Meet the new boss ... same as the old boss (Iraq)

N&P: Discuss governments, nations, politics and recent related news here.

Moderators: Alyrium Denryle, Edi, K. A. Pital

Post Reply
User avatar
Crown
NARF
Posts: 10615
Joined: 2002-07-11 11:45am
Location: In Transit ...

Meet the new boss ... same as the old boss (Iraq)

Post by Crown »

Clicky Linky
Iraqi leader 'killed prisoners'
July 17, 2004

THE Australian Government has questioned claims that interim Iraqi Prime Minister Iyad Allawi shot dead six prisoners shortly before the handover of power from coalition forces.

The Sydney Morning Herald and The Age today reported that two witnesses saw Dr Allawi pull a pistol and execute suspected insurgents at a Baghdad police station in the week before last month's handover.

Journalist Paul McGeough, who wrote the story, has left Iraq, but stands by his story.

"If you have a story like this, it's not a good idea to remain in the country," Mr McGeough told Ten News.

The witnesses said the handcuffed and blindfolded prisoners were lined up against a wall in a courtyard, next to the maximum-security cell block in which they were held at the Al-Amariyah security centre.


They say Dr Allawi told bystanders the victims had each killed as many as 50 Iraqis and they deserved worse than death.

A spokesman for Foreign Minister Alexander Downer today said the Australian Government had not been able to substantiate the claims, although he conceded the allegations were serious.

"We, as a country, know nothing about these allegations and we've checked with the Americans and the British, who also know nothing about these allegations," the spokesman said.

"They're obviously quite serious allegations, but there's no evidence to support them at this stage; none of the authorities in Iraq that we've been able to contact know anything about them."

He said that if Mr McGeough had information about alleged crimes that had been committed in Iraq, he had a responsibility to take that information to authorities.

The reports have been denied entirely by the Iraqi prime minister's office which said Dr Allawi had never visited the centre and did not carry a gun.

Opposition foreign affairs spokesman Kevin Rudd today urged Mr Downer to seek further details from Australian Embassy officials in Baghdad, saying Mr McGeough should cooperate with any investigation.

"Mr Downer can't just brush it to one side," Mr Rudd said in Brisbane.

"Such reports appear to me to be unbelievable, but because they are written by a credible journalist, Mr Downer's responsibility is to get the truth from the Australian Embassy and the United States.

"There is not much more to say until we have clarification from Mr Downer and this must occur as a matter of urgency."

Mr Rudd said the Federal Government should use Australia's diplomatic network and ties with the US to investigate the claims.

He refused to speculate over the accuracy of the report or the impact of the claims on the credibility of Iraq's new regime.

Meanwhile, Australian Greens leader Bob Brown called on Prime Minister John Howard to explain his role in the promotion of Dr Allawi, renewing his calls for Australian troops in Iraq to return home.

"The immediate question is how did Allawi, who helped install Saddam Hussein, become the White House choice to lead this benighted country into freedom and democracy?" Senator Brown said.

Dr Allawi's record was well known to both Mr Howard and US President George W. Bush, he said.

"Our PM should tell Australia about his role in this brutal man's promotion," Senator Brown said.

"He should return Australia's defence forces from the service of this bloodcurdling brute."

Dr Allawi, 58, built a political party of former Iraq Baath party members and ex-military officers during 33 years of exile in London.

He was named interim prime minister last month after receiving the backing of fellow Iraq Governing Council members.

