Democrats & Liberals: Archives

The Army has acted properly since January of 2004 and followed procedures appropriate to the Uniform Code of Military Justice.

Because they are not implicating the people you have already decided SHOULD be guilty, you are unhappy with the result.

The behavior at the prison was strictly unauthorized and not done for intelligence. Only one of the detainees abused at Abu Ghraib was there to be interrogated for actionable intelligence. Most were just ordinary criminals.

This is a strictly partisan affair. I am ashamed that U.S. soldiers did such things, but I am becoming equally ashamed of the constant exaggerations by Americans in trying to pin the blame on someone very high just because they won the election.

How high would the blame have to be to satisfy you, Bert. Would Sanchez be enough? The Secretary of Defense? No, I think you just are after the President? And for partisan reasons. If the president spent his days thinking about the details of a prison in Iraq, he would be a horrible micromanaging leader. Even micro Carter would not have been so involved.

There are about 70 cases of confirmed abuse among some 300 allegations of abuse — in relation to the several hundred thousand troops that served in the area. The U.S. record is good in comparison to any other army fighting such a war and in comparison to any historical time.

We found the people responsible and they are being tried. Justice is being done. Justice is often slow and you can’t always punish the people you just don’t like. But that does not make it less justice.

“If the president spent his days thinking about the details of a prison in Iraq, he would be a horrible micromanaging leader.”

Jack,

I am more appalled by the fact that it took more than a year for these abuses to come to light.

You have to admit that Kapinski does make too easy of a target.
A little too butch maybe?
A little too outspoken?
But even at that, one has to wonder what kind of circus she was running there?
It should have been her job to know that abuses were going on under her watch. She couldn’t possibly have been that naive.
If nothing else, even if she was unaware, it shows a great deal of negligence on her part.

Jack, you have to ask yourself though, does Bush honestly care? I don’t think he really does and that is fairly revealing.

in my military experience what went on in the iraq prisons couldn’t have gone on without someone other than the grunts knowing. this up the chain of command to at least the prison commander. so, jack i don’t think that we have found all that are responsible and that substantial justice is being served.

Rocky,
I don’t think that anyone denies that Karpinski knew about what was going on. I’m sure she knew all about the abuse and the interrogation techniques that were implemented. Do we honestly think that Karpinski was the one who decided to implement these techniques? I’m sure it was Karpinski who decided that mass masturbation was a great way to get the prisoners to talk. Come on you guys.
Jack,
“We found the people responsible, and they are being tried.” I just find that hard to believe. Do you honestly think that Karpinski, England, and Lynch are the ones responsible for what has happened. Now I don’t think that this is a Pres. Bush conspiracy, I think that these interrogation techniques come from the highest levels of the military. It just really bothers me that these “scapegoats” are going to lose all of there benefits that they spent time earning in the military, and the big dog’s who are in good shape financially aren’t really going to be touched.

This is a strictly partisan affair. I am ashamed that U.S. soldiers did such things, but I am becoming equally ashamed of the constant exaggerations by Americans in trying to pin the blame on someone very high just because they won the election.

It’s interesting how this quote relates to the next one.

It should have been her job to know that abuses were going on under her watch. She couldn’t possibly have been that naive.

I think Karpinski and England need to be held responsible for their actions, but so should their higher ups, even if only to a lesser degree. That’s why we have chains of command, so that each level becomes somewhat responsible for the level beneath it. It’s unrealistic and partisan to to hold Prez. Bush responsible for the actions of grunts, but it’d be nice if he had that old “the buck stops here” sign on his desk. Instead, he never seems to accept the responsibility for any failures, neither big nor small. It’s good internal politics but it’s bad leadership and worse ethics.

Every American, conservative and liberal alike, should be patriotic enough to step up and demand responsibility from political leaders of all stripes, because it is their lack of action that is harming the war effort. A case in point is the situation in Afghanistan, where protests are spreading like wildfire in response to a Newsweek report that Guantanamo Bay interrogators flushed copies of the Koran down a toilet. These kind of actions, if true, very literally put our soldiers and our whole nation as risk, and they promise to undo the sacrifices made and victories won in Afghanistan.

