• We’re currently investigating an issue related to the forum theme and styling that is impacting page layout and visual formatting. The problem has been identified, and we are actively working on a resolution. There is no impact to user data or functionality, this is strictly a front-end display issue. We’ll post an update once the fix has been deployed. Thanks for your patience while we get this sorted.

Kerry: Postpone Iraq Abuse Courts-Martial

Kerry: Postpone Iraq Abuse Courts-Martial

By Matea Gold, Times Staff Writer


LITTLE ROCK, Ark. ? Sen. John F. Kerry said Wednesday that the U.S. military should postpone the courts-martial of several soldiers linked with the mistreatment of Iraqi prisoners, saying the trials would demoralize the rank-and-file at a time when the government should be examining the behavior of commanders.

During a 20-minute interview with radio talk-show host Don Imus, the Democratic presidential candidate said that the trials, the first of which was scheduled to take place in Baghdad next week, should be held only after a complete investigation into who was responsible for the abuses at Abu Ghraib prison.

"I think it leaves a terrible taste throughout the military," Kerry said of the courts-martial.

He called the trials "inadequate" and "rushed," adding: "I think it's sort of a panicked move to try to display to the Arab world and others that we're going to do things immediately."

Kerry, who has called for Bush to be held accountable for the humiliation and torture of the detainees, said again Wednesday that the incidents resulted from "major failures in command."

He repeated his call for Defense Secretary Donald H. Rumsfeld to resign, and suggested Sen. John McCain (R-Ariz.) for the post, among others.

In interviews, the Massachusetts senator reiterated the pointed language he had used in recent days about the war in Iraq, accusing the Bush administration of "miscalculations and incompetence."

"I just think the president is making unbelievable ? just catastrophic mistakes for our country," he said on "Imus in the Morning."

Some Kerry allies had been complaining that he had been too cautious in his comments on Iraq as turmoil escalated in the country last month and even as photos of prisoner mistreatment surfaced recently. Last week, Kerry began sharpening his criticism.

Still, as he campaigned in Orlando, Fla., and Little Rock on Wednesday, Kerry displayed a certain level of caution as he was pressed in several interviews to react to the situation in Iraq, a sign of the charged political terrain he was navigating.

Kerry said he disagreed with a comment by his Massachusetts colleague, Democratic Sen. Edward M. Kennedy, that the U.S. had replaced former Iraqi President Saddam Hussein in running torture chambers in the country.

He emphasized that his call for Rumsfeld to resign was based more on the overall management of the war than the prison abuse scandal ? despite the fact his campaign has circulated a petition stating that the mistreatment of the detainees requires Rumsfeld's removal.

And at one point, Kerry followed a critique of the administration's approach in Iraq by insisting, "I'm not saying that politically."

Republicans have pounced on several of Kerry's comments as evidence that he is exploiting the situation, including a remark he made Tuesday connecting the abuses to "America's overall arrogance in policy."

"At a moment when America and Americans stand strong behind our troops on the battlefield, John Kerry is attacking President Bush and the military and seeking to divide along party lines," Bush campaign chairman Marc Racicot said in a conference call with reporters Wednesday.

The Kerry campaign rejected that charge, noting that Republican lawmakers had also questioned and criticized the military's handling of the abuses.

Kerry spent the last few days pitching his healthcare plan in swings through Pennsylvania, Kentucky and Florida, and during town hall meetings he had not mentioned the abuse scandal.

One national poll released on Wednesday indicated that the prison scandal was starting to seep into views of the presidential race.

Bush's job approval rating among 1,800 people interviewed nationwide May 3-9 fell to 44% from 48% in April, a poll by the Pew Center for the People and the Press showed.

The percentage of Americans who think the nation is headed in the right direction is at 33%, an eight-year low, and for the first time, a majority of 51% said the Iraq war was going poorly, the Pew survey said.

The poll also found Kerry leading Bush, 50% to 45%. The poll had a margin of error of 2.5%.

Kerry, in an interview with Associated Press Radio on Wednesday, said he believed the American public remained concerned about domestic issues, despite the furor over the incidents at Abu Ghraib.

"We're all interested in what's happening in Iraq, and we're deeply disturbed by it and upset, particularly by the events yesterday," he said, referring to the release of a video depicting the beheading of a young American. "But life goes on, and people realize that we've got to make America strong here at home."

In his Wednesday morning interview with Imus, Kerry was asked whom he would appoint to head the Defense Department.

"I have any number of people that I would make secretary of Defense, beginning with our good friend John McCain, as an example, and many others who could manage it very effectively," said Kerry in one of his nearly daily references to McCain on the campaign trail.

He went on to list Sens. Carl Levin (D-Michigan) and John Warner (R-Virginia), as well as Clinton administration Defense Secretary William J. Perry, as possible candidates for the post.

