disturbing tale of abu gharib torture: revealed in pics

protonhybrid SG

these pictures the great peoples of a certain great nation, who often has no respect for other cultures, people or religion, didn't think will become public. the same people are furious, fuming with anger, that it became public.

CAUTION: Disturbing content. View at your own discretion.

http://smh.com.au/ftimages/2006/02/15/1139890768716.html

sorry to see humanity has no place in these barbaric people's acts. can someone even explain why, why it can be condoned if at all? the likes of "salman" may especially wanna help since he seems so interested in affairs involving conflict.

peace.

Salman SG

nothing can compare to the real abu gharib that was under Saddam.
Did we see you hypocrites complain back then? Nope?

free thinker SG

I agree with SALMAN. Under Saddam, there were mass executions and goodness knows what happened to them before they were killed.

But I also strongly believe that coalition forces shouldn't do these sort of things. This only breeds new terrorists! Those responsible should be dealt with severly for violating the Geneva Convention.

protonhybrid SG

so that's how you CONDONE those acts? hmmm..your intentions are fishy.

calling me names? not good. just because you're losing doesn't mean you gotta call me names, use civilized language and behaviour.

peace.

oh btw, can i ask YOU to give me the figures for CIVILIAN deaths due to illegal occupation of Iraq alone? plz give me those figures, and quote your source. if you want to justify those acts, i won't stop you either.

let us see if you call me more names or use some common sense (i am beginning to think you may lack that faculty, but not sure as of now).

peace

protonhybrid SG

hello! which world are you living in? no one says saddam was good. does that mean iraq is good now, or its illegal invasion can be justified. no!

btw,

Under Saddam, there were mass executions and goodness knows what happened to them before they were killed.

it may be cheem, but u gotta noe ur facts first. IF u dunno what happened, why you even use that as an argument. that "I dont even know what happened back then, goodness me, THEREFORE, whatever happens now can be justified. OR is at least better than before".

in an argument, you gotta know what you're arguing for and against.

free thinker SG

dear protonhybrid

I did not mean to say that everyone said Saddam was good and US involvement is correct. But i am sure life under Saddam wasn't any nicer than life now.

I don't know about you, but i feel that it is very wrong for the occuping forces to do such things to prisoners.

Salman SG

Where did i coindone those tortures?
I don't condone proton's hypocrisy though.

protonhybrid SG

of course dear free thinker fren,

i feel like you and we're totally unlike the self-professed multiculturalist salman, who doesn't have a word to say when these disturbing tales emerge! Laughing

I am not TOO SURE life wasn't any nicer under saddam in iraq than now. I don't want to be too cocky to assume i know iraqis' preferences better than their own selves. that's just arrogance!

they know what's better for them! so i won't say which one was better or worse, i know both are very bad and were very bad. one of them claiming superiority over the other is hypocrisy and mendacious.

honour & glory SG

POW is common...... jus a matter of which side you are standing...

a knife can cut you or others.... just a matter of how you use it

protonhybrid SG

so that's your argument? very nice logic Exclamation

btw maybe you forgot it oredi, so lemme remind u, i requested you to give me the total number of CIVILIAN casualties in Iraq after this illegal invasion. and you can give me your source too. i also said i didn't stop you from justifying them, since you like to think muslims are threats to world peace.

Mr. Green

now state those figures with source plz.

protonhybrid SG

your point being? that these tortures are also common and justifiable? bravo fren bravo! just dun be surprised and pretend to not understand when some bigger neighbours want to squeeze your country for some pleasure, or your civilians too in bad times, coz "POW is common....jus a matter of which side you are standing....".

Salman SG

Can I request the civilian casualties under Saddam Hussein?
Did we see you complain about it? Whats all this hypocrisy all about?

Illegal invasion? What illegal invasion? Was there a court case and a trial?

honour & glory SG

tis is life.... nothing can change tis fact.

in war, there is only winner/conqueror. there is no place for losers.

thus to avoid being the losers, all means of winning MUST BE UPHOLD.

death is just a number.

throughout history, a strong and capable nation is built upon piles of bones.

my stand is firm....

if you cannot take it, just to bad....

free thinker SG

I have to disagree with you this time.

You feel that the US-led coalition was justified right... The US went in there to "remove" WMD. But they found nothing! You call that legal?

About it being a court case... I feel that it is totally unnecessary for it to go there. Its like small children arguing with each other. Waste of time.

Salman SG

Just because there was no WMDs does not mean it wasn't there.
Saddam had them and used them against Iranians and Kurds and he made life impossible for the UN inspectors that they left in disgust.

All intelligence services pointed to a WMD porgram, the Russians, French, Brit, Isreali. How do you account for the 20 ton of VX that was found in Jordan just after the war?

Saddam was given 12 years to cooperate with the UN and he never complied. The world needs to act.

You may not agree with the invasion but you can never say it was illegal.

free thinker SG

President Bush and PM Blair said that they might have been wrong about WMDs in a news conference... So i don't understand why you still believe that there were WMDs.

I never said it was illegal. But sending armed forces into another sovereign state without the UNSC( United Nations Security Council) approval and backing suggests something! Moreover, there were other countries that strongly disapproved this operation. What do think of their opinions?

will4 SG

This is an excuse by Bush n Blair to invade Iraq n another reason Al Qaeda
has established a base in Iraq. Strong reason to invade but more trouble cause if u look at it, the terroist getting stronger.
The invasion is getting no result n many US troops had perished necesarily.

Salman SG

Originally posted by free thinker:
President Bush and PM Blair said that they might have been wrong about WMDs in a news conference... So i don't understand why you still believe that there were WMDs.

They said they might be wrong, they didn't say they were wrong.
I think the only thing they were wrong about was Saddam Hussein leaving his WMDs around to be discovered by the coalition, not that it wasn't there.
Had there been no invasion, it would still be there cos it was there and it was used to kills tens of thousands.

The question still remains, how do you account for the 20 tons of VX foiund in Jordan?

I never said it was illegal. But sending armed forces into another sovereign state without the UNSC( United Nations Security Council) approval and backing suggests something! Moreover, there were other countries that strongly disapproved this operation. What do think of their opinions?

Invasion of Bosnia and Kosovo didn't have UNSC approval too and there were nations who strongly disapproved it too. I didn't see you complain. Why the hypocrisy.
You think the UN is perfect? Are you saying the UN is perfect?

Salman SG

Originally posted by will4:
[b]

This is an excuse by Bush n Blair to invade Iraq n another reason Al Qaeda
has established a base in Iraq. Strong reason to invade but more trouble cause if u look at it, the terroist getting stronger.

Yes indeed. Saddam did house, fund and train Al Qaeda. Thats good enough reason to remove him.

The invasion is getting no result n many US troops had perished necesarily.

No result you say?
Iraq can't harm any other countrie sany more, Saddam is on trail and waiting to be hanged and the Iraqis had democratic elections.
What do you mean persih unnecessarily? Please explain.

SilverPal SG

Under Geneva convention, terrorists are not considered as POW but as common criminals. They cannot be said to be patriots fighting for the good of a nation unless they are soldiers.

Torture and inhumane treatment exists everywhere. Why don't you complain about changi prisons first? How come inmates are not given beds, privacy etc?

Prisons are different from hotels, get used to it.

I'm not saying the treatment at abu gharib is rite, but I dun think its fair for us to say that it is wrong. Many times we only know one side of the story and we jump to conclusions.