The Photos
Moms View Message Board: The Kitchen Table (Debating Board): The Photos
I'm tired of seeing the photos of the Iraqi prisoners. I am ashamed for my country and angry that it was allowed to happen. I was talking to a friend and she tried to rationalize it by saying that we aren't doing anything worse than what's been done to us, but aren't we supposed to be better than that? I believe the majority are better than that, but it only takes a few to make the rest look bad.
Who is ultimately responsible? Are those who were in charge (and I do mean all the way up to Rumsfeld) going to be held accountable or will it only be the soldiers? It just makes me angry. Am I the only one who feels this way?
I'm disgusted by it. I agree the Iraqi's have done worse behavior for years and years, and dragging the bodies of our men through their streets is despicable. BUT, we are Americans and we are supposed to know better! The Americans who did these things deserve to be stripped of their military status and put in jail, definitely. I don't know who exactly to hold accountable as I've not been following this closely, but those who actually did it and photographed it and circulated the photos are a horrible representation of America and I am highly ashamed of them.
Ditto Kate.
It makes me sad that because of these few the entire military will pay for this. No one will look at the good things we did there only the things these few did. I am also tired of seeing the pics and i certainly hope these soldiers get the worst punishment possible for war crimes. There is a big difference in defense and just torture for the heck of it. The only ones that should be held accountable are those involved. I don't believe this is at all related to any orders given!
I also think this is a terrible thing and that there needs to be some accountability by the "higher-ups" I am tired of seeing the pictures, but the hardest thing was signing on a few mornings ago and having my 6yo see the pics on my AOL welcome screen. She, of course, asked what that was and I did not want to explain something like this to her. I just told her that some people hadn't been nice to some people that they were responsible for and now they were in trouble for it. Then she saw different pics on the news that I usually don't even have on for that precise reason. This isn't something I want to see everytime I sign on or turn on the TV! I know it happened and we have a right to know what is happening, but I don't think my kids should be exposed to it like this.
It is appalling. We are supposed to be better than that. How can we expect the Iraqis to believe we are trying to improve their lives (which is already very difficult) when stuff like this happens.
From what I have read there was a major breakdown of authority. Here is a quote from a story on Netscape News:
Karpinski's subordinates at Abu Ghraib at times disregarded her commands, and didn't enforce codes on wearing uniforms and saluting
superiors, which added to the lax standards that prevailed at the prison, said one member of the 800th MP Brigade. The soldier, who spoke on condition of anonymity, also said commanders in the field routinely ignored Karpinski's orders, saying they didn't have to listen to her because she was a woman. (Comment - Karpinski is a general, and her commanders routinely ignored her orders.)
There also appears to have been insufficient training, and from what I have read, copies of the Geneva Convention and material containing the rules for dealing with prisoners were not distributed.
Having civilian contractors being in control of any part of our intelligence machine also doesn't help, as they are not subject to military command, but from what I have read were invested with some level of authority.
I too am afraid that the punishment will start and stop at the lowest levels. Again, from what Ihave read, the Red Cross gave reports to Rumsfeld months ago and he didn't even read the reports through to the end. I do not believe he can credibly disclaim knowledge. The buck should not stop at the GI level but should continue up to the highest policy makers who had knowledge and did nothing to stop what was going on.
Several different comments I have read, in my local papers and on the internet, note that the military personnel in the pictures were smiling, and distributed the photos, as if they knew or believed that they would not get into trouble for what they were doing. That could only come from a breakdown in command.
I won't say I am "tired" of seeing the pictures. I am heartsick, but I think if the media don't show the pictures and comment on what has been happening, it has a better chance of "going away" with nothing serious or permanent being done about it. Which would be even more appalling. This administration, like all administrations, will try to sanitize this - that has already happened with the banning of photos of the flag-draped coffins coming in to Dover AFB, as if seeing anonymous flag-dropped coffins somehow violates the privacy of the families. This administration is not the first and probably won't be the last to try to "protect" us from the knowledge of the unpleasant things being done "in our name". Without the media digging and publishing such information and photos, we might never know - or not until things got really, really bad. As bad as this is, believe me, it could be worse. In fact, it already is worse - there are reports of murders and rapes, as well as serious beatings. I think the photos we have seen so far may be the tip of the iceberg.
While I do agree with you that the pictures serve a purpose and I understand the importance of showing them, I don't need to see them over and over again. Perhaps tired isn't the right word, but I really don't need to see that woman with the cigarette hanging out of her mouth smiling and pointing at that man's genitals. I've seen it enough. You know, the more I think about it, the more I realize that the expressions on the faces of the service men and women anger me as much as the mistreatment portrayed in the photos.
Quote:I think the photos we have seen so far may be the tip of the iceberg.
New pictures surface everyday. I wouldn't be surprised if you are right. 
Sunny, that one bothers me the worst out of all of them. Her parents must be so proud. Not.
Ok, I am not going to be popular for what I'm about to say, but oh well. I agree that these pictures were uncalled for, and the soldiers were wrong for what they did. However, this is WAR. It's not supposed to be pleasant and friendly. These soldiers do their best to follow the Geneva Conventions, and do everything in the "proper" manner, but their opponents are not doing the same. They are fighting a guerilla warfare, they are fighting dirty, breaking ALL the rules, and raping, torturing, humiliating, and murdering our soldiers. Not to mention the civilian contractors that were dragged and BURNED alive. Oh, and the American POWs, what about the horror and macabre they are subjected to. IF they are not killed. This is not a chess game... this is "my LIFE or yours". We expect our soldiers to behave, when the enemy combatant they have in custody just BLEW UP their buddies! What about Sgt. Randy Rosenberg, a Ft. Hood soldier Nate served with for years. His wife Misty is a young widow because an Iraqi decided to blow him up by suicide bomb while he checked IDs. CPL Genaro Acosta, whose wife Roxanne was planning a renewal of vows upon his return. He was one of Mike (daddyof3's)friends. Sgt Maj. Jim Blankenbeckler, whose 14 year old daughter stood and sobbed at his funeral, reading the letter she had written him after he was killed. She buried her daddy. And they are just some examples, many of us know soldiers who have been killed, widows who buried their young grooms, and children without fathers. Have you ever been to a military funeral? Heard the role call they hold for the dead soldier? Do you know just exactly WHAT happened to those Americans? How their ultimate sacrafice came? It came many times by the hands of a faceless coward strapped with bombs, or an RPG, which is not supposed to be used against anything but light armored vehicles. Ask Jessica Lynch what she really thinks of these pictures... and if it compares to the treatment she received. These enemy soldiers are killing anyone who is not one of them. Media, civilian contractors (who are MAJOR targets, but cannot carry weapons), these people are not supposed to be targeted. Anyone remember Daniel Pearl? What about what they did to him? And this girl was an enlisted soldier, her command is not without fault here. She's just taking the fallout. In my opinion, those who are holding our soldiers to a higher standard need to read The Art of War, and realize this isn't a pretty little game. And what about this last thought... 11 September 2001. I'm tired of America playing nice.
