Wikileaks: Release has exposed the terrifying reality of the Iraq War

[bemildred]

It is the minutiae of the Wikileak documents which is the most disturbing – the sickening accounts of torture, rape and physical abuse conducted by Iraqi police officers and soldiers under the noses of American and British troops.

The 391,831 reports, drawn up in many cases by US soldiers of relatively junior rank, perhaps after a long, hot day on patrol in Baghdad, provide a terrifying insight into the anarchy which enveloped Iraq after Saddam Hussein's regime collapsed.

The reports reveal in terrifying detail how any hope of replacing the former dictatorship with a functioning democracy quickly became a faded dream as Iraq descended into an orgy of killing which reached every corner of the country.

In often nauseating detail, the files disclose the coalition commanders turned a blind eye to acts of torture and murder conducted on an industrial scale.

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/middleeast/iraq/8083084/Wikileaks-Release-has-exposed-the-terrifying-reality-of-the-Iraq-War.html

[stray cat]

1. A draft would do a much better job if it is reality people want

[Demeter]

2. Eric Holder, Call Your Office

and do the People's business, dammit!

[sabrina 1]

3. If we are a nation of laws, does he have any choice? With all we

ordinary people know, and with how much more they know?

How disingenuous of them to tell us 'we are a nation of laws' as someone said to me a few days ago here, when it comes to DADT, when these massive crimes are overlooked and we are told to 'move on'.

I hope there is a huge outcry for justice from around the world. I doubt it will come from the American people, they are immune to news of how their government has been committing war crimes for a decade now.

[Demeter]

4. Oh, He Has the Ultimate Choice

If Justice doesn't do it, nobody will--unless the International
Criminal Court steps in....don't hold your breath on that, either. It's far more likely we'll get a shellacking from China, first.

[northernlights]

6. oh, we're a nation of laws all right...

They'll change the laws and go after Assange... and anybody who actually reads the Wikileaks documents. Just wait. I have no hope for this fucked up administration. Or for anything the otherside offers, either.

We're done. Stick a fucking fork in us already. :cry: :cry: :cry:

[ljm2002]

17. "If we are a nation of laws"...

...that's rich.

We used to be a nation of laws. Never perfect but then no one / no nation is perfect. But now, we really are not a nation of laws.

Item:
- the S&L scandal saw more than 1,000 successful prosecutions; many of those convicted did jail time
- the recent financial collapse that was based on fraud on an international scale, that brought our economy and the world's economy to its knees, was a much larger-scale catastrophe than the S&L scandal and to date there has been NOT ONE prosecution

Item:
- the banks commit fraud, falsify papers, notarize papers without actual notaries, create fake records, plan ways to sell flawed products, refuse to deal with people, yet not only are none of them in jail but they gave themselves even higher bonuses than last year's record bonuses
- the little guys try and use the letter of the law to protect themselves, such as the "produce the note" strategy, and are roundly castigated from all sides as deadbeats with no sense of personal responsibility

Item:
- BP flouts safety regulations and their cavalier attitude kills 11 of their employees and causes untold damage to the Gulf, yet no one has been charged with anything
- meanwhile the government and BP conspire to keep the truth from being reported, refuse to let the press or any of the little people onto public beaches, report that things are safe when they demonstrably are not, et cetera

The USA is a nation where the "law" serves two purposes: 1 - protect the ruling elites; 2 - keep the boot on the little people.

[felix_numinous]

5. Without the public domain of the internet

much of these crimes would have disappeared into a memory hole somewhere. I think we have to do something soon with all the information we have as American citizens, to fight this corruption. The world has to see that we are indeed awake, despite reports otherwise.

[sabrina 1]

7. 'coalition forces turned a blind eye to acts of torture and murder

conducted on an industrial scale.'

I hope at least other countries will start investigating THEIR role in this giant War Crime.

I remember early on, after Abu Ghraib, when some countries pulled their forces out. I believe Norway was one of the first airc.

But somewhere there needs to be an accounting for these crimes, or they will simply be worse next time.

I can't help thinking of Sen. Byrd's warning in his speech before he voted 'no' on the Iraq War Resolution. 'I weep for my country'!

