News Are Mercenaries in Iraq Considered POWs Under the Geneva Conventions?

[Adam]

If you think that contractors in Iraq are overcharging, why don't you take advantage of the situation, go to Iraq, and make yourself some easy money? How much would you charge to drive a gasoline tanker across Iraq? Perhaps you would like to underbid one of the contractors. LOL

Wow. Way to go. You're really great at completely missing the point.

Watch closely. Pay attention.

A company given a contract in Iraq (a company with Bush and Cheney as investors, which did not even have to bid for the contract) is being investigated for overcharging. Got it? It's very simple. It's not a matter of "If you think that contractors in Iraq are overcharging"; what I think has absolutely no bearing on the fact that they are being investigated for overcharging.

As for making money, there are two problems with your "go drive a truck" idea:
1) I would not want to profit from a war spawned by lies which has killed over 8,000 innocent civilians.
2) I simply don't require the money.

 

[amp]

Another issue I think is that these 'companies' are paying such large saleries to former service men and the military is paying them so why are there pay cuts going against our current US service men who are in harms way, who are in at least as much peril as the mercenaries but getting nowhere near the money.

 

[hughes johnson]

1) I would not want to profit from a war spawned by lies which has killed over 8,000 innocent civilians.
2) I simply don't require the money.

These are good excuses, and I will accept them.

 

[Adam]

That, and I'm right.

 

[hughes johnson]

You're not right, but I am accepting your excuses; as a courtesy of course. I think you deserve the benefit of the doubt this time.

 

[Adam]

And I'm just plain right. Deal with it.

 

[member 5645]

Wow. Way to go. You're really great at completely missing the point.

Watch closely. Pay attention.

A company given a contract in Iraq (a company with Bush and Cheney as investors, which did not even have to bid for the contract) is being investigated for overcharging. Got it? It's very simple. It's not a matter of "If you think that contractors in Iraq are overcharging"; what I think has absolutely no bearing on the fact that they are being investigated for overcharging.

As for making money, there are two problems with your "go drive a truck" idea:
1) I would not want to profit from a war spawned by lies which has killed over 8,000 innocent civilians.
2) I simply don't require the money.

So, Bush and Cheney sneak Halliburton in. Then, to cover up their sneakery, they investigate the company for overcharging to make it look like they don't have an interest in the company making a healthy profit! It's brilliant! Why let Halliburton get away with it, when you could make sure they are sticking to the rules!

 

[russ_watters]

...why are there pay cuts going against our current US service men who are in harms way...

What pay cuts?

Also, before I enlisted, I assumed the low pay for the military that everyone always talks about was accurate. Its much more complicated than that.

Most places you hear that cite the pay scales and ignore the extras. A housing allowance (if you qualify) is enormous for example. I lived in about the poorest section of the country (southern MS) and it was $600/month for a junior enlisted. You also get additional allowances for hazard pay, flight pay, sea pay, etc. (though probably not enough for combat).

Also, while new enlistees start off making dirt, that's all they are qualified to make. The biggest problem I saw was with people just plain not doing what they needed to do to advance. It really isn't that hard. One guy on my ship, for example, was an E-5 at age 32 - 4 promotions in 14 years. Anyone with half a brain should be an E-5 in 3 years in the Navy. His biggest problem was he liked to fight, so he got knocked down a rank every couple of years. He was not an unusual case though. We had even a 30 year old E-7 and a 50 year old E-6. Not nice to say, but the 50 year old E-6 wasn't smart enough to advance any further.

Where pay really was insufficient was in the skilled fields - computers, telecommunications, etc. That's a problem with the inflexibility of the military for dealing with that type of thing. And they pay for it with retention problems. They offer a big signing bonus, but it isn't even close to competitive with the outside.

One caveat: I get the impression that advancement is much more difficult in the Marine corps and possibly the army. I don't know enouh about them.

 

[hughes johnson]

I get the impression that advancement is much more difficult in the Marine corps and possibly the army. I don't know enouh about them.

Look sharp, and accomplish the mission every single time no matter what. The Army wants you to succeed. It's easy.

 

[Njorl]

What pay cuts?


Where pay really was insufficient was in the skilled fields - computers, telecommunications, etc. That's a problem with the inflexibility of the military for dealing with that type of thing. And they pay for it with retention problems. They offer a big signing bonus, but it isn't even close to competitive with the outside.

One caveat: I get the impression that advancement is much more difficult in the Marine corps and possibly the army. I don't know enouh about them.

I heard recently something about combat pay being reduced, or a scheduled increase being delayed.

