African American soldier/mercenary has been captured by Russian forces

Dudes, first, we don't really know what this guy does for a living. (Heck, we don't even know if he's really who they say he is.)

But I think it would serve the Russian purpose to a much higher level if they treat him with honor and respect, and release him to NATO authorities without incident. It would create a 'separation' between the US and Russian policy on prisoners. That could play well in the UN arena, it's all in the showmanship you know.

reply to post by Maxmars


You have to hold onto those enemy combatants. That way they can't rejoin the fight. Keep them in a nice secure place like...Siberia...away from prying eyes.

Seriously though, they should return unharmed, well fed.

Didn't the article say explicitly that the soldier was attached to a NATO training force??? That makes him Just that, a detached soldier from the US forces for the purpose of training NATO forces in a NATO state. He is NOT a mercenary. He is active US military and is a legal participant in any NATO excercise.


Zindo

Originally posted by Animal

Birdman you seem very certain that those captured by Russian forces will not be tortured, lets hope for their sake you are right. Countering your point, look at the numbers of people the US has tortured in the 'war on terror' how many of those do you think had little or nothing to offer the US in terms of intelligence?

Little bit different. The US is/was fighting an ideaology, Russia is/will be fighting a military & government entity. I didn't say that the Russians wouldn't interrogate him, BTW, just like we've interrogated the enemy combatants in Git'mo. If they waterboard him, so be it, that's a valid form of interrogation and I'm sure he's been trained in how to deal with it if he is US military. If the dude comes back with a bunch of limbs broken, crap jammed under his nails, teeth yanked, eyeballs gouged, balls crushed, etc, then he's been tortured and I'd be fairly shocked for Russia to be that brazen with their dealings in this.

Russia historically reserved torture for their own prisoners & internal dissidents, ocassionally throwing an international spy or two in there only when they knew the country the spy was working for wouldn't risk exposure by saying or doing anything. Torturing military prisoners from high profile Western countries has never been their thing, at least that I am aware of. Feel free to correct me if you know of a precident here.

Have we had any secondary sources for this. Or does this remain 'unanswered' by the United States?

reply to post by burdman30ott6


Theres stories of Russians at the Hanoi Hilton watching our troops being 'interrogated'! Not sure of actualy taking part but they where there.

Zindo

reply to post by ZindoDoone


I might also add, that it is highly probable that there were Russian (then Soviet) advisers on the ground in Angola, while the Cubans were there, as well as Nicaragua, during the Sandinista uprising. But if you ask me for proof, I guess you won't believe me.

[edit on 11-8-2008 by Maxmars]

Originally posted by Animal
Birdman you seem very certain that those captured by Russian forces will not be tortured, lets hope for their sake you are right. Countering your point, look at the numbers of people the US has tortured in the 'war on terror' how many of those do you think had little or nothing to offer the US in terms of intelligence?

The movie "Rendition" had quite a bit to say about that and said it quite well. The feel-good catharsis ending was sadly predictable but the underlying message is quite true IMO.

If the Russians find out his identity, will they release the information to the press?

reply to post by Maxmars


Max, I know for a fact that you are right about Angola. The Soviet advisors where there because the Cubans needed logistics for certain munitions that had been airlifted to them. They had never before used some of what was sent. They are there still causing trouble along with the Chinese in AFRICA. Theres going to be alot more trouble than we are being told in the very near future!

Zindo

reply to post by ZindoDoone

First off, I wasn't aware Gerogia was part of NATO. Could you please provide a link showing that information. Second off, even if they were NATO, American troops shouldn't be helping them invade an autonomous region or kill ethnic Russian civilians or is that part of the training that we are there to do? Since when do we not care about right and wrong. I don't care whose flag is worn on whose uniform, what matters here is who is right and who is wrong.