Whether or not the higher ups knew about Abu Ghraib and, if true, about the situation in Guantanamo, they should have had processes in place to prevent it. And Republicans should be the very first people to stand up and say so. To his credit, some Republicans like McCain have done so.

Most of these guys were not being asked to “talk” about anything. Only one of those involve was there to be interrogated for actionable intelligence. This was not an interrogation technique.

I am sure president Bush does care about a prison out of control. I am sure he does care about the U.S. reputation. But I am sure that he believes, as I do, that the investigation is being made in a proper way.

This incident has resulted in jail time for some of the actual perpetrators and discipline for officers up to the general officer level. Specifically, what more should be done? Who else is to be punished?

Reed

Yes, I believe Karpinski and England are responsible. The prison was poorly run. The guards got out of hand. This is very bad. But in any organization responsibly is delegated. We have to look for the part of the system that failed. We found it, and it went as high as the level of a general.

Honest question, does anyone know how far up the line responsibly for My Lai went? I recall that it went only as far as the captain involved, but I don’t know.

I definately have a problems with the military prison scandals. How far up should it go? How far up DID it go is a bettery question. One I fear will probably never be answered.

The thing that disappoints me the most is that the international red cross was crying foul at several of the prisons long before the media got hold of it. If the military was responsible, they would have at least had the situations independently checked. Someone “up the chain” should have been talking with someone form the IRC to get to the bottom of the situation.

I agree with Jack that those that performed the abuse need to be punished. However, these folks weren’t operating in Afghanistan or Cuba, where the IRC brought about several allegations of abuse.

How far did it go? Who knows. The military doesn’t operate on a democratic principle (as it shouldn’t). Orders are generally given and carried out without deviation and little question. Yes, the direct commander should certainly be accountable. However, if her commander wasn’t keeping up with operations then they, too, should be held accountable.

Honest question, does anyone know how far up the line responsibly for My Lai went? I recall that it went only as far as the captain involved, but I don?t know.

I think it went as high as Lt. William Calley. But it might be an instructive example because there seems to be a general consensus that a coverup and whitewash were involved. Here’s a quote from the top source found in a simple Google search:

“Decisions were made to prosecute a total of twenty-five officers and enlisted men, including General Koster, Colonel Oran Henderson, Captain Medina. In the end, however, only few would be tried and only one, William Calley, would be found guilty. The top officer charged, General Samuel Koster, who failed to report known civilian casualties and conducted a clearly inadequate investigation was, according to General Peers, the beneficiary of a whitewash, having charges against him dropped and receiving only a letter of censure and reduction in rank.”
—from http://www.law.umkc.edu/faculty/projects/ftrials/mylai/Myl_intro.html

We’ll have to wait and see if history eventually judges the current situations as whitewashes.

Following site is a transcript of a radio interview withg Seymour Hersch. Powerful stuff, first portion of article discusses My Lai.

http://www.democracynow.org/article.pl?sid=05/05/11/142250&mode=thread&tid=25

In the military, you delegate authority, not responsibility. In an example like Abu Ghraib, the responsibility goes up the line, certainly to Sanchez, probably to Myers, Rumsfeld, and maybe even Bush.

Most of us are civilians, and do not understand the way this concept is applied in the military. For a civilian, it’s enough to say ‘I take responsibility’ without expecting any repurcussions. In the military, taking responsibility means accepting all the repurcussions, even it it seems unfair. But that’s how it is; you delegate authority, not responsibility.

The phenomenon of toruture extends far beyond Abu Ghraib and this one general. Torture is being conducted in various prisons in Iraq, Afghanistan, and elsewhere. Many of the enemy undergo rendition- they’re shipped to Uzbekistan, where they can be tortured with impunity. To date the US acknowledges 26 prisoners have been tortured to death in Afghanistan & Iraq. It’s not a case of one prison and one group going overboard. They’re scapegoats, little fish, guilty of implementing the policy, and the public saw the pictures.

There’s no point in pretending.

Torture a US policy.