He warned about the possible deaths of innocent Iraqis. But even he at that time, or any of us for that matter, little as we thought of Bush and his fellow war criminals, ever imagined what horrors they inflict on those poor people.

[Diclotican]

8. sabrina 1

sabrina 1

Norway was never part of the Iraqi war!.. Even tho I know our then prime minister Bondevik would love to send military forces in Iraq too, to please his good friend GWB, who he was kissing but on before the war.. Stortinget (our parlament) and most of the population in norway against the war.. And our prime minister have not that power to do as he please, without the consent by the Parlament... But he got us into the mess in Afghanistan, so at least he got his "war on terror" himself....

But it is rumored, that some equipment from our special forces (Telemarksbataljonen) was used inside Iraq, as some of the equipment we have, is verry adwanced, maybe more advanced than even the mighty US special forces...

Diclotican

[sabrina 1]

9. Thank you for your response Diclotican.

But I believe that Norway sent a few troops who were withdrawn in 2006. I don't know if they played any real role in combat operations. Perhaps this was done without the knowledge of the Norwegian people?

Coalition forces in Iraq



Norway: 150 troops (deployed 7/03-withdrawn 8/06)

Perhaps they were sent to help operate the material you referred to?

If you click the link and scroll down a bit, there is a list of all the countries who sent troops.

Interesting to see that Iceland only sent 2 troops!

And Spain withdrew their several thousand troops early, in 2004, after the people threw out Berlusconi and after the terror attack in Spain which Berlusconi tried, but failed, to use as a reason for having troops there. The people came out in their millions to let him know it was BECAUSE of the presence of Spanish troops in Iraq, that they became a target and the newly elected government withdrew them as promised.

[Diclotican]

11. sabrina 1

sabrina 1

I do not know, if norwigan soldiers was sendt to Iraq, but I would not doubt that some soldiers was sendt there, at least to keep and eye of the equipment US was borrowing... Kongsberg Våpenfabriker is rather smart when it came to gagdeds, and they would try to keep an eye of what US did with it I guess.. But if some soldiers was sendt to Iraq, as part of the war effort in 2003 and forward, it would be an hell to pay for the politicals who was doing that, behind Stortinget and the norwigian people.. But as I said, it is rumored that some equipment was lent to US from Norway under the Iraqi war, and it is posible that it is that the "tropp rooster" is talking about.. But I doubt even the government would send combat troops behind the back of both the parlament, and the people.. If they did that.... Wel I would not be in that governments boots.. At least they would be trown out of power faster than I can eat a banana.(and I can eat a banana FAST). At worst a full impeatcment would be in order - who have not happend since 1884 in Norway! But Bondevik was a man who liked mr Bush really good (he was after all an minister himself before he got into politic, and also a conservative by all means )

I know Spain withdrew their forces after they was attaced. And I also know a few right wingers who claim that it was wrong so show "softness" after an attac like that. But the new government was just doing what they had campanied on a year.. Get the soldiers back to spain regardness of what US like it or not. And they did it also. And millions of spains was not in agreement with the then conservative government in Spain either, who had been kissing up to GWB and Blair a few years earlier.. It is allways a prize to be eating strawberies with the rich and powerfull you know. And Spain paid a hefty prize for it in the end....

But you can be asured that most of norway was strictly against the Iraq war, I even was going in a demostration marsh agains the war. The only time in my life I ever did that... And most was against it if you ever asked them on the streets.. It was build on lies, and most pepole understood it too...

Diclotican

[sabrina 1]

12. Thank you again for your response.

I absolutely believe you regarding how the Norwegian people opposed the Iraq War. I remember and so many other European countries also.

As you say, you had a Conservative, Bush-friendly leader at the time who no doubt KNEW he could not openly send combat troops, but wanted to do something for his friend, Bush.

I admire the Norwegian people greatly for their opposition to that war, and for making their government too afraid to send combat troops to help Bush's illegal war. We tried here too, but were ignored.

Good for you too for marching against it. The leaders of many countries ignored their citizens at that time.