Second, you are using Freaking Nam as a good reason for us to be able to torture. We shouldn't have been there either. Besides that was 35 years ago, let it go. Also, just because they did it 35 years ago doesn't make it ok for us to do it now. We are not the heroes in this story anymore if that is the way we act. Those actions make us the villains and I don't want to be the villains. If I had wanted to be the villains I would have chosen to be the Stormtroopers when we played Star Wars as kids. This is what happens when you choose to always be the cowboy in Cowboy and Indians. Just cause you aren't the one in the loin cloth you're in the right.


[edit on 11-8-2008 by yourrolemodel]

reply to post by yourrolemodel


You obviosly aren't aware of alot of information. NATO was asked to send military trainers to help the Georgian military. It is a mutinational force from NATO that was there to do just that. You want a link try using your own search engine and learn. Also, I was answering someone else about Russian advisors and they'er use in other conflicts, and I realy don't care if you have a problem how I answer. It says in the OP's post that they had NATO trainers. Try reading what the subject is sometime. You might get it right ..once in a while!!!

Zindo

If he was just an instructor, then what in gods name was he doing in Tshinvale, IN THE HEART OF THE WAR ZONE?!

Clearly he wasn't sent there simply to instruct.

Oh geez... the pipeline. If NATO is in there already, some idiot platoon might think it's a "good" idea to blow the pipeline to drag more NATO re-enforcements into the conflict zone.

This is a bad idea, get those western units out of there. This could drag this conflict into a multinational war!

What moron ordered them in there?

When they say Mercenary don't they mean a private contractor?
Employed by a private firm to train troops?
This wouldn't be the same as capturing an enlisted soldier would it?

Originally posted by Fathom
he probably is a blackwater employee...

Well if that is the case, then i have absolutely no sympathy and i'm quite glad the russians have captured this yank.

About time America realised it's messing with the big boys now.

Shame Russia doesn't have its own version of Guantanamo eh?



Seriously though the US should back down and quit aiding Georgia.

Originally posted by mr-lizard


Shame Russia doesn't have its own version of Guantanamo eh?

Uhmm Hello, they do. Many of them. Where waterboarding is not the tactic of last resort, but merley level one.
Plus, siberia, ya know?

reply to post by mr-lizard


That pipe line that the Russians are trying to takeover is going to have 1 mill. brls a day that supposed to go to the EU. Its your oil, if you want the Russians to control it instead of Georgia I'm sure its just fine with the US!

Zindo

reply to post by Shazam The Unbowed

Originally posted by Shazam The Unbowed

Originally posted by Wotan
Well if true, you had better hope that the Russians 'play nice' and dont do a Gitmo on any captured US/Israeli forces.

So much for GW Bush's policy of torture. It seems that the chickens could possibly be coming home to roost.

Umm could you name a single theatre our soldiers have been in, either unofficially or officially, in which those soldiers who were captured were not tortured?

Even One in the last 80 years?

Silly boy. Don't you know that the US is the only nation on earth that tortures? Those prayer mats, culturally-adjusted meals, medical care, and copies of the Quran issued in Gitmo are atrocities beyond the pale!

But what I really want to know is what difference does it make that this soldier was African-American?

12:13 (on August 10)


Before Tskhinvali they found the killed black mercenaries
The authorities of unacknowledged South Osetia assert that before the Georgian offensive on Tskhinvali participated the black mercenaries. About this reports [yuzhnoosetinskiy] plenipotentiary in Russia Dmitriy [Medoev].
According to him, on destroyed Tskhinvali's streets there are many killed Georgian servicemen. “Among those killed are negroes, most likely, either mercenaries or instructors of the Georgian armed forces”, he said.
The previously President of South Osetia the edward Of [kokoyty] stated that the mercenaries battle on the side of Georgian subdivisions. In Tbilisi this information they did not confirm. // RIA “of the news”

www.gazeta.ru...

Originally posted by jsobecky


But what I really want to know is what difference does it make that this soldier was African-American?

Im wondering if he was really "African American" or if he was just dark skinned and reflexive PC made them say "African American"?