Do you think it's really all that surprising that Iraq detainees are being abused and killed, considering people who voluntarily join the military have no problem with violence?
WASHINGTON - The investigation of the treatment of prisoners from the wars in Afghanistan and Iraq has recently uncovered 12 more detainees who have died in U.S. custody. Defense officials told reporters that the Army had investigated the deaths of 32 detainees in Iraq and five others in Afghanistan since August 2002, 12 more than the Defense Department reported two weeks ago. The victims are from 33 separate cases, two of which involved more than one death.
Nine of the cases remain open, and eight of those are classified as homicides, NBC News’ Tom Busby reported. Those deaths, six of which occurred in Iraq, are believed to have followed assaults by U.S. soldiers before, during or after interrogations...
youthink is a forum for opinions, and telling someone that they are wrong is no way to debate. Yes, the question may have been worded wrong, but that doesn't mean it gives you the right to jump down someone's throat. Am I saying that it is wrong? No, because that is what makes America great. The ability to jump down someone's throat and challenge what they say. Sure, it may be wrong that the prisoners are being treated harshly, but that is how society is. A few bad seeds that ruin it for everyone else.
I don't really support war, but I think that right now it is our only option, so I support our troops. I hope that makes sense to you guys.
Well I don't particularly agree that people in the military have no problem with violence. Some people may be in the army because they wanted a better life for their families, like a 19 year old husband with one or two kids at home. Or they feel they need to be in the military because they don't have a good job. Although I am not very knowledgeable in this area.
No, it's not surprising, but not for the reason stated in the pathetically leading question. I wouldn't have thought KikiPeepers would have had to include that crap in order to get her question rubber-stamped.
People in the military are willing to use violence, but I wouldn't say they have "no problem" with it. First and foremost, they are trained to be disciplined. If there is any reason that I'm not surprised, it is because we are at war.
Peepers QUOTE: "I love how that's how you people take it - that's how people in the military are though. They assume that just because you don't agree with their practices, that you hate America and hate the troops, when really THAT is where the ignorance comes into play."
Kiki, I think that the people blasting you were doing it, not because you critisized the abuse (which I think all rational people agree is wrong), but because of the way you phrased the question.
Your question wrongly generalizes the "type" of person who joins the military. It's an offensive generalization and completely clouds the issue you're actually trying to discuss.
There IS a certain type that joins the military though, that's a fact - it takes a certain personality to be able to be broken down and take orders like that, not every personality type could be like that. Many couldn't, in fact.
Of course not every personality could or would do that - but you make it sound like it's only one type of person or personality that joins the military and that is NOT fact. Your simplistic view may make it easier for you to understand "military people", but it doesn't make it any more accurate.
So okay, go ahead and defend your uninformed, obviously offensive position. Just realize why people are dismissing the real topic to take issue with your biases.
I think it is you that's uninformed (and has trouble reading) if that's what you think I just said - there is not ONE personality type that would join the military, but there are only 16 major personality temperaments so the number isn't as high as you are probably thinking - I can promise I've studied personality psychology more than you've studied about the military - I know what I'm talking about here.
The military definitely has a certain type, personality-wise. There are also a lot of socio-economic factors that go into it as well. It's a well-documented fact. I'm not sure why you are trying to make that the issue and not the horrible abuse that has been going on
QUOTE: "Do you think it's really all that surprising that Iraq detainees are being abused and killed, considering people who voluntary join the military have no problem with violence" and "that's how people in the military are though" and "There IS a certain type that joins the military though, that's a fact" and "The military definitely has a certain type, personality-wise."
Hm, I wonder where I got the idea that you think there is only one personality type that would join the military? And I'm uninformed and have trouble reading? Interesting.
I think I explained pretty clearly why how you worded your question bothers some people.
This is the first time you've mentioned any actual data (the 16 major personality temperaments), which I have no trouble accepting. You don't know what I'm thinking or what I've studied, so please don't presume that you do.