If, we the people, in Norway, Britain, Spain and even here, had been listened to there would have been no war in Iraq. It is shameful how little power the people have against these leaders.

[Diclotican]

13. sabrina 1

sabrina 1

Most of Norway was absolutely against the war, and on some boards who I was and are active now, the discussings for and against the war was livid and hard in times.. That long before the Iraq war started, the opposition against the war was great, but the other side had some debatants who was atting at flank speed, and using all, even the smalest hope to prove that they was right, and the rest of us wrong... Wel after allmoust a decade, most of them have not been seen for a long time, and they who still are on the board, is the one who never would understand what wrong they did when they suported the war....

Many european country was not in agreement with the US when it came to war with Iraq. And was accused of beeing soft of Saddam Hussain, or have business dealings with him. Withouth doubt some nations did have in the past been selling weapons, chemicals, an many other things that in the hand of Saddam Hussain was made posible to use as WMD.. But it was not intended as sutch.. The know how came from US, from France, from Germany and other european nations (US was in fact under the first Reagan willing to sell Saddam Hussain some nasty biological germs, who was usable just for WMD, but thanks to the State Dep, they never got their hand on the nasty stuff....

Yes we had a conservative (or at least fairly conservative by norwigian standard at least) and he was absolutely in "love" with mr Bush, and he might have going behind the back of the rest of the government, and the parlament in Oslo, to please mr Bush.. But I doubt that they could have keept that for a secret for long, Norway is a small country, and even our special forces have families.. But if he managed to do that, he was a bigger player on the political field than I ever know...

Many tried their best to be in oppostion to the war, the norwigian people just did their little chare of the whole thing. And the government, and Parlament had to listen to the pepole in Norway, even tho parts of høyre (our center/right party) and parts of FRP (right/right party, but not far right party then) was totaly for the war.. But the opposition to the war was great in most of Norway, so we was just doing our little part of it all. And compared to others we was mostly sivil in our disagreement with the US over this I would say.. France, UK, Germany Spain and many others was more aggresive in their actions against what they was seeing as something they would not be part of...

Sometimes the political leaders wil do what they wil do, regardness if 90 percent of the population was in disagreement with it. As long as the last 10 percent is the most influencefull parts of the country, they would not care about the rest. But the consequenses can allmoust allways be mighty in the next election then. As both the leaders in Spain and UK discovered in the end.. Tony Blair, who untill he wanted to play ball with GWB was a great politican, and also a great prime minister, are now been seen as something of a outcast, and a man many would not talk to anymore.. And it is somewhat sad, becouse he was a brilliant prime minister for UK, who after Thatcher and John Mayor was elected and made it "cool" to be britain again. And he is one of the longest serving prime minister after Churchill...

Many leaders ignored, or belived that the demostrations could just go their cause, and then they could go to war regardness of what people thing or not are beliving regardness.. It is something that happend all to often, and some can questning if we really are a democracy when most of the peopole is against a war - and then they go to war even after the people have sayd NO..

I am not so sure about that if Spain, Denmark, and other nations had voiced their disagrement with US over a war with Iraq, that the war would not have been..I fear that even if US had been alone against the whole rest of the war, US would have going to war with Iraq, becouse the Administration of mr Bush was deadbang against going to war with Saddam Hussain, regardness if US was to go it all alone... GWB wanted war, and the possy he had behind him, had wanted it since the early 1990s... They wanted it, and just needed an excuse, who they got in 2001 when WTC was hit by terrorist. Of course they know a few days after that most of the terrorist was from Saudi Arabia and non from Iraq. But they wanted a war with Iraq, and they got a war with Iraq.. Even tho most of the "coalisation of the bribed and coorserset" was unvilling to send forces to the war... Jr tried to outdo his father GHWB, who managed to build a REAL colation to fight Iraq over Kuwait.. his son GWB, failed missrable to build the same coalisation, as most of the "old europe" was not willing to play around...

Diclotican

[sabrina 1]

14. Diclotican, I know how opposed the Norwegian people were

to the war. Here in the U.S. we were so happy to see the opposition in so many countries, and for a while hoped it would influence the Bush administration.

