Why was Ahbu Graib a big deal?

[elder999]

This post really has less to do with the actual event than it does with how it is being ignored. If this happened when bush was running the war, the coverage would have been non-stop, 24/7, tell me I'm wrong.

Well, there was this during the Bush administration, but we didn't hear much about it except for that article.

There are more like that-if not outright murder, then excessive behavior.

We all remember My Lai, and Lt. Calley, some 43 years later. These things happen, and they don't all get blamed on the President, even when it was Bush, and they don't all get non-stop, 24/7 coverage, so now, I'll tell you:

You're wrong....(again!)

In the future, when history is written, just remember: It’s not that we weren’t told what was going on. It’s that we looked the other way.

 

[Bruno@MT]

This post really has less to do with the actual event than it does with how it is being ignored. If this happened when bush was running the war, the coverage would have been non-stop, 24/7, tell me I'm wrong. This would have been regardless of wether or not it was institutional or just a rogue band of criminals.

Actually, no I don't think so. I'm pretty sure such things happened under Bush too.
And again I refer to the Apache incident which got a lot more attention, 24/7.

 

[shihansmurf]

Have you ever served in the military? I ask presuming that you haven't. Any veteran on these boards knows that behavior like what happened at Abu Ghraib was systemic and a clear indication of at least tacit approval all the way up the chain of command. Abuse to that degree doesn't happen on such a large scale unless it is condoned and even encouraged by the senior NCOs, at the very least.

So, for you to suggest that it was the actions of a few is naive. To suggest that those responsible answered for the crimes is also naive. A Colonel received an Article 15. A Lt. Colonel was acquitted of all charges. These were the only two officers charged.

The highest ranking soldier prosecuted aside from these two was an E5. Most were spec-4s. We're talking a bunch of first term soldiers and a couple with maybe 5 or 6 years in. Abu Ghraib was a SNAFU, and a bunch of low level soldiers were thrown to the wolves. Don't kid yourself.

I think your OP is retarded, and the non sequitur to Obama is also retarded.

QFT!

While your post is pitch-perfect, as a member of the Armed Forces, I would point out that there is simply the fact that the actions taken at Abu Graib were simply illegal. We don't torture for a variety of reasons ranging from the inherent unreliability of information taken under duress(the intelligence is difficult to trust as the victim will say anything to get the torturer to stop), to the illegality of torture under the Geneva and Hauge conventions, to the simple fact that it is immoral.

The rouge unit going about murdering civilians is awful but didn't have the entreanched support of higher levels of command making the situation completely different. The Army is a microcosm of the U.S. population at large. Just like the civilian world we get violent, worthless scum. We can't weed them all out. On occasion there will be those that perform dastardly and vile actions. When that happens we bring them up on charges, they stand trial at a Court-Martial, and are punished. Just like in the civilian side of things.

When the chain of command/NCO support channel is involved, however, it makes it several orders of magnitude worse. Actions like Abu Graib implicates the whole Army. It undermines good order and discipline, and destroys the individual soldier's faith in the system and organization that he or she is serving. The fact that senior officers were involved but not punished while young enlisted soldiers were crucified for it only serves to further undermine good order and discipline.

The things that occured at Abu Graib were beyond "hazing" which, incidentally, we've outlawed as a practice withing our own ranks. The things that were done to those prisoners were beyond what I experienced in SERE. Downplaying the criminal behavior at Abu Graib is, at best, naive. It also demonstrates a rather profound laack of understanding in how the institution of the military works. Utilizing a tragic event like the murder of civilians in the combat zone as a game of political one-upmanship and petulant whining about the inherent "unfairness" in the media is vile.


Just a thought,
SSG(P) Mark Chapman