If I were president (as extraordinarily unlikely as that is) heads would roll (figuratively). The slowness of the administration's actions in dealing with this tells me that they did not really view unleashing sadists on suspects (with the emphasis on suspected, as opposed to proven terrorists) as a problem. If we are to stoop to the level of our opponents, then all we are really fighting for is ourselves, and not any greater principles. I find that unacceptable.
Is this behavior different from any other war? That's hard to say (at least for me), because compact digital camera's that could store hundreds of images (or transmit images to anywhere in the world within seconds after the photographs were taken) did not exist in any other war. Is this behavior connected to the endless sadism that one sees on TV and in the movies (I've written about this subject before on Mom's View)? Again, I don't know. I'm pretty sure, however, that no previous American generation was raised with so much exposure to media-sadism.
At any rate, in my view we should be far more agressively legally pursuing those who perpetrated this and those who made this possible. All the way from Donald Rumsfield (who should resign) to Lynndie England and the others who perpetrated these acts.
Yes, Crystal, this is war. And war has rules. And we agreed to follow them, no matter what the other guy does.
I went to the memorial service for a young man from my church last Wednesday. I watched him grow up. He was 30 years old, the father of a 6 year old son. His mother and I have been friends for 25 years. I won't forget him or any of the other people killed in Iraq.
But, our nation sent troops into Iraq, according to the present scenario, to bring democracy to that part of the world. And most of what we have done has been the wrong thing to do, the wrong way to do it, and pretty much a failure if our goal is to win the hearts and minds of most Iraqis for a democractic way of government.
You say "These soldiers do their best to follow the Geneva Conventions, and do everything in the "proper" manner, but their opponents are not doing the same." And I believe most of them are. But the soldiers (and civilian contractors) involved in the incidents in the photos weren't. They have harmed and hampered the efforts to move Iraq toward believing in and accepting democracy, they have aided and abetted the enemy - the terrorists who are shooting at their fellow soldiers - by doing these things AND providing evidence, and they had to know that what they were doing was wrong, wrong, wrong. That terrorists kill, kidnap and harm U. S. and European personnel does not in any way justify or permit what they have done. Two wrongs are just that - two wrongs.
I have no use for and abhor terrorists, in Iraq and everywhere else. But you don't stop terrorists by descending to their level. What happened in that prison, even if it weren't just terribly wrong, was and is just plain stupid. It has provided wonderful propaganda for the recruitment of more terrorists who will try to kill our young men and women and made it more likely that the average Iraqis will either support the terrorists or at least not aid in efforts to detect and stop them. It has put every soldier in Iraq even more in harms way and damaged the reputation and image of every soldier over there. And what it has done to the reputation and image of the U.S. in the rest of the world is equally bad.
Those abberant soldiers weren't fighting a war - they were, at best, trying to get revenge, which is perhaps understandable but always counter-productive and usually fruitless. More likely, from what I have read, there has been a drastic failure of command and they simply thought they could get away with it and the idea appealed to them at the time. Which is why the military have rules and chain of command and accountability -it is the job of older and wiser soldiers, those in command along the line, to prevent the younger troops from doing such stupid things, and there was a definite failure of command.
Surely heads must roll. I am afraid, however, based on the latest pronouncements from Washington, that the only people who will be punished are the people at the bottom - while the people higher up, who are supposed to make certain things like this don't happen, will get off. General Karpinski has been removed, but I doubt she will be courtmartialed or put at risk of dishonerable discharge. And if the comments I quoted above are accurate and officers in her command didn't obey her orders - because she is a woman or for any other reason - I very much doubt they will be courtmartialed. They may get black marks in their records but their lives won't be destroyed, while the lives of those soldiers in the photos and many other soldiers in that prison will be destroyed. And that is a tragedy, not only for the lives destroyed but for what it will do to discipline in our military generally.
Crystal, I agree with you 100%.
What they did have not only hurt efforts in iraq but hurt the military in all over seas locations. We are getting alot of feedback here as well. On the news everyday here we see those pics of what "the americans did" as if it was all of us. With all the protests that happen on the 3rd of may here, this just was fuel for the fire. We came here thinking we were gonna see much of a new country but we keep getting orders not to leave our homes becuase of violent protestors! Every day it gets worse and if something doesn't happen to rectify this then we will all be prisoners of our homes for the time we are here! The worse part is that it was NOT just american soldiers it was British soldiers as well committing these crimes but still the people blame us for influence! I can't really say who should take the fall outside of those who did the crime and those who knew because i don't have the info to point fingers beyond that. I hear so many say to just go ahead and pull out our people and let the Iraqi people figure this out for themselves but i am torn on that because in one instance i feel that they may come to home territory for revenge they feel they deserve and in one way i feel like we are just getting farther behind with all the negative things that have happened. I feel so bad for the way this has got out of hand.
An eye for an eye? Whatever we've done to them is okay because they've done worse to us? All's fair in war?
I disagree.
I had written a long response, but am choosing not to post it. I am sorry for all the soldiers killed and for their families. I put as much blame on the politicians who sent them to Iraq for their deaths as I do the person who killed them.
Well I haven't posted in a while, but I cannot resist this one.
First of all, I would like to say that soldiers were wrong for the "torture" they are accused of, however these actions are nothing compared to what has happened to our soldiers and civilians. It is very easy to sit at home and criticize how soldiers are acting over there, but think of how it feels to see your best friend's head and upper torso ripped from the rest of their body. Soldiers back at home after surviving these attacks have been mangled so horribly that they are completely unrecognizable. We are told what is expected of us as soldiers regarding the treatment of prisoners. But in reality you yourself cannot say how you would react to a person who just killed your buddy and shot 47 rounds into your vehicle. You may be cool headed and follow your training and the rules of engagement as specified by the Geneva Convention. What ever your convictions about morals and right and wrong are usually taken over by instinct, and the will to live. It is completely wrong of you, I don't care who you are, to ask ME to fight a war in which I cannot fight back with the same force that is being used against me. Part of my duty as a soldier is to ensure that my comrades in arms make it home. More than that duty though is my duty as a father and husband to make it home to my family. Counter productive as it is, revenge is a strong human instinct. But if you and your daughter or son were coming home from buying your husband a hunting rifle as a present for Christmas, and a random person shot and killed your loved one, would you shoot back?