But, as you said so well, nothing would have stopped them. Bush said that if no one else supported him, 'we will go it alone'.

They bribed and threatened and bullied countries into joining them because they wanted to make it look like they had support. They are criminals, so what could we expect?

You are so right about Blair. I was so thrilled when he became PM of Britain. But maybe we didn't really know him. Someone her from Britain told me that he never was a liberal and that to many Brits his total support for Bush was not a surprise. He is an outcast now, but I doubt he cares. He is a very rich man and is accepted by the people he apparently cares most about, those who appear to be ruling the world right now. I suppose he thinks that we 'little people' just don't understand.

Anyhow, thank you for your post. I can see how hard you all worked to try to help US stop Bush and I for one always appreciated that.

The link I provided came from Wiki. If the information is not accurate, it can and should be corrected. Maybe instead of using the word 'troops', they should have been referred to as 'technicians'.

Again thank you for your efforts on behalf of peace in this world :-)

[Diclotican]

16. sabrina 1

sabrina 1

Many was against the war, norway, and many others did their best, peacefully to show that war was not the option on this.. But we failed becouse the "powers" wanted to do it anyway, regardness of what most of their population wanted... It was a sad day when the US-Iraq war started, mostly for the iraqi itself, who was killed by the ten of thousands... And wikileak have also proved that americans was rather indifferent to the crimes who happend on "their watch", from 2003, to at least 2009...

It was really sad that GWB, and the gang who run the show then, wanted war regardness of what the rest of the world wanted, or at least have grave doubts about it all. After sept 11 2001, we all was americans, and I was as soched about what happend in NYC as everyone else in the West. It was an attac not just for NYC and USA, it was a attac on "us" too. And with another leadership in US, a whole different Administration, the whole history would be a another one.. With suport from US and her allied country all over the world, who have working to fight terror many decades allready. And the actions that mr Bush did, from the start, when he on the ruins of WTC was promishing that everyone should hear from US - soon with venegange, and the infamous "either are you with us, or against us" policy, the Administration soon ruined all hope of everyone work toghgeter for the same solution.. It was a failure of historic propotions from the start, to play it so tuff when little carefull diplomatic manvours would have made a whole another difference about it all. If the Administration had just been more diplomatic, and not just DEMANDED but asked for help, and tried to explain why it was so important to take out Saddam Hussain, not becouse of WMD, and the whole story that followed but the real, honest truth.. But of course, GWB and Cheney was not out for telling the truth about why they wanted to get Saddam Hussains Iraq, and not say... Saudi-Arabia where most of the killers from 11 sept was from, and who many decades before have educated many thousands of men angry about the west, but with sour to non skills to live in the real modern world of the 21 century.. And where still more than 60 percent of the population HATE the west with an venegade and would be really pleaced if another attac, on the scale of NYC was to hit US soil again.. But of course, Saudi-Arabia is a nation who are "friend" with US, and you even are selling them military equipment worth more than 60billion dollar now, new fighters, a lot of new tools or waging war and ground eqipment and so one. Guess who wil happend if the House of Saud (or as I call it more and more, the house of cards) is to be toppled? All this in the hand of a new regime, who would give everyone a shiver, Even Iran would be afraid of that regime.. Mostly becouse a new regime in Saudi-Arabia would be far more radical and extreme than the regime who occupay Teheran today..

