You can hurt one mentally and physically really, really badly without any blood being spilt.

__________________

yes, amnesty international qualifys sleep deprivation as torture, by that definition i must have been a real torturer for my parents when i was a baby.

@ Startup

Both.

It's pretty clear that most of these military guards were put up to this and constantly encouraged by those "civilian intelligence contractors" that the soldiers probably (and mistakenly) believed to be official CIA/DIA/FBI officers. They were actually "none of the above". Those "contractors" are not accountable to either the US military or the US government, although they clearly have the full support of the latter. These contractors only need to "drop a few names or threaten to make a few phone calls to certain politicians" to totally browbeat the military authorities into full submission. This is one of the big problems with this "privatization" movement that the Bush administration is so intent on using to replace just about every government functionary with these days, including many within the military itself. In this way the Bush administration doesn't have to acknowledge or explain anything that these people do, since they are not officially "US government employees" to begin with; they work for privately owned companies under government contract, which is an entirely different thing, especially since they are not operating on US soil anyway, and so are not subject to any US laws. And if things go wrong they make very convenient scapegoats, though I doubt very much that any of these "contractors" will ever be punished for anything: more likely they'll be handsomely rewarded, albeit very discreetly.

It's also pretty clear that many of the men and women in the military these days share the views of Americans here at home. The views that "the ends justify the means", that this is indeed a "Holy War", and that it's okay to become just as bad as the enemy in order to effectively combat them. They bring these attitudes with them from the society that they originally come from, of course. If people are fucked-up in the brain here at home, then our military will behave in a very fucked-up way overseas as well.

Bush's election (and the ongoing support for him now) is proof that there is something very, very wrong with America itself, these days. That's going to spill over into everything that we do, both here and abroad.

I sat and listened to Pat Robertson (of 700 Club fame) this morning rant about the "dangers of Islam". He says that there is no "peaceful solution" to the problem of Islam - and he makes no distinction at all between peaceful muslims and Islamic fundamentalists - they are all the same according to him. He believes that we must wipe them all off the face of the earth if we, ourselves, are ever to survive. He preaches that if we don't totally destroy Islam as soon as humanly possible then they will wipe us off the earth. This from a guy that ran for US President, and is one of Bush's staunchest political supporters. Robertson has an enormous following here in the US as an evangelical Christian "religious leader". Go figure. But that seems to be the way this entire country is headed these days, apparently.

With people like those (Bush and Robertson) in the political majority in this country these days what do you really expect from our military? Why should they be any different in their personal and political beliefs? They simply mirror the beliefs and attitudes of our entire society as a whole, and they behave accordingly.

Ranger, what do you feel can be done? I don't know enough about America(ns) to know if you're right, but I sure hope you're wrong. Are we heading for a full scale holy war; the US and some allies against all muslims? (I say some allies, because I don't think many members of the EU (EU before 05-01-2004) will help much, them being rather secular states) And why did they select a guy like Kerry as the only real opponent against Bush? (a two party system sucks anyway)

I hope some scientist will come up with a potion to save the deranged american people ;)

American people don't want to be saved

__________________

I agree with Ranger.

I believe that in the minds of Americans (not all of course, but some) all the muslims of the world are responsible for the 9/11 attack. It's "them" against "us" and the "good" vs. the "bad". The statistics and many other incidents also support the view of a Christian USA vs. Islam (and all 'ragheads'...):

[hr]1[/hr]

"WASHINGTON (Reuters) - Incidents of violence, discrimination and harassment against Muslims in the United States soared 70 percent in 2003 over the previous year, an Islamic civil rights group reported on Monday.

The war in Iraq and the lingering atmosphere of fear from the Sept. 11, 2001, attacks contributed to the sharp rise in anti-Muslim activity, according to a report by the Council on American-Islamic Relations.

Other factors included an increase in anti-Muslim rhetoric by some in government and the media, implementation of the USA Patriot Act -- which has been criticized as infringing on the constitutional right to privacy -- and increased reporting and documentation by members of the Muslim community, the report said."


http://www.reuters.com/newsArticle.j...4&section=news

[hr]1[/hr]

"WASHINGTON (Reuters) - Arab- and Muslim-Americans are increasingly frustrated by the Pentagon's failure to discipline a top U.S. general who said Muslims do not worship "a real God," and say it raises questions about whether the so-called war on terrorism is not a war on Islam.

Army Lt. Gen. William Boykin, head of military intelligence, touched off a brief firestorm last October after publicity about speeches he gave while in uniform that referred to the war on terrorism as a battle with "Satan" and said America had been targeted "because we're a Christian nation.""


http://www.reuters.com/newsArticle.j...7&section=news

[hr]1[/hr]

These are just a few examples. And the fact that the leader of the nation and his best buddies share the views of this general is very, very disturbing...

__________________

You were so ugly they were scared to go to sleep???


But jokes aside, you don't really think a man can't be tortured without blood being spilt or even without any physical abuse, do you?

__________________

Electric shocks don´t cause blood spills, but they are highly painfull and highly illegal.
Placing a man under a water drip won´t cause any visible physical damage, but give it a few hours and the guy underneath the drips will go bananas.

The human mind is highly imaginative when it comes to develope new and improved techniques of inflicting pain, wether physical or psychological.
For those countries that don´t give a shit about the Genevre Convention, it is easy to use more brutal ways of torture. But those countries that want to portray an image of legallity and compliance to international conventions, they have ways to bend the rules and leave no marks to tell the tale.
I don´t think there is a single country in the world that doesn´t use torture, one way or another. Except maybe the Vatican. All the other countries use and abuse of torture techniques to get people to submit to the will of the state. Some use it more, others use it less, but they all have instances of abuses going on inside their jails and police stations. Some tortures will leave flesh wounds and marks, others will leave battered minds, but all of them will leave deep psychological scars that will never heal. It´s a fact of life.
One of the most common forms of torture is isolation, and sensory deprivation. Every jail, every penitenciary has at least one solitary where to confine people to break the spirits of its inoccupants.
:indeed:

Hell, even the brutal onslaught of spam and publicity on the TV could and should be considered torture! Just as listening to George W. Bush trying to say something inteligent, using his brain cell nº2! (nº1 was fried at birth)

__________________
"Quincitilius Varus, give me back my legions!"
Emperor Augustus of Rome.

First of all, I am sure some bad shit happens to the Iraqi prisoners and I would not condone that kind of behavior. That being said, the pictures are kind of strange, aren't they? Maybe the press cropped the photos but they were well framed and there is no movement in any of the pictures = posing for the camera. The "bad seeds" obviously know they aren't supposed to be mistreating prisoners. Why would they be 'effectively' posing for the pictures?

The photos of British troops may be fake, but the ones of American troops are real.

__________________