen again, somewhere else? Who is accepting the accountability ultimately?
I don’t know the solution and I do agree with your post, Tom, that maybe tearing this shit hole down is a very good thing. It was a torture chamber to Iragi’s under Saddam and now has become a torture chamber under the US Military. The placed is cursed and should be leveled.
The key element here is that with the building of the new prison, who will take the accountability to make sure nothing lke this happens again?
It’s been suggested that, like the Nazi concentration camps, Abu Ghraib should be preserved as a testament to the brutality of the regime that ran it. Saddam Hussein, that is. I guess it’s too late for the US to go that route now…
Why do liberals frequently debase themselves by calling names and spewing rhetoric instead of reasoned, informed debate???
“Why do liberals frequently debase themselves by calling names and spewing rhetoric instead of reasoned, informed debate???”
Funnily enough, that’s normally what I think about people on the right of the political spectrum when I read their posts.
And aren’t you guilty of the same thing - you are belittling davidd without actually responding to the content of his post.
Seems to me that there are people on both sides of the debate whose arguments are a little weak.
dt.
Never underestimate the value of the symbolic.
In a profoundly different context, think of the Chicago fans blowing up that baseball that was caught by that goofy guy sitting in the first row. Was it logical or necessary? No. Was it meaningful? Absolutely. Humans attach meaning and memories to places and things. Destruction of the place can sometimes help people move beyond those bad memories. In this situation, we’re morally obligated to do everything in our power – both symbolic and practical – to redress the wrongs committed by our troops and civilian contractors.
I gotta agree with this. 95% of the time, I’m pissed about the way our tax dollars are spent, but in this case, I think it it a step in the right direction. No, it won’t eliminate the atrocities committed there, but then, nothing will.
I don’t see any belittling and I do see him addressing the content of the post.
I think it’s better than giving it to the richest peeps in the U.S., which is Bush’s other favorite way to spend money.
Bad building. Bad building! We’ll tear you down and teach you a lesson. You bad building, you tricked our innocent GI’s into doing naughty things.
The Iraqis will be impressed by how we deal with our mistakes.
I think it’s better than giving it to the richest peeps in the U.S., which is Bush’s other favorite way to spend money.
Any facts to back that up?
" Even families making only $20,000 to $30,000 a year are getting an average cut this year of $638. And 98.4% of that group – “middle-class” by almost anybody’s standards – are getting some tax reduction… it increases their after-tax income an average of 2.7 percent above what it would have been before the Bush tax cuts."
I hate rhetoric.
TTTorso,
If you have $1 in your pocket and I take 35 cents of it instead of 40 cents, did I just give you a nickel?
Its money needed to run governmental functions…its part of the deal, you make a shitload of money, you pay the government a shitload of money. Besides, a good share of that money taxed isn’t earned its inherited…
There are services being cut all over the country, and you are in favor of giving this fraction of money back to the rich!? You really think that is the way the world should work!?
Do you think it was a good way to spend money in the bank!? Certainly doesn’t seem so now does it, now that we are going into massive debt, and the economy still stinks…
That the prisoners at Abu Ghraib were NOT uniformed combatants, Iraqi military, etc., but were IN FACT, guerillas, aka terrorists, who were arrested AFTER the cessation of hostilities.
Such individuals ARE NOT covered by the Geneva Conventions and have NO RIGHTS thereunder. In fact, the Geneva Conventions stipulate to this. These animals are the snipers, RPG launchers and potential suicide bombers. They should have all been executed, except that someone thought they might have intel…
Also, we wanted to be better than they were and not just kill them.
What do you suppose they do to Americans that THEY capture… Well, just ask Nick Berg, or the contractors whose charred remains were hung up for display in Fallujah…
Any facts to back that up?
" Even families making only $20,000 to $30,000 a year are getting an average cut this year of $638. And 98.4% of that group – “middle-class” by almost anybody’s standards – are getting some tax reduction… it increases their after-tax income an average of 2.7 percent above what it would have been before the Bush tax cuts."
I hate rhetoric.
I never said that the poor and middle class received no benefits from the deal…just a piss poor way of using badly needed tax dollars IMO…
The vast majority of people in US custody in Iraq are widely recognised to be falsely incarcerated - The Red Cross Report quotes US military officials who say that up to 80% may falsely detained.
To believe that everyone arrested are guerillas is extremely naive.
And to say “The other side is worst” is simply disingenous - the goal is not to be just better than the enemy, it is to demonstrate that Western democracy is something to desire - least-worst option is not good enough.
The US needs to win local support in Iraq - behaviour like this is not what is needed.
Not sure how we are fu**ing the rich people by not giving their taxes back, but I like how you try to make me feel sorry for them!!