Bert:

While I can support the idea that the Abu Ghraib fallout should have gone higher up the food chain, no amount of rhetoric can excuse the individual who was directly responsible for the prison. Just because others were guilty does not exonerate Karpinski, nor does it exonerate England, Graner, and all the other direct perpetrators. It’s very important to send the message that obeying orders is no excuse for doing something illegal. If we start ruining the careers of those who are willing to carry out illegal orders, then we’ll find far more whistleblowers and far fewer abetters in cases of military human rights abuses.

Chops,

“Whistleblowers”? In the military? I’ve got some ocean-front property I would love to sell you….it’s in Arizona.

Bert, very interesting article.

But why do you consider Karpinski an “accidental hero” though? Do you feel she really had no idea that what was taking place under her command was illegal? Or immoral?
Or do you think she really might have wanted to question the commands coming from above her but was afraid to do so?
Did she claim that she felt the blame for the “techniques” that were being used at Abu Ghraib came from very high up the chain of command? Possibly all the way to Rummy?
For some reason my computer isn’t letting me watch the video link you gave — so sorry for all the questions. Your article really makes me wish I’d caught the program.

There are many anomalies at Abu Graib. Not least of which was the absence of a JAG Officer onsite. All my military friends say that JAGs are mandatory yet Abu Graib got its JAG pulled without a replacement.

Also, what about that picture of Intelligence Agents giving orders on how to abuse Iraqis?

Jack, c’mon, guy? I really don’t understand your loyalty here. Rumsfeld and Bush publicly gave the OK for suspected terrorists to be treated outside of the Geneva Conventions - translated that means they gave the OK for torture. This is a matter of public record.

Now, do you really believe the President and Secretary of Defense and those who serve at their pleasure, who opened the door for torture to take place are NOT going to take measures to insure that responsibility DOES NOT get allocated up the chain of command?

That defies common sense about human nature and historical knowledge of how power protects power.

Reed wrote
“A case in point is the situation in Afghanistan, where protests are spreading like wildfire in response to a Newsweek report that Guantanamo Bay interrogators flushed copies of the Koran down a toilet. These kind of actions, if true, very literally put our soldiers and our whole nation as risk, and they promise to undo the sacrifices made and victories won in Afghanistan. “

Now that Newsweek has issued an apology for the article and it can’t be proven, I’m anxious to see how the left responds or will they ignore it as usual…That article spawned riots and costs lives too.

…and why is it we should believe Karpinski?
Even people caught red handed go before a judge and plea NOT GUILTY.
I seem to recall a certain person claiming ‘I did not touch that woman.’ - on National TV and then the blue dress turned up.
Is this a matter of hearing what you want and making it the truth?

I think the incidents at Abu Ghraib, even if they did not take place in the pursuit of actionable intelligence, reflected the permissive attitude towards the mistreatment of prisoners. How do you tell people who’ve been “softening” everybody up to stop doing it when it’s pleasure and not just business? When the name of the game becomes dominating the prisoners, the interrogation room door becomes a poor barrier to that kind of behavior.

I think blamed deserved to go higher up in the chaing of command, but could not do so without harming individuals that were close to administration figures or those figures themselves. Also, it’s hard to believe that there is no relationship to the Pentagon and DOJ findings that torture and other aggressive interrogation techniques were permissable.

C’mon, Jack. Only one person there to be interrogated for intelligence?

Stephen:
“I think blamed deserved to go higher up in the chaing of command, but could not do so without harming individuals that were close to administration figures or those figures themselves. Also, it’s hard to believe that there is no relationship to the Pentagon and DOJ findings that torture and other aggressive interrogation techniques were permissable.”

Yes, two very good points. I think you might be right. I’d really like to hear Karpinski’s opinion on those sorts of questions since she is probably going to be made to take the fall for her superiors.

Adrienne

“…she [Karpinski] is probably going to be made to take the fall for her superiors.”

Karpinski is the superior. She was in charge of the prison when the abuse happened. The responsibility can’t go much higher.