One problem the military faces is that it is hard to pay a subordinate more than his commander. It is not that uncommon in technical fields for a valuable, highly skilled worker to make more than their boss. It has always been the case where I work that a few of our scientists make more than their supervisors.

I think the Air Force started doing this a few years back. It makes sense to me that the guy who fixes a jet engine should make more than the guy who tells him to do it. Then again, you're not going to convince the Marines by telling them, "This is how they do things in the Air Force."

Njorl

 

[Adam]

So, Bush and Cheney sneak Halliburton in. Then, to cover up their sneakery, they investigate the company for overcharging to make it look like they don't have an interest in the company making a healthy profit! It's brilliant! Why let Halliburton get away with it, when you could make sure they are sticking to the rules!

It isn't Bush and Cheney doing the investigating. Thus, we can consider your entire response an irrelevant waste of bandwidth.

 

[member 5645]

It isn't Bush and Cheney doing the investigating. Thus, we can consider your entire response an irrelevant waste of bandwidth.

So Bush and Cheney don't have the power to hide this?

 

[Adam]

Apparently someone found out, since it is being investigated. Nor do they have the ability to hide their dodging out from Vietnam. Nor do they have the ability to hide the breaches of the US constitution they have made.

 

[RageSk8]

Read this!

Graphic photographs showing the torture and sexual abuse of Iraqi prisoners in a US-run prison outside Baghdad emerged yesterday from a military inquiry which has left six soldiers facing a possible court martial and a general under investigation.

The scandal has also brought to light the growing and largely unregulated role of private contractors in the interrogation of detainees.

According to lawyers for some of the soldiers, they claimed to be acting in part under the instruction of mercenary interrogators hired by the Pentagon...

"We know that CACI and Titan corporations have provided interrogators and that they have in fact conducted interrogations on behalf of the US and have interacted the military police guards at the prison," he said.

"I think it creates a laissez faire environment that is completely inappropriate. If these individuals engaged in crimes against an Iraq national - who has jurisdiction over such a crime?"

"It's insanity," said Robert Baer, a former CIA agent, who has examined the case, and is concerned about the private contractors' free-ranging role. "These are rank amateurs and there is no legally binding law on these guys as far as I could tell. Why did they let them in the prison?"

This is a much bigger problem than I preveously thought.

 

[member 5645]

Apparently someone found out, since it is being investigated. Nor do they have the ability to hide their dodging out from Vietnam. Nor do they have the ability to hide the breaches of the US constitution they have made.

So they hid the involvement in 9/11, an even recorded all over, but can't keep the paperwork right to help out halliburton? I don't buy it ;)

 

[pelastration]

Read this!
This is a much bigger problem than I preveously thought.

I agree. It's a big ethic problem ... and tells us something about ... USA. The 'elixir of power' ... the power of projecting the Almighty in yourself.
It's a drug. Some of the top-top guys have something similar, GW Bush is one of them.
Do you like that? Yes? Then vote for Bush. He will bring you in heaven.

 

[member 5645]

I agree. It's a big ethic problem ... and tells us something about ... USA. The 'elixir of power' ... the power of projecting the Almighty in yourself.
It's a drug. Some of the top-top guys have something similar, GW Bush is one of them.
Do you like that? Yes? Then vote for Bush. He will bring you in heaven.

There's already a thread for this.

 

[pelastration]

There's already a thread for this.

and does it tells about: "
The scandal has also brought to light the growing and largely unregulated role of private contractors in the interrogation of detainees.

According to lawyers for some of the soldiers, they claimed to be acting in part under the instruction of mercenary interrogators hired by the Pentagon."

and:
"Lawyers for the soldiers argue they are being made scapegoats for a rogue military prison system in which mercenaries give orders without legal accountability.

A military report into the Abu Ghraib case - parts of which were made available to the Guardian - makes it clear that private contractors were supervising interrogations in the prison, which was notorious for torture and executions under Saddam Hussein."

---

"One civilian contractor was accused of raping a young male prisoner but has not been charged because military law has no jurisdiction over him."

No jurisdiction: good news!
Why have jurisdiction? For sure the civilian contractor followed his 'instinctive' and honnest feelings about how the 'good' guys must teach the 'bad' guys. This are the natural values GW Bush talks about ... freedom, democracy, ... let them feel what "justice" is all about!
And let's be reasonable: When "the soldiers argue they are being made scapegoats for a rogue military prison system in which mercenaries give orders without legal accountability", this is because they are pussies. The real solution is the use of tough guys. When they get $1,000- 1,500 a day ... they deserve that. These guys have the balls. And they use them! Let's go back to the American roots where native Indians learned their lesson, like now Iraqi indians will learn their lesson. Oil them.

