Why did the US detain Iraqi civilians in Abu Ghraib and even tortured them?
If we invaded Iraq because the government had WMDs, then why did the US capture its people and torture 7,000 of them in Abu Ghraib prison, which was empty before the US came, then the US filled them up only for Bush to say in 2005 that the prison would be demolished. So, what was the deal?
See pic as an example:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:AbuGhraibAbuse-standing-on-box.jpg
The prison wasn’t opened to give people a place to torture Iraqi’s. It was opened as a place to detain enemy combatants. Believe it or not there were some really bad people at that prison. The prison was opened for the same reason any other prison would be opened here or any where else and it was closed because after the scandal there was nothing but negative connotations associated with it. Some of our soldiers got carried away and did the wrong thing. What they did set our military and country back years in terms of relations with muslim countries. It was even used as a recruiting tool by terrorist organizations.
Iraq never had any WMD, Bush just needed a scapegoat to limit your freedom and raise war budget, making his halliburton friends happy and getting the oil.
That is the war on terror. A huge lie.
References :
There was no WMD in Iraq and even of it had one, that’s the right of every independent nation to have weapons for its security. If you are looking for WMD then the US is having the large compile of such weapons of mass destruction and surely they are using it on Sovereign states and innocent people. The war in Iraq was merely for capturing the Iraqi oil and for getting oil US have to shed blood of innocent people. As question is about Civilian detention by US, then a simple answer is that American Army have no moral value, you can expect any thing from them….
References :
The prison wasn’t opened to give people a place to torture Iraqi’s. It was opened as a place to detain enemy combatants. Believe it or not there were some really bad people at that prison. The prison was opened for the same reason any other prison would be opened here or any where else and it was closed because after the scandal there was nothing but negative connotations associated with it. Some of our soldiers got carried away and did the wrong thing. What they did set our military and country back years in terms of relations with muslim countries. It was even used as a recruiting tool by terrorist organizations.
References :
1. Don’t listen to biased news sources. You know what I mean
2. Iraq DID have WMD’s, not nukes, WMD’s! if you have any shred of intelligence, you would know that includes chemical weapons, and cruise missiles. We found both.
3. We did not authorize the torture. That was (reportedly) a regiment of soldiers that, many of whom, lost family in 9/11. They wanted blood for blood. I would support them in that any day. It was not war mongering, it was vengeance.
References :
Standing for hours, naked is not torture. When the rubber hoses come out, waterboarding, that’s torture. And, since they are combatants, since 9/11 — who cares?
Much useful intelligence is gathered and could save lives. But, instead, we’ll grant the other side Constitutional protections so they don’t get their feeling hurt. Meanwhile, Allied forces are beheaded and hung from bridges. I notice nobody has ever asked that question…
References :
From the question, I’m going to presume you don’t want an answer… just somebody to agree with you that the US is evil and that GW Bush is to blame.
If that’s the case, you’re not going to like my answer.
I would put this to you for your consideration. Why is it that some people are allowed to physically torture their captives, force them to beg for their lives on international television, and when they’re done, behead them on television, disembowel them and leave their bodies to rot in the streets, or to hang their bodies from bridges to rot as warnings to others, it’s perfectly acceptable? Why is it that people tend to support those who would deny a people the basic right of self government or of education? But when these sweethearts complain that somebody embarrassed them, it’s suddenly "cruel and inhuman"? Why is the mere allegation that somebody looked disrespectfully at a book they claim to hold sacred is enough to send the world into a frenzy?
War isn’t pretty. I’ve been in some of it. I don’t think it’s supposed to be. If it were pretty, we’d probably be more inclined to engage in it. But, if you want to play hypothetical games, be sure to apply the rules equally to all the parties involved… and enforce the rules equally. How do you enforce the rules on somebody over whom you have no control? That’s the problem you need to address before condemning some kids who had some fun with some prisoners… and were dumb enough to take pictures.
If this is merely a political protest against our being in Iraq, I was online with a guy in Iraq. He told me, "My orders didn’t say, ‘Find WMD.’ They didn’t say, ‘Get the guy who threatened my daddy.’ They didn’t say, ‘Secure a cheap source of oil for the US.’ My orders say, ‘Iraqi Freedom.’ That’s why I’m here." You can put whatever spin on it you want. You can blame whomever you want. But I think that’s a pretty good reason to be there.
References :