The chain of command has a lot on their plate from making sure soldiers are accounted for, taken care of, and battle ready, to planning battles and strategies routes for convoys, and making sure that reports are all sent to proper authorities and higher headquarters. Therefore, it is unrealistic to expect them to also control Private so and so. It is the equivalent of expecting the owner of Wal-mart to come and reprimand a sales person in your town for being rude.
In respect to Donald Rumsfeld having to apologize, it is not his responsibility nor obligation to apologize to anyone in this case. Nor is it the responsibility of anyone in the chain of command to apologize for the actions of those soldiers. The obligation of apology rests solely on the soldiers who committed the crime. It is IMPOSSIBLE to have one soldier's entire chain of command watching his/her every move. The NCO's that were there when it took place are the ones to which the responsibilities of the soldier's actions were delegated. That Donald Rumsfeld is even making an apology, although unnecessary in my opinion, makes him a better man.
You haven't heard much from me yet, but I couldn't resist, either.
Yes, word got to Mr. Rumsfeld early on. However, letters were also sent to 11 of our senators and/or representatives on Capitol Hill months ago as well detailing the abuse being perpetrated on the Iraqi prisoners. Why didn't THEY say anything about it? I have a theory. Perhaps they ignored the letters that they received in hopes that, when these abuses finally did come to light, Rummy would get lynched, the Administration's credibility would be further damaged, and Kerry wins the election. Sound far-fetched? I know it does. But I know that some democrats are desperately hungry for power again.
What about our citizens who were burned and hung? We don't see those pictures on TV the way they are showing the Iraqi prisoners. Look how mad everyone is about our soldiers' wrongdoing! Why aren't as many people as mad at whoever tortured and murdered our people? Why aren't the pictures of our dead Americans still on TV?
"...and pretty much a failure if our goal is to win the hearts and minds of most Iraqis for a democractic way of government."
That is untrue. Ollie North was just in Iraq and, after speaking with an Iraqi citizen, related that most Iraqi citizens are thankful that they don't have to live under Saddam Hussein anymore, the abuse that the Iraqi prisoners went through was MILD compared to what Saddam put his own people through, and they don't see what WE are making such a fuss about with regard to that abuse.
"That terrorists kill, kidnap and harm U. S. and European personnel does not in any way justify or permit what they have done. Two wrongs are just that - two wrongs."
Fight fire with fire.
"It has provided wonderful propaganda for the recruitment of more terrorists who will try to kill our young men and women and made it more likely that the average Iraqis will either support the terrorists or at least not aid in efforts to detect and stop them."
As Ollie North said, the average Iraqi supports the actions of the allied forces in their country. It has, however, provided wonderful propaganda for anyone who was already against allied actions in Iraq. They are the ones who have taken this story and run with it for the purpose of inciting just the kind of anger you now have against our presence there.
"And what it has done to the reputation and image of the U.S. in the rest of the world is equally bad."
The image of the U.S. in the rest of the world was already bad, even before 9/11. According to an article in the February 2004 edition of Reader's Digest, written by Tucker Carlson, "Most Americans would be shocked to learn just how ugly their so-called Europen allies consider them."
Some of the causes of this hatred are obvious, beginning with America's growing power. We are richer and more influential than any European country, making those nations eager to see us brought down to size, if not humiliated. When we send troops to Kosovo to halt a genocidal conflict, we're warmongers; when we pour billions into foreign aid, we're imperialists; when we open a new McDonald's or Disneyland on foreign siol, we're polluters of culture"
Supporters of France's National Front Party reportedly celebrated with champagne as they watched the World trade Center collapse."
I understand that there are a lot of emotions involved in this debate. That is the purpose of all this media hubub- to stir emotions, because we are a people ruled by emotions. I also understand that there are other facts that you don't hear in the general media. Facts that would otherwise put this whole thing into better perspective.
After just seeing that they beheaded an American contractor I am even more sickened than I was before.
Quote:Yes, word got to Mr. Rumsfeld early on. However, letters were also sent to 11 of our senators and/or representatives on Capitol Hill months ago as well detailing the abuse being perpetrated on the Iraqi prisoners. Why didn't THEY say anything about it? I have a theory. Perhaps they ignored the letters that they received in hopes that, when these abuses finally did come to light, Rummy would get lynched, the Administration's credibility would be further damaged, and Kerry wins the election. Sound far-fetched? I know it does. But I know that some democrats are desperately hungry for power again.
I could infer from this that you feel the Democrats are to blame, but I'll gvie you the benefit of the doubt and assume you meant something else. Remember, Rumsfeld is the Secretary of Defense. Doesn't that mean he is the one in charge?
Quote:What about our citizens who were burned and hung? We don't see those pictures on TV the way they are showing the Iraqi prisoners. Look how mad everyone is about our soldiers' wrongdoing! Why aren't as many people as mad at whoever tortured and murdered our people? Why aren't the pictures of our dead Americans still on TV?
I remember being outraged and angry. I also remember it being broadcast day and night.
I said my piece; I am angry that this has happened. I don't know what it's like to be a soldier in a war and could never possibly predict how I would react or feel, but this has just added more fuel to an already volatile fire. I can only pray that it doesn't result in anymore revenge killings and we can hand over Iraq to it's people on June 30th, peacefully.
BTW, the American who was killed was a civilian trying to get back to the US. I just saw his parents on TV the other night telling the story of how they had lost communication with him for weeks and just wanted him to come home. Unfortunately, it will be in a body bag.
I am just sick to my stomach about the death of the civilian. But to me, it just shows how little value this enemy places on human life. To say this horrible act was in response to the behavior of our soldiers..what were the suicide bombings in response to. We talk about rules of engagement, but how fair are they playing when they kill civilians. However we feel about the war and whether or not we should be in it, we must always realize this is a WAR. I heard a very interesting quote this am. "ALWAYS be on the side of peace, but NEVER be on the side of the enemy".
I think what happened is very unfortunate but in many ways I'm not suprised. Let me explain...
In almost every war there are always a small group of cruel people who use the situation to act out their sadistic tendencies.
These people exist on both sides and are of EVERY nationality...American included.
HOWEVER...I hope that the cruel acts of these few don't besmerch the vast majority of honorable men and women serving in Iraq.
I believe that NO ONE should excuse the behavior of these individuals...it is disgusting! To justify the behavior of these "guards" smears the reputation of the thousands of good people serving in Iraq.
Now that the damage is done, it is up to America to show the world how we deal with these people and put them on public trial.
THAT alone will show the world that America IS different than other countries who would try to sweep this under the rug.
I am in no way condoning what the American soldiers did, but how much culpability does the media have in all this? It was the publishing of the pictures that incited the retaliation.