I am so happy phatmonky understands this.

 

[Adam]

Now that is a straw man. Who said anything about Bush and Cheney hiding paperwork about 9/11? Yes, a straw man. Thus, you are again wrong and have again wasted bandwidth.

 

[ptex]

Do you like that? Yes? Then vote for Bush. He will bring you in heaven.

Why would I want to go to "heaven"? I think that’s the problem here. I want to be safe and pay low taxes. I don't understand go to "heaven" what's going on?? Heaven is a place for suicide bombers and people who kill the people who perform abortions oh and maybe people who smoke crack.

 

[pelastration]

the nature of the American leaders

In my opinion the Commander-in-Chief is responsible for the torture of detainees in Iraq. Is such abuse 'isolated'? Maybe, I don't know. We only know what has become public. We have seen some photo's, but are there video's too? And Pentagon tried to stop but because of Internet (some sites began to publish ...) we know it.

There is something really wrong on the structural level however. And there he - Bush - is also responsible for.
Allowing private contractors to interrogate prisoners is shameful and illegal. Private contractors have no rules of conduct. When mercenaries have human beings under there hands inside a protected environment - and they have the 'freedom' to do whatever they can imagine with these prisoners - you open the door for all types of sadistic actions and sexual aberrations. Who controls the mental health of these private contractors?

Just think how private contractors of DynCorp (actual CSC http://www.csc.com/solutions/businessprocessoutsourcing/ ) organize prostitution with Bosnian girls of 13. http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/main.jhtml?xml=/news/2002/04/25/wbos25.xml: Quote: "The women who refused were locked in rooms and withheld food and outside contact for days or weeks. After this time they are told to dance naked on table tops and sit with clients. If the women still refuse to perform sex acts with the customers they are beaten and raped in the rooms by the bar owners and their associates. They are told if they go to the police they will be arrested for prostitution and being an illegal immigrant." end of quote.

Can you imagine if such type of private contractors have almost unlimited power in a prison?
This sick situation should stop asap.
US regulations should make such practices or possibilities impossible. As long it doesn't stop ... this system is characteristic of U.S. forces, since it creates the structural framework to make abuse possible, and that will tell us something about the nature of the American leaders ... and 'the way we do things in Iraq".

Outrage in Iraq and Arab countries? Yes. And can you imagine when some of your relatives are actually a prisoner in Iraq?

http://www.canada.com/calgary/calgaryherald/news/story.html?id=1de49146-ea60-492f-bb5f-b68c09d22933
President George W. Bush expressed personal disgust Friday with photographs detailing the humiliation of Iraqi prisoners by American troops and vowed swift punishment to soldiers found responsible for any mistreatment.

With Arab television networks broadcasting the images throughout the Middle East, Bush called the abuses isolated and uncharacteristic of U.S. forces.

"I share a deep disgust that those prisoners were treated the way they were treated," Bush said at a Washington news conference with Prime Minister Paul Martin.

"Their treatment does not reflect the nature of the American people. That's not the way we do things in America. And so I didn't like it one bit."

 

[ptex]

organize prostitution with Bosnian girls of 13. http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/main.jhtml?xml=/news/2002/04/25/wbos25.xml: Quote: "The women who refused were locked in rooms and withheld food and outside contact for days or weeks. After this time they are told to dance naked on table tops and sit with clients. If the women still refuse to perform sex acts with the customers they are beaten and raped in the rooms by the bar owners and their associates. They are told if they go to the police they will be arrested for prostitution and being an illegal immigrant." end of quote.

US regulations should make such practices or possibilities impossible. As long it doesn't stop ... this system is characteristic of U.S. forces,

Could you please post the title of this (http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/main.jhtml) article.
Here is a quote "The former American policewoman claims she was sacked because she sent an email to Jacques Paul Klein, the chief of UN mission in Bosnia-Hercegovina, which highlighted the sexual exploitation of women by those who had been sent to protect them from the sex trade.

Details of the email, sent in October 2000, were given to the tribunal at Southampton, Hants, yesterday.

In it, Mrs Bolkovac, a mother of three from Lincoln, Nebraska, claims that bars were frequented by UN police officers and other humanitarian workers who availed themselves of women forced into prostitution."

Damn Americans?

I think that you take much of the stuff you post out of context and much of the links when read fully contrdic your stace. But hey I would do it also if I no real facts. You would make a great politician you should move to the US and run for office you are on the right track.

 

[hughes johnson]

In my opinion the Commander-in-Chief is responsible for the torture of detainees in Iraq. Is such abuse 'isolated'? Maybe, I don't know.