And damn it, when do we start seeing all these jobs the rich people were supposed to come through with after receiving that tax cut!?!?
No matter how you put it I don’t agree with what Bush has done or how he spends money…no need to take it any further…pretty obvious if you look at the state of the economy over the past few presidential terms who has it figured out…but I know how you’ll argue that one!! Already heard it!!
Cheers!
This isn’t a political forum, but someone opened a door and I couldn’t just walk by…
“The vast majority of people in US custody in Iraq are widely recognised to be falsely incarcerated”
-
- “Widely”? You mean “popularly.” The vast majority of Americans are FÜ¢k!NG CLUELESS about what’s going on there.
“The Red Cross Report quotes US military officials who say that up to 80% may falsely detained.”
-
- Under the conditions there, anyone suspected should be held. There have been and continue to be, too many American deaths by those who spit on the Geneva Conventions and all other guidelines for acceptable conduct in reasonable society. The Red Cross should stick to what it does best, helping victims of natural disasters.
“To believe that everyone arrested are guerillas is extremely naive.”
-
- To believe an absolute would be foolish. To err on the side of safety is intelligent. To expect that 80% of those suspected guerillas wouldn’t slit your throat or strap on an explosive vest to wear to your daughter’s wedding reception is beyond naïve, it’s just plain foolhardy.
“And to say ‘The other side is worst’ is simply disingenous (sic)”
-
- Sorry, check your dictionary. Not only did you misspell it, you don’t seem to understand it. *Disingenuous - *Not straightforward or candid; crafty
IOW, dishonest. The undeniable FACT is that the other side MOST DEFINITELY IS WORSE, so to say so is simply being accurate.
- Sorry, check your dictionary. Not only did you misspell it, you don’t seem to understand it. *Disingenuous - *Not straightforward or candid; crafty
“the goal is not to be just better than the enemy, it is to demonstrate that Western democracy is something to desire - least-worst option is not good enough.”
-
- The “goal” is to finish the job of removing Saddam and establishing a free and independent Iraq.
“demonstrate?” Anyone who can’t see that our form of government (NOT democracy, btw, the founding dads even warned about the dangers of same) is infinitely superior to the tyranny of Saddam is brain-dead, and trying to convince such people of ANYTHING would be like trying to teach a pig to sing - it’s a waste of time, and it annoys the pig.
Least worst option is actually the pragmatic approach, and one that I thoroughly endorse. I believe it was Bull Halsey who said (during WWII) “The only good Jap is a dead Jap, and I intend to go over there and make as many good Japs as possible.” (or something very close to that).
Politically incorrect? Yeah. So how politically correct do you suppose the surviving widows of slain American soldiers who were ambushed by terrorist guerillas or the contractors who were burned and hung from the bridges in Fallujah wish we had been?
- The “goal” is to finish the job of removing Saddam and establishing a free and independent Iraq.
“The US needs to win local support in Iraq”
-
- Sorry, the US needs to take care of US business, and the local Iraqis can feel free to kiss my butt.
“behaviour like this is not what is needed.”
-
- On this last point, I’m almost prepared to agree, except that we don’t have facts, merely photos. Are you aware that most of the sexually explicit photos were NOT from Abu Ghraib, but from a porn filmmaker in Souther California?
As to the “torture and attrocities,” I say BALDERDASH. Iraqis cut throats and burn and dismember bodies. That’s pretty much the definition of “atrocity,” wouldn’t you agee? We make some guys get naked and have some homely trailer-trash PFC tramp point at their dicks and laugh. That’s rude, but it ain’t attrocity… Not by a LONG stretch.
We need to all chill and let the UCMJ work. We also need to let the military do what it does best: Kill people and blow sh!t up. Once all the “necessary” killin’s been done, the PC crowd can go in and see how friendly the natives are. I recommend letting the French handle that part.
What gives you the qualifications to call, “The vast majority of Americans fucking clueless”? Basically what I got out of your comment was, “the people that don’t agree with my idea that all Iraqis are bad are clueless.” Those for and against the war are employing selctive memory to only remember and recite the points they want to make, I have no doubt that for the gross generalizations you brought up such as Iraqis slitting throats etc. (last time I checked that was allegedly Al Qaida by the way) I can provide points to combat yours because you have provided little fact just opinions on why Iraqi=bad American=good.
I’m not sure if I agree or disagree with the whole prison idea yet. Apparently I jumped on the bandwagon against the whole wedding bombing fiasco before all the facts were straight, so I’ll try and reserve judgement for now. However I am 100% sure this is a needless war full of needless expenses footed by the taxpayers and out of all the money wasted in Iraq a new prison wouldn’t be the worst way to spend some of it.