AAP
Well if this is true, there is only one thing left to say ... :oops: :oops: :oops:
Image
Η ζωή, η ζωή εδω τελειώνει!
"Science is one cold-hearted bitch with a 14" strap-on" - Masuka 'Dexter'
"Angela is not the woman you think she is Gabriel, she's done terrible things"
"So have I, and I'm going to do them all to you." - Sylar to Arthur 'Heroes'
User avatar
Boyish-Tigerlilly
Sith Devotee
Posts: 3225
Joined: 2004-05-22 04:47pm
Location: New Jersey (Why not Hawaii)
Contact:

Post by Boyish-Tigerlilly »

Wouldn't be totally suprised.
User avatar
Vympel
Spetsnaz
Spetsnaz
Posts: 29312
Joined: 2002-07-19 01:08am
Location: Sydney Australia

Post by Vympel »

Cool, our papers got a scoop.
Like Legend of Galactic Heroes? Please contribute to http://gineipaedia.com/
User avatar
Shinova
Emperor's Hand
Posts: 10193
Joined: 2002-10-03 08:53pm
Location: LOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOL

Post by Shinova »

It would be so like them to appoint someone who'll promise to sell oil to the US for cheap prices.


Sheer speculation from me.
What's her bust size!?

It's over NINE THOUSAAAAAAAAAAND!!!!!!!!!
User avatar
18-Till-I-Die
Emperor's Hand
Posts: 7271
Joined: 2004-02-22 05:07am
Location: In your base, killing your d00ds...obviously

Post by 18-Till-I-Die »

Why am i not shocked.
Kanye West Saves.

Image
User avatar
Stofsk
Emperor's Hand
Posts: 12925
Joined: 2003-11-10 12:36am

Post by Stofsk »

Is anyone else reminded of that head guy in Sth Vietnam who shot suspected Vietcong members during that Other War? It's only one of the most famous photographs EVER.

Sorry, my brother keeps on saying Iraq is Vietnam version 2.0. I hope he's wrong, personally.
Image
User avatar
JME2
Emperor's Hand
Posts: 12258
Joined: 2003-02-02 04:04pm

Post by JME2 »

Shinova wrote:It would be so like them to appoint someone who'll promise to sell oil to the US for cheap prices.


Sheer speculation from me.
No quite it one takes into account how the CIA put into power numerous right-wing, pro-U.S. regimes across the globe during the Cold War. This is simply history repeating itself in my eyes.
Axis Kast
Vympel's Bitch
Posts: 3893
Joined: 2003-03-02 10:45am
Location: Pretoria, South Africa
Contact:

Post by Axis Kast »

Is anyone else reminded of that head guy in Sth Vietnam who shot suspected Vietcong members during that Other War? It's only one of the most famous photographs EVER.
Except that the South Vietnamese Chief of Police who did the shooting was actually killing a spy. The death penalty was appropriate in that situation. Naturally, the horrific nature of the picture led many people to draw uninformed opinions, however.
User avatar
Illuminatus Primus
All Seeing Eye
Posts: 15774
Joined: 2002-10-12 02:52pm
Location: Gainesville, Florida, USA
Contact:

Post by Illuminatus Primus »

The photographer who took that and recieved a Politzer later lamented the terrible rep that guy got, and praised him.
"You know what the problem with Hollywood is. They make shit. Unbelievable. Unremarkable. Shit." - Gabriel Shear, Swordfish

"This statement, in its utterly clueless hubristic stupidity, cannot be improved upon. I merely quote it in admiration of its perfection." - Garibaldi in reply to an incredibly stupid post.

The Fifth Illuminatus Primus | Warsie | Skeptical Empiricist | Florida Gator | Sustainability Advocate | Libertarian Socialist |
Image
User avatar
Stofsk
Emperor's Hand
Posts: 12925
Joined: 2003-11-10 12:36am

Post by Stofsk »

Illuminatus Primus wrote:The photographer who took that and recieved a Politzer later lamented the terrible rep that guy got, and praised him.
Interesting. I hadn't heard what Axis Kast said about that guy, I was more or less referring to the image the Iraq story invoked (as opposed to the story - the unfortunate reality is a picture gives the greater impact).
Image
User avatar
Sarevok
The Fearless One
Posts: 10681
Joined: 2002-12-24 07:29am
Location: The Covenants last and final line of defense

Post by Sarevok »

