Steve G. has a point about the West's over-reaction to the recent allegations of torture in Iraq:
| ....Given the conduct of civilian guards in an American prison, why is anyone surprised that with no supervision, Americans inflicted the worst kind of sexual humiliation on Iraqis. Americans cherish the idea of sexual humiliation in prison. Anal rape is widely seen as just deserts for convicts. Female convicts wind up pregnant. So this shock that Abu Gharib was turned into a sexual torture center is disingenious at best. It would have taken strong leadership to prevent this from happening.
Any American, given this power, over a people we had been told we had to subjugate or they would kill us, would have had to been fully under control to not act out their worst impulses. Remember, Bush and his administration had hinted over and over that Saddam was behind or cooperated in 9/11. What could anyone possibly think would be the outcome of that? .... |
If the majority of Americans think that Hussein and Iraq were behind 9-11, why wouldn't they then project their anger towards Iraqis? Bush and Cheney (and Blair), more than anyone else on the planet, are primarily responsible for supplying an avenue for unleashing the primal rage and hate fostered (by our society) in those prison guards. Of course the guards themselves should be punished for their behavior; but that punishment should, with sustained intensity, be distributed up the chain of command, all the way to the "Commander in Chief".
I would sure like to hear some outspoken fundagelicals rationalize this behavior by our military and administration.
No comments:
Post a Comment