I was so shocked at seeing the beheading pics that I couldn't type a full response. Dh put it into perspective, What do you expect? Are you shocked? Did you really think they would be throwing flowers at our feet?
So, we humiliate some of them and they burn, maim, and chop off the heads of our citizens/soldiers and threaten more in the future. These are not civilized people. They don't play by the rules of normal society. We are over there building schools and roads and trying to help them, but they do not help themselves. They have lived like this for thousands of years and have not tried to live in a democracy and they are still not trying. If you want freedom you need to fight for it. They are not, and a whole lot of American Daddies (and mommies) are dying. For what? This is absolutely ridiculous, how many daddies have to be maimed or die before we either pull out or unleash our full military strength, pull our soldiers out and turn the entire middle east into a sheet of glass?
I believe that the majority of Iraq's are Good people like you and me who want a good life for themselves and their children.
The people doing these atrocities are fanatical extremists that the common people are afraid of...and afraid to say anything against.
Unlike us...who have the police car just a phone call away to protect us ...the common people in Iraq are on their own.
One careless comment to the wrong person could mean the death of their entire family at the hands of these criminals with guns.
Many of these monsters have come from outside the country JUST for the chance to kill an American.
Texannie,
I agree, the media has been out of control for so many years, They will do ANYTHING for a buck, and they are not without blame here. And as far as that civilian who was beheaded, Nate stumbled across the full video. I'll spare you the details, I refused to look at it, but it's the most horrendous thing you could EVER have nightmares about. Nate was horrified and sickened to an extreme by it, and he's seen a decapitation in the flesh from a MVA. It's just that unimaginable. These hooded men never revealed themselves to this poor American, he never saw his killers. I'm with Colette, let's make a table top out of the Middle East. These, well I really can't think of an appropriate term for them, they chanted "God is good" while they did things to this man that are only seen in horror movies. Is this what ANYONES God would want?! And on that note, I'm going back into the news-less state I'd spent about 2 months in. It's hard to function with such horror thrown in our faces every day.
Just a note here. My dad is a ret col in the army, he was on the front line in Vietnam. It is interesting hearing his viewpoint on this. He was in war, he saw just how mean the US people can be. "We win wars because we are the meanest SOB's out there". He said it is much less this time because there is so much media coverage. That being said. We had 300,000 troop in Nam and it took us years to feel like we had some control. Vietnam is easily half the size of Iraq. What are we doing only sening 125,000 troops there? We have no chance of really making a difference. Through in the unfair fighting and there is only one end to this, unless we do something different! I don't condone what our solidiers did. I don't know what I would do. I do know that my dad watched people cutting off body parts of people they killed and wear them as jewelry and he did not participate. Was he angry, yes, did he know that was wrong, YES! I would like to think that my moral standards would be unheld. As far as killing my children's murderer that Seth mentioned. I am sure I would think about it, but I don't think I would do it. I think the only time it is acceptable to kill is under a life or death situation.
OK - shoot the messenger.
The media did not create the problem. And deferred publishing for a few weeks at administration requests. To think for even one minute that the people in Iraq did not already know what was going on is - politely, extremely short-sighted. We - the people who are paying for this war - the wives, mothers, fathers, sisters and friends of those in harm's way - were the ones being kept in ignorance.
I do not think for a second that the terrorists who kidnapped Berg would have done anything different if the photos had not been published.
From what I read in TIME magazine, this "stuff" has been going on for months, and an investigation began in January - and the day before the photos were finally published Rumsfeld met with members of the Armed Services Committee, knowing about the Red Cross report, knowing about the military investigation, knowing the photos were out there and would likely be published, and didn't give them even a "heads up".
What the media did is to let us know - whether we want to or not - what some people are doing and what is perceived in the Middle East as being done on our behalf and in our name.
Shooting or blaming the messenger only ensures that if the news is bad you'll never hear it. Not a condition in which I'd want to live.
Until each of us has walked a mile in the soldiers shoes, I don't feel we have the right to judge what they have done. Why should these prisoners feel that they have the right to be treated fairly? If they had not done what they had done, then they would not be where they are.
I feel the same with prisoners in our jails in the US. I just had to fight with our local jail because a prisoner that we did not know had an incorrect number and called us collect at all hours of the day and night. We would receive calls religiously at 1:30am. The first response I got when I called the jail was to not answer the phone. My response back was why is a prisoner out of his cell at 1:30am. This is their problem not mine.
Lead a better life and you will not have to worry about these things whether in the US or abroad.
First, I have to say that my grandfather was one of the editors of the Houston Chronicle. I grew up cutting my teeth on the First Amendment and was a journalism major in college. But I do worry that the media has gone too far in their pursuit of "the public's right to know". I would not want to live in a place where there was no free speech, but it is interesting that the enemy did not do anything in retaliation until the pictures were published.
I often wonder if we would have had the successful military battles that we did in WWII if the media had the attitude they do now.
The only problem i have with the media is that on the news or in the papers is that the ONLY thing i have seen is the BAD stuff. Why can't we see some of the good we are doing over there. Why is it that only the horrible things happening are brought to light? If there has been good stuff it has been so small and not nearly as glorified as the bad stuff, why is that? I know there has been good stuff going on, my dh was there for months, his friends have been there but the only place we hear the good stuff is in the base magazine! No one cares about the good things cuz they can't use that to blame the president or prove their points when arguing about the whether it was right or wrong to go over there!
I want to make sure I am clear on what my dad thinks on the media. Because of the medias presence, the soldiers really are on their best behavior. The media holds up some accountablity for soldiers. This can be good and can be bad. We probably do need to just level the place and start over, IF we are going to continue this war. But can you imagine the outrage of us, if that was shown on TV. Plain and simple war is brutal and NOT nice, we sit back over here and want to think we are all playing fair and honestly if that were the case we wouldn't be at war now would we.
Story about Brit abuse of an Iraqi teen from Mirror (warning with pictures):
http://www.mirror.co.uk/news/allnews/tm_objectid=14199634&method=full&siteid=50143&headline=shame-of-abuse-by-brit-troops-name_page.html
Abuse of women in Iraqi jail
2763,1214698,00.html,http://www.guardian.co.uk/Iraq/Story/0,2763,1214698,00.html
Thanks John for the story on the brits abuse. They constantly talk about how horrible us americans have been in this war on the news but they never mention their own soldiers!
http://www.guardian.co.uk/Iraq/Story/0,2763,1215101,00.html
Tex...i think its a cop out! They have not proved they are fakes and just because someone says they are does not mean its true. Its not a surprise that government officials have put out the word that its a fake before they even proved it!
Just showing other links. I don't have any idea of the truth or not.