The captured Iraqi insurgents are POWs. They should be treated as such according to the geneva convention and not summarily executed like this.
I have to tell you something everything I wrote above is a lie.
User avatar
The Yosemite Bear
Mostly Harmless Nutcase (Requiescat in Pace)
Posts: 35211
Joined: 2002-07-21 02:38am
Location: Dave's Not Here Man

Post by The Yosemite Bear »

Axis Kast wrote:
Is anyone else reminded of that head guy in Sth Vietnam who shot suspected Vietcong members during that Other War? It's only one of the most famous photographs EVER.
Except that the South Vietnamese Chief of Police who did the shooting was actually killing a spy. The death penalty was appropriate in that situation. Naturally, the horrific nature of the picture led many people to draw uninformed opinions, however.
and said non legal combatant/spy was also a member of a terrorist group that had killed the police officer's little girl....
Image

The scariest folk song lyrics are "My Boy Grew up to be just like me" from cats in the cradle by Harry Chapin
User avatar
Illuminatus Primus
All Seeing Eye
Posts: 15774
Joined: 2002-10-12 02:52pm
Location: Gainesville, Florida, USA
Contact:

Post by Illuminatus Primus »

evilcat4000 wrote:The captured Iraqi insurgents are POWs. They should be treated as such according to the geneva convention and not summarily executed like this.
Not necessarily. If they were caught in civilian clothes and especially if they were caught red-handed with such terrorist materials as preparations for suicide and car bomb attacks, the Geneva Convention clearly allows us to execute them summarily.
"You know what the problem with Hollywood is. They make shit. Unbelievable. Unremarkable. Shit." - Gabriel Shear, Swordfish

"This statement, in its utterly clueless hubristic stupidity, cannot be improved upon. I merely quote it in admiration of its perfection." - Garibaldi in reply to an incredibly stupid post.

The Fifth Illuminatus Primus | Warsie | Skeptical Empiricist | Florida Gator | Sustainability Advocate | Libertarian Socialist |
Image
User avatar
Elfdart
The Anti-Shep
Posts: 10691
Joined: 2004-04-28 11:32pm

Post by Elfdart »

After hearing Seymour Hersh about how little boys were cornholed on tape at Abu Ghraib by US "intelligence", the shooting of a few "terrorists" seems rather tame.

The Geneva Conventions state that those taken into custody are to be treated as POWs until a COMPETENT TRIBUNAL finds them to be spies or saboteurs or whatever. That ARVN officer was a thug and deserved the bad reputation he got. With that kind of hero (shooting a man in handcuffs :roll: ) commanding S. Vietnamese forces, no wonder the NVA rolled them in 1975.
Axis Kast
Vympel's Bitch
Posts: 3893
Joined: 2003-03-02 10:45am
Location: Pretoria, South Africa
Contact:

Post by Axis Kast »

The man was not a uniformed combatant, Elfdart. He was not a combat soldier.
User avatar
Elfdart
The Anti-Shep
Posts: 10691
Joined: 2004-04-28 11:32pm

Post by Elfdart »

Axis Kast wrote:The man was not a uniformed combatant, Elfdart. He was not a combat soldier.
Doesn't matter.

From the Geneva Convention:
Article 5

The present Convention shall apply to the persons referred to in Article 4 from the time they fall into the power of the enemy and until their final release and repatriation.

Should any doubt arise as to whether persons, having committed a belligerent act and having fallen into the hands of the enemy, belong to any of the categories enumerated in Article 4, such persons shall enjoy the protection of the present Convention until such time as their status has been determined by a competent tribunal.
Now what "competent tribunal" was the guy in the handcuffs given? What "competent tribunal" were the Iraqi prisoners given?