Soldiers have a duty title that explains what their responsibilities are. Her duty title would have said something like this. “Responsible for Abu Ghraib prison.” She was expected to run the prison with integrity and leadership. Her superiors have to be able to delegate the RESPONSIBILITY not just the task. Karpinski was trusted with the responsiblity and she screwed it up. It doesn’t matter how much you want this to be a conspiracy, she failed miserably. And she got what she deserved.

Pat:
“Karpinski is the superior. She was in charge of the prison when the abuse happened. The responsibility can’t go much higher.”

Just so you know, I’m not in any way giving Karpinski the pass here (which is why I questioned Bert in calling her a “Hero”). But she does, and indeed did have, superiors who ranked above her. So what I would like to know is:

1. Did she ever voice an objection or write a memo to those higher up the chain of command questioning these brutal “interrogation techniques” that were taking place at Abu Ghraib?
2. Was she being negligent, or was she completely unaware how out of control things were getting on the night shift at the prison under her command?
3. Did she write letters home or discuss views with anyone where she claimed she felt she was at the mercy of what the higher up’s were sanctioning or allowing in direct defiance of the Geneva conventions?

You see, I hate it when people want to immediately jump to a guilty verdict when they might not have all the pertinent facts needed to draw an intelligent conclusion.

Adrienne,

1. Did she ever voice an objection or write a memo to those higher up the chain of command questioning these brutal “interrogation techniques” that were taking place at Abu Ghraib?
2. Was she being negligent, or was she completely unaware how out of control things were getting on the night shift at the prison under her command?
3. Did she write letters home or discuss views with anyone where she claimed she felt she was at the mercy of what the higher up’s were sanctioning or allowing in direct defiance of the Geneva conventions?

She was the decision maker. The great thing about the chain of command is that everything goes through her before it goes to her subordinates. It’s not like the Bush administration was calling the enlisted people in here unit and telling them to use those interrogation techniques.

1. If there’s a memo it would be self addressed.

2. She was negligent.

3. Who cares? She had the power and the responsiblity to stop it and she didn’t.

Pat,
I just read this article.
It’s an interview where Karpinski answers many of my questions quite directly and in great detail. It’s kind of long, but you may want to read it too.

“I’m anxious to see how the left responds or will they ignore it as usual”

No, I doubt few people, on the left or right, will ignore it. It should be seen for what it is, reporting that wasn’t well-verified enough to report — sloppiness that may have cost lives. You can bet the press will go into its usual act of self-flagellation, not that Rush and company won’t join in as well.

Now, when do the American people get an apology from a president who got us into a costly war based on false (oops, sorry, faulty) reporting?

I feel some are getting side tracked about Karpinski because she is a woman! I don’t feel sorry for her one bit and I bet she fought like a man to get to her position and now in the face of these allegations against her she’s doing the old bat-the-eyelashes and claim I’m a woman being used as a scapegoat routine! The facts were that she didn’t enforce any policies because she was too busy trying to be the “cool” leader! People were not wearing their uniforms correctly and boyfriends/girlfriends came and went as though it was a prom!
I am a woman, and have worked for many women only to learn that I would no longer like to! Policy is always subject to their emotions and popularity factors!(Please do not write in screaming that all women are not like that in power positions, of course their not, there is always the exception I just wish it was more of the rule!)
It is a rediculous, embarassing, situation (although I’m really not sure torturous-lets be real they were pointing at naked buttholes and laughing….it was more like porn) that needed to be stopped, but despite command, order or whatever the claim for doing so, it only takes a feeble mind to determine that it was wrong!!

Traci:

“I feel some are getting side tracked about Karpinski because she is a woman! I don’t feel sorry for her one bit and I bet she fought like a man to get to her position and now in the face of these allegations against her she’s doing the old bat-the-eyelashes and claim I’m a woman being used as a scapegoat routine!”

Go read the linked interview with her that I put up earlier and then tell me if you still feel this is an entirely accurate view.
In the interview, she claims she wasn’t even in charge of the prison during the abuses, but that those in charge of military interrogations were.

