US Soldiers Trade Iraqi Dead Photos for Porn (This can't be true, can it?)

[Scrooge McSam]

Originally Posted by sleepyjeff

3-Putting thousands of US troops in harms way just to wipe off a few smiles(especially when one considers that these smiles can be wiped clean without the danger)??

Apparantly not.

Did you catch that story about the army cancelling the investigation into this mess?

The Army Criminal Investigation Command in Iraq conducted the preliminary inquiry within the past week but closed it after concluding no felony crime had been committed and failing to determine whether U.S. soldiers were responsible for the photos and whether they showed actual war dead, Army officials said.

LOL Couldn't determine whether U.S. soldiers were responsible for the photos and whether they showed actual war dead?

And we're supposed to trust these idiots? These are the minds that took us into this war. Truly stunning.

Perhaps they could ask the soldiers in the US army uniforms pointing at the dead bodies. THEIR NAMES ARE EMBLAZONED ACROSS THEIR CHESTS IF THAT MAKES IT ANY EASIER TO IDENTIFY THEM.

Oh, and after that, check with Lyndie England to see if people participating in this kind of ghoulish freak show are responsible for their actions.

But this is even more telling...

"We're not blowing this off," Curtin said. "If the Army thinks it's in its interest to investigate something, we will"

It's not in the best interest of the army to investigate. There it is.

Sleepy, your faith in the army to handle this appropriately is misplaced.

[sleepyjeff]

Originally Posted by Scrooge McSam

.

Sleepy, your faith in the army to handle this appropriately is misplaced.

Find me a police force of any city over 100,000 which has never mis-handled a single crime. They are there first and foremost to win a war....policing themselves, although important, is not nor should it be their primary concern.

[Scrooge McSam]

Originally Posted by sleepyjeff

Find me a police force of any city over 100,000 which has never mis-handled a single crime.

There's not one. That's why it is so important to have a free press.

Originally Posted by sleepyjeff

They are there first and foremost to win a war....

Yeah, a war that was never properly declared. Congress slinked under the table and sacrificed their responsibility, not to mention their collective balls, to give one man the power to drag us into this idiotic mess. Where is the declaration of war?

We are there first and foremost to prop up the political and ideological aspirations of a fool who was planning to invade Iraq before he was even (s)elected. This same fool (or "disgusting individual", if you prefer) told us he was bringing in Osama "dead or alive". Osama bin Laden is the guy who runs the organization responsible for 9/11, for those of us who haven't been paying attention. Months later after getting his stupid little war with Iraq he tells us that he just doesn't spend that much time thinking about Osama. Our president (and it would appear, half our population) doesn't spend much time THINKING, period!

We are there because some people can't tell the difference between Al Queda and Iraq. I swear the next person that tells me we're in Iraq because they attacked us is gonna get it right between the eyes. I HAVE HAD ENOUGH!

We are there because we were lied to. And we'll be there until the people who supported this man and believed his lies about restoring honor to the White House stand up and call this man what he is... a lying warmongering fool who should be impeached immediately.

I won't be holding my breath.

[Prudence]

Originally Posted by sleepyjeff

Find me a police force of any city over 100,000 which has never mis-handled a single crime. They are there first and foremost to win a war....policing themselves, although important, is not nor should it be their primary concern.

Don't major cities usually have citizen review boards and other mechanisms to reduce episodes of police corruption? Do soldiers get a free pass on abhorent behavior because their job is difficult and unsavory? Or is it that they get a free pass because there are so many of them we just throw up our hands and say "soldiers will be soldiers"? Because there will always be the proverbial bad apples so we should never try to pluck them out as soon as they are identified? Or perhaps because if we ignore it, we can pretend it will go away?

[scaeagles]

I agree with that Turkish activist's reamark to Karen Hughes who is trying to improve the US reputation in the Middle East.

Quote:
There is "no chance for America to make its image better … while the war in Iraq is still going on (and) people are dying every day,"...

I wonder what the Turkish activist would say about terrorists who set off road side bombs or explosives in market places in Iraq. Yes, people are dying every day, and it is sad.

I agree that the soldiers must be held accountable. I don't cringe that the story has been reported, it just makes me sick that it happened. The problem is that isolated incidences make our forces look like thugs and, yes, does damage our reputation.

But, for a Turkish activist to complain that people are dying every day because of the presence of America....that is reprehensible. People are dying every day because of terrorists who are in opposition not just to America's presence, but to any government in Iraq that is not in line with what they want. It is interesting that even with large Islamic components coming into the Iraqi Constitution that the terrorists don't stop. Wouldn't they be happy if it were truly going to establish an Islamic state? They are against freedom in ANY form.

Saddam killed more Iraqis and Muslims than the US ever will. If the Turkish activist were truly concerned about the death, then I would wonder why she doesn't condemn the terrorists, or offer gratitude that Saddam is gone. I have no problem with people complaining about progress being made or not enough Iraqis taking part in the security forces or whatever, but to blame America for the death? Seems disingenuous to me.

[sleepyjeff]

Originally Posted by Prudence

Don't major cities usually have citizen review boards and other mechanisms to reduce episodes of police corruption? Do soldiers get a free pass on abhorent behavior because their job is difficult and unsavory? Or is it that they get a free pass because there are so many of them we just throw up our hands and say "soldiers will be soldiers"? Because there will always be the proverbial bad apples so we should never try to pluck them out as soon as they are identified? Or perhaps because if we ignore it, we can pretend it will go away?

Yes I suppose they do but I am not really talking about the "official" or "police" response to this incident. Bad apples should be punished. However, shouldn't the justice be carried out in such a way so as not to endanger the lives of all the good apples?

If one tree has a couple of bad apples you don't chop down the entire orchard.

oy....first flightless birds now apple trees

[Prudence]

Originally Posted by sleepyjeff

Yes I suppose they do but I am not really talking about the "official" or "police" response to this incident. Bad apples should be punished. However, shouldn't the justice be carried out in such a way so as not to endanger the lives of all the good apples?

If one tree has a couple of bad apples you don't chop down the entire orchard.

oy....first flightless birds now apple trees

Last night, my husband snorted and said "they're already in danger." He doesn't think soldiers are more or less in danger as a result of this reporting. I know he doesn't speak for all soldiers or veterans, but he has a bit more clout than me on that aspect. (And did I mention that my husband's a rabid conservative?)

Second: If justice is being carried out, then by all means let's get out of it's way. I'm not a fan of cameras in the courtroom, re-enactments on CourtTV, chasing officials into their homes when they're just trying to take the kids to school, etc. However, in this case the website persists, new content gets added, and the official government word so far is apparently a giant "oh well." And isn't that why a free press is supposed to be so fantastic? To ensure that information gets to the people so that the people can then make appropriate voting choices if government is not carrying out the people's will? Don't we raise a hue and cry when other governments limit press reporting on unflattering conduct?

If the government's soundbite on this issue was "We agree that this sort of conduct is inappropriate and will take steps to identify those responsible and take appropriate disciplinary action. Thank you for bringing this to our attention." then I might be persuaded to give them a moment to carry our their justice or whathaveyou. But that doesn't seem to be the case so far.