It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

US kidnapping relatives of insurgents?

page: 1
0
<<   2  3 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Apr, 6 2005 @ 06:18 AM
link   
The US has reportedly taken hostage the Mother and Sister of Iraqi insurgents and left a note for him at the home saying they will be released if the insurgents turn themselves in. I'm pretty sure this is a violation of international law but I can't say that this surprises me.


yahoo

Batawi, who spoke to Reuters at the offices of a leading group of Sunni clerics, said U.S. soldiers searched his home on Saturday. When they found neither him nor two brothers also on the wanted list, they arrested his mother and sister, he said.

A message purportedly left at the house by the troops, which urged the brothers to surrender, contained a mobile telephone number. This was answered by an American soldier who appeared to be aware of Batawi's accusation but declined further comment.
--snip--


When Reuters called the mobile telephone number at the bottom of the message, an American answered, saying he was on a military patrol. Asked about Batawi's accusation, he said: "I can't comment on that. The commander will call you back."

Hours later, a second call elicited the same response before the American, who would not identify himself, hung up.

The U.S. 3rd Infantry Division is active in the area.

A spokesman at U.S. headquarters in Iraq, who also declined to give his name, said he could neither confirm nor deny the incident. He said he did not find Batawi's account "plausible."

Three neighbors of the Batawi home did corroborate the accusation. They said U.S. troops, accompanied by Iraqi police, had arrested Batawi's 65-year-old mother and a sister who is 35.




posted on Apr, 6 2005 @ 06:24 AM
link   
While it may be a breach in International Law, I can't say that I am opposed to it. Fight fire with fire. It seems that the only thing that these "insurgents" understand is this style of mannerism. Routinely kidnapping, shooting, and beheading those that are innocent, these people have dug their own grave, and now it's time to pay. I may not have the most popular point of view, but I say -



posted on Apr, 6 2005 @ 09:09 AM
link   
I support this 100%. Its about time some hard ball gets played.


At least the US wont behead them Ace.



posted on Apr, 6 2005 @ 09:12 AM
link   
This is excellent news, and I doubt it is against international law, as long as the captives aren't harmed.


Sep

posted on Apr, 6 2005 @ 09:18 AM
link   
I thought insurgents werent Iraqis and were of other nationalities.

Good to see democracy working for the Iraqis.

[edit on 6-4-2005 by Sep]



posted on Apr, 6 2005 @ 09:21 AM
link   


While it may be a breach in International Law, I can't say that I am opposed to it. Fight fire with fire. It seems that the only thing that these "insurgents" understand is this style of mannerism.


Yet, if we stoop to the tactics of these monsters, are we then no better than the monsters themselves?

Yes, I'm pretty sure this would be a violation of international law in general. It'd be like arresting an elderly woman because her son committed murder. However, if it can be proven that the woman was aiding her son, then you've justified it legally. This is probably what is being done in this case, and the report is an exaggeration of this.



posted on Apr, 6 2005 @ 09:25 AM
link   
Well I can say I am appalled by it after all we are the world leader in democracy.

But I have to agree that is nothing wrong with coercing insurgents into turning themselves in using their families as long as the family and specially the young children will be well taken care off and no torture or abuse be used on them.

After that I think is a good idea.


Sep, sometime along the line Iraqis became insurgent when they opposed their own government and the US occupation.



posted on Apr, 6 2005 @ 09:39 AM
link   
Jordan once went out and rounded up all the mothers of a terrorist group and told them to call their sons and turn themselves in.

Every single one of the mothers who said they didn't know where their son was called and had their sons come in.

It works.

[edit on 6-4-2005 by Psychomike]



posted on Apr, 6 2005 @ 09:47 AM
link   
i dont know, it dont seem like a really good tactic, sometimes it works, sometimes not. its better to use informants and operatives to get intell and we have to have patience in waitin for a suspected insurgent or terrorist to go home unless u.s. troops have other operations to attend to. if this keeps up insurgents can use propaganda to tell that the women are raped or killed even if they return harmless because the women wont go telling the world what happened to them after their release they just go home and stay home not tell their neighbors wat happened.



posted on Apr, 6 2005 @ 10:13 AM
link   
I am somewhat shocked with how many people support this idea.

What ever happened to being above these sorts of actions? ( most especially since we do seem to consider ourselves some sort of moral leader in the world) Are we just going to keep bending the rules until we're sending suicide car bombers into their camps?!?

sheesh. before long we will be NO BETTER than the people we are fighting. i cannot wait to how it's spun and justified.



posted on Apr, 6 2005 @ 10:21 AM
link   

Originally posted by negativenihil
I am somewhat shocked with how many people support this idea.

What ever happened to being above these sorts of actions? ( most especially since we do seem to consider ourselves some sort of moral leader in the world) Are we just going to keep bending the rules until we're sending suicide car bombers into their camps?!?

sheesh. before long we will be NO BETTER than the people we are fighting. i cannot wait to how it's spun and justified.



These family members wont be beheaded, killed or beaten. They will be fed and housed. Thats why its different than the animals its meant to combat.



posted on Apr, 6 2005 @ 10:29 AM
link   

Originally posted by skippytjc
These family members wont be beheaded, killed or beaten. They will be fed and housed. Thats why its different than the animals its meant to combat.