“The facts were that she didn’t enforce any policies because she was too busy trying to be the “cool” leader! People were not wearing their uniforms correctly and boyfriends/girlfriends came and went as though it was a prom!”

Could you possibly provide a credible link to back up this assertion?

“I am a woman, and have worked for many women only to learn that I would no longer like to! Policy is always subject to their emotions and popularity factors!(Please do not write in screaming that all women are not like that in power positions, of course their not, there is always the exception I just wish it was more of the rule!)”

I would really like to know why so many conservative women seem so much more critical of women who hold powerful positions. Personally, I must say I find it more than a little creepy that so many of you frequently voice such harsh opposition to women whose intelligence and hard work have put them on an equal footing with men, and who feel the need to make sweeping comments of just this sort.

“It is a rediculous, embarassing, situation (although I’m really not sure torturous-lets be real they were pointing at naked buttholes and laughing….it was more like porn)”

Not all of it was humiliation, there was torture taking place too. People died there. If you aren’t aware of that fact, you do a bit more reading on the subject.

“that needed to be stopped, but despite command, order or whatever the claim for doing so, it only takes a feeble mind to determine that it was wrong!!”

After reading the transcript of that interview with her, I am almost certain that she cannot be held solely responsible. Which means the ultimate questions still remain: Who else needs to be held responsible for what was going on in that prison, and how far up the chain of command does the blame actually go?

Adrienne~
Being able to be a proud,strong woman that does not need to hype up women that don’t deserve it, comes with age….I knew you would be the one to respond to that post because frankly all your posts sound like Spice Girl Hype….meaning, you take it the other direction and are willing to stand up for any woman, deserving or not!!MEN AND WOMEN ARE DIFFERENT! One may not be superior to the other but, they are different!! BTW I did read the article…..Made no difference to me!!

Adrienne~
Even your buddy Gloria S. has changed a few of her views with age and put her bra back on! Don’t take the high road with me though because in a few of your posts you have done just the same manuever only reversed…..such as the one where you were glorifying Gloria saying that she paved the way for women more “ambitious” than housewives! So don’t give me your “creepy” line when you think mass production and corporations are more important than molding young minds!

“Being able to be a proud,strong woman that does not need to hype up women that don’t deserve it, comes with age….I knew you would be the one to respond to that post because frankly all your posts sound like Spice Girl Hype”

Hmmm, since I’m 42 years old, I guess that makes me “Old Spice”!
Btw, at least those girls really seem to be having fun, whereas you conservative gals seem extremely bitter and angry in a good many of your posts here.

“BTW I did read the article…..Made no difference to me!!”

So you feel that everything she said there was a lie?
That a career military woman who enlisted during the Nixon administration and who reached the rank of Brig. General is saying all that simply to cover her own ass.

“So don’t give me your “creepy” line when you think mass production and corporations are more important than molding young minds!”

I already did give you the creepy line, and I still feel that way. As for the rest of that sentence, I honestly have no idea what the hell you’re talking about…

Since you want to know, I’ll tell you. I have no wish limit any woman’s choices in any way. If they want to be housewives they should be housewives — as long as they don’t turn around and show disrespect for the choices of their more ambitious sisters who wanted to do something else with their lives — whatever that may be.

This is what you stated in the “Why Men Earn More Than Woman” discussion.

Adrienne~
Does that refresh your memory? Choosing motherhood does not reflect on your ambitions, they are just different ambitions! Very important ones at that! So go ahead and scream about all the wonderous things Gloria did for us…let’s see shall we:
Women were always allowed in the work field (maybe for different pay and not all fields) but no one was stopping them from working if they wished! Then along comes Gloria and suddenly she speaks for all demanding that all women work! So the government decided that if many households were going to be adding an extra income they would raise the cost of living, hence sending everyone into the work field leaving no one with the kids! So how’s that for disrespect, she only cared about her goals and wants and suddenly the world HAD to follow suit!
I’m not saying Gloria didn’t do some positive things, she just didn’t think about the ramifications of some of her crusades!
Their are a great many successful women that I admire for their accomplishments, But I will not assume that they have achieved accomplishments simply because they are a woman! And that is how I maintain my dignity, by choosing my crusades wisely! I think all minority groups would benefit themselves more and be taken more seriously if they chose their battles more wisely rather than fighting all the causes!