I think it is degrading to the memories and the honor of those who have sacrificed their lives to have Americans behave in this fashion. Yes, this is war, but we are trained warriors, not vigilanti. We have a armed forces that are educated and responsible. What these few have done is put us down to the level of that which we are fighting to eradicate.
I'd like to know if the armed forces do psychological testing as part of the entrance screening. You have to be pretty sick to come up with what we're seeing.
I think it's important that we have seen these photos. At least we can show the world that although these things have been done by Americans, there will be consequences and reparations, unlike what might happen somewhere else.
Ame
There is no such thing as the public's "right to know", except where specific laws exist giving the public access to information, such as the Freedom of Information Act. Any reporter who uses the phrase, "the public's right to know" is blowing smoke. What the First Amendment (blessings on the Founding Fathers) says is: Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the government for a redress of grievances.
What this means, according to the courts, especially the Supreme Court, is that the press has the right to print anything without prior outside censorship. The courts have restricted that right somewhat by saying that the press cannot print something it knows is false (libel/slander) and if the press/media publishes something it knows is false and in so doing causes measurable harm, financial redress can be sought and sometimes achieved.
It is important to remember that our free press is one of the many reasons that tyrants and terrorists hate us. A free press is the enemy of every tyranny, every corrupt politician, every individual in a position of power or control who abuses that position.
As to whether the photos are fakes, I don't know. Some of the U. S. troops in the photos have said they posed, which would seem to imply that those photos at least are not fakes. And, there is the Red Cross report and the report(s) of the investigation(s) conducted by our own military.
As for the enemy not doing anything in retaliation until the photos were published, members of the U.S. military have been attacked and killed daily for months. That this particular atrocity took place now probably does have to do with timing, taking advantage of the photos, but also has to do with the fact that that particular group of terrorists had a U.S. citizen as prisoner, and I am very sorry to say it, but I think his death was inevitable once he was taken captive. The method of his death was horrible deliberately - to cause terror, which is what terrorists do. That is why the bombs in Spain targeted a civilian passenger train and why most of the Palestinian bombers in Israel target civilians, women and children and old people, in places where they thought they should be safe. The Irish terrorists have done much the same in England. The purpose of terrorism is to cause fear in the minds and hearts of the average citizen who is not involved in military or government activity, to persuade them to get their governments to stop doing whatever the terrorists want stopped and to do whatever the terrorists want done (if they - the terrorists - actually know, which I sometimes doubt). The purpose of terrorism is to cause terror and horror.
I understand, Mike and others, that our troops in Iraq are being shot at every day, and that probably many of the people in the 800th know people who were injured or killed, and worry about their friends and buddies. But those guards in the prison were not in harm's way. And, as Ame points out, our troops are not - or at least are not supposed to be - vigilantes.
Whether these soldiers were ordered, or encouraged by those they thought to be in command situations, to do what they did is highly likely, at least for some of them.
With deep respect, Mike, for your opinion and feelings - you've been there and I haven't - no, I don't expect the owner of Wal-Mart to come reprimand a rude sales clerk. I expect Wal-Mart to employ managers who will, upon complaint, reprimand rude sales clerks. And if the store manager doesn't, I expect the area or regional manager to act when a complaint is made about the local manager's inaction. And, if the local or regional manager doesn't deal with the problem, then I expect the CEO of Wal-Mart to take action - that's what a chain of command is about. From what I've read, the commander of the prison even allowed soldiers to not wear their uniforms when they were on duty, and to not follow the rules about saluting superiors - you know that is so totally out of line it isn't even worth thinking of. There was a lack of training, a lack of distributing important information to the people carrying out the tasks, and a failure of command. And the rules that I know is that if it happens on your watch, in your command, you are ultimately responsible. As good old Harry Truman said, "The buck stops here." It appears, however, that the buck will start and stop with the troops - the people who were not adequtely trained and were inadequately supervised. Which is a damned shame. If heads are going to roll - as well they should - some of those heads should be falling from more important shoulders than privates and sergeants.
Having said all I have said in this post and othrs above (and in other threads), I have come to believe that once we invaded Iraq we took on a responsibility that we cannot, in honor, walk away from. Whatever the horrors of Hussein's regime, it was stable, and Iraq is no longer stable. Its economy is down the tubes (not that it was great to start with) and whole regiments of terrorists have moved to that part of the world, taking advantage of the destabilization. I believe we need some new thinking - probably involving the UN but definitely involving a lot of U.S. force and money for many, many months - to try to find ways to counter the terrorists in the only way they can be countered, by removing their popular base. To leave Iraq less stable than it was before the invasion will only further destabilize an already risky part of the world and inevitably lead to greater risks for the U.S., both at home and everywhere else in the world, especially the Middle East. I hate thinking or saying this, and many of my friends disagree with me very strongly. But I am terribly afraid of what will happen if we just leave, June 30th or anytime in the near future.
Once again let me say that I do not agree with what the Soldiers did. But in comparison to what the Iraqi's have done their crimes pale in comparison.
I have the video of Nicholas Berg, it is one of many videos I have seen involving the sickening tactics used by our enemy. What a lot of you may not realize is that we see these things first hand while we are there. It may be our friend, or some one who saved our life the day before that this happens to.
Above Amecmom asked if we undergo psychological testing.
Yes we do, when joining we have a preliminary test then before and after a deployment we go through testing.
But after seeing the video one would have to admit that it would probably cause some mental distress seeing this type of thing first hand. So this is a look at what we are up against. The amount of force used by U.S. forces needs to be modified or we need to get out and stay out of Iraq. We cannot possibly continue with odds like these and FIGHT FAIR. Just something to think about.
WARNING DISTURBING VIOLENCE AND GORE ARE
CONTAINED IN THIS VIDEO..................
If you want to see what we what we are up against e-mail me @ drelvin63 @ bellsouth .net
WARNING DISTURBING VIOLENCE AND GORE ARE
CONTAINED IN THIS VIDEO..................
Maybe this will give a sense of what our troops are facing.
This is in no way an excuse for the soldiers actions, but maybe you can get a sense of what could have driven those soldiers to this level of grotesque actions.
Just a different perspective.
http://apnews.myway.com//article/20040512/D82HAE800.html
No matter how you look at it the soldiers that did this was wrong. You can try to say that its okay because they have done worse to us, but it isn't. We are supposed to be better than this and frankly I don't think it is fair to call these idiots soldiers. They are an embarrassment to the United States & deserve to be in prison. I think anyone that knew this was going on is very accountable & should be considered accomplices. No matter how high up it goes. And to say they were following orders, you know the difference between right & wrong. Making some one sodimize themselves is WRONG, no matter what the reason.
Yes, they are blowing smoke out their a##, but it's amazing how many people (the general public and the media) feel they have the RIGHT to know everything the government does.