Despite the media's focus on Iraq, Kerry said, the situation there won't determine the outcome of the presidential election in November.

"No, I think this is much bigger than Iraq," he told AP Radio. Later in the day, in a predominantly Latino neighborhood of Orlando, an audience of several hundred waited for the senator to speak at the Englewood Community Center.

But in a gym festooned with campaign banners that read "Affordable Healthcare ? A Stronger America," people seemed to have something else on their minds, along with the cost of prescription drugs and doctor's bills.

"Bush lied; people died!" the crowd chanted, as they waited for the candidate to arrive.


So, any bets on what his stance would have been if Bush would have said this - about "postponing" the trials? This is absolutely amazing - but not suprising coming from the likes of kerry. There are already chants and accusations of "sweeping it under the rug" - yet he thinks Bush should postpone the courts martials? Sheesh...talk about blowing in the wind....


CkG
 
Well, first, I'd tend to focus on what Kerry said, not other Democrats, as it's Mr. Kerry you're evaluating here. I can see the logic behind his comments about postponing the trial, and I respect his opinion as that of a man who's been in the trenches during a demoralizing period in military history.

Other than that, no comment.
 
Yeah, and I happen to agree with him. And so should anyone who supports the troops. (Note: Just having the stickers on your truck doesn't count.)
 
In all fairness, he just seems to be saying that the courts-martial shouldn't be a substitute for a full investigation into whether those are higher levels are to blame for these abuses.

Speaking as a person who has been working in military justice for more than 5 years, I don't happen to agree with Sen Kerry, in that there is a lot to be said for prosecuting the small fish first, so they can be compelled to testify against others higher up the chain after their trials. Still, I DO agree that these trials are only the beginning of addressing the larger problems of how we have apparently treated EPWs and detainees - there certainly appear to be systemic problems, and I tend to think the behavior of the soldiers we see in those pictures are only a symptom of a much bigger issue.
 
I i expect nothing more, and nothing less than what kerry (a highly decorated Vietnam Veteran) is doing...

no matter what Bush does, he is going to oppose it.

now, just for the sake of argument, if Bush had stated "We should postpone the Court Martial of these military folks so as not to demoralize the troops", how many of you believe Kerry would have been howling
"Coverup!!"

the Democrats are acting like a giant Al-Qaeda cell, plotting and hoping for the "defeat" of the great "Shaitan" America.
 
Thought we'd be on a roll for once.

There were three reasoned replies in a row. Then heartsurgeon had to come in and fvck up the streak.


I think Kerry is dead-on with this. It seems too knee-jerk to court martial these troops before a full investigation has been completed.
 
Originally posted by: conjur
I think Kerry is dead-on with this. It seems too knee-jerk to court martial these troops before a full investigation has been completed.

Just like you'd think he was "dead-on with this" if he took the other side. Weren't you one of the ones who said this was being swept under the rug? Or that nothing was being done about it?
Well, there have been investigations, there are ONGOING investigations and these court martials need to proceed in a timely fashion yet not rushed - which is what is happening. The false assumption here by kerry(a highly decorated Vietnam Veteran)😉 that they are being rushed is pure politicking and projected rhetoric.

But HS is correct - kerry would charge a "cover-up" if it was Bush who said these things, and you would too conjur.

CkG
 
Originally posted by: conjur
Thought we'd be on a roll for once.

There were three reasoned replies in a row. Then heartsurgeon had to come in and fvck up the streak.

Did you expect anything less? Where would this forum be without him shaking his fist and screaming "damn liberals!" in every post? 😀

I'm not sure where my stance is on this. On one hand, this is some serious crap that needs to be addressed, and my gut reaction would say sooner rather than later.

On the other hand, troop moral in Iraq is already terrible and this is likely just making it worse.
 
Originally posted by: PingSpike
Originally posted by: conjur
Thought we'd be on a roll for once.

There were three reasoned replies in a row. Then heartsurgeon had to come in and fvck up the streak.

Did you expect anything less? Where would this forum be without him shaking his fist and screaming "damn liberals!" in every post? 😀

I'm not sure where my stance is on this. On one hand, this is some serious crap that needs to be addressed, and my gut reaction would say sooner rather than later.

On the other hand, troop moral in Iraq is already terrible and this is likely just making it worse.

It's just further proof how ineptly this war has been managed by the politicians.
 
"I think it leaves a terrible taste throughout the military," Kerry said of the courts-martial.

He called the trials "inadequate" and "rushed," adding: "I think it's sort of a panicked move to try to display to the Arab world and others that we're going to do things immediately."

Kerry, who has called for Bush to be held accountable for the humiliation and torture of the detainees, said again Wednesday that the incidents resulted from "major failures in command."

He repeated his call for Defense Secretary Donald H. Rumsfeld to resign, and suggested Sen. John McCain (R-Ariz.) for the post, among others.

