New and shocking footage of British troops torturing Iraqis...

VIRII · 13 Feb 2006 at 12:56

Visage said:
I understand what you're saying, but the problem with this conspiracy theory is that the people that have most to gain from it are the people that are most unable to bring it about (i.e radical muslims)...

That assumes that only radical muslims stand to gain with this being released.
It's release diffuses things somewhat and everyone goes back to their corners. The losers here are the Army who shouldn't be there to begin with.

As much as I think that the behaviour was wrong I can imagine that being couped up under threat of death constnatly could possibly strain your mental state and make you slightly less rational than normal. I certainly do not condone what they have done but perhaps this was one way in which they let off steam.

The little bit of footage that I have seen was far from "torture" as per the rather SUNTASTIC REDTOP PAPER HEADLINE but it was also far from tea and cake. None of the kicks looked uncontrolled, none looked designed to really damage. That looked like a very rough lesson being taught to some people as opposed to a kicking to death as implied by the OP.

People under severe stress do crazy, stupid and nasty things. Professional Soldier or not.

@if ®afiq · 13 Feb 2006 at 13:02

cleanbluesky said:
At least we can all agree that taping it was a stupid idea

So if it wasn't taped then it would be OK? :rolleyes:

Richdog · 13 Feb 2006 at 13:04

VIRII said:
none looked designed to really damage.

What on earth are you talking about man. How about we arrange a meeting where you lie face-down and I savagely kick you in the testicles from behind, then you can tell me if it "didn't really do any damage". That could easily paralyse someone. Oh, and I can also headbutt you first full-force if you like? I assure you it hurts like hell.

Controlled beating? Sheesh...

Pug · 13 Feb 2006 at 13:10

worse happens every saturday night in our towns and cities but i dont see it making headlines.

Well done our boys for an otherwise imppecable tour of duty.

ethan · 13 Feb 2006 at 13:11

I think a lot of you are taking this all out of perspective. What would the Iraqi police have done 2 them if they had been there? Not only that, would there have been any newspaper coments if they had

Amen 2 Pugs comments.

Sleepy · 13 Feb 2006 at 13:18

cleanbluesky said:
At least we can all agree that taping it was a stupid idea

Its depressing how stupid people are at times.

Then again do we really want clever criminals?

Roughneck · 13 Feb 2006 at 13:21

I dont understand why they were kicking a corpse?

was the corpse a threat?

cleanbluesky · 13 Feb 2006 at 13:23

Visage said:
I think there are more people suggesting the troops were right, despite an equally large lack of evidence to support that view.

Perhaps what is happening here is that some are seeking to protect the image of our soldiers - because as has already been said we cannot tell how justified from the video alone our soldiers were... or whether their motives for the beating was in any way proper...

I suppose if some of us are criticising our soldiers for this, that other people will also seek to defend them.

@if ®afiq · 13 Feb 2006 at 13:26

cleanbluesky said:
Perhaps what is happening here is that some are seeking to protect the image of our soldiers - because as has already been said we cannot tell how justified from the video alone our soldiers were... or whether their motives for the beating was in any way proper...

There can be no justifiable motive for beating up unarmed civilians!

cleanbluesky · 13 Feb 2006 at 13:27

@if ®afiq said:
There can be no justifiable motive for beating up unarmed civilians!

I was thinking more strategically than morally...

Nana · 13 Feb 2006 at 13:30

dirtydog said:
I'm still amazed anyone is defending it here.

as am I.

How can this be anything other than yet another reason for Iraqis to resent our prescence in their country? This increases the likelihood of further attacks, imo, so these soldiers by their foolish and illegal actions have actually increased the risk posed to their comrades.

Pug · 13 Feb 2006 at 13:30

@if ®afiq said:
There can be no justifiable motive for beating up unarmed civilians!

not even adrenaline after running into a mob of 100+ people who have been throwing rocks etc at you, and having dragged them back?

no one here says it should be normal practise, and the soldiers behaviour was maybe excessive, but i think most normal people agree that it shouldnt be made such a big thing of, and that these guys are living in this environment and are therefore wound pretty tight.