How do you know they won't be beaten or killed?

Have you already forgotten how we treat enemy combatants?

You can justify this all you want, all day long. It's not going to change the fact that we are slowly becoming no better than the people we are fighting.

skippy- at what point would you draw the line (as far as the US Military using the same terrorist tactics that have been used against us)? Torture? Bulldozing homes? Suicide bombings?



posted on Apr, 6 2005 @ 10:32 AM
link   
A few points:

1) If I am not mistaken, the report said that the houses were searched by American soldiers and Iraqi police. This seem to indicate to me that it probably was the other way around - Iraqi police making a search being backed up by US troops.

2) If arrests were actually made, it was probably done by Iraqi police forces, not US troops.

3) If these people were in any way harboring or protecting terrorists, they are guilty of breaking the law and should be arrested and detained.

Although it is a noble concept to take the "high road" on these matters, to effectively fight terrorism, you must sometimes "get dirty" and descend into the mud with these villains, not unlike the vice cop who goes undercover to break up drug rings.



posted on Apr, 6 2005 @ 10:34 AM
link   

Originally posted by Pyros
Although it is a noble concept to take the "high road" on these matters, to effectively fight terrorism, you must sometimes "get dirty" and descend into the mud with these villains, not unlike the vice cop who goes undercover to break up drug rings.


As i have asked in my prior post-

At what point do you draw the line with "getting dirty"?



posted on Apr, 6 2005 @ 10:46 AM
link   

Originally posted by negativenihil

As i have asked in my prior post-

At what point do you draw the line with "getting dirty"?


Great question. Where do the terrorists draw the line? THEY DONT.

Its funny, I dont see any posts by you commenting on terrorist techniques, but its way over the line for the US to get tough and use relatives to lure these guys in.

So, ill answer your question anyways: Where do we draw the line? The line is drawn wherever it needs to be to counter these terrorist savages that live by no law or ethics.



posted on Apr, 6 2005 @ 10:56 AM
link   

Originally posted by skippytjc
Great question. Where do the terrorists draw the line? THEY DONT.


So that makes it ok for us to do so?



Its funny, I dont see any posts by you commenting on terrorist techniques, but its way over the line for the US to get tough and use relatives to lure these guys in.


What technique would you like a comment on?

If you're trying to imply i'm some sort of anti-american/terrorist sympathizer you can just stop right there.



So, ill answer your question anyways: Where do we draw the line? The line is drawn wherever it needs to be to counter these terrorist savages that live by no law or ethics.


So basically you're saying that if it takes bulldozing insurgent's homes and sending suicide car bombs into known insurgent areas - you're ok with it?

[edit on 6-4-2005 by negativenihil]

[edit on 6-4-2005 by negativenihil]



posted on Apr, 6 2005 @ 02:13 PM
link   
1. international law may not apply if the Iraqi police are arresting Iraqis. the original article said that US soldiers were accompanied by Iraqis.

2. the original article stated that there was a cell phone. a novice investigative journalist could find out who owns the phone.



posted on Apr, 6 2005 @ 02:34 PM
link   
negativenihil,

As you can see above, I'm in agreement as to not stooping to their level.

However, if there is reason to believe that these relatives know where the insurgent is, then they are guilty of aiding and abetting, and I'm sure this is what they were charged with by the Iraqi police there. Seems this is probably being spun to read differently though. Just as such suspects would be here in the USA, I'm sure they'll be questioned, detained, etc. until it is determined if they are indeed guilty of breaking the law.

The scarier thing is the amount who would support these relatives being tortured, abused, etc. to get the info. THAT's a scary thing.



posted on Apr, 6 2005 @ 02:53 PM
link   

Originally posted by Gazrok
However, if there is reason to believe that these relatives know where the insurgent is, then they are guilty of aiding and abetting, and I'm sure this is what they were charged with by the Iraqi police there. Seems this is probably being spun to read differently though. Just as such suspects would be here in the USA, I'm sure they'll be questioned, detained, etc. until it is determined if they are indeed guilty of breaking the law.


Yes, but what you've described is VERY different than a "kidnapping" or "toops took mother hostage".

I'm all for using American law enforcement tactics to gain information - it's a system that *works*.

When the word "kidnapping" gets toss around, it paints a very different picture.



The scarier thing is the amount who would support these relatives being tortured, abused, etc. to get the info. THAT's a scary thing.


I couldn't agree with you more


[edit on 6-4-2005 by negativenihil]



posted on Apr, 6 2005 @ 03:11 PM
link   
Lets say you were in a fist fight.

You "put up your dukes" and assume the "gentlemen Jim" pose and get ready to bare knuckle it. But your opponent picks up some sand and throws it in your eyes, then kicks you in the groin then proceeds to bite you while pulling your hair....You still continue to put your dukes up and try to fight fair? Take your beating like a man? Or do you change your tactics to handle a dirty fighter?

If taking and holding a family member works, do it. Period. I can sleep fine at night knowing that the US wont brutally kill them like the terrorists they fight.



new topics

top topics



 
0
<<   2  3 >>

log in

join