Author |
Share Topic Topic Search Topic Options
|
Jalisco Lancer
Sultan
Retired AE Moderator
Joined: 07-Aug-2004
Location: Mexico
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 2112
|
Quote Reply
Topic: Documents Show US Army Seized Wives As Tactic Posted: 27-Jan-2006 at 17:24 |
The U.S. Army in Iraq has at least twice seized and jailed the wives of suspected insurgents in hopes of "leveraging" their husbands into surrender, U.S. military documents show.
In one case, a secretive task force locked up the young mother of a nursing baby, a U.S. intelligence officer reported. In the case of a second detainee, one American colonel suggested to another that they catch her husband by tacking a note to the family's door telling him "to come get his wife."
The issue of female detentions in Iraq has taken on a higher profile since kidnappers seized American journalist Jill Carroll on Jan. 7 and threatened to kill her unless all Iraqi women detainees are freed.
The U.S. military on Thursday freed five of what it said were 11 women among the 14,000 detainees currently held in the 2 1/2-year-old insurgency. All were accused of "aiding terrorists or planting explosives," but an Iraqi government commission found that evidence was lacking.
Iraqi human rights activist Hind al-Salehi contends that U.S. anti-insurgent units, coming up empty-handed in raids on suspects' houses, have at times detained wives to pressure men into turning themselves in.
Iraq's deputy justice minister, Busho Ibrahim Ali, dismissed such claims, saying hostage-holding was a tactic used under the ousted Saddam Hussein dictatorship, and "we are not Saddam." A U.S. command spokesman in Baghdad, Lt. Col. Barry Johnson, said only Iraqis who pose an "imperative threat" are held in long-term U.S.-run detention facilities.
But documents describing two 2004 episodes tell a different story as far as short-term detentions by local U.S. units. The documents are among hundreds the Pentagon has released periodically under U.S. court order to meet an American Civil Liberties Union request for information on detention practices.
In one memo, a civilian Pentagon intelligence officer described what happened when he took part in a raid on an Iraqi suspect's house in Tarmiya, northwest of Baghdad, on May 9, 2004. The raid involved Task Force (TF) 6-26, a secretive military unit formed to handle high-profile targets.
"During the pre-operation brief it was recommended by TF personnel that if the wife were present, she be detained and held in order to leverage the primary target's surrender," wrote the 14-year veteran officer.
He said he objected, but when they raided the house the team leader, a senior sergeant, seized her anyway.
"The 28-year-old woman had three young children at the house, one being as young as six months and still nursing," the intelligence officer wrote. She was held for two days and was released after he complained, he said.
Like most names in the released documents, the officer's signature is blacked out on this for-the-record memorandum about his complaint.
Of this case, command spokesman Johnson said he could not judge, months later, the factors that led to the woman's detention.
The second episode, in June 2004, is found in sketchy detail in e-mail exchanges among six U.S. Army colonels, discussing an undisclosed number of female detainees held in northern Iraq by the Stryker Brigade of the 2nd Infantry Division.
The first message, from a military police colonel, advised staff officers of the U.S. northern command that the Iraqi police would not take control of the jailed women without charges being brought against them.
In a second e-mail, a command staff officer asked an officer of the unit holding the women, "What are you guys doing to try to get the husband have you tacked a note on the door and challenged him to come get his wife?"
Two days later, the brigade's deputy commander advised the higher command, "As each day goes by, I get more input that these gals have some info and/or will result in getting the husband."
He went on, "These ladies fought back extremely hard during the original detention. They have shown indications of deceit and misinformation."
The command staff colonel wrote in reply, referring to a commanding general, "CG wants the husband."
The released e-mails stop there, and the women's eventual status could not be immediately determined.