I quite liked how people have said "other soldiers walked by and didn;t do anything to stop them" well i noticed a few were had drawn their batons and were ready to step in if it couldnt be contained - which suggests to me somewhat normal operating procedure for that period of the confilct.

Seemed to me our guys were trying to get them to lay down on the floor to be cuffed. When they werent doing this they encouraged them with batons until they did. At which point they stopped - except for the one bit where he got kicked in the balls - thats the only bit i thought was unjustified.

@if ®afiq · 13 Feb 2006 at 13:32

cleanbluesky said:
I was thinking more strategically than morally...

The children of Palestine have been throwing stones and getting more brutal beatings for the past 50+ years - but that still hasn't stopped them. If anything it will galvanise them even more.

cleanbluesky · 13 Feb 2006 at 13:34

@if ®afiq said:
The children of Palestine have been throwing stones and getting more brutal beatings for the past 50+ years - but that still hasn't stopped them. If anything it will galvanise them even more.

What has this to do with anything? Where would you pick up such rhetoric?

@if ®afiq · 13 Feb 2006 at 13:40

Pug said:
not even adrenaline after running into a mob of 100+ people who have been throwing rocks etc at you, and having dragged them back?

It would be understandable if they beat them during the actual riot itself, but not after when they were in the security of their own base.

pug said:
no one here says it should be normal practise, and the soldiers behaviour was maybe excessive, but i think most normal people agree that it shouldnt be made such a big thing of, and that these guys are living in this environment and are therefore wound pretty tight.

Most people? Have you been watching the news at all? The Army has launched an investigation faster than ever before - why would this be?

pug said:
I quite liked how people have said "other soldiers walked by and didn;t do anything to stop them" well i noticed a few were had drawn their batons and were ready to step in if it couldnt be contained - which suggests to me somewhat normal operating procedure for that period of the confilct.

Maybe they had their battons drawn bacuse they just returned from a riot? Regardless - it is still not justifiable - and illegal under international law.

pug said:
Seemed to me our guys were trying to get them to lay down on the floor to be cuffed. When they werent doing this they encouraged them with batons until they did. At which point they stopped - except for the one bit where he got kicked in the balls - thats the only bit i thought was unjustified.

Are you sure you watched the same video? The one I saw started with the guy with the riot helmet head butting a youth with it. And once they were on the floor and begging them to stop they were still getting beatings - how can this be explained.

@if ®afiq · 13 Feb 2006 at 13:42

cleanbluesky said:
What has this to do with anything? Where would you pick up such rhetoric?

It's not rhetoric, it's fact.

You said that this can be stratigically justifed, and I pointed out that beatings will just galvanise and radicalise them even more.

i know nothing · 13 Feb 2006 at 13:55

@if ®afiq said:
It would be understandable if they beat them during the actual riot itself, but not after when they were in the security of their own base.

So they should have given them the same beating on the street whilst the riot was underway and everything would be acceptable? :confused:

VIRII · 13 Feb 2006 at 13:56

Richdog said:
What on earth are you talking about man. How about we arrange a meeting where you lie face-down and I savagely kick you in the testicles from behind, then you can tell me if it "didn't really do any damage". That could easily paralyse someone. Oh, and I can also headbutt you first full-force if you like? I assure you it hurts like hell.

Controlled beating? Sheesh...

Calm down

Now read what I posted again and take special note of "the little bit of footage that I have seen".
I have made it clear in both of my posts that I have not seen the whole thing.
You do like to fly off the handle a bit don't you, I assume it's not what I posted but as you previously stated "who" posted it that is the problem for you.

dirtydog · 13 Feb 2006 at 13:57

i know nothing said:
So they should have given them the same beating on the street whilst the riot was underway and everything would be acceptable?

It isn't too hard to understand. If the rioters were being violent or resisting arrest on the street then some violence would be justified from the soldiers. Once the rioters were in custody and back on the base however, and on the ground begging for mercy then kicking their heads in isn't justified any more is it.

VIRII · 13 Feb 2006 at 13:57

@if ®afiq said:
There can be no justifiable motive for beating up unarmed civilians!

Why not? You have no issues with stoning homosexuals to death, seems like a double standard to me.