Cost of the War in Iraq
(JavaScript Error)
To see more details, click here.


Support The Troops But only Those Who Have a High Rank

This really pisses me off. The Bush Administration claims that anyone who is or was against the Iraq War just doen't support our troops. That is a wrong assumption. One does not mean the other. I was against the Iraq War from the beginning. I am not for pulling out until the right time and now is not it. I have always supported the troops and am a veteran myself.

Now when it comes to the abuse of prisoners and the use of torture, the same bush administration that claims it supports our men and women in uniform are letting the lower ranked soldiers take all the rap for the mistreatment of prisoners. In several or most of the cases of abuse, the soldiers were acting in accordance with orders from superior officers and even from private contractors hired by the CIA for millions of taxpayer dollars.

Why has this administration allowed GI Joe and Jane take the fall while shielding the private contractors and higher ranking officers who gave the orders? Is this an example of how we should support our men and women in uniform?

From the Guardian: A US army officer was guilty of negligent homicide in the death of an Iraqi general during an interrogation, a military court ruled on Saturday.

Chief warrant officer Lewis Welshofer is the highest-ranking army officer tried on murder charges arising from the Bush administration's campaigns in Afghanistan and Iraq. He was found not guilty of murder and faces up to three years in prison when sentencing takes place today.

The court heard that Welshofer caused the death of Major General Abed Hamed Mowhoush by putting him head-first into a sleeping bag, tying electrical cord around him, straddling him and covering his mouth. Welshofer was also found guilty of negligent dereliction of duty, which carries a sentence of up to three months. He was acquitted on charges of assault by a jury made up of army officers.
Yes, Chief Warrant Officers are the highest ranking officers to participate in or give orders to mistreat or abuse or torture prisoners. We are supposed to believe that?

Welshofer was interpreting an email from superiors sent in August 2003, three months before Mowhoush died. The email, from Captain William Ponce, said: "The gloves are coming off, gentlemen ... we want these individuals broken. Casualties are mounting."

A subsequent memo from Lieutenant General Ricardo Sanchez, the commanding officer in Iraq, authorised new interrogation techniques including, Welshofer claimed, the sleeping bag method.
Now, notice that neither of these officers are responsible, only the one carrying out the orders. If I tell you to beat someone up and you go do it, I guess I'm not guilty of a crime.

Mowhoush's death came two days after he was beaten with rubber hoses by Iraqi contractors working for the CIA. Welshofer was present at that interrogation. The next day, he held Mowhoush while water was poured on his face. A day later, Mowhoush died after being put in a sleeping bag by Welshofer.
I guess the private contractors actions were legal, while this soldier's copying those same type of actions was illegal.

This is called supporting our troops? Shielding higher ranking officers from responsibility and hanging soldiers out to dry? Shielding private companies who are getting millions of taxpayer dollars from any liability while prosecuting the soldiers that help them?

This post is not even addressing the question as to what techniques we should be using in interrogations there. This post is simply asking if these techniques are being carried out by private contractors and security companies, why are they being shielded from prosecution while our soldiers are going on trial? And if these interrogationtechniques/abuse/torture is being ordered by high ranking officers, why are they not standing up for the soldiers who serve under them?

Either the abuse and torture is legal or is not. If it is legal, then stop prosecuting soldiers who do it. If it is illegal, prosecute those who are really responsible and let the soldiers go.

More things that just piss me off


Blogger Orion Blastar said...

You know this reminds me of a movie that Michael J. Fox was in, he was ordered to rape a Vietnamese woman by his Sargent, and refused to, saying "Sarge, I do not think that this is the right thing to do. I refuse to obey your order." or something like that.

I agree that we should hold the officers who made the orders responsible as well, but come on. The enlisted men and women who did the torture, knew it was wrong, and did it anyway. Does it make sense to disobey an order like that, and risk time in a brig, but document why you disobeyed an order? If their officers asked them to jump off a bridge to their deaths without a paracute, would they jump off a bridge?

I support our troops, I support the wars in Iraq and Afgnanistan. I agree that both officers and enlisted soldiers who did the orders or torture should be held acountable.

Also I think it is horrible that many Hollywood Liberal Actors and Actresses refuse to support the troops in putting on a show, just because they disagree with the reasons to go to war. I mean follow Robin Williams, he doesn't agree with the reasons we went to war, but he is out there putting on a show. Liberal Hollywood has shown its true colors by disrespecting our troops. If you got a beef with the Bush Administration, take it up with them, just don't abuse, harass, or disrespect the troops.

9:49 PM  
Blogger kidsearch said...

Hi Orion, you make good points. We agree for the most part here. A brave soldier can disobey an order he knows is wrong and if he doesn't, I agree, he should be punished, but only if those giving the orders are put on trial with them.

Just so you know, I can't stand gw bush or the rest of the bushes. I live in florida so have to deal with jeb too. I'm not a liberal democrat though. I am against abortion. I'm against gun control. I was all for creaming the hell out of afghanistan where there were people we know were involved in 9-11. Couldn't stand bill clinton either.

But, I do follow what ben franklin said, those who are willing to give up some of their freedoms for security deserve neither. Not the exact quote, but you get my point. I don't like people who mess around with the constitution or bill of rights. I don't care if they technically are not breaking the law, when they walk that thin line, the bill of rights is threatened. Anyone that does that gets me pissed off. Therefore, bush pisses me off by carrying executive priveledge too far and by using fear to pursue his own personal agenda.

12:53 AM  
Blogger Orion Blastar said...

Interesting, I left a post here earlier today in response to yours and now it seems to be missing?

Server error or censorship? Who knows? It is that sort of thing that will drive me away. Let us hope it does not happen again.

7:39 PM  
Blogger kidsearch said...

Never any sensorship on my blog. If you posted and it didn't accept you may have not typed the weird letters right or something then closed the window not knowing.

8:32 PM  

Post a Comment

Note: Only a member of this blog may post a comment.

Links to this post:

Create a Link

<< Home

Powered by Blogger