We've seen the ridiculous pictures. We've read the outraged editorials, and heard the fuming congresspeople. We've seen the Pentagon start a furious spin cycle, attempting to blame it all on some small town reservists and a National Guard female general. So WTf was really going on?
I heard the female general, Gen. Karpinski, on O'Reilly last night and a funny thing happened as she spoke. I began to believe her. Let's consider the known facts first.
The prison was apparently used for interrogation by military intelligence (that well known oxymoron) and no doubt CIA operatives. The MP's were there to run things, provide security, herd the prisoners around, etc. Somehow the MP's aresnapping picutres of themselves mugging with naked Iraqi prisoners, often in suggestive poses.
Now does it make any sense that a bunch of low level MP's are going to organize stripping dozens of Iraqi prisoners and posing them together in a prison crawling with military intelligence officers? What was to keep the Iraqi's from ratting them out the first time they were questioned? Weren't the MP's afraid of being discovered? Where did they get these ideas anyway? And significantly, how did they manage to order the Iraqis to do this stuff without Arabic language skills, which I am sure none of the MP's possessed?
I think the questions answer themselves. The intel officers were stripping the Iraqis and doing stuff to humiliate them. Probably they were posing them in homosexual poses and taking pictures of them, then threatening to release the pictures to their families if they didn't play ball. The MP's were helping, then left to clean up the mess. They decided to get in on the fun, and took some pictures themselves when no one was looking. Now that the sh*t has hit the fan, they are left holding the bag.
Not a pretty picture, but let's consider the bigger picture. These Iraqis were picked up for the most part as insurgents. They had timely information about forthcoming attacks or the location of explosives, weapons and other insurgents. I don't condone torture, but really, what was done to these guys seems pretty mild. None of them was killed, that we know, and probably the most that happened was that they got wired up and tasered. Not pretty, but what if it saved a few dozen of our troops from getting blown up? That is the tradeoff. To paraphrase Jack Nicholson, we are out there on the wall protecting you, but you don't really want to know how we are doing it. You can't handle the truth.
I heard the female general, Gen. Karpinski, on O'Reilly last night and a funny thing happened as she spoke. I began to believe her. Let's consider the known facts first.
The prison was apparently used for interrogation by military intelligence (that well known oxymoron) and no doubt CIA operatives. The MP's were there to run things, provide security, herd the prisoners around, etc. Somehow the MP's aresnapping picutres of themselves mugging with naked Iraqi prisoners, often in suggestive poses.
Now does it make any sense that a bunch of low level MP's are going to organize stripping dozens of Iraqi prisoners and posing them together in a prison crawling with military intelligence officers? What was to keep the Iraqi's from ratting them out the first time they were questioned? Weren't the MP's afraid of being discovered? Where did they get these ideas anyway? And significantly, how did they manage to order the Iraqis to do this stuff without Arabic language skills, which I am sure none of the MP's possessed?
I think the questions answer themselves. The intel officers were stripping the Iraqis and doing stuff to humiliate them. Probably they were posing them in homosexual poses and taking pictures of them, then threatening to release the pictures to their families if they didn't play ball. The MP's were helping, then left to clean up the mess. They decided to get in on the fun, and took some pictures themselves when no one was looking. Now that the sh*t has hit the fan, they are left holding the bag.
Not a pretty picture, but let's consider the bigger picture. These Iraqis were picked up for the most part as insurgents. They had timely information about forthcoming attacks or the location of explosives, weapons and other insurgents. I don't condone torture, but really, what was done to these guys seems pretty mild. None of them was killed, that we know, and probably the most that happened was that they got wired up and tasered. Not pretty, but what if it saved a few dozen of our troops from getting blown up? That is the tradeoff. To paraphrase Jack Nicholson, we are out there on the wall protecting you, but you don't really want to know how we are doing it. You can't handle the truth.