Besides, it's always been understood (for over 150 years) that not being in uniform meant that the prisoner was trying to deceive the other side by passing himself off as a civilian or as a member of the opposing armed forces -not members of guerilla armies who simply don't have standard uniforms or insignia. A number of German and Japanese officers who ordered the summary hanging and shooting of partisans who didn't have uniforms were convicted of war crimes at Nuremberg and Tokyo and other trials.
User avatar
Illuminatus Primus
All Seeing Eye
Posts: 15774
Joined: 2002-10-12 02:52pm
Location: Gainesville, Florida, USA
Contact:

Post by Illuminatus Primus »

Elfdart wrote:After hearing Seymour Hersh about how little boys were cornholed on tape at Abu Ghraib by US "intelligence", the shooting of a few "terrorists" seems rather tame.
What? Link please? What is this?
"You know what the problem with Hollywood is. They make shit. Unbelievable. Unremarkable. Shit." - Gabriel Shear, Swordfish

"This statement, in its utterly clueless hubristic stupidity, cannot be improved upon. I merely quote it in admiration of its perfection." - Garibaldi in reply to an incredibly stupid post.

The Fifth Illuminatus Primus | Warsie | Skeptical Empiricist | Florida Gator | Sustainability Advocate | Libertarian Socialist |
Image
User avatar
Illuminatus Primus
All Seeing Eye
Posts: 15774
Joined: 2002-10-12 02:52pm
Location: Gainesville, Florida, USA
Contact:

Post by Illuminatus Primus »

Elfdart wrote:Besides, it's always been understood (for over 150 years) that not being in uniform meant that the prisoner was trying to deceive the other side by passing himself off as a civilian or as a member of the opposing armed forces -not members of guerilla armies who simply don't have standard uniforms or insignia.
You're an idiot. How can they be "summarily executed" under the Convention if they have to be held until some tribunal decides something. Besides, how do you have a court case over whether a combatant was dressing in civilian clothes and not attempting to destinguish themselves with somesort of "obvious mark" as the Convention states as an exception.

Besides, guerilla armies aren't explicitly banned, what is, is the fact that troops who dress as civilians risk civilian collateral damage both by anesthetizing troops to shooting people who are in civilian clothes who -may- be combatants, and because it makes destinguishing between them very difficult. Its banned because it makes the civilian population a target.
Elfdart wrote:A number of German and Japanese officers who ordered the summary hanging and shooting of partisans who didn't have uniforms were convicted of war crimes at Nuremberg and Tokyo and other trials.
And it was bullshit. We summarily executed any German found in GI uniform without any sort of deliberations during the war in Europe.
"You know what the problem with Hollywood is. They make shit. Unbelievable. Unremarkable. Shit." - Gabriel Shear, Swordfish

"This statement, in its utterly clueless hubristic stupidity, cannot be improved upon. I merely quote it in admiration of its perfection." - Garibaldi in reply to an incredibly stupid post.

The Fifth Illuminatus Primus | Warsie | Skeptical Empiricist | Florida Gator | Sustainability Advocate | Libertarian Socialist |
Image
User avatar
Pu-239
Sith Marauder
Posts: 4727
Joined: 2002-10-21 08:44am
Location: Fake Virginia

Post by Pu-239 »

Elfdart wrote:
Axis Kast wrote:The man was not a uniformed combatant, Elfdart. He was not a combat soldier.
Doesn't matter.

From the Geneva Convention:
Article 5

The present Convention shall apply to the persons referred to in Article 4 from the time they fall into the power of the enemy and until their final release and repatriation.

[/b]Should any doubt arise as to whether persons, having committed a belligerent act and having fallen into the hands of the enemy, belong to any of the categories enumerated in Article 4, such persons shall enjoy the protection of the present Convention until such time as their status has been determined by a competent tribunal.


Now what "competent tribunal" was the guy in the handcuffs given? What "competent tribunal" were the Iraqi prisoners given?

Besides, it's always been understood (for over 150 years) that not being in uniform meant that the prisoner was trying to deceive the other side by passing himself off as a civilian or as a member of the opposing armed forces -not members of guerilla armies who simply don't have standard uniforms or insignia. A number of German and Japanese officers who ordered the summary hanging and shooting of partisans who didn't have uniforms were convicted of war crimes at Nuremberg and Tokyo and other trials.