I have read statements from the enemy that the beheading was done in retaliation.
Mike, WOW. I am not sure I will ever be the same after watching that. I agree with you on this "The amount of force used by U.S. forces needs to be modified or we need to get out and stay out of Iraq".
Like I said I don't agree with what they did, and they do deserve to be punished. But no one seems to care about what we as soldiers see and deal with on a day to day basis in Iraq. Some soldiers could be driven to this type of behavior due to the stress of seeing the types of things which take place in the video I was sent. You should view this if you think our Soldiers are the only ones at fault.
I am not saying our soldiers are the only ones at fault. I support them, with exception of the ones that have done this. Just like I do not think that all Islamics should be held accountable for those that mistreat or murder our people.
I can't imagine what ya'll saw. Thank you for seeing it and fighting for us.
No, I can't imagine dealing with what you soldiers deal with on a daily basis. That's why I'm not a soldier. I have a great appreciation for what the soldier is able to do, which is why I am so disappointed and disheartened to see what some Americans have done. Yes, we know the enemy does not fight fair. We know they do horrible things. That's why they are the enemy. We're fighting to stop the things they do, not to perpetuate them. This should not be if you can't beat them join them.
I would hope there is continuing psychological evaluation and counseling to help soldiers deal with what they do for all of us. I would hope that support system is there.
Let me say again, I have the greatest respect, admiration and gratitude for what our armed forces do. I think this action, from the lowest to the highest ranking perpetrators, is an insult to every American risking his or her life in Iraq and a dishonor to every person who gave his or her life.
I was reading this to Mike and he said to tell you "Thank You, Annie"
Me talking: Those guys DID see a lot. I can *somewhat* understand soldiers reacting in a way in which they would deeply regret later out of anger, frustration, resentment, you name it. However, I strongly believe that the soldiers that took part in the abuse of the prisoners were WAY out of line, but obviously very mentally sick. I hope they receive psychological treatment as well as an appropriate punishment.
I would like the media to let me know what is going on with our country at all times, except when it would put our citizens and/or military in danger.
I think that Mike has very strong feelings about this because of all that he experienced out there. It kind of comes across funny when such a big deal is being made out of this when EVERY DAY there are US soldiers dying horrible deaths in Iraq and the only public recognition they get sounds something like: "In other news, Sgt. So-and-so was killed by an RPG today in Iraq." We are becoming numb to these types of reports, and it's getting kind of scary. Mike just feels like what is happening to Americans in Iraq is being reported with such frequency and blase, that it is offensive when reports of abuse to our ENEMIES are making headlines. And I agree.
Mike,
I cannot begin to imagine what it must be like to be in the midst of these horrific scenes.
I also cannot pretend to understand how it would affect me (being a soldier) to see these things.
I also realize that soldiers need to "close ranks" and stick together in these sorts of situations just to survive.
As far as winning these sorts of conflicts (fighting against guerillas with conventional forces), history is full of failures in these types of conflicts including:
The French in Indochina (early 1900's)
The US in Vietnam
The Dutch in Java and Sumatra (late 1800's)
The Germans in the USSR (WWII)
The Russians in Aghanistan (1980's)
The latest news from Iraq has made me wonder whether we CAN win in such a conflict.
A series of errors on lewd images
By Christine Chinlund | May 14, 2004
IT IS AN understatement to say that the Globe erred when it ran a photo that, if you look closely, showed images of men dressed as soldiers having sex with unidentified women. It's also an understatement to say the paper regrets the error -- as was evident in the apology published yesterday as an editor's note. There's no excuse for what happened -- but, for the many readers who asked how the Globe could publish a photo that included sexually explicit and unauthenticated images, there is this explanation:
First, the context. On Tuesday Boston City Councilor Chuck Turner held a press conference to display photos he said showed Iraqi women being raped by US soldiers. Some news outlets didn't report on the press conference because the photos were unverified -- and there was reason to doubt them -- but the Globe Metro staff decided it was better to write the story, raise questions within it, and let voters judge Turner's actions.
Tuesday afternoon a photo staffer reviewed photos taken at the press conference. They showed Turner next to a display of four sexually explicit photos that he said were from Iraq. Picture editor Thea Breite -- failing, she says, to realize that the sexual images were recognizable -- asked the photography director, Catie Aldrich, if she had a problem with the photo running. Aldrich, who was on deadline and says she had no idea that Breite was asking about the photo's appropriateness, gave a routine OK.
At that point the question of taste, says Aldrich, should have been raised more explicitly. Says Breite, "I would have . . . if I had thought you could see something [inappropriate] in the photo."
That constituted Mistake No. 1, a misperception and a miscommunication, perhaps attributable to simple human error. But Mistake No. 2 is more troubling.
The photo, headed for the publication pipeline, should have been flagged for discussion by top editors, as all sensitive or graphic photos should be. Although several staffers saw it, no one set that process in motion; one raised a question but the message was not received in time. "There should have been a lot of checks and balances and, for whatever reason, there weren't," said Aldrich, who as photo chief takes ultimate responsibility for what she calls the "huge embarrassment."
"There was a lapse in judgments and procedures, and we apologize for it," said Globe Editor Martin Baron. The graphic nature of the photos and their lack of authentication made them unsuitable for publication, he said.
First edition carried the Page B2 photo three columns wide -- big enough to make out the roughly 1-inch square sexual images within it. In later editions it was made smaller at the request of Michael Larkin, heiputy managing editor, who said that although he could not discern the sexual images on the page proof he viewed, he wanted to play it safe, given the story's content.
On Wednesday many editors were shocked to see the photo in print. So were readers, who called in large number, many saying they were "disgusted" and "angry."
The photo quickly became the subject of talk shows and websites. It was held up as evidence of the Globe's "anti-Americanism," its desire to "bring down Bush" or discredit US troops. I think that criticism is off the mark. Yet the error could not have come at a worse time. Emotions about Iraq were running high even before the beheading of Nicholas Berg. That the Berg story shared the May 12 paper with the inappropriate photo only made things worse. Some readers called for the firing of various Globe editors. "We are not firing anybody," responds Baron. What will happen, he says, is conversations with staffers about following proper procedure.
One of the additionally unfortunate elements of the photo was that it made the accompanying story on Turner seem less skeptical. "Our intent . . . was to bring some scrutiny to allegations" by Turner "specifically his claims that he had evidence of extensive abuse committed by US soldiers," says Metro Editor Carolyn Ryan. Instead, the photo seemed to give weight to his case.
Various sources last week said the photos displayed by Turner came from a pornography website, and they may well have, although I could not trace it to the source. I did find one news website with a note from a woman identified as the porn site operator. She was quoted as saying the images, shot in Hungary, had been removed because they were used for anti-American purposes.
