Father of accused soldier calls Bush a coward

[Cocoa]

Javal Davis is one of the guards/scapegoats at Abu Ghraib.

His dad seems to know the score.

http://www.newsday.com/news/local/wire/ny-bc-nj--prisonerabuse-dav0621jun21,0,3285101.story?coll=ny-ap-regional-wire

<snip>

Davis, 26, is charged with conspiracy to maltreat detainees, dereliction of duty for failing to protect detainees from abuse, and maltreatment of detainees. He also faces charges of rendering official statements false, and assault, and could be sentenced to up to eight and a half years in jail, forfeiture of pay, reduction in rank and a dishonorable discharge.

In Roselle, Jonathan Davis seethed as he watched television reports Monday morning about the hearing, which was held in the Baghdad Convention Center in the heavily guarded Green Zone, the nerve center of the American-run occupation of Iraq.

"President Bush is a coward," he said. "He needs to come to me, look me in my eye and tell me he didn't know" how the defendants were ordered to treat prisoners.

"I can't see how these seven soldiers, including my son, have to suffer because of decisions that were made by our government, who are no better than two-bit hustlers off the street, hustling our sons and daughters," he said. "They're trying to put my son in prison, which is bull."

[DarkPhenyx]

1. And Davis is probably guilty of all those things.

It dosen't matter where the order originated at it was still clearly illegal. Everyone involved decided, conciously or not, to follow those orders.

Bush being a coward isn't going to change that.

[LittleApple81]

7. Did you read what happened to one of the whistleblowers when

he reported what was going on (before the pictures showed up). They wanted to declare him crazy... and he was punished.
So... I don't think this is your normal army.

[LittleApple81]

8. But I agree you must be willing to follow through... which does not

speak highly of the participants.

[DarkPhenyx]

10. It doesn't change what is right...

...and what is wrong. I agree it's a completely fucked up situation but the rules remain the same.

[Cocoa]

12. it's a completely fucked up situation

that's probably what Mr. Davis is so pissed about.

[DarkPhenyx]

22. And in his position I would be to.

Hell, I'm not in his position and I'm pissed off about it.

[lanparty]

15. Did anyone else see "A Few Good Men" ....

No ...

When your an enlisted soldier on foreign soil ... YOU FOLLOW ORDERS!!!! They are TRAINED to follow orders. They aren't trained to think and make strategic decisions.

You cannot hold enlisted men responsible for following the orders of their officers. You hold the OFFICERS accountable. They by definition are responsible for the conduct of their charges.

[DarkPhenyx]

20. I did see it.

You can hold enlisted soldiers responsible for their actions when the orders given are very obviously illegal. You also hold the officers accountable. That's how it works people. Even soldiers, the lowest ranked of them, are responsilbe for their own actions.

[lanparty]

29. Catch-22

You're placing enlisted personnel in a Catch-22. In most cases, the "illegal orders" will not be exposed. Than the enlisted person will be court-martialed for insubordination and drummed out of the military. Then a sadistic soldier with "ZEAL" could be placed in his stead.

Do you remember "Glory" when Col. Shaw is ordered to fire the town. And the General makes it clear that he'll be court-martialed and lose his command to a sadistic SOB. This is the place that these folks are placed in.

Yes, that and "A Few Good Men" are anecdotal situations and they're both fictional. One could just as soon bring up "Crimson Tide". Of course, in that movie a nuclear war is prevented by refusal to follow an order. But the stakes were a "bit higher" in that film. And this goes to my point.

A soldier has to weigh towing a prisoner around by a leash vs being court martialed. The fact that those prisoners are considered "hostiles" complicates the situation. In fact, enlisted personel are subjected to propaganda that de-humanizes the enemy to nothing more than a mere "target". And your telling me that they should be overly concerned about stripping them naked when they're TRAINED to consider them as something LESS than human?????

I don't think we will agree on this issue. But I think you have to place yourself in the soldiers situation. You have to realize the line that they walk and the consequences for not following orders compared to WHAT they are doing.

If a soldier was ordered to serially rape all the women on a prison block, that would probably be a clear cut situation. But putting a prisoner on a leash and stripping them naked???? Restraint and nudity are PART of holding prisoners. Sorry, thats just how it's done. The differences in Abu Ghraib are subtle, but not necessarily so subtle that an MP should instantly refuse. Especially considering that most of the guards at Abu Ghraib were TRUCK DRIVERS ... not MPs.

The president had some very long position papers written for him explaning how torture was legal for him to order. If it's legal for the president to order, wouldn't it be legal for enlisted personnell to FOLLOW that order. And since the situations were so borderline, how would these Sargeants and Privates know unless they had lawyers with them????

If they were cutting off arms and heads, I would say it's pretty clear cut and they should prosecute ALL responsible parties. In the case of the prioners who were beaten to death, this is clear as well. But the forms of intimidation that cumulatively reflected a pattern of torture and humiliation rarely amount to war crimes in any single act. They had orders from on high and they generals on high were assured those techniques were LEGAL!!!!!