The administration of mr Bush wanted this war. And they was doing their best to bribe, threated and bullied their friends and allies to do the same.. The US ambassador to Norway under GWB, was also in diplomatic terms more or less treated most of the then shief of staffs in Oslo militære samfund that if US was not to be suported by the government of Norway,it would cost Norway dearly in the future, and it would harm the friendship between Norway and USA.. It was posible not meant that harsh, but I belive he got a clear message back to US, when he was asked to wisit our forreign office, and given a lecture not to interfere with norwigian intern politic.. You do not tell most of the shief of staffs, and the higher ones on the sivilian side to do as US want you to do, or else... After that, the ambassador keept an low profile for the rest of his time here in Norway - and was given more or less a free pass when he was traveling back to US. And he loved his stay here in Norway, even tho he as a new ambassadør proberly steped into the salat and shoot himself in the foot... But the message was out anyhow, that US was willing to risk 60 year of friendship, and alliance becouse of suport of a war in Iraq.. Our current king was in fact guest of the Roosevelts in world war two, before he and the rest of the royal familiy found their home abroad from home to the war ended in 1945. A friendship given between Roosevelt and then Crownprince Olav alleready in 1938, when they was wisiting US as a part of wisiting the "norwigian states" in US. Where most of norwigians had settled when they arived in US... Olav and Franklin D Rosevelt got a real friendship going then, a friendship who survived as long as FDR lived, and Olav was sad when he got the news about his friends dead in 1945. But it was not the time to be sad, as the endgame was in hand, and the germans was more or less defeated.. But FDR are the only american president with an statue about himself in Oslo. In a nice little place in the shaddows of Akerhus Fortress and Castle (it was a royal castle from 1380s, to the 1700s) the statue of mr Rosevelt is sitting on a shair and looking as he might have been doing, when he was alive. It is a nice statue, a gentle statue, of a man who was a real friend to Norway when Norway was in need of help.. Even Churchill have not be given that a honnor in Oslo. Even tho he might should have been given a statue also, as he was a great friend of norway himself. But not that great as mr Rosevelt I guess...

Mr Blair was a great change from both Thatcher and Mayor.. And I liked him, I really liked the man, as he was young, and also "modern" compared to what britain was about before.. Mr John Mayor was probarly an good prime minister, but he was not that popular at all... And compared to mr Blair, he fall totaly down and out... I reall liked mr Blair, and it was a real hope that the future could be that good.. And he was a good Counterpart to mr Clinton, who was the president in US at the same time. But Clinton had his two ADministration, and then came GWB into power, and he and Blair got into the ugly business of going to war.. Even when most of the "old europe" as mr Rumsfeld put it, was dead against it. And mr Fisher, the german forreign minister even told Rumsfeld in a public meating that he was lying, becouse the evidences was not there at all.. Mr Fisher was in fact really ANGRY about the prospect of going to war - as he had been a yung child when the war was coming to Germany in 1943-44 and had first hand experience with what war was... And what it could do.. The evidence the allies was given, was not near enough to suport a war, and US, and her "new europe" allies was going to war, leaving the "old europe" in the dust as they marshing to war began.. And a year after, they asked if the "old europe" was able to put soldiers on the grond, to help US stop the insurgents from killing to many of them..

Mr Blair is maybe a rich man now, but he is also a outcast, a man with few real friends, and many foes.. And I would rather have the friends, than the money if you ask me.. He even got over to the Roman Chatolic side, a few monts after leaving nr 10.. He could not go over to the Roman Chatolic side as prime minister! (it is a old thing going back as to Elizabeth 1 of England)
The Powers who rule the world today, they might belive they rule the world, as they see fit. But they seen to have forgot one, little but important thing.. it is many more of "us" than "them". And if "us" is tired of been ruled by "them" they would be trown under the same bus, as they are treating to do with us..

Wel, as I said I doubt that it was soldiers in the front line that was in iraq in 2003, it might have been what you could call "technicians" instead of soldiers.. But I would not doubt that mr Bondevik would have tried to please both the homefront, and the US government by doing it by stealth.. It is not the first time a norwigian prime minister have played it both ways when it came to popular suport, or the lack of home, and the need to suport a larger power the last 60 year or so.. For the most part they have doing it brilliantly, by never learn english to good, and therefore allways could claim "we never got the full message". Specailly under the cold war it was good to claim that sometimes...

I can't do mutch, but I can allways do the little I can do, to try stop war when posible... Peacefully off course. And I know many millions also are doing this, every day, every week, every year all over the world. As an old norse saying from Edda say it "fred er det beste om man noget vil".. Peace is the best solution, if you wanted something been doing" (losely translation but I hope you get the message)

Diclotican:hi:

[Meeker Morgan]

10. The revelations will not make any difference ...

... and I don't expect Assange to disappear either. Precisely because the revelations will not make any difference.

[indepat]

15. Sadly defining us as a nation and as a people with each and every instance of inhumanity

:cry: