"Emmanuel Gustin" wrote in message
...
"Kevin Brooks" wrote in message
...

Emmanuel, what would *you* have done more rapidly or differently from
the
above?

Well, for a start, there are persistent reports that the Pentagon
allows "special techniques" to be used on prisoners as "enablers
for interrogation".

If true, that is a war crime.

No, that depends upon what you are specifically referring to. The actions of
the guards at Abu Ghraib do appear to be clear-cut criminal acts--which is
why prosecutions are underway. More subtle forms of softening up individuals
for interrogation are not necessarily criminal acts, though (i.e., sleep
deprivation, within reasonable limits; isolation, again within reasonable
limits, etc.).

Not, of course, at the same level as
actual mass murder or genocide; as OJ would say, there is still
a difference between beating a wife and murdering her.
Nevertheless a crime which, brought to court, would merit at
least a few years imprisonment.

How much time did the prosecution ask for in the case of those two Belgian
paras holding the kid over the fire? One *month*? (They of course did not
even get *that*). How much time did SGT Nassel end up receiving--one single
year, IIRC (and only then after his original lesser sentence was appealed?)?


But also stupid. The psychology of camp and prison guards has
been studied extensively. Give people a position of power and
the feeling that some rough behaviour to prisoners is not just
tolerated, but expected, and you will see no end to what they
will fall to, especially under stress. For *most* people that is a
very steep slippery slope. It doesn't take a particularly bad
character. (The guards who committed the crimes cannot be
absolved of guilt, but is also unfair to demonize them.) Allow
the line to be crossed, and you are certain to have a disaster.

If it is not true, it is still unforgivable that the US government
allows its credibility to drop so low that such rumours are
widely believed and printed. It is the duty of government
officials to make it 100% clear and obvious that such behaviour
will not be tolerated, BEFORE it happens. Afterwards is always
too late. To blindly trust that it will not happen, in a war situation,
is plainly stupid. (Vietnam should at least have served as a warning.)

Belgium...Somalia. Look closer to home before you start ranting about a
process that is still ongoing regarding our own criminal prosecutions.

Brooks


The US government does allow Red Cross inspections of the
detention facilities in Iraq. At the very least it has neglected to
give the unsatisfactory reports that it has been receiving for
over a year, the attention they deserved. And to neglect an issue
like this, in a situation where a hollow pumpkin could grasp
the importance of showing scrupulous respect to the Iraqi people,
is beyond words.

--
Emmanuel Gustin
Emmanuel dot Gustin @t skynet dot be
Flying Guns Books and Site: http://users.skynet.be/Emmanuel.Gustin/