In interviews, the Massachusetts senator reiterated the pointed language he had used in recent days about the war in Iraq, accusing the Bush administration of "miscalculations and incompetence."


All of this coming from a PUNK who after taking a Oath to Support and Defend, while serving in our Military Forces turned his back on his brothers and his Country. Lets remember one thing here, when in the Military you do not have to agree or like the decisions of the leaders. However you will follow them requardless. This guy is a joke, he tries to bring fellow military members as a prop but yet others who he served with spoke out aginst him. He now would like to lead the country he once turned his back on, the office of which he took an oath, to follow any and all orders of those appointed over him

These are only the comments and opinions of a military infantry grunt with 20 years in the military.
 
I think it's a shame (though hardly surprising) that this thread couldn't stay on topic at all, because it immediately evolved into a Kerry-bashing fest. We are all entitled to our opinions, but it seems like sheer conjecture to presume what Kerry would be saying if Bush were the one proposing this.

As I indicated above, I don't happen to agree with Senator Kerry on this particular issue, but unlike others here, I have substantial experience in military courts-martial, and my opinion is based on a tactical military justice perspective, not a political one.

I don't see how Sen Kerry's opinion makes him a "PUNK," or how it even implicates his own service whatsoever. For whatever it's worth, I too am a GI, and see his service, and its aftermath, as courageous and not at all indicative of "turning his back on his brothers," but rather of a sincere interest in preventing their continuing, needless deaths. I understand how his testimony before Congress alienated and angered some GIs and vets, but that does not, in my opinion, undermine its intentions.
 
Don-Vito, I don't know why you're not an elite member here. You certainly are in my mind. It's a profound pleasure to read your consistently reasoned and well thought out posts. As I struggle to make sense of the complexities of the military situation in Iraq, I'm constantly on the lookout to see if you've a post. I think you have a facile and nuanced mind and a calm clear perspective. I'm really glad you post here.
 
it's a shame our country places so much importance on having served in a war. Ideally we shouldn't be fighting any wars, and we shouldn't need an army. In fact, we shouldn't be pursuing new weapons tech., we should be dismantling what we have along with the rest of the nations of the world. It's only a matter of time before we nuke this planet to holy hell.
 
Originally posted by: Moonbeam
Don-Vito, I don't know why you're not an elite member here. You certainly are in my mind. It's a profound pleasure to read your consistently reasoned and well thought out posts. As I struggle to make sense of the complexities of the military situation in Iraq, I'm constantly on the lookout to see if you've a post. I think you have a facile and nuanced mind and a calm clear perspective. I'm really glad you post here.

Thanks, and right back atcha! I have long admired your common sense and devil's advocacy.

As I've said before here, I think this forum (and the world at large, for that matter) would be a better place if people could intelligently converse about ideas and principles without being hamstrung by partisanism. The world is not black and white, but the political arena certainly is for many.

IMO this kind of us-vs-them thinking is at least partially an unfortunate by-product of the ready accessibility of information and editorials nowadays (though for the most part I think that same accessibility is a Good Thing). In my mind the modern version of "hate thy enemy" is best personified by Rush Limbaugh et al, but there are plenty of obnoxious ignorami on both sides of the aisle. Most people seem to resort to a kind of political shorthand: "I'm a Democrat, so I can't acknowledge the positive contributions of Republicans, or that they might be right on some issues" or, "I'm a Republican, so it's Clinton's fault." 'Tis a shame.
 
Wow. Seems to be a little problem in here today keeping the OP as the focal point. Hearing a lot of "if bush said this, they kerry would have said this" scenerio's but that's about it from the other side. Seems pretty politically correct for Kerry or Bush to take this stance right now, not withstanding DV's point about frying the small fish first. I would like to echo Moons compliment of DV. I admire you as someone who does not seem to let emotion factor into your well thought out and well articulated posts. I wish I had the same discipline. It is something we should all strive for. :thumbsup:
 
Originally posted by: Sudheer Anne
it's a shame our country places so much importance on having served in a war. Ideally we shouldn't be fighting any wars, and we shouldn't need an army. In fact, we shouldn't be pursuing new weapons tech., we should be dismantling what we have along with the rest of the nations of the world. It's only a matter of time before we nuke this planet to holy hell.

Hopefully this is sarcasm.

Otherwise you are asking a return to the 1930's Apeasement & isolationism. that only works if no country has ambitions
 
Originally posted by: EagleKeeper
Originally posted by: Sudheer Anne
it's a shame our country places so much importance on having served in a war. Ideally we shouldn't be fighting any wars, and we shouldn't need an army. In fact, we shouldn't be pursuing new weapons tech., we should be dismantling what we have along with the rest of the nations of the world. It's only a matter of time before we nuke this planet to holy hell.