Traci, I’d really like to reply, but then I’d probably end up breaking the “message, not messenger” rule of Watchblog, so I think I’ll pass.
Happy to be the Seasoning rather than the Crab in the pot,
Sincerely,
Old Spice

Adrienne~ I figured as much, quite all right though you were tiring me anyways!It’s better to be thought a fool than open your mouth and remove all doubt anyways.

“It’s better to be thought a fool than open your mouth and remove all doubt anyways.”

Exactly. Such as derailing a topic because one has got a bug up their ass from another thread.

No~ you should just not change your stances from one topic to another! Unless your going for the “Kerry” effect, than you have succeeded!

Adrienne,

That’s an amazing article you linked to. Thanks for providing it.

Essentially, the worry is that this story is true:
http://www.newyorker.com/fact/content/?040524fa_fact

It definitely seems in the realm of possibility that if you had Albert Gonzales writing up new laws to undermine the Geneva Conventions, specifically to shuttle over to Geoffrey Miller, and then Miller shows up at Abu Ghraib, wants the MI put in charge, and then torture starts happening, that we should at least think it valid to have suspicions.

Are any of the members of the MI group that were stationed there being brought up on charges? Why is everyone I’m seeing part of the MP and not the MI?

I have to say, I don’t buy into conspiracy as a general rule, but the actions that Rumsfeld, Gonzales and Miller have taken in the past raise big red flags in terms of their morality. We know that they don’t particularly care about the Geneva Conventions, view the rules as rules for pansies, and take it as a point of pride to operate in secrecy, prevent lawyers from representing prisoners, and actively seek ways to keep the Red Cross at bay.

Should we ignore all these indicators, and vehemently prevent an investigation into the culpability of these men?

I see an administration that seems dismissive of the rule of law when it inconviences them. This isn’t a flame against Republicans, this is an accusation against a specific group of men who consistently seem to be in the midst of these kind of problems.

I think Jack is wrong, this isn’t about taking people down for political reasons. And the President wouldn’t have been micromanaging Abu Ghraib. But did the President say “do whatever it takes to get the information we need, and Gonzales, give me a way to get through the Geneva conventions so we can do so.”

It seems like he did. Didn’t Gonzales craft that legal slipperiness in response to the President? Didn’t he do it for Guantanemo? Didn’t Geoffrey Miler then move from Gitmo to Abu Ghraib, bringing a team with him? Didn’t torture occur after he arrived at Abu Ghraib? Didn’t the torture occur at the same time we started vamping up our intelligence operations against what we decided was a “resistance” group operating in Iraq?

Seems fishy.

Julia

Julia:
“That’s an amazing article you linked to.”

So was yours. After reading both articles, I think there is a very strong possibilty that Karpinski is being railroaded.

“Are any of the members of the MI group that were stationed there being brought up on charges? Why is everyone I’m seeing part of the MP and not the MI?”

I don’t know, but that’s a good question. Karpinski claims they were in charge of Abu Ghraib, but obviously it’s her word against all of theirs.

“I see an administration that seems dismissive of the rule of law when it inconviences them. This isn’t a flame against Republicans, this is an accusation against a specific group of men who consistently seem to be in the midst of these kind of problems.”

I couldn’t agree more. They are Neocon Rogues — and I’ve personally come to view these guys as something totally separate and distinct from True Republican’s.

“Seems fishy.”

Yeah. Seems like much of what they do carries a whiff of that stench.

Meow! Pfft! Pfft! :D

Seriously, thanks for the restraint ladies.

Rumsfeld was on Larry King and said he offered Bush his resignation - twice - over the Abu Ghraib crimes. He said, “These events occurred on my watch. As secretary of defense, I am accountable for them. I take full responsibility.”

But when people started talking war crimes and accountability, he blamed the whole thing on a few enlisted personnel. Now he says, “What was going on in the midnight shift in Abu Ghraib prison halfway across the world is something that clearly someone in Washington DC can’t manage or deal with. And so I have no regrets,”

So much for responsibility.

