Wednesday, May 04, 2005
Abu Ghraib and the war on terror
(See the original post in Spanish)
It is clear that the tortures of Abu Ghraib are a shame and should be punished. If we consider that the punishment is not enough, we can say so. That's what a democratic society is all about. However, there is a bottom line and it is that these tortures are being used by the enemies of democracy, starting with the jihadis, to make their propaganda. We can see terrorist Al Zawahiri denouncing the "American style of democracy". We can see those who are on the side of the head-choppers, in the web pages of Al Jazeera, of the ultra-leftists and the jihadi, rubbing their hands with images of Abu Ghraib. Yes, those who took part in the tortures ought to be punished. I cannot agree more. They have damaged the cause against terror.
However, the point, as the Belmont Club states, is a different one:
We cannot be selective in our rejection to tortures. These images are not exclusive of American or British soldiers in Iraq. There are similar images of soldiers of "pacifist" countries, opposed to the interevention in Iraq, such as Belgium orCanada, during the intervention in Somalia. If the issue is torture, Abu Ghraib is part of a wider phenomenon, soldiers' behavior in international conflicts. To focus solely on Abu Ghraib is to miss the issue and support a political agenda. In that case, we should bear in mind that after Abu Ghraib was revealed, there were elections that had the massive popular support of Iraqis. This did not happen in other contexts in which tortures were also denounced. Iraqis, in spite of the shameful tortures filtered to the press by American soldiers, support democracy in Iraq and condemn the "Iraqi resistance".

Belgian soldiers torturing Somalis (more information here).

Less famous images. Belgian soldiers torture their victims in blatant abuse of their privileged position as United Nations' "Blue Helmets", "Beasts of blue berets". These images have not circulated as much as Abu Ghraib's (neither, apparently, did they deserve Botero portraying them in his paintings). Why?



Several Canadian soldiers tortured and killed Somali prisioners (see it also here, with video included).

Prisioners of Bosnian Serbs. We can only see the results of malnutrition, abuse and humiliation, not the abuse in action....
All of these cases have received less international attention than Abu Ghraib. It is not surprising: US soldiers are not involved. And, of course, there are more tortures and executions such as those exerted by French soldiers in Algeria or byGerman prison guards between 2001 and 2004, or Killing camps in Bosnia.
|
It is clear that the tortures of Abu Ghraib are a shame and should be punished. If we consider that the punishment is not enough, we can say so. That's what a democratic society is all about. However, there is a bottom line and it is that these tortures are being used by the enemies of democracy, starting with the jihadis, to make their propaganda. We can see terrorist Al Zawahiri denouncing the "American style of democracy". We can see those who are on the side of the head-choppers, in the web pages of Al Jazeera, of the ultra-leftists and the jihadi, rubbing their hands with images of Abu Ghraib. Yes, those who took part in the tortures ought to be punished. I cannot agree more. They have damaged the cause against terror.
However, the point, as the Belmont Club states, is a different one:
While it is important to punish everyone responsible for the outrages at Abu Ghraib, the only effective way to stop the corrupting influences of war is to achieve victory. Japanese tourists are welcome in Asia everywhere today because the Second World War ended in 1945. And if by contrast Palestinians hand out sweets whenever a Jewish orphanage and Old Folk's home is bombed it may be because the UN refugee camps there celebrated their 50th anniversary in 1998. If the outrages at Abu Ghraib hasten the end of war it will not have been in vain, but if they lead, as the Left most earnestly desires, to a Vietnam-like stalemate, it will be not the last but the first of many sad mileposts.Said it very clearly, Abu Ghraib tortures cannot be seen apart from the international war on terror. These images are used to give support to international yijad against democracy. The impression and rejection we can feel against these facts fall in the of false pacifists's propaganda, of those useful idiots (though increasingly less idiots and more concious supporters) of the jihadis. It ends up being a selective impression, only applicable to Abu Ghraib.
We cannot be selective in our rejection to tortures. These images are not exclusive of American or British soldiers in Iraq. There are similar images of soldiers of "pacifist" countries, opposed to the interevention in Iraq, such as Belgium orCanada, during the intervention in Somalia. If the issue is torture, Abu Ghraib is part of a wider phenomenon, soldiers' behavior in international conflicts. To focus solely on Abu Ghraib is to miss the issue and support a political agenda. In that case, we should bear in mind that after Abu Ghraib was revealed, there were elections that had the massive popular support of Iraqis. This did not happen in other contexts in which tortures were also denounced. Iraqis, in spite of the shameful tortures filtered to the press by American soldiers, support democracy in Iraq and condemn the "Iraqi resistance".

Belgian soldiers torturing Somalis (more information here).

Less famous images. Belgian soldiers torture their victims in blatant abuse of their privileged position as United Nations' "Blue Helmets", "Beasts of blue berets". These images have not circulated as much as Abu Ghraib's (neither, apparently, did they deserve Botero portraying them in his paintings). Why?



Several Canadian soldiers tortured and killed Somali prisioners (see it also here, with video included).

Prisioners of Bosnian Serbs. We can only see the results of malnutrition, abuse and humiliation, not the abuse in action....
All of these cases have received less international attention than Abu Ghraib. It is not surprising: US soldiers are not involved. And, of course, there are more tortures and executions such as those exerted by French soldiers in Algeria or byGerman prison guards between 2001 and 2004, or Killing camps in Bosnia.
|
Comments:
(5) comments
Good design!
[url=http://qemsulfm.com/wcsu/reus.html]My homepage[/url] | [url=http://iwqdwqsu.com/dhrx/gqzw.html]Cool site[/url]
[url=http://qemsulfm.com/wcsu/reus.html]My homepage[/url] | [url=http://iwqdwqsu.com/dhrx/gqzw.html]Cool site[/url]
как отдыхают русские студенты онлайн http://free-3x.com/ маму трахают молодые free-3x.com/ русские студенты развлекаются онлайн [url=http://free-3x.com/]free-3x.com[/url]
United Nations has always been involved in dispensing selected justice. Its own peacekeeping troops have been involved in killing and massacring innocent people and they get away with it by referring to the technicality that the Geneva Convention does not apply to their soldiers since UN is not signatory to the convention. Whether signatory or not, how can one justify such acts of brutality and savagery. Men can turn into beasts if you do not check their impulses. William Golding was absolutely right.
Post a Comment





