Children as young as 11 years old were held at Abu Ghraib, the Iraqi prison at the centre of the US prisoner abuse scandal, official documents reveal.
Brig Gen Janis Karpinski, formerly in charge of the jail, gave details of young people and women held there.
Her assertion was among documents obtained via legal action by the American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU).
The Pentagon has admitted juveniles were among the detainees, but said no child was subject to any abuse.
Brig Gen Karpinski said US commanders were reluctant to release detainees, an attitude she called "releasophobia".
In her interview, she said Maj Gen Walter Wodjakowski, then the second most senior army general in Iraq, told her in the summer of 2003 not to release more prisoners, even if they were innocent.
"I don't care if we're holding 15,000 innocent civilians," she said Maj Gen Wodjakowski told her. "We're winning the war."
I'd like to know why SOMEONE isn't rotting publicly in Leavenworth.
Then why are you trying to deflect one crime (The incarceration of an 11 year old)
Last time I checked that wasn't a crime....... What's the issue here? What a kid couldn't be part of the terrorism? hmm I seem to remember this other conflict in Asia where kids killed many soldiers by carrying bombs.
Then why are you trying to deflect one crime (The incarceration of an 11 year old)
Last time I checked that wasn't a crime....... What's the issue here? What a kid couldn't be part of the terrorism? hmm I seem to remember this other conflict in Asia where kids killed many soldiers by carrying bombs.
What makes an Iraqi child so much more mature than an American one that they can be detained in a military prison?
Then why are you trying to deflect one crime (The incarceration of an 11 year old)
Last time I checked that wasn't a crime....... What's the issue here? What a kid couldn't be part of the terrorism? hmm I seem to remember this other conflict in Asia where kids killed many soldiers by carrying bombs.
What makes an Iraqi child so much more mature than an American one that they can be detained in a military prison?
American children don't don't strap bombs to their chests?
Correction Mr. President, I DID build this, and please give Lurker a hug, we wouldn't want to damage his self-esteem.
Partha wrote:So you have proof that he strapped a bomb to his chest? I'd think he'd be dead after using it, wouldn't you?
You have proof that he didn't? Its a non sequiter question anyway. You wanted a reason why American children can be viewed differently than Iraqi children. The reason I cited is valid. Suicide bombs aren't age dependent.
Correction Mr. President, I DID build this, and please give Lurker a hug, we wouldn't want to damage his self-esteem.
I am GUESSING and my thought certainly doesn't make putting an 11 yr old in prison okay. But if an 11yr old was shooting at you with an automatic weapon in a war zone. (we don't know that he was.) What do you do with him? If you have no war time social services setup. It sure would be easy to send he off to what ever detention facility you have.
I haven't heard of any being made for juvies, but there might be some. If his parents were shooting with him, sure can't give him back to the parents, even if they weren't what assurances do you have he won't run out maybe kill a marine or two. Not a happy situration any way you look at it.
Also would be interesting to see if they just dumped the kids in with the adults or put them in a special kids area. But my guess would be, if he was killing people or trying too, they just put him on the detention bus to get him off the battle field.
I seem to recall curfew violations and looting being a shoot to kill offence at times in war zones in WWII.
War gets even more complex when not everyone wears uniforms.
I don't care for the attitude of Janis Karpinski, I hope Iraq will stablize enough soon, that they can safely sort this out.
Holding a -child- without charge or trial in a military prison doesn't strike you as, oh, a blatant violation of international law, not to mention a basic sense of human decency?
I submit that the child being in a prison cell rather than strewn over an acre of landscape is prima facie evidence that he didn't.
Beek... of course the kid didn't blow himself up. But did he have a bomb? Or any other weapon?
You don't know and neither do I. But the fact is that children over there DO strap bombs to their chests and DO carry military weapons and HAVE used them.\
Which would you prefer.. that an 11 year old be detained until they figure out what role he may or may not have? Or just shoot him?
It's freakin' war over there dude. Standards of civility that apply here don't apply there. You get that, don't you?
Correction Mr. President, I DID build this, and please give Lurker a hug, we wouldn't want to damage his self-esteem.
Relbeek Einre wrote:Holding a -child- without charge or trial in a military prison doesn't strike you as, oh, a blatant violation of international law, not to mention a basic sense of human decency?
Its human decency not to use children as combatants or suicide bombers. But if they are used as a tool of war, they have to be treated as a tool of war.
Correction Mr. President, I DID build this, and please give Lurker a hug, we wouldn't want to damage his self-esteem.