Atrios provides some well-written context for the latest news from Iraq:
I'm amazed at the number of right wingers (see Thomas, Cal below and too many hacks around the web to mention) who think that when we talk about US soldiers torturing inmates that it's important to provide context by reminding people that, well, you know Saddam Tortured People Too! Aside from the obviously bizarre low bar we've now set for ourselves, this isn't about how we here at home react to these pictures - it's about how people in Iraq do.
Aside from the horror, this is just a complete and total failure of leadership at every level. It's a failure of leadership which is going to lead to more and more of our troops getting killed. It's a failure of leadership which is going to chip away at our fast-eroding moral authority. It's a failure of leadership which completely undercuts the now-stated purpose of being in Iraq - spreading the flowers of American Democracy. [...]
We'll presumably have the military and economic superiority for a little while longer, but for American Exceptionalism to persist to any degree, we also need [moral superiority].
He also points to Digby, who says:
I'm once again struck by the moral surety of these religious Republicans who don't seem to be upset by the deviant behavior graphically shown in these pictures and who don't seem worried in the least about how they are going to explain it to their children. It seems like only yesterday that every other word from their mouths was "deplorable," "reprehensible," "despicable," "disgusting," and " "revolting," as they relayed their shock and horror at the stunning news of a 50 year old man having an affair with a young woman in his office. If I recall correctly, this was considered to be an act of such depravity that they didn't know how the nation could survive if the perpetrator wasn't removed from office.
I listened yesterday as Al Franken's dittohead pal tried to chastise Al, saying something like, "Boy, you sure like talking about all those graphic descriptions of torture and rape. What is that? Do you get a kick out of it or something? Do you really get a thrill out of talk that makes us look bad?" Where to start with this moronic level of dialogue? The reason we liberals talk about it is because we're outraged and appalled, and we want to grab every Moron American by the collar and force them to see what they voted for and what they say they support in the polls. Why is it that to be critical of this administration is to be UnAmerican?
Then there's the selective outrage argument. Conservatives say, "Sure, I'm mad about the torture, but I am more outraged about what happened on 9/11. Why aren't you?" This pretends that you can't be mad about both. It also brings out the moral equivalence thing as above, "Hey, at least we're not *worse* than Saddam." Sorry, I'd like to set our standards a bit higher.
Finally, here is a don't-miss compilation of Bush quotes. This guy mentions "they're better off now that there are no longer any torture chambers and rape rooms" in just about every speech regarding Iraq, and he hasn't changed his speech a single iota since this tragedy exploded. It's like the administration feels like as long as it stays "on message", no matter the reality, they've got a good chance to win in November.
Posted by Observer at May 7, 2004 08:39 AMComments on entries can only be made in pop-up windows while those entries are still on the main index page. Sorry for the inconvenience this causes, but this blocks about 99.99% of the spam the blog receives.
I haven't seen the pictures. US soldiers "tortured" the prisoners? The descriptions I'd heard said they humiliated them, but I didn't hear about torturing them.
The only rape I've heard talk about was when Arab newspapers used US and European web site faux "war porn" created with actors as real images of US troops raping Iraqi women. Not exactly something to get upset about.
Posted by: B Humbaba's wife on May 7, 2004 08:58 AMYeah, that's a fairly common conservative meme now, that this was basically not torture but rather something akin to the hazing a frat boy must endure. That's another reason liberals like me are going to the trouble of repeating the basic facts of the story, because it just isn't getting prominent play over here in the media (at least, not the gruesome details, which are front page everywhere else).
I think there's a lot more coming out, from what I've read, but so far we have examples like:
The guy who was "humiliated" so hard that he died, so they packed his body in ice, wheeled him out on a gurney like he was a patient being transferred, then dumped his body somewhere.
They guy who was sodomized with a chemical light.
The many guys who were just randomly beaten, kicked and punched as they were naked and bound.
And I think some of the sexual stuff goes beyond prankish humiliation and gets into what are normally considered war crimes, things that would normally get you a nice long prison sentence over here. If you haven't already read Sy Hersh's piece in the New Yorker about this, you should do so in order to get yourself acquianted with what happened.
Posted by: Observer on May 7, 2004 09:15 AMIf the Hersh story doesn't do it for you (you know, the "liberal media" thing and all that), here's a quote from Secretary of Defense Donald Rumsfeld during today's Congressional Hearings (it also confirms my suspicion that there is much more horrible stuff yet to be revealed):
Beyond abuse of prisoners, there are other photos that depict incidents of physical violence towards prisoners, acts that can only be described as blatantly sadistic, cruel and inhuman...
There are many more photographs and indeed some videos. Congress and the American people and the rest of the world need to know this.
Posted by: Observer on May 7, 2004 02:47 PMLoved those speeches, by the way. Classic example of "never miss an opportunity to spin."
I'll give us some credibility when we actually try and convict or turn over to the sovereign authorities in Iraq or an internation war-crimes tribunal those people who were outside our direct jurisdiction (i.e. Soldiers of Fortune). I *hope* that our military will treat their own with stern enough hand to sway arguments of a simple slap on the wrist (which will not win us any allies in the Middle East) but that does not address the concept of war criminals that we brought in.
Simple principle... Do with these criminals exactly what we claim to want done with every other war criminal in the world. Try them in a court of law and if we don't have jurisdiction to do so then turn them over for trial in a court that does have jurisdiction. Anything less simply puts us at the top of the list of terrorist states in the world. (Quick, ask me what I think is going to really happen with regard to this. I'm guessing that we'll hold the Soldiers of Fortune responsible right after we find out who was responsible for compromising the identity of Valerie Plame.)
Posted by: Seattle Astronomer on May 7, 2004 03:40 PM