Of this episode, Johnson said, "It is clear the unit believed the females detained had substantial knowledge of insurgent activity and warranted being held."
source:
http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20060127/ap_on_re_mi_ea/iraq_leve raging_wives_2;_ylt=Akd1ktcPpTjY0SL80wZ_0QFX6GMA;_ylu=X3oDMT BiMW04NW9mBHNlYwMlJVRPUCUl
|
|
Mila
Tsar
Retired AE Moderator
Joined: 17-Sep-2005
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 4030
|
Quote Reply
Posted: 27-Jan-2006 at 18:34 |
EUFOR does the same thing in Bosnia and Herzegovina. They've been
torturing the wives and children of war criminal fugitives since the
war ended - constantly raiding their homes, following them everywhere,
interrupting family gatherings, taking them in for the same interview
once or twice a month. They even shot and killed one wife a few weeks
ago.
|
[IMG]http://img272.imageshack.us/img272/9259/1xw2.jpg">
|
|
Loknar
Colonel
Joined: 09-Jun-2005
Location: Somalia
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 666
|
Quote Reply
Posted: 27-Jan-2006 at 18:39 |
I dont understand...whats the problem?
The KGB once kid-naped the family members of terrorists, killed them, and sent the terrorists the body parts. As a result, kidnaped Soviet citizens were released (this happened in lebanon). I'm not saying thats right (in fact I"ll say itm it's pretty sick) but its a proven method to go after their familys.
If we dont harm them I dont see the problem. In their minds we would harm their family and thats what counts.
|
|
Illuminati
General
Joined: 08-Dec-2004
Location: United States
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 949
|
Quote Reply
Posted: 27-Jan-2006 at 19:45 |
If the wives have information about the insurgency, and it sounds like tehy do, then detaining them to get information is perfectly legit.
However, if they are being tortured or anything of that nature, then it's completely unacceptable
|
|
Maju
King
Joined: 14-Jul-2005
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 6565
|
Quote Reply
Posted: 27-Jan-2006 at 20:35 |
It's obviously ilegitimate: they are being kidnapped for ransom - the
ransom being the surrender of their husbands. This would not happen (at
least so widely) would the occupation forces been subject to a legal
corps.
|
NO GOD, NO MASTER!
|
|
Loknar
Colonel
Joined: 09-Jun-2005
Location: Somalia
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 666
|
Quote Reply
Posted: 27-Jan-2006 at 20:41 |
Originally posted by Maju
It's obviously ilegitimate: they are being kidnapped for ransom - the ransom being the surrender of their husbands. This would not happen (at least so widely) would the occupation forces been subject to a legal corps. |
Funny, the insurgency does the same thing.
You cant show weakness to the enemy.
Edited by Loknar
|
|
Leonidas
Tsar
Joined: 01-Oct-2005
Location: Australia
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 4613
|
Quote Reply
Posted: 27-Jan-2006 at 20:51 |
it is illegimite, holding peiople indirectly related as some kind of
ransom is not right and shows the USA is desperate. The war on 'terror'
is goin to be remembered as the time the USA ignored morality.
No you shouldnt show weakness, but you can show the moral high ground.
With the logic of fighting fire with fire, should the US also copy the
tactic of using suicide bombers or beheading its captors on TV
|
|
Maju
King
Joined: 14-Jul-2005
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 6565
|
Quote Reply
Posted: 27-Jan-2006 at 23:33 |
Originally posted by Loknar
Originally posted by Maju
It's obviously ilegitimate: they are
being kidnapped for ransom - the ransom being the surrender of their
husbands. This would not happen (at least so widely) would the
occupation forces been subject to a legal corps. |
Funny, the insurgency does the same thing. |
But aren't they supposed to be the bad guys?
|
NO GOD, NO MASTER!
|
|
Omar al Hashim
King
Suspended
Joined: 05-Jan-2006
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 5697
|
Quote Reply
Posted: 28-Jan-2006 at 05:41 |
Originally posted by Loknar
I dont understand...whats the problem? |
WHAT?!?!
What do you mean whats the problem? Seizing and interrogation the wives
of the resitance fighters is so enormously wrong it makes my blood
boil. How would you feel if someone invaded america and seized your
wife?
