Tongue in cheek US statement?

Welshwarrior

Welshwarrior

Banned
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/middle_east/4559332.stm


The US says it will not hand over detainees to the Iraqi authorities until they raise levels of care.
After the discovery of hundreds of neglected prisoners held by Iraq's interior ministry, an official said Iraq still had to meet US standards.
"We will not pass on facilities or detainees until they meet the standards we define and that we are using today," Major General John Gardner said.
 
If you are only going to post an article without any of your opinions added to start a discussion, it needs to go in one of the news forums.
 
Doody said:
If you are only going to post an article without any of your opinions added to start a discussion, it needs to go in one of the news forums.
Click to expand...
I thought my title said it all? or are you a little oversensitive to the story and decided it would be better to hide it away somewhere?

For you then Doody, I find it ironic and hypocritical for a country to complain about another's handling of prisoners in Iraq. I think that covers it.
 
I personally dislike the direction this post discussion is heading.

I could make a case for either side of this argument but I refuse to get in a flaming session with someone who is NOT completely right or wrong in their reasoning.

Suffice it to say, I am "mostly" glad these suspected terrorist detainees are not free to attack our young troopers in Iraq (nuff said?).
 
Chief Bones said:
I personally dislike the direction this post discussion is heading.

I could make a case for either side of this argument but I refuse to get in a flaming session with someone who is NOT completely right or wrong in their reasoning.

Suffice it to say, I am "mostly" glad these suspected terrorist detainees are not free to attack our young troopers in Iraq (nuff said?).
Click to expand...

There was no intention to to star a flame war Chief, I was hoping to start a roubust,reasoned and adult discussion on the subject.
 
Welshwarrior said:
There was no intention to to star a flame war Chief, I was hoping to start a roubust,reasoned and adult discussion on the subject.
Click to expand...

I wasn't hinting you were considering a flame war.

I could make a case for either side of this argument but I refuse to get in a flaming session with someone who is NOT completely right or wrong in their reasoning.
Click to expand...

With the "hot" button on this issue, a flaming match IS a very real possibility and that's something which I personally do not desire.
 
Last edited:
Compared to other foriegn prisons of that region, even the one the US had in Iraq were those prisoners were abused. Staying at the US prison is like staying at the Walfdorf Astoria compared to other Middle East prisons. I don't see what was so tounge and cheek about the US demading better treatmnet other than to start a flame war.
 
gladius said:
Compared to other foriegn prisons of that region, even the one the US had in Iraq were those prisoners were abused. Staying at the US prison is like staying at the Walfdorf Astoria compared to other Middle East prisons. I don't see what was so tounge and cheek about the US demading better treatmnet other than to start a flame war.
Click to expand...

Did you actually read what you posted in response? Comparing
Abu Ghraib with the Waldorf Astoria does both establishments an injustice.

I thought that the statement issued by the US authorities about better treatment for Iraqi prisoners was written and delivered with a tongue in the cheek and maybe a wry smile?

If you want to know the truth about the extent of abuse of prisoners in Afghanistan, Cuba and Iraq, then all you have to do is google. BTW the problem is not confined to your forces either.
 
The Abu Gharib incident was not one of the U.S.'s shining moments, but you do have to admit that the treatment of the prisoners under U.S. control is on a level totally different than what they were under Saddam and the prisoners that were recently found that were mistreated.

The biggest concern that I have is that the abuse pointed out at Abu Gharib was pretty minor if you related it to any other detained persons, like the ones that were beheaded. I don't believe anyone in Abu Gharib died from the incidents. I'm not condoning what happened, but the outrage is judged based on a very liberal bias from the media.

If someone is the enemy, regardless of which side you are on, they are not treated as your best buddy when they are detained. I would venture to say that even those that were abused were treated more humainly than any one of the foreign people that were captured by "the enemy" in Iraq.

My question would be, who in their right mind would object to meeting a standard that has been imposed by the world court (world court basically being the moral right if you would want to use that term)?
 
Senior Chief said:
The Abu Gharib incident was not one of the U.S.'s shining moments, but you do have to admit that the treatment of the prisoners under U.S. control is on a level totally different than what they were under Saddam and the prisoners that were recently found that were mistreated.

The biggest concern that I have is that the abuse pointed out at Abu Gharib was pretty minor if you related it to any other detained persons, like the ones that were beheaded. I don't believe anyone in Abu Gharib died from the incidents. I'm not condoning what happened, but the outrage is judged based on a very liberal bias from the media.

If someone is the enemy, regardless of which side you are on, they are not treated as your best buddy when they are detained. I would venture to say that even those that were abused were treated more humainly than any one of the foreign people that were captured by "the enemy" in Iraq.

My question would be, who in their right mind would object to meeting a standard that has been imposed by the world court (world court basically being the moral right if you would want to use that term)?
Click to expand...


Exactly Chief, "who in their right mind would object to meeting a standard that has been imposed by the world court".

One can but hope that the CIA will eventually think like you.

CIA Holds Terror Suspects in Secret Prisons
Debate Is Growing Within Agency About Legality and Morality of Overseas System Set Up After 9/11
By Dana PriestWashington Post Staff Writer
Wednesday, November 2, 2005; Page A01
The CIA has been hiding and interrogating some of its most important al Qaeda captives at a Soviet-era compound in Eastern Europe, according to U.S. and foreign officials familiar with the arrangement.
The secret facility is part of a covert prison system set up by the CIA nearly four years ago that at various times has included sites in eight countries, including Thailand, Afghanistan and several democracies in Eastern Europe, as well as a small center at the Guantanamo Bay prison in Cuba, according to current and former intelligence officials and diplomats from three continents.
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2005/11/01/AR2005110101644.html
 
Welshwarrior said:
Did you actually read what you posted in response? Comparing
Abu Ghraib with the Waldorf Astoria does both establishments an injustice.

I thought that the statement issued by the US authorities about better treatment for Iraqi prisoners was written and delivered with a tongue in the cheek and maybe a wry smile?

If you want to know the truth about the extent of abuse of prisoners in Afghanistan, Cuba and Iraq, then all you have to do is google. BTW the problem is not confined to your forces either.
Click to expand...

In case you didn't catch it, I wasn't comparing Abu Garib to the Waldorf literaly. But compared to the other prison in the Middle East it would seem like a stay at the Waldorf Astoria. Seems like you dish out to tounge and cheek, but when at comes right back at you you don't know how to respond.
 
Staying at the US prison is like staying at the Walfdorf Astoria compared to other Middle East prisons. And that is not a comparision? Odd that you used the word compared then....
 
So do you believe that the US should not have commented on the condition of the Iraqi prisons until the existence of secret CIA prisons is either proved or disproved? Also you will notice that the US prosecuted Lyndie England for the abuses that took place at Abu Ghraib, and i believe that she is cuurently serving time in prison herself. While i see the point you are trying to make also take into consideration that the US is trying to improve the standards of the Iraqi national prison system with the measures taken.
 
Welshwarrior said:
Staying at the US prison is like staying at the Walfdorf Astoria compared to other Middle East prisons. And that is not a comparision? Odd that you used the word compared then....
Click to expand...

Yes it is a comparison, but not a literal one. Do you even get it?

So like I said other than to start a flame war whats your point of this whole topic, because it seems like there is none.
 
I will type this slowly so that you get the message ....W A S .... I T....A..
T O N G U E.. I N ...C H E E K...S T A T E M E N T ...? You can phone a friend......
 
Last edited:
Excellent! So you did ring a friend then?... may I take this opportunity beteween the bouts of verbal sparring to wish you,and all the other readers of this scintillating drama.. A very Happy New Year to you and yours.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top