Barbaric Thugs
Dan has an interesting post up on his site describing the moral and cultural shortcomings of muslim extremists. The people he describes are absolutely dusgusting.
I’ve thought many times how strange it is that there are people who can’t see clearly why there is such a difference in the level of morality displayed by the Islamic terrorists and American troops.
Recent events involving abuse of Iraqi prisoners of war cleared much of this confusion up for me.
I regularly read TPM a blog written by Joshua Marshall who is a shameless hack for the Democrat party. I rarely agree with his politics but he’s a very good writer and researcher. He has an interesting post where he shares his take on a recent report released by the International Committee of the Red Cross. He chose to highlight a very scary part of the report and I’ll quote briefly from his post:
The key passages come early on. For instance, on page 7, “In most cases, the allegations of ill-treatment referred to acts that occurred prior to the internment of persons deprived of their liberty in regular internment facilities, while they were in the custody of arresting authorities or military and civilian intelligence personnel.” Once prisoners were transferred to “regular internment facilities, such as those administered by the military police, where the behavior of guards was strictly supervised, ill-treatment of the type described in this report usually ceased.”
…The key passage is probably on page 11 where it states that “methods of physical and psychological coercion used by the interrogators appeared to be part of the standard operating procedures by military intelligence personnel to obtain confessions and extract information. Several military intelligence officers confirmed to ICRC that it was part of the military intelligence process to hold a person deprived of his liberty naked in a completely dark and empty cell for a prolonged period [,] to use inhumane and degrading treatment, including physical and psychological coercion, against persons deprived of their liberty to secure their cooperation.” (itals added)
The list of frequently used methods of ‘ill-treatment’ is on page 12 and among other things includes beatings of various sorts, threats of various sorts — including further ‘ill-treatment’, “reprisals against family members, imminent execution or transfer to Guantanamo” — being paraded around naked, being photographed in humiliating positions, etc.
My take on this is generally the same as Marshall’s. This abuse doesn’t appear to be the result of rogue prison guards. Our intelligence agencies admitted to the Red Cross that they were doing this type of thing to assist in their interrogations. One of the guards accused of participating in this abuse has claimed he was told by intelligence officers to “soften the prisoners up” before interrogation and this abuse was the “softening”.
My support of the war in Iraq hinges on the notion that our culture is morally superior to that of the Muslim extremists. It is clear that they are a threat to us so I support efforts to move the fight to their turf. If it is possible to establish a liberal society that can be a sort of “city on the hill” for the rest of the abused people of that region than lets do it. I think we are capable of doing it (I grew up while Ronald Reagan was president and some of the optimism rubbed off on me).
If this Red Cross report is correct I may need to rethink my premises. The animals who perpetrated the disgusting abuse portrayed in the pictures I’ve seen from Abu Ghraib are not that much better than the thugs Dan described in his post. If this abuse was ordered by U.S. intelligence officials Iraq will not likely ever be a “city on the hill” or an example others want to follow. I’m not ready to switch sides in the debate yet but I have to admit that my confidence is shaken.
2 Comments »
RSS feed for comments on this post.
Leave a comment
Line and paragraph breaks automatic, e-mail address never displayed, HTML allowed:
<a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <code> <em> <i> <strike> <strong>
I’m always interested in hearing the way in which people justify their support for the Iraq war. Your support for the war “hinges on the notion” that our culture is superior to that of muslim extremists. This, on its own, is obviously insufficient as a justification for war and I’m not sure why your support for war hinges on it. Your first reason for supporting the war is that “They” (muslim extremists) are a threat to us. There are many hot beds of muslim extremism around the world so this justification for war doesn’t specify Iraq as a target. Additionally, you could argue that the North Korean communist culture is moraly inferior to ours and that they pose us a threat. Why not attack North Korea then on this same basis?
The other reason you give is that we can, through military force, establish a “city on a hill”. This is dubious at best. This reason also does not specify Iraq. It could be used as a justification for attacking any number of countries.
Comment by John Anderson — May 21, 2004 @ 10:52 pm
John, thanks for your post. I agree with you that taken on their own the reasons I gave in this post for my support for this war are not sufficient.
Iraq is an excellent place for a war with Muslim extremism for several reasons. It is a nation that has historically had a secular government rather than one closely based on the Sharia. I think that with a few years of American occupation…then a few years of American support…Iraq could be the first Arab nation to adopt a more liberal form of government. I am also heartened by the fact that hundreds of foreigners have flooded into Iraq to fight the occupation troops. These “crusaders” can be killed by Americans in Iraq before they get a chance to do damage to civilian targets down the road. Even if our experiment to create a liberal democracy in fails we will have killed a great number of those extremists who could have been a threat later and we have a continuing military presence in the Middle east that can be a trap for those who want to target the U.S. with terrorism. When President Bush said, “Bring it on!” I smiled while foolish people on the left cried and whined about how insensitive the President is.
John, the reason I like these things is my experience on 9-11. I live in northern Virginia and on 9-11 I Was outside about a mile from the Pentagon when I heard the plane crash into it. I watched the trade Center burn then collapse on TV while I watched the Pentagon burn outside the window shy. For three weeks after 9-11 I smelled the stench of the burned building and bodies on my way to work as I drove on the detour around Rt. 110 past the smashed and burned portion of the Pentagon. I hate the barbarians that did this. We can’t directly target the slimeballs who attacked us but we can create an environment where those who would do this in the future can be killed now in Iraq. The more we kill now the better.
Comment by Jeremy — May 22, 2004 @ 6:57 am