Check out the bold. Then check out IP and TYB's posts.

There doesn't appear to be any doubt...

ah.....the path to happiness is revision of dreams and not fulfillment... -SWPIGWANG
Sufficient Googling is indistinguishable from knowledge -somebody
Anything worth the cost of a missile, which can be located on the battlefield, will be shot at with missiles. If the US military is involved, then things, which are not worth the cost if a missile will also be shot at with missiles. -Sea Skimmer


George Bush makes freedom sound like a giant robot that breaks down a lot. -Darth Raptor
Axis Kast
Vympel's Bitch
Posts: 3893
Joined: 2003-03-02 10:45am
Location: Pretoria, South Africa
Contact:

Post by Axis Kast »

Check out the bold. Then check out IP and TYB's posts.

There doesn't appear to be any doubt...
Precisely.

From the Geneva Convention:
Article 4
A. Prisoners of war, in the sense of the present Convention, are persons belonging to one of the following categories, who have fallen into the power of the enemy:
1. Members of the armed forces of a Party to the conflict as well as members of militias or volunteer corps forming part of such armed forces.
The prisoner in question was not a member of any uniformed armed forces. He was not considered an official, legal combatant.
2. Members of other militias and members of other volunteer corps, including those of organized resistance movements, belonging to a Party to the conflict and operating in or outside their own territory, even if this territory is occupied, provided that such militias or volunteer corps, including such organized resistance movements, fulfil the following conditions:
(a) That of being commanded by a person responsible for his subordinates;
(b) That of having a fixed distinctive sign recognizable at a distance;
(c) That of carrying arms openly;
(d) That of conducting their operations in accordance with the laws and customs of war.
He did not belong to an organized military force, and bore no fixed, distinctive signs of allegiance. Further, he was not carrying arms openly, and was certainly not conducting his operations in accordance with the laws and customs of war.
3. Members of regular armed forces who profess allegiance to a government or an authority not recognized by the Detaining Power.
He was not a uniformed member of the regular armed forces.
4. Persons who accompany the armed forces without actually being members thereof, such as civilian members of military aircraft crews, war correspondents, supply contractors, members of labour units or of services responsible for the welfare of the armed forces, provided that they have received authorization from the armed forces which they accompany, who shall provide them for that purpose with an identity card similar to the annexed model.
He was not a non-combatant member of any armed forces.
5. Members of crews, including masters, pilots and apprentices, of the merchant marine and the crews of civil aircraft of the Parties to the conflict, who do not benefit by more favourable treatment under any other provisions of international law.
He was not a service technician or civilian fulfilling military contractual agreements.
6. Inhabitants of a non-occupied territory, who on the approach of the enemy spontaneously take up arms to resist the invading forces, without having had time to form themselves into regular armed units, provided they carry arms openly and respect the laws and customs of war.
He was not a bystander.
B. The following shall likewise be treated as prisoners of war under the present Convention:
1. Persons belonging, or having belonged, to the armed forces of the occupied country, if the occupying Power considers it necessary by reason of such allegiance to intern them, even though it has originally liberated them while hostilities were going on outside the territory it occupies, in particular where such persons have made an unsuccessful attempt to rejoin the armed forces to which they belong and which are engaged in combat, or where they fail to comply with a summons made to them with a view to internment.
2. The persons belonging to one of the categories enumerated in the present Article, who have been received by neutral or non-belligerent Powers on their territory and whom these Powers are required to intern under international law, without prejudice to any more favourable treatment which these Powers may choose to give and with the exception of Articles 8, 10, 15, 30, fifth paragraph, 58-67, 92, 126 and, where diplomatic relations exist between the Parties to the conflict and the neutral or non-belligerent Power concerned, those Articles concerning the Protecting Power. Where such diplomatic relations exist, the Parties to a conflict on whom these persons depend shall be allowed to perform towards them the functions of a Protecting Power as provided in the present Convention, without prejudice to the functions which these Parties normally exercise in conformity with diplomatic and consular usage and treaties.
C. This Article shall in no way affect the status of medical personnel and chaplains as provided for in Article 33 of the present Convention.
And once again, he was neither a uniformed, regular soldier identifiable as a member of any organized, armed forces, and nor was he a neutral or non-belligerent person.