And America wonders why it can't secure the country! How can you be so
removed from the world not to understand the enormity of that crime!
Originally posted by Loknar
You cant show weakness to the enemy.
|
The sight of 10000 american marines running from 100 Iraqi's in Nasseriyah is weakness.
Showing honour and mercy to your enemies is Strength!
"A military operation involves deception. Even thought you are
competent, appear to be incompetent. Though effective, appear to be
ineffective."
- Sun Tzu
Showing weakness is advantageous, but it appears the US army does have to pretend to be incompetent and ineffective at all.
Edited by Omar al Hashim
|
|
Yiannis
Sultan
Joined: 03-Aug-2004
Location: Neutral Zone
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 2329
|
Quote Reply
Posted: 28-Jan-2006 at 06:13 |
I consider that if the ones who claim they want to bring democracy to the oppresed, use the same methods like the terrorists, then they're no different than the terrorists themselves. The rest is just talk and poor excuses.... what makes democracy superior to totalitarian regimes is its moral superiority and guarantee of civil liberties, without it it's potentially more dangerous than it's enemies.
|
The basis of a democratic state is liberty. Aristotle, Politics
Those that can give up essential liberty to obtain a temporary safety deserve neither liberty nor safety. Benjamin Franklin
|
|
Guests
Guest
|
Quote Reply
Posted: 28-Jan-2006 at 06:36 |
Iraq's deputy justice minister, Busho Ibrahim Ali, dismissed such
claims, saying hostage-holding was a tactic used under the
ousted Saddam Hussein dictatorship, and "we are not Saddam." |
That's the most lame defense ever.
|
|
Genghis
Caliph
Joined: 02-Aug-2004
Location: United States
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 2656
|
Quote Reply
Posted: 28-Jan-2006 at 11:57 |
I think that's a simple and effective solution that should be used whenever possible. I'm kind of disappointed I didn't think of it.
|
Member of IAEA
|
|
Mira
Colonel
Joined: 03-Aug-2005
Location: United Arab Emirates
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 697
|
Quote Reply
Posted: 28-Jan-2006 at 12:33 |
Isn't it strange that only forumers with the American flag showing on their
profiles are the ones who find this to be OK? Or maybe it's not
really that strange..
Edited by Mira
|
|
Byzantine Emperor
Arch Duke
Kastrophylax kai Tzaousios
Joined: 24-May-2005
Location: United States
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 1800
|
Quote Reply
Posted: 28-Jan-2006 at 12:44 |
Oh yeah, I knew this topic would be a liberal love-fest as soon as I saw it! Everyone line up and take your pot-shot at America and don't forget to say that the American military is worse than the "resistance fighters" (terrorists)! /sarcasm
Holding wives for ransom and not torturing them is a good deal more civilized than sawing innocents' heads off on TV in the name of Allah and blowing women and children up in cafes. And no, Leonidas, it won't lead to America adopting the terrorists' tactics, sorry to ruin your hopes!
|
|
|
Mira
Colonel
Joined: 03-Aug-2005
Location: United Arab Emirates
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 697
|
Quote Reply
Posted: 28-Jan-2006 at 13:21 |
Well then I guess you shouldn't be surprised when you hear that
anti-Americanism is on the rise everywhere. You harvest what you
plant.
|
|
Alparslan
Colonel
Joined: 07-Aug-2004
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 517
|
Quote Reply
Posted: 28-Jan-2006 at 14:59 |
I cannot believe in "the solutions" of American army to cope with Iraqi guerilla forces. Kidnapping wives of suspected persons. It seems like we are only at the beginning of this war. In Middle East, if you adopt such "tactics", it means that husband will certainly return to you but as being a suicide bomb.
Originally posted by Loknar
I dont understand...whats the problem?