That is correct, you don't know. Your opinion has no effect on the facts. We are currently running an official investigation to find out what the facts are. You are not.

Allowing private contractors to interrogate prisoners is shameful and illegal.

Is it?

President George W. Bush expressed personal disgust Friday with photographs detailing the humiliation of Iraqi prisoners by American troops and vowed swift punishment to soldiers found responsible for any mistreatment.

"I share a deep disgust that those prisoners were treated the way they were treated," Bush said at a Washington news conference with Prime Minister Paul Martin.

"Their treatment does not reflect the nature of the American people. That's not the way we do things in America. And so I didn't like it one bit."

That's good enough for me. If it's not good enough for you, do something about it (other than whining). When you see things like this happening, and you don't do anything about it, that makes you guilty as well. Your country should be doing a lot more about this sort of thing in countries all over the world. How come you haven't been? You are not pulling your weight. Perhaps there's no profit in it for you?

 

[pelastration]

If it's not good enough for you, do something about it (other than whining). When you see things like this happening, and you don't do anything about it, that makes you guilty as well. Your country should be doing a lot more about this sort of thing in countries all over the world. How come you haven't been? You are not pulling your weight. Perhaps there's no profit in it for you?

I don't ask you to defence yourself.
You have nothing to do with those facts.
Do you feel attacked personally?
And why point at me?

What I see is a sick mentality in treating these prisoners.
I ask in first instance: What are private defense contractors doing there?

I put this link already on another post http://www.newyorker.com/fact/content/?040510fa_fact but here I put some lines again.

In letters and e-mails to family members, Frederick repeatedly noted that the military-intelligence teams, which included C.I.A. officers and linguists and interrogation specialists from private defense contractors, were the dominant force inside Abu Ghraib. In a letter written in January, he said:

I questioned some of the things that I saw . . . such things as leaving inmates in their cell with no clothes or in female underpants, handcuffing them to the door of their cell—and the answer I got was, “This is how military intelligence (MI) wants it done.” . . . . MI has also instructed us to place a prisoner in an isolation cell with little or no clothes, no toilet or running water, no ventilation or window, for as much as three days.

The military-intelligence officers have “encouraged and told us, ‘Great job,’ they were now getting positive results and information,” Frederick wrote. “CID has been present when the military working dogs were used to intimidate prisoners at MI’s request.” At one point, Frederick told his family, he pulled aside his superior officer, Lieutenant Colonel Jerry Phillabaum, the commander of the 320th M.P. Battalion, and asked about the mistreatment of prisoners. “His reply was ‘Don’t worry about it.’”

...

Taguba’s report, however, amounts to an unsparing study of collective wrongdoing and the failure of Army leadership at the highest levels. The picture he draws of Abu Ghraib is one in which Army regulations and the Geneva conventions were routinely violated, and in which much of the day-to-day management of the prisoners was abdicated to Army military-intelligence units and civilian contract employees. Interrogating prisoners and getting intelligence, including by intimidation and torture, was the priority.

------
To me: " MI has also instructed us to place a prisoner in an isolation cell with little or no clothes, no toilet or running water, no ventilation or window, for as much as three days. " is a systematic policy, known and approved by superiors. That means 'war-crimes'.

This case of abuse in Iraqi prisons brings again attention to the letter to the United Nations delivered on Monday May 6, 2002 ,(where) the US says it will not consider itself bound by the treaty (to establish an International Criminal Court (ICC)- even though Bill Clinton signed up to it in 2000.
The US has vehemently opposed the setting up of the ICC, fearing its soldiers and diplomats could be brought before the court which will hear cases of war crimes and crimes against humanity.
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/americas/1970312.stm.
It seems to me that the "nature of Mr. Bush" is at such a mental and intellectual level that "war crimes" are allowed and justified. And that means no 'justice' for the victims (if they are still alive).

 

[hughes johnson]

We're investigating it. If some things need to change, then I'm sure we will change them. Everyone is doing the best they can under the circumstances. I really don't mind if sadaam is wearing panties, they probably look nice on him if he has the legs for it.

 

[pelastration]

We're investigating it. If some things need to change, then I'm sure we will change them. Everyone is doing the best they can under the circumstances.

sure. We know those type of investigations. I'm sure everyone is doing the best they can under the circumstances to cover as much as possible.

 

[hughes johnson]

sure. We know those type of investigations. I'm sure everyone is doing the best they can under the circumstances to cover as much as possible.

If there is a problem, it will be straightened out in time.

 

[pelastration]

If there is a problem, it will be straightened out in time.