There was no doubt.
User avatar
Keevan_Colton
Emperor's Hand
Posts: 10355
Joined: 2002-12-30 08:57pm
Location: In the Land of Logic and Reason, two doors down from Lilliput and across the road from Atlantis...
Contact:

Post by Keevan_Colton »

Except, there is no war, there is no other country involved....why the fuck is the US/Iraq puppet incapapble of treating "terrorists" and the like as criminals. They are acting as criminals, there is no fucking issue with the geneva convention when you arent at fucking war with anyone! Arrest them, try them and then deal with them as fit.

Summary execution without trial can never be justified.
"Prodesse Non Nocere."
"It's all about popularity really, if your invisible friend that tells you to invade places is called Napoleon, you're a loony, if he's called Jesus then you're the president."
"I'd drive more people insane, but I'd have to double back and pick them up first..."
"All it takes for bullshit to thrive is for rational men to do nothing." - Kevin Farrell, B.A. Journalism.
BOTM - EBC - Horseman - G&C - Vampire
User avatar
Elfdart
The Anti-Shep
Posts: 10691
Joined: 2004-04-28 11:32pm

Post by Elfdart »

Illuminatus Primus wrote:
Elfdart wrote:Besides, it's always been understood (for over 150 years) that not being in uniform meant that the prisoner was trying to deceive the other side by passing himself off as a civilian or as a member of the opposing armed forces -not members of guerilla armies who simply don't have standard uniforms or insignia.
You're an idiot. How can they be "summarily executed"
They can't.
Illuminatus Primus wrote:under the Convention if they have to be held until some tribunal decides something. Besides, how do you have a court case over whether a combatant was dressing in civilian clothes and not attempting to destinguish themselves with somesort of "obvious mark" as the Convention states as an exception.

Besides, guerilla armies aren't explicitly banned, what is, is the fact that troops who dress as civilians risk civilian collateral damage both by anesthetizing troops to shooting people who are in civilian clothes who -may- be combatants, and because it makes destinguishing between them very difficult. Its banned because it makes the civilian population a target.
Elfdart wrote:A number of German and Japanese officers who ordered the summary hanging and shooting of partisans who didn't have uniforms were convicted of war crimes at Nuremberg and Tokyo and other trials.
And it was bullshit. We summarily executed any German found in GI uniform without any sort of deliberations during the war in Europe.
Did it ever occur to you that summarily shooting ANYONE who is held prisoner is also "bullshit"? The fact that people do something and get away with it does not make it legal. A number of Allied soldiers looted like crazy at the end of WW2, but looting is prohibited.

Keevan Colton, the fact that no war has been declared does not mean anything as far as GC is concerned. The US has occupied a foreign country and thus has to abide by the law. Sure, they can declare the rebels "terrorists" -just as they can declare them a tuna on rye- but it's meaningless as far as the law is concerned.
User avatar
Elfdart
The Anti-Shep
Posts: 10691
Joined: 2004-04-28 11:32pm

Post by Elfdart »

Illuminatus Primus wrote:
Elfdart wrote:After hearing Seymour Hersh about how little boys were cornholed on tape at Abu Ghraib by US "intelligence", the shooting of a few "terrorists" seems rather tame.
What? Link please? What is this?
www.dailykos.com/story/2004/7/14/193750/666

Buzzflash has a link to Hersh's lecture in which he claims that the Pentagon is sitting on video of boys being sodomized at Abu Ghraib.
Post Reply