How do you feel about George Bush’s “rape rooms”?

Question

George Bush used the term “rape rooms” when describing the atrocities of the Saddam Hussein regime. But did you know that during the Abu Ghraib torture investigation, General Taguba of the US Armed Forces investigation comity discovered footage of female Iraqi detainees being sodomized by American military guards? We viewed the photos of the humiliation the male detainees suffered; they endured physiological abuse, sexual humiliation, forced stress positions, etc. But how many of us knew while that was going on, their wives, daughters, and sisters, were being raped?

It is one thing to do this to their men, but when their women and girls are gathered up and systematically raped, we become no better then the men we overthrew in the first place. Our president used the terminology of sexual abuse as a method to shock and manipulate the American people to believe our invasion of Iraq was justified; yet we enter the scene and become guilty of the same behavior the Iraqis perpetrated.

http://www.newyorker.com/reporting/2007/06/25/070625fa_fact_hersh

The specific mention of sodomizing women is found on the bottom paragraph of the first page.

Answer 1

We have to do what we can to break the "America=always hero" metanarrative. You will never get a response to this that starts with "No, the US is not committing war crimes because..." because the US obviously is. The only rebuttal to this will be a knee-jerk reaction, attempts tear down your credibility through indirect means ("Someone needs to up your Prozac dose") to keep that metanarrative propped up, because some of us use it for support more than others...

Answer 2

Thank you. That was the first article I've ever read from the New Yorker, and now I know why I haven't read it before.

The press is so against President Bush right now that this would be all over the news if it was true.

I would also have to question why you seem to think it would be okay to rape Iraqi men, but not women. "Sytstematically" rape the Iraqi people? Does that mean all 150,000 or so troops were lined up? I'm guessing the New Yorker is trying its own method to shock and manipulate the American people. I guess it worked on you :)

Answer 3

This is what YOU say is reported..."footage of female Iraqi detainees being sodomized by American military guards?"

This is what is quoted in the article you cite...“a video of a male American soldier in uniform sodomizing a female detainee.”

Do you see a difference? If there is video evidence of this, where is it? Why do people like you feel you must give exaggerated views of accounts like this? Where is the credibility?

Talk more softly and bring better evidence.

Answer 4

If this did actually happen, and that's a big IF, there is only mention of one man who did this. How is President Bush responsible for this one man's actions? And how do you take the leap from a rapist who unfortunately became a soldier supposedly assaulting a detainee... to "rape rooms"? There were some very wrong things that went on there. It's disappointing, and it's embarassing. But your assertions and conspiracy theories are only doing more harm.

Answer 5

"It is one thing to do this to their men, but when their women and girls are gathered up and systematically raped... "

No, the article says "SYSTEMIC" meaning within the system, not "systematically", which implies being done all the time.

From your source: "Taguba said that he saw “a video of a male American soldier in uniform sodomizing a female detainee.”

A video, A soldier, A female. "A" in this sense still means "one" doesn't it?

I am in no way justifying what happened, but I do understand the anger of the soldiers involved. They obviously chose to express it in a horrible way, but that doesn't make it alright for you to change the facts.

Please provide evidence to support your claim that the female family members of the prisoners were being raped while the prisoners were incarcerated.

Answer 6

It appears you are promoting propaganda un fitting to our community. It may be your opinions but you are making false statements against the President of the United States. Never a good plan as your implications are unfounded and very derogatory.
The guards found to be abusing prisoners were tried and held accountable. You say there are more. What proof do u have? I see no links here? Please research these things throughly and find us credible sources or keep them off here. Thank you. Sorry I respect your rights and mine include respect to the Commander -in -Chief unless I have a damn good arguement. Thanks.

Answer 7

i'll have to wait for a more credible source than you or the new yorker before i even entertain the thought of this bulls.... which i'm sure will never come about.

and besides, were the people involved in the abu graib scandal not punished and dishonorably discharged from the military? i mean what exactly would you like george bush to do? torture them?

Answer 8

I think this question stinks. It begins with a false premise. It is inflammatory in nature. It provides partial information and makes conclusions based on that partial information. It is unanswerable, in a logical manner.

All in all, I'd say that's what a lie looks like. JMO

Answer 9

Guilty until proved innocent, is that it? Your behavior is shameful and seditious.

Now bringing the article to light is not. Asking what people think about it is not. But then proceeding with the accusations and "facts" that have no basis in anything but hearsay is worthy of nothing but contempt.

Saddam and his people PARTICIPATED in those acts.

President Bush prosecuted those who did.

You don't know the difference. Says a lot about you.

Answer 10

Systematically? A lone report of one occurrence, not corroborated by any other source, and you take it as gospel. Why hasn't Amnesty Int'l been on this if it was true?

Sorry dude, sensationalized journalism at it's worst.