The KGB once kid-naped the family members of terrorists, killed them, and sent the terrorists the body parts. As a result, kidnaped Soviet citizens were released (this happened in lebanon). I'm not saying thats right (in fact I"ll say itm it's pretty sick) but its a proven method to go after their familys.
|
"its a proven method to go after their familys."
No!!! How can you say something like this? This is disgusting. Where do you put these women and children? Under which conditions are they living? It is like a nightmare.....
Are you comparing USA with Soviets and KGB? But you were representing the "free world". What happened? Iraqi war was a very big mistake for USA. You are not the judge of the world that will decide to "bringing democracy" to other countries. You destabilised the country by giving fake reports of weapons of mass distructions. Now the stiuation is out of control and you have started to defend Soviets-KGB tactics. I am really sad for Iraqi people who are deriving towards a bloody internal war which may kill millions during long long years. I am also sad for the American soldiers and their loved ones who are the victims of poor leadership and distorted facts to launch this unfair war.
The only "winner" of this war will be arms and war industry. They made a lot of money.
Edited by Alparslan
|
|
SearchAndDestroy
Caliph
Joined: 15-Aug-2004
Location: United States
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 2728
|
Quote Reply
Posted: 28-Jan-2006 at 15:44 |
I honestly can't figure out what Bush thinks when signing his cabinent. It seems everyone he has put in a office is going under investigation. Bill Clinton had one member under a serious investigation and that was the guy incharge of the Department of Agriculture.
Here we have Rumsfeld, who has to sign off on this kind of stuff. And he is giving the ok for some war crimes.
I don't agree with it, but I think the military is expiermenting and taking any new idea to use against an insurgency that has new leader and is splintered. Psychology is another option to use, and is the only one I can see that works with such a enemy. I don't agree with it, and I believe other options should be used, but I don't know how many they have tried, and it's usually the bad ones that are told.
|
"A patriot must always be ready to defend his country against his government." E.Abbey
|
|
Kalevipoeg
Chieftain
Joined: 06-Aug-2004
Location: Estonia
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 1458
|
Quote Reply
Posted: 28-Jan-2006 at 18:18 |
You created the bloody "terrorist freedom fighters" and wine how you
have to use dirty tactics towards them or they won't go away, boohoo.
If you can't fight fair as the leading democracy on the Globe, then
stay home the next time you plan attacking random countries. Leave the
blooy women alone atleast.
|
There is nothing in the world more helpless and irresponsible than a man in the depths of an ether binge...
|
|
SearchAndDestroy
Caliph
Joined: 15-Aug-2004
Location: United States
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 2728
|
Quote Reply
Posted: 28-Jan-2006 at 19:36 |
Don't tell us that, you have to tell Bush. But I doubt he'd listen, he could care less about how half of Americans feel. I found this site, http://www.sorryeverybody.com/ it's shows pictures of Americans who voted for Bush apologizing, and others just apologizing for our mess of a government.
But you said Terrorist Freedom Fighter, I think they are two seperate groups, the Freedom Fighters who actually didn't want America there, and the terrorist who came into the country to fight for totally different reasons. So if we are taking wives of fighters, we may be just stealing wives of men who are fighting because they worry about their own future and in that case not really a bad person or atleast an lesser evil.
|
"A patriot must always be ready to defend his country against his government." E.Abbey
|
|
Anujkhamar
Chieftain
Retired AE Moderator
Joined: 03-Aug-2004
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 1027
|
Quote Reply
Posted: 28-Jan-2006 at 19:38 |
Originally posted by Byzantine Emperor
Holding wives for ransom and not torturing them is a good deal more civilized than sawing innocents' heads off on TV in the name of Allah and blowing women and children up in cafes. And no, Leonidas, it won't lead to America adopting the terrorists' tactics, sorry to ruin your hopes!
|
i get where your coming from, just thought that it might as well be stated that they don't exactly "saw" off the heads, as that would be haram. It should just be a clean swipe, otherwise its the duty of every other muslim to declare a jihad on the killer (along those lines.....)
|
|