Soldier calls Afghanistan prisoner abuse probe (political) 'witch hunt'

http://www.mysanantonio.com/sharedcontent/APStories/stories/D8EIMMM00.html

The commander of a U.S. Military Police company at the center of a prison abuse scandal in Afghanistan said his soldiers have been made into scapegoats, maintaining they did the best they could with little training and the charges against him are "bogus."


"It has become a political thing and the Army must show it takes abuse seriously — as well it should, but not for political reasons," Beiring said in a telephone interview last week from Fort Bliss, Texas. "Most of the offenses could have been dealt with at a much lower level."

He acknowledged that a few of his men "probably did go way overboard," but said the two detainees contributed to their own deaths by fighting with the guards. "They chose to be combative," Beiring said. "I am not convinced we broke any rules."

<snip>

One of the charges against Driver is that he shoved a detainee — Omar al-Farouq, one of Osama bin Laden's top lieutenants in Indonesia — against a wall. Al-Farouq has since escaped from American custody in Afghanistan.

because he sure hasn't learned anything from the Nuremberg Trials.

...becoming "combative" in the middle of being beaten to death-the animals deserved it....

Toodles!

but this statement is at best naive, and at worst seems strictly a self-centered view:

"They chose to be combative," Beiring said. "I am not convinced we broke any rules."

Every animal has a natural right of self-defense. When one is placed in a position where either death or the threat of death is perceived as imminent, survival instincts surface. These instincts are outside of the thought processes, that's why they're called instincts.

Of course they chose to be combative. Once jailed, the jailer has natural animal responsibilities to keep prisoners safe. The Geneva Conventions appear, to me at least, to address this adequately. That politicians spin and spin (making new anti-torture legislation) to makes it seem like the Geneva Conventions did not address the issue of torture.

Lower-level troops such as Beiring are being ground through the political meat grinder as those at the top refuse to take responsibility for at least their lack of oversight, and at most, their direct orders that were to be followed by those lower in the command chain.

With the break-the-law scandals in the White House and the routine money-laundering of the GOP congress, I feel confident in my understanding of precisely where those orders that troops such as Beiring followed, originate.

Fact is some US Soldiers have demonstrated they are undisciplined and act in manners which can only be called unsoldier-like conduct.

This isn't to paint the entire force with a broad brush, it's just to point out the all too obvious; there are truly some bad apples in the lot.

even though it is the legitamate one, and the bushole has repeatedly pulled assets out of afghanistan to put them in iraq when the advertised cakewalk there proved to be more of a minefield.

i'm not excusing the actions the actions of capt beiring and his men, but he did request more training and more resources to deal with the situation and was denied, while we (the public) were constantly being reassured that the boots on the ground had everything they needed. but we know that was false in iraq, i'm sure it's even more the case in afghanistan.

and they are scapegoats until some serious prosecution starts happening to people with stars on their shoulder boards or secretary in front of their names.

sure, there are E-1s and O-2s that are guilty of some shit, but i'm a lot more inclined to go a bit easy on someone in the field, someone under the stress, than i am to go easy on someone removed from the situation by rank and privilege.

i wouldn't mind a witch hunt but i'd like to start in the WH and the pentagon, and i'll give long odds we find more than a few cauldrons, brooms and pointy hats...

(no offense meant to practitioners of wicca, just tryin to make a point)