Publication of the photo in the Globe did not reflect the paper's editorial intent. But it did reflect the failure of its system to keep inappropriate material out of the paper. Baron was right to apologize.
The ombudsman represents the readers. Her opinions and conclusions are her own. Phone 617-929-3020 or, to leave a message, 929-3022. E-mail: ombud@globe.com.
© Copyright 2004 Globe Newspaper Company.
Link
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/uk_news/politics/3716151.stm
Editor sacked over 'hoax' photos
The Mirror board said Morgan would be stepping down immediately
Daily Mirror editor Piers Morgan has been sacked after the newspaper conceded photos of British soldiers abusing an Iraqi were fake.
In a statement the Mirror said it had fallen victim to a "calculated and malicious hoax" and that it would be "inappropriate" for Morgan to continue.
The Queen's Lancashire Regiment (QLR) said the Mirror had endangered British troops by running the pictures.
Roger Goodman, of the QLR, said the regiment now felt "vindicated".
Mr Goodman added: "It is just a great pity it has taken so long... and that so much damage has been done in the meantime."
The Daily Mirror... apologises unreservedly for publishing the pictures and deeply regrets the reputational damage done to the QLR and the Army in Iraq
Mirror statement
At a news conference in Preston on Friday afternoon, the regiment demonstrated to reporters aspects of uniform and equipment which it said proved the photographs were fake.
The regiment's Brigadier Geoff Sheldon said the vehicle featured in the photographs had been located in a Territorial Army base in Lancashire and had never been in Iraq.
He said the QLR's reputation had been damaged by the Mirror and asked the newspaper to apologise because the evidence they were staged was "overwhelming".
The Conservatives said they hoped lessons had been learned from the row.
Deputy leader and foreign affairs spokesman, Michael Ancram, said: ''Looking at the facts objectively, this is the right thing for Piers Morgan to have done.
"The photos that were published in the Daily Mirror have done great damage to the reputation of our troops, who are serving under some of the most difficult conditions in Iraq.''
'Recruiting poster for al-Qaeda'
The photos published in the Mirror on 1 May appeared to show British troops torturing an Iraqi detainee.
In one picture a soldier is seen urinating on a hooded man while in another the hooded man is being hit with a rifle in the groin.
Colonel Black, a former regiment commander of the QLR, said the pictures put lives in danger and acted as a "recruiting poster" for al-Qaeda.
However one of the Mirror's informants - Soldier C - said there had been abuse in Iraq.
The Territorial Army solider has been questioned by Royal Military Police after talking about his claims to the Daily Mirror.
On ITV's Tonight With Trevor McDonald he said: "It did go on, it wasn't all the army, it wasn't systematic but it did happen."
Downing Street refused to comment on the issue, saying it was a matter for the Mirror board.
This was about the life of British soldiers, and you can't tough it out when you're wrong
Andrew Neil, former editor of the Sunday Times
Reaction to Morgan sacking
The BBC's Nicholas Witchell said it appeared Piers Morgan remained unrepentant right to the end
"According to one report Mr Morgan refused the demand to apologise, was sacked and immediately escorted from the building," he said.
Morgan will be replaced on a temporary basis by his deputy, Des Kelly.
The newspaper released a statement saying: "The Daily Mirror published in good faith photographs which it absolutely believed were genuine images of British soldiers abusing an Iraqi prisoner.
"However there is now sufficient evidence to suggest that these pictures are fakes and that the Daily Mirror has been the subject of a calculated and malicious hoax.
"The Daily Mirror therefore apologises unreservedly for publishing the pictures and deeply regrets the reputational damage done to the QLR and the Army in Iraq.
"The paper will continue to cooperate fully with the investigation.
"The board of Trinity Mirror has decided that it would be inappropriate for Piers Morgan to continue in his role as editor of the Daily Mirror and he will therefore be stepping down with immediate effect."
The Sun newspaper had offered a £50,000 reward for "information about the fake Mirror photos" but withdrew the offer following the sacking of Morgan.
Thanks for the info, Annie. It's nice to know the truth!
The problem is that the people here still do not believe it is a hoax. Last night on the news here they are saying that he only hoaxed one pic but there are actuall dozens of them brought to TOny Blair that were never published. They said that the soldiers are indeed following our lead and disgracing and abusing the Iraqi people but the Brits are not as outraged as americans are over this as a whole. This si what is stirring up trouble over here right now. There are many muslims in London right now that are protesting and outside of the bases )which is normal) that are not happy about the photos in either case.
I don't think they were all hoaxes either. Sure maybe a few were hoaxed, but the British were trying to save face IMO. They just did a better job of saving face than we did. BUT!! I still say this is more psychological warfare and propaganda than actual abuse. What do you think they do to our soldiers to get them to talk? We want info, we NEED info, and they won't give it to us if we are giving them the royal treatment in jail. I really think this is just how war is. We can always go back to lining up and marching toward each other like Colonial days if you think that would be more effective. I think this stuff looks worse than it really was. Not everything can be taken at face value.
I wasn't implying that I think they were all hoaxes.
There were hoaxes in Great Britain. And also in Boston, I believe, where some low level politician held a news conference and showed photos allegedly of rape that, from what I have read, may have been taken from a porn web site.
The sad thing about some politicians is they will jump on whatever they think is the bandwagon that will get their name in the news, whether they know what they are doing or talking about or not.
Here is something I read in John Grogan's column in the Philadelphia Inquirer last Thursday. He expresses pretty much what I have been thinking.
It has become a well-worn cliché, yet one that on this day, on this street, in a house where a devastated family huddles in grief, bears repeating: Violence breeds violence. Inhumanity begets inhumanity. Incivility spreads like an infectious disease.
You're disgusted and angry; I am, too. But you know how we win in the end? How we win not just the battle that is Iraq but the broader, much tougher war to convince Arabs worldwide that we act with noble intentions?
We win by showing the world that Americans are better than this. That Americans do not meet revenge with revenge. That Americans play by rules of human decency. That Americans are not those soldiers in the photos coming out of Abu Ghraib.
We start by demanding justice for the murder of Nick Berg, not vengeance for it. We start by drawing a line and saying the downward spiral of brutality ends here.
We start right in our own neighborhoods by trying to better understand people who are not like us.
There are demons in this world, and we saw some of them in the videotape of Nick Berg's murder. But mostly there are people - people not unlike you or me.
Understanding the difference between the two is the first step to winning the bigger war.
Thanks for that article, Ginny. That's what I was trying to say, only Mr. Grogan is much more eloquent.
Ame
That is a very wonderful article. Thank you for posting it Ginny.
Those who do not learn from history are doomed to repeat it
THE MY LAI MASSACRE
The objective of the American military mission was clear: search and destroy the My Lai (pronounced, somewhat ironically, "me lie") hamlet of Son My village in the Quang Ngai Province of South Vietnam. What wasn’t clear was what to do with any civilians who might be encountered at My Lai. On March 16, 1968, Charlie Company, a unit of the US Eleventh Light Infantry Brigade, was ordered into combat by Captain Ernest Medina. The 150 soldiers, led by Lt. William Calley, stormed into the hamlet, and four hours later more than 500 civilians -- unarmed women, children, and old men -- were dead. Charlie Company had not encountered a single enemy soldier, and only three weapons were confiscated. The only American casualty was a soldier who shot himself in the foot. It was a massacre that would haunt the conscience of the US Army and the American people. However, it seems to have been forgotten.
The average age of soldiers in Charlie Company was twenty; they had been in South Vietnam for three months. Trained in Hawaii, the unit was considered one of the best in the army. William Calley, aged 24, was not particularly popular with the men he led. Small in stature, he was considered nervous and excitable and too gung ho -- always trying to impress his superiors. Captain Medina ridiculed Calley, calling him Lieutenant Shithead in front of the troops.
When the soldiers in Charlie Company pushed into the hamlet, they expected to be locked into fierce combat with a Viet Cong battalion believed to be at My Lai. For three months the American unit had been in no major battles but had suffered a lot of casualties from snipers, mines, and booby traps. The soldiers were ready to prove themselves, ready to exact revenge on the enemy.
Charlie Company met no resistance; there were no Viet Cong soldiers at My Lai. Calley then ordered the slaughter of the civilians. People were rounded up into ditches and machine-gunned. They lay five feet deep in the ditches; any survivors trying to escape were immediately shot. When Calley spotted a baby crawling away from a ditch, he grabbed her, threw her back into the ditch, and opened fire. Some of the dead were mutilated by having "C Company" carved into their chests; some were disemboweled. One GI would later say, "You didn’t have to look for people to kill, they were just there. I cut their throats, cut off their hands, cut out their tongues, scalped them. I did it. A lot of people were doing it and I just followed. I just lost all sense of direction."
Flying high above the slaughter was helicopter pilot Hugh Thompson. Sickened by what he was witnessing, Thompson set down his aircraft and began to rescue the Vietnamese survivors. he ordered his machine gunner to open fire on any American soldiers who continued to shoot villagers. In one ditch, Thompson pulled out a three-year-old child, almost smothered in blood, but not injured. After he radioed for help from other helicopters, an enraged Thompson reported to his section leader and in graphic detail told of what he had seen. Soon afterward, Charlie Company was ordered to stop killing civilians.
Coverup of the massacre began immediately. Reports on the My Lai operation stated that it was a stunning combat victory against a Viet Cong stronghold. Stars and Stripes, the army newspaper, ran a feature story applauding the courage of the American soldiers who had risked their lives. Even General William Westmoreland sent a personal congratulatory note to Charlie Company. An initial investigation into My Lai was swift and definitive: My Lai was a combat operation in which twenty civilians had accidentally been killed.
Too many soldiers knew what had really happened at My Lai. One of them was Ronald Ridenhour, a Vietnam veteran who was not at My Lai but had heard about the operation from several of his friends who had served in Charlie Company. A year after My Lai, Ridenhour wrote a letter about the atrocity and sent it to his congressman, Morris Udall. he also sent a copy of the letter to thirty other prominent officials, including President Richard Nixon. Reaction to the letter was quick, and Westmoreland ordered an immediate inquiry.
Two separate investigations uncovered the horror of My Lai. The soldiers of Charlie Company were extensively interviewed. An army photographer, who had been at My Lai, produced pictures of the carnage. In addition, it was learned that hundreds of civilians had also been killed by other army units, at My Khe and Co Luy. Details of the investigations were leaked to the press, and an interview with William Calley, by freelance reporter Seymour Hersch, put My Lai on the front pages of American newspapers.
Eighty soldiers were initially under investigation for the My Lai massacre. Twenty-five officers and enlisted men, including Lt. Calley and his superior officer Capt. Medina, were eventually charged with crimes. Only six cases were ever tried. In some cases, the evidence was overwhelming; some of the defendants admitted killing the civilians. But only one soldier, William Calley, was found guilty of murder.
The court martial of Lt. Calley began on November 17, 1970. For more than four months, witness after witness came forward to testify before a six-officer jury -- all six officers had been in combat and five had served in Vietnam. Calley’s defense was straightforward: he had simply followed orders given to him by Captain Medina. As he testified, "I was ordered to go in there and destroy the enemy. That was my job that day. That was the mission I was given. I did not sit down and think in terms of men, women, and children. They were all classified the same."
Did Captain Medina, at a briefing given the day before My Lai, explicitly order Charlie Company to kill any civilians encountered? Testimony at the court martial failed to answer the question. Some soldiers said Medina made it clear that the villagers should be killed, but other soldiers disagreed. Yet another group claimed that Medina didn’t exactly say that civilians should die, but he implied it.
When the prosecutor made his final summation to the jury, he quoted what Abraham Lincoln said to the troops he commanded during the American Civil War: "Men who take up arms against one another in public do not cease on this account to be moral human beings, responsible to one another and to God." The jury found Calley guilty of murdering 22 civilians at My Lai and sentenced him to life imprisonment.
After Calley had served three days in prison, President Nixon ordered that he be taken to Fort Benning, Georgia, to be held under house arrest. Sequestered in a comfortable apartment, Calley was allowed to have pets, entertain guests, and cook his own meals.
Many Americans thought the Calley verdict was unjust. Some believed he was a scapegoat used to mask enormous blunders made by the US Army. Others felt he was a hero, fighting a battle against Communism. Protests were waged on his behalf. Thousands of telegrams in support of Calley poured into the White House. The legislatures of several states passed resolutions asking for clemency for Calley.
Calley’s life sentence was subsequently reduced to twenty years, then reduced again to ten years. In 1974 he was paroled after serving three years under house arrest.
I will be honest in saying I didnt read ALL the posts but from what I read all I can say is:
DITTO MIKE AND CRYSTAL! You guys hit it on the nose. And Mike, my DH was over there and he agrees with every comment you've made. Especially when you mentioned about not being able to fight in a war that you cannot fight back in the same force and the duty of making it home for your children and wife.
BTW- i've yet to see the photos or videos and I refuse to see them.
Melissa, I've seen them - and they are awful. I suggest never looking at them. B/c I've been having trouble ever since. The video is the worse thing I have ever seen. EVER
Amy, I laid in a fetal position for a very long time after watching them.
|
Members
