Friday, December 19, 2008

Gosh, They're Going Bankrupt?

The sheer refusal of our Leftist media to bend to reality in their eagerness to take swipes at the Bush administration continues to amaze me. I knew the idiotorials would continue, and they have. You don't even need to go past the first paragraph:

Most Americans have long known that the horrors of Abu Ghraib were not the work of a few low-ranking sociopaths. All but President Bush’s most unquestioning supporters recognized the chain of unprincipled decisions that led to the abuse, torture and death in prisons run by the American military and intelligence services.


Really? Horrors? Torture and death at Abu Ghraib? There was one detainee death, as I understand it. This is unfortunate and a crime, but it does not indicate torture nor does it indicate that the soldiers taking part in criminal activity were part of a responsiblityless "chain of unprincipled decisions" higher up. This is how the military, which identified the abuse, investigated it, and punished the guilty, describes that abuse in a lengthy report:

For clarity of analysis, my assessment divides abuses at Abu Ghraib into two different types of improper conduct: First, intentional violent or sexual abuses and, second, actions taken based on misinterpretations of or confusion about law or policy.

(3) (U) Intentional violent or sexual abuses include acts causing bodily harm using unlawful force as well as sexual offenses including, but not limited to rape, sodomy and indecent assault. No Soldier or contractor believed that these abuses were permitted by any policy or guidance. If proven, these actions would be criminal acts. The primary causes of the violent and sexual abuses were relatively straight-forward — individual criminal misconduct, clearly in violation of law, policy, and doctrine and contrary to Army values.

(4) (U) Incidents in the second category resulted from misinterpretations of law or policy or resulted from confusion about what interrogation techniques were permitted. These latter abuses include some cases of clothing removal (without any touching) and some uses of dogs in interrogations (uses without physical contact or extreme fear). Some of these incidents may have violated international law. At the time the Soldiers or contractors committed the acts, however, some of them may have honestly believed the techniques were condoned.


Crimes took place. But torture? No. Death? Well, one, it seems. But recall that an American soldier who found the detainee reported the incident and attempted to get medical help for the man. Horrors? From our point of view, yes. Which is why we stopped the abuses and prosecuted and punished the guilty. But if you want actual torture, death, and sheer horror, look to our enemies for that.

The piece then goes on to the fantasy world of Leftist indignation that our Senate recently produced. God, the whole lot of them are worthless when it comes to our war effort. If we truly had a debate on torture and interrogation held in good faith, it would be a good thing. But who knows, maybe that will change in 2009.

As the new administration ramps up the fight in Afghanistan, there will likely be a case of our troops committing some crime. That happens even in our military which is rigorous in making sure our troops fight in accordance with the rules of war. I'm sure our newspaper editors will be equally quick to claim a chain of unprincipled decisions leading all the way to the Oval Office as the cause of that crime.