I would hold officers accountable. They went to school and should know how to crack a law book. Especially those who were trained to supervise holding prisoners captive. But the poor privates and sargeants aren't so priveleged. They DON'T have lawyers that they can consult for advice. That is the job of the OFFICERS!!!!! And the officers told them that this shit was legal.

[DarkPhenyx]

30. nearly all soldiers are well educated too.

All have a HS grad or GED and most are working on some sort of secondary schooling. I had two soldiers who were working on their masters. You do all service members a great disservice by assuming they are too stupid to know the difference between right and wrong. Reguardless, it dosen't take a rocket scientist to figure out that torturing prisoners is illegal. You get at least that much training in basic.

Oh please. We knew the position papers were for shit 10 seconds after hearing about them.

Yes, they are stuck in a bad situation and have a hard choice to make. It is unfortunate that they took the easier wrong.

As far as nudity being part of how you hold prisoners...under which mideval King? Sorry. Once again you are sadly wrong.

[lanparty]

32. Strip searches ...

... they're a STANDARD part of incarceration. It's necessary to check for contraband. The guards even make them "spread their cheeks" so they can take a peek up their rectum.

[DarkPhenyx]

33. Yes, of course.

Don't be daft. However that is something completely different from what we see in the pics. FOr crying out loud.

[AndyTiedye]

18. and like most small fry, he should get to cop a plea and testify...

...against those who gave the orders.

That is how you take down a large criminal enterprise.

[DarkPhenyx]

21. I disagree.

For a variety of reasons. Not the least of which is that they seem more than willing to take the big boys down w/o any bennies.

[blueknight]

2. it so sad...

to think these young people probably joined the armed forces for the right reasons and now have to be fall guys for this corrupt administration

[blueknight]

3. it so sad...

to think these young people probably joined the armed forces for the right reasons and now have to be fall guys for this corrupt administration

[blueknight]

4. it so sad...

to think these young people probably joined the armed forces for the right reasons and now have to be fall guys for this corrupt administration

[blueknight]

5. it so sad...

to think these young people probably joined the armed forces for the right reasons and now have to be fall guys for this corrupt administration

[blueknight]

6. it so sad...

to think these young people probably joined the armed forces for the right reasons and now have to be fall guys for this corrupt administration.

[blueknight]

9. sorry about all the duplicates

my keyboard went crazy on me. it is a repub conspiracy to keep me off dem underground lol

[Cocoa]

11. it was worth repeating

it is indeed sad.

[wtmusic]

17. a little WD-40 under the 'Enter' key should do the trick

:D

[cocoabeach]

13. These losers have to accept responsibility for their actions

The "I was only following orders" wasn't a feasible defense in WWII and it isn't going to fly now. The military judges and juries are going to punish them all and maybe the General will sink too but the defense lawyers are going to lose it all.

[Q]

14. But shouldn't those who COMMAND them take some responsibility?

- It should go without saying that those who committed these crimes should be punished. But in most cases...they WERE following orders. That means that the orders were illegal and those who gave the orders must be punished right along with them. That includes their commander in chief.

[kaitykaity]

26. Let's let Rummy sink. How about that?

It's cheap and tawdry to try and convict the soldiers
for following the orders without trying and convicting
the secy of defense and president who gave them.

[proud patriot]

16. That's my favorite thing to yell at protests "Bush is a Coward"

:D I've been yelling it for a long time now .

[wtmusic]

19. OK, so how many people here honestly believe

in the context of the situation, with everyone around you either doing it, or commanding you to do it--would have participated, or looked the other way?

I have to think I would have gone to jail first. Some of those pictures--you just have to be devoid of compassion.

[jokerman93]

28. I know I would have refused

And I also know I would have gotten my ass kicked...maybe worse.

[anarchy1999]

31. I would have refused. I would have been screaming and been sent to

some sort of lock up. I would never have gone along with this sick demented behavior. War crimes are easy to understand and so is abuse. I feel sorry for everyone involved but they had a choice. They are human and they took the fork in the road.

If that Lynndie person was my daughter I just really don't know what I would do. I know for certain I would be very disturbed and wonder how had I failed as a parent.

[Moonbeam_Starlight]

23. bush IS a coward, no argument there

but no servicemember is under any obligation to follow an unlawful/immoral order, either.

[RickyRicardo]

24. Duh!

[Cat Atomic]

25. Yeah, Bush is a coward. And if his son did the things he's accused

of, he SHOULD be in prison.

I hope he isn't suggesting that Bush's admission of complicity would somehow exonerate his son, because it wouldn't.

[ElementaryPenguin]

27. He's a coward and a war profiteering murderer!

:puke:

[AndyTiedye]

34. Perhaps They Had Plenty of Volunteers for That Duty

since the Iraqis inside Abu "Redemption" were unarmed and tied up,
and therefore not nearly as dangerous as the ones outside,
who are quite obviously capbable of fighting back.