I don't disagree with you that people in the military may share some similar characteristics, and can even have their own culture - but that doesn't equate that these people have a personality that is violent, abusive or murderous.
You can choose any segment of society by region, employment, financial standing, race, gender, health, etc. and find that they share certain characteristics. That doesn't prove they would all act the same in similar circumstances. You're tarring all military with the same detainee-abusing brush and I think it's inaccurate. This is all I'm trying to point out to you.
But you aren't reading or aren't understanding what I'm saying them - I never said ALL military are bad, or that they are all violent, in fact I said I'm aware that it's a minority that behaved like this. But I don't think even the minority of many other groups could stoop to such animalistic behavior - but a minority of the military definitely have that propencity. Read the entire thread again, I think you're missing a piece of the puzzle or something if you don't understand it.
Okay. I read the entire thread again as you suggested, trying to be fair and openminded. Its true, you did say: "I am aware that the vast majority of people in the army aren't like that. But to try to justify the behavior of the rest - it's not going to fly around me. What they did is sick and wrong, and they are the ones that are animals. And those who saw the abuse and were too chicken sh*t to stop it or say anything aren't much better. I don't respect THOSE troops, no. Not a bit." Okay, GREAT! I agree. But then you immediately follow it up in your next post with QUOTE: "Isn't that their job? To kill?" No, it isn't. There are a lot of jobs in the military and although many of them have been trained how to kill, that isn't their job discription, nor their inclination.
A minority of our country's population has a propencity to "stoop to such animalistic behavior" as seen nightly in the news, so I can't agree with your analysis that those in the military are somehow worse than the murderers, rapists, thieves and creeps that do what they do for fun. I can agree that there are people in the military who join hoping to cause trouble, inflict pain and even kill. Just like there are people who try to work in hospitals seeking opportunities to prey on the weak, or people who try to work in youth programs or as teachers to molest children. You can find these "types" anywhere if you look, but these people are not the norm. You persist in believing that those who choose a military life are somehow completely different than an average person in civilian life.
If what I'm say still sounds like I'm confused YOU might try reading the entire thread again because YOU are either missing my point or purposefully ignoring it.
typical americans - talking crap! military life is not about using violence to solve a problem, it is about a last resort. if the iraq situation could have been sorted out another way then it would have. do u have any idea the state the world would be in if we had no armed forces!and as for this comment,
"only complete morons want to join the military to fulfill their dream of being the big man instead of the dumb loser they really are. Should have worked harder at school you freaks, get a real job."
i mean get a grip!fair enough, there are alot of people in the forces with no qualifications, but there are also very well educated people who work in intelligence and radio and i hardly think that pilots are stupid.if it wasnt for the peole who are brave enough to put their lives on the line to protect their country, then everyone would be in a lot worse situation now.i think the lack of intelligence comes from the american civilians rather than their military! >
The UN and the world told the Truth, even Saddam told the Truth. Bush LIED and so your children DIED.
Bush used up your parent's 5 trillion dollar surplus, and created your children's forcasted 7 trillion dollar deficeit, to falsely accuse, attack, murder and maime, 148,000 innocent men, women and children in Iraq.
Do you think any other republican or democrat, if president, would have done this dastardly deed ?
The Honest and Honorable would not.
I would rather flush my money down a comode than to use it to lie and kill creation for oil, revenge, politics or whatever the hell excuse Bush dreams up next.
I look at it this way. The people that are being detained had some part in the attacks on New York, they didnt give a rats tail who they hurt or killed, therefore, why should we? Yes I know that the USA is supposed to be better than the other nations and that an eye for an eye is not the right way to do things. But I personally have no sympothany (or however you spell it) for them. They started a war with us when they attacked us just because they dont like the way we live and the freedoms we enjoy. If they get hurt or killed to me thats one less criminal we have to worry about and less tax money that we have to pay for them to live on our dime.