If there is a problem? If there is a problem?
See ... you also would prefer a cover-up. Do you question too that there is the Taguba report?

A fifty-three-page report, obtained by The New Yorker, written by Major General Antonio M. Taguba and not meant for public release, was completed in late February. Its conclusions about the institutional failures of the Army prison system were devastating.

Specifically, Taguba found that between October and December of 2003 there were numerous instances of “sadistic, blatant, and wanton criminal abuses” at Abu Ghraib. This systematic and illegal abuse of detainees, Taguba reported, was perpetrated by soldiers of the 372nd Military Police Company, and also by members of the American intelligence community. (The 372nd was attached to the 320th M.P. Battalion, which reported to Karpinski’s brigade headquarters.) Taguba’s report listed some of the wrongdoing:

Breaking chemical lights and pouring the phosphoric liquid on detainees; pouring cold water on naked detainees; beating detainees with a broom handle and a chair; threatening male detainees with rape; allowing a military police guard to stitch the wound of a detainee who was injured after being slammed against the wall in his cell; sodomizing a detainee with a chemical light and perhaps a broom stick, and using military working dogs to frighten and intimidate detainees with threats of attack, and in one instance actually biting a detainee.

There was stunning evidence to support the allegations, Taguba added— “detailed witness statements and the discovery of extremely graphic photographic evidence.” Photographs and videos taken by the soldiers as the abuses were happening were not included in his report, Taguba said, because of their “extremely sensitive nature.”
...
Taguba backed up his assertion by citing evidence from sworn statements to Army C.I.D. investigators. Specialist Sabrina Harman, one of the accused M.P.s, testified that it was her job to keep detainees awake, including one hooded prisoner who was placed on a box with wires attached to his fingers, toes, and penis. She stated, “MI wanted to get them to talk. It is Graner and Frederick’s job to do things for MI and OGA to get these people to talk.”

Another witness, Sergeant Javal Davis, who is also one of the accused, told C.I.D. investigators, “I witnessed prisoners in the MI hold section . . . being made to do various things that I would question morally. . . . We were told that they had different rules.” Taguba wrote, “Davis also stated that he had heard MI insinuate to the guards to abuse the inmates. When asked what MI said he stated: ‘Loosen this guy up for us.’ ‘Make sure he has a bad night.’ ‘Make sure he gets the treatment.’” Military intelligence made these comments to Graner and Frederick, Davis said. “The MI staffs to my understanding have been giving Graner compliments . . . statements like, ‘Good job, they’re breaking down real fast. They answer every question. They’re giving out good information.’”

General Taguba saved his harshest words for the military-intelligence officers and private contractors. He recommended that Colonel Thomas Pappas, the commander of one of the M.I. brigades, be reprimanded and receive non-judicial punishment, and that Lieutenant Colonel Steven Jordan, the former director of the Joint Interrogation and Debriefing Center, be relieved of duty and reprimanded.

He further urged that a civilian contractor, Steven Stephanowicz, of CACI International http://www.caci.com/business/intel.shtml , be fired from his Army job, reprimanded, and denied his security clearances for lying to the investigating team and allowing or ordering military policemen “who were not trained in interrogation techniques to facilitate interrogations by ‘setting conditions’ which were neither authorized” nor in accordance with Army regulations. “He clearly knew his instructions equated to physical abuse,” Taguba wrote.
He also recommended disciplinary action against a second CACI employee, John Israel. (A spokeswoman for CACI said that the company had “received no formal communication” from the Army about the matter.)

“I suspect,” Taguba concluded, that Pappas, Jordan, Stephanowicz, and Israel “were either directly or indirectly responsible for the abuse at Abu Ghraib,” and strongly recommended immediate disciplinary action.

The only thing you can say is: If there is a problem, it will be straightened out in time.

 

[kat]

fifty-three-page report, obtained by The New Yorker, written by Major General Antonio M. Taguba and not meant for public release, was completed in late February

Whenever I read something like this I begin to question whether we're being selectively fed information.
I think there IS a problem, and I think it is serious. I also think that we have safeguards set up to catch (obviously it's been caught, albeit better by far to not have happened at all) and then to prosecute. I don't foresee this being dropped. The American public is outraged.
The fact that the U.S. media along side the government is the device that is working through the process...is one more example of the difference between a democratic country and those run by tyrants.

 

[studentx]

Pelastration, I am glad your beginning to discover the horrors that can go on behind closed doors and it finally touching you. I thought with Dutroux and all these belgian perverts you wouldn't have slept thru Saddam, but it took a few Americans to finally wake you up

Dont you think we should wait for the UN to agree before we take any action?