Hopefully this is sarcasm.

Otherwise you are asking a return to the 1930's Apeasement & isolationism. that only works if no country has ambitions

Unfortunately, EagleKeeper is right. That plan would be ideal if we were not living in a hostile world. And make no mistake, we are living in a VERY hostile world. It would be unwise at this point to dismantel our military or even to allow it to become outdated.
 
it's all political posturing!!!
wake up!!

Kerry is hoping that the "investigation" can be dragged out (at least until November!) so as to maximize the political damage the Dems can "milk" from it.

If a court martial takes place...oops, its all over..someone gets blamed, punished, and the public moves on and loses interest in the topic (frankly, nobody carried anymore the moment the Berg atroctity became public knowledge).

it's like real estate..except it's politics, politics, politics, not location, location, location.

what the dems fail to acknowledge is that the same people who beheaded Berg, would gleefully behead your child, your sister, your mother whether or not the U.S. was in Iraq or not. They would gleefully drop a nuke on New York, or L.A., or Chicago if they could.

by the way...i thought Al Qaeda wasn't "in" Iraq...at least that's what you guys all said.
I guess Abu Musab al-Zarqawi musta quit Al Qaeda eh?
 
Weren't in Iraq BEFORE the invasion.

Keep your facts straight, heartsurgeon. I know that's hard for you to do, though, since you barely know what one is.
 
puh-leeze, gentlemen- these ultra quick court martials are just an attempted whitewash- put it off on a few overzealous dogfaces, when, in fact, it's obviously policy from the highest levels- in Afghanistan, Gitmo, Iraq, wherever so-called "terrorists" are being held.

It doesn't matter what the guys like al-Zarqawi do- as a free and democratic people, we hold ourselves to a higher standard. Failure to do so negates any moral pretext for this invasion at all.

In the minds of the Iraqis, we need to be very careful not to be perceived as thugs. Given a choice between home-grown and foreign thugs, they'll go with the hometeam every time... as would most anybody...
 
so-called "terrorists"
It doesn't matter what the guys like al-Zarqawi do
we need to be very careful not to be perceived as thugs


let me guess...
you believe the 9/11 attack was staged by the Mossad and the CIA
you believe Bush, Rumsfeld and Wolfowitz are terrrorists
you believe al-Zarqawi has been "driven" mistreatment by the U.S. to attack us in self-defense.
you believe that it is important that our enemies like, or better yet love us.

you self-loathing liberals wear me out.
wake up. some people are bound and determined to kill you.
you cannot make them like you, no matter what you do.
they hate you, and want you dead.
they would prefer to drop a nuke on your home town, but until they can manage that, they will settle for cutting off a head here and there.
what ever shortcomings we may have in our society, our military, and our goverment, pale in comparison to depravity of our enemies.
self-flagelation serves only to fortify those who are committed to destroy us.
 
Originally posted by: heartsurgeon
so-called "terrorists"
It doesn't matter what the guys like al-Zarqawi do
we need to be very careful not to be perceived as thugs


let me guess...
you believe the 9/11 attack was staged by the Mossad and the CIA
you believe Bush, Rumsfeld and Wolfowitz are terrrorists
you believe al-Zarqawi has been "driven" mistreatment by the U.S. to attack us in self-defense.
you believe that it is important that our enemies like, or better yet love us.

you self-loathing liberals wear me out.
wake up. some people are bound and determined to kill you.
you cannot make them like you, no matter what you do.
they hate you, and want you dead.
they would prefer to drop a nuke on your home town, but until they can manage that, they will settle for cutting off a head here and there.
what ever shortcomings we may have in our society, our military, and our goverment, pale in comparison to depravity of our enemies.
self-flagelation serves only to fortify those who are committed to destroy us.

Wow, never realized you were so scared of the sand boogie men creaping into your room at night. Hell, just keep a light on HS, it will be OK. 🙂
 
As usual, you've guessed wrong, Heartsurgeon. I believe none of those things.

Nor do I loathe myself or my country, but I do loathe your smug and slanderous innuendo, also the sickeningly self-righteous aura of false patriotism. Emulating the conduct of our enemies destroys all moral distinctions between us and them. If you can't acknowledge that, then your sense of values is twisted in ways that are irredeemable, your morality unworthy of the name "American". Have you no sense of decency, no shame whatsoever?

Oh, yeh, what happened to "freeing the Iraqi people", anyway? Or are they now our enemies, too? Or was that just another empty slogan, another bait and switch, another deception? Or just part of the rightwing "win at any cost" method of getting over on the public?
 
No Kerry wants a delay so that the Media can drag this through the gutter. They (Kerry and the Media) only want this to go away after the maximum amount of damage is done to the president. Then no one will care except the Terrorists with strecthed out poopers.
 
Back
Top