5 ms·

Was it the low-level soldiers or the higher-ups who created the plans for torture at Abu Ghraib who were publicly shamed, humiliated and then jailed?

hef19898 6y ago
The higher ups created it, the average soldier was sacrificed for it. Doesn't change the fact, that the military has apparently better internal controls, better training and better rules of engagements. Even for some sorts of police work. The US military. Quite telling if you ask me.
- idoubtit 6y ago
  > the military has apparently better internal controls Source? The video "Collateral Murder" which made Wikileaks famous is one of the many proofs of that the US military doesn't apply much control on their engagements. The army had a video of the helicopter crew that shot unarmed civilians, including reporters and children. The crew obviously had fun killing them. They used offensive words and gamer slang. And the army lied to the press in order to protect the murderers. You may also read the many NGO reports about misconducts, torture, and civilian killings in Yemen, Iraq, Afghanistan… The internal controls almost never do anything unless a high level of media pressure applies. The US army may have internal controls when the victims are Americans (bullying, etc), but apart from this... some lives are more equals than others.
  - hef19898 6y ago
    There were comments on another thread from soldiers being deployed to Bagdad during the surge. Citing rules of engagement, and these were a lot more stringent and de-escalating than police actions against protests in the US. Also true that US forces are the least restraint forces at the moment. Because all you said is true. And yet, it seems to work at least as good for the armed forces as it does for police. Only that the former is an occupation force on foreign soil, while the latter is nominally there to serve and protect the public.
  - deleted 6y ago
    [deleted]
  - austincheney 6y ago
    One video is a poor qualifier of an organization comprising millions of people over the past 25 years.

hef19898 6y ago

The higher ups created it, the average soldier was sacrificed for it. Doesn't change the fact, that the military has apparently better internal controls, better training and better rules of engagements. Even for some sorts of police work. The US military. Quite telling if you ask me.

idoubtit 6y ago
> the military has apparently better internal controls Source? The video "Collateral Murder" which made Wikileaks famous is one of the many proofs of that the US military doesn't apply much control on their engagements. The army had a video of the helicopter crew that shot unarmed civilians, including reporters and children. The crew obviously had fun killing them. They used offensive words and gamer slang. And the army lied to the press in order to protect the murderers. You may also read the many NGO reports about misconducts, torture, and civilian killings in Yemen, Iraq, Afghanistan… The internal controls almost never do anything unless a high level of media pressure applies. The US army may have internal controls when the victims are Americans (bullying, etc), but apart from this... some lives are more equals than others.
- hef19898 6y ago
  There were comments on another thread from soldiers being deployed to Bagdad during the surge. Citing rules of engagement, and these were a lot more stringent and de-escalating than police actions against protests in the US. Also true that US forces are the least restraint forces at the moment. Because all you said is true. And yet, it seems to work at least as good for the armed forces as it does for police. Only that the former is an occupation force on foreign soil, while the latter is nominally there to serve and protect the public.
- deleted 6y ago
  [deleted]
- austincheney 6y ago
  One video is a poor qualifier of an organization comprising millions of people over the past 25 years.