AP,

Meow! Pfft! Pfft! :D

Seriously, thanks for the restraint ladies.

GASP! ARE YOU INSINUATING WOMEN ARE CATTY, AP? FOR SHAME! FOR SHAME!!!

I find it telling that we get few to no comments on the substance of these articles from the Reds. Especially when it comes to the culpability of people like Gonzales and Miller.

Come on, somebody! I want to see the red reasoning for not investigating these guys!

Julia

AP:
“Meow! Pfft! Pfft! :D”

:^p

“Seriously, thanks for the restraint ladies.”

After reading that interview with Karpinski, I didn’t want to completely derail the thread.

“Rumsfeld was on Larry King and said he offered Bush his resignation - twice - over the Abu Ghraib crimes. He said, “These events occurred on my watch. As secretary of defense, I am accountable for them. I take full responsibility.”

But that was all lip-service — because Dubya then said he was doing a “superb job”!

“So much for responsibility.”

I honestly don’t think these guys know the meaning of that word.

Zeek:
“ARE YOU INSINUATING WOMEN ARE CATTY, AP? FOR SHAME! FOR SHAME!!!”

In my experience cattiness, jealousy and insecurity can be found in both sexes. ;^)

Julia:

“I find it telling that we get few to no comments on the substance of these articles from the Reds. Especially when it comes to the culpability of people like Gonzales and Miller.”

Yeah Julia, me too. It seems that many people have just decided that Karpinski is a liar without really looking into her account of what took place — and quite obviously, that is so unfair.

“Come on, somebody! I want to see the red reasoning for not investigating these guys!”

Unfortunately, I think this thread might be too far down the page for us to expect to get a another response from the reds. Or maybe they’ve read the articles you and I provided, and are getting the same horrible feeling that we have that the command to use torture did in fact go all the way to the top?

“ARE YOU INSINUATING WOMEN ARE CATTY, AP? FOR SHAME! FOR SHAME!!!”

Heh. No, Zeek, I’m not that subtle. I’m flat out saying Adrienne and Traci were getting catty. Is that bad? :)

Adrienne and Julia, good luck getting the reds to respond. Everytime they’re confronted with facts, they clam up and retreat back to their “Liberal Moms Are Stupid” threads.

AP:
“I’m flat out saying Adrienne and Traci were getting catty. Is that bad? :)”

Hey! Personally, I thought I did a damn good job of sheathing my claws!

Glad to have supplied you boys with a good ol’fashioned cat fight- Thanks for the spar Adrienne, it keeps the blood flowing and life interesting!

I must say, I’m disappointed (but not surprised) to have deduced that those here pinning total, if not sole, responsibility on Karpinski’s shoulders, did not bother to read the article link or watch the video clips, I provided. I could still respect ones argument nonetheless, but only if I saw some evidence that the facts Karpinski related were taking into consideration.

Facts that are undisputed, are that Karpinski was in charge of 17 prisons and Abu Ghraib. She had no incidents or reported problems at any of those other 17 sites. In fact, Abu Ghraib as a whole was not ‘poorly run’, as these acts of torture were confined to Unit 1 and Unit 2, which she detailed were taking out of her control with full knowledge of Gen. Sanchez.

Furthermore, Karpinski was convicted of 1 count of dereliction of duty and a 7 year old shoplifting charge. If she was guilty of gross negligence and complicity as many of you insist, why isn’t she in jail?

But why do you consider Karpinski an “accidental hero” though? Do you feel she really had no idea that what was taking place under her command was illegal? Or immoral?

For more than a year Adrienne, troops have complained about a lack of body armor to an indifferent chain of command. Remember Rummy’s ‘…you go to war with the Army you got’ quote? These Interrogation tactics were brought from Guantanamo Bay, signed off by Sanchez, with Units 1 and 2 taken from Karpinski. Who was she to complain to?

She was railroaded and scapegoated, pure and simple. She becomes a hero in my eyes, by challenging this injustice.