With one question that’s hanging in the air to perhaps spur us on: Should Rumsfeld be fired over Abu Ghraib?
Bush has demonstrated loyalty to his staff, so I don’t think it will happen (nor am I asserting at this point that it should), but some key Senators look mad as hell about the torture photos:
On Capitol Hill, senior senators from both parties denounced Defense Secretary Donald H. Rumsfeld’s handling of the affair and demanded full-scale inquiries.
And, despite even the President going on Arab TV to assure folks in the Middle East that we regret these atrocities (for which I give him high marks), Rumsfeld doesn’t seem to appreciate what’s happened.
But Mr. Rumsfeld, at a Pentagon news conference, did not offer an apology when asked if one would be appropriate, saying he had to focus on the legal issues and “how we’re organized and trained and led.”
I’m going to, as usual, reserve judgement on this. In other words, I’m Waiting and Seeing.
As horrifying as the press coverage of this has been, it doesn’t constitute a complete discovery of fact. I believe Rumsfeld is being similarly cautious, but it’s possible that he’s covering his ass. The one thing that turned my head this morning is when Rumsfeld said (in one Q&A or other) that Defense had notified Congress about the abuses “immediately” (or some other word to that effect), and that doesn’t really go along with the comments of McCain, Daschle, Kennedy and others.
In the event that he turns out to have been directly or negligently responsible for the abuses, I’d support the demand for his ouster. Not that that would mean much; I’ve been screaming for Tenet’s head ever since I learned that he’s kept Deutch on the payroll.
This is an appointed administration which actively avoids accountability so the chances Rumsfeld will be fired is pretty remote. And considering the fact Rumsfeld (among others) should have been canned for his simply inept planning and execution of the Iraq campaign–it’s apparent there is no firing offense when it comes to Rumsfeld.
Fire him. He’s a liability at this point, not to mention incompetent at public relations. One article I read said that Pentagon officials were “surprised” at the reaction the pictures got in the Arab world.
Morons.
It is apparent that the imperative instruction from the command chain is “get good intelligence”.
The recently appointed General Miller(chief of detentions and interrogations) has made his orders clear:
“But General Miller, the chief of detentions and interrogations at the American prison in Guantánamo Bay, said he hoped to make the base a model for military prisons in Iraq. In both places, he said he saw his main purpose as extracting as much intelligence as possible to help the American war effort.”
NY Times
Rumsfeld is in no danger of losing his job. The command structure is committed to detention and some degree of coercion to “eliminate terror”. We will not see a change in goal, just some tighter control, starting with “no cameras”.
You had me at “fired.”
Rumsfeld’s concern for Iraqis was exemplified by his comment on the plague of looting in the early days of the American “liberation” of Baghdad. He didn’t apologize for the hideous error of ignoring the advisers who had told him that there needed to be protection against civic disruption: he said “Freedom is messy” and made a stupid unfunny joke about vases. He ought to have been sacked for that failure: the message sent to Iraqis was that hospitals, museums, and libraries did not matter to Rumsfeld – the only building the army could spare guards for was the Ministry of Oil.
Of course he ought to go over this debacle, too: but I doubt it.
I’m with the Red Queen on this one: “Off with his head!” But, then again, we would still be stuck with the Mad Hatter (“big time” Cheney) and the drunken mouse (W) in the White House…
It’s not getting any better either.
Friends from Turkey emailed us images mixed in with the ones from Abu Ghraib that supposedly show American soldiers in groups raping Iraqi women. The quality and tonal values (and Photoshop treatments) of the images are close enough to the ones from the prison that I’m sure many people consider them part of the same expose. Certain discrepancies in the uniform and location tell me they’re not, but that opinion hardly matters on the Muslim streets.
It may just be me but I would prefer to see the whole bunch flushed simultaneously rather than piecemeal.
Edward, are you not reading your co-bloggers’ stuff?
“Bogus GI Rape Photos Used As Arab Propaganda”:
I had read that Phil, but thanks for highlighting it here.
Not having seen the “Iraq Babes” or “Sex in War” images, though, I didn’t want to assume they were the same ones I had been emailed.
Moreover, their exisitence is different from their being forwarded from friends in Muslim countries as proof of greater atrocities than those being reported.
My point (not well made obviously) is that what’s hitting the Muslim street is even worse than what we’re seeing, regardless of whether it’s true. We should understand just how atrocious Muslims believe what happened is.
At the risk of attracting labels that I do not want, and with all awareness that this bears directly on the task still before us in Iraq, I am only marginally more interested in “how atrocious Muslims believe what happened is” than I am in whether Indymedia thinks Bush had Paul Wellstone’s plane sabotaged or whether Jerry Falwell thinks Bill Clinton was a coke dealer.
When people are in a position that they are willing to believe lies as part of the truth, they probably didn’t need much of a push to get them there in the first place.
When people are in a position that they are willing to believe lies as part of the truth, they probably didn’t need much of a push to get them there in the first place.
Blaming Iraq for September 11, for example?
I think I’m missing something Phil, but it seems like you’re arguing that the Muslim/Middle Eastern perception of what happened is not important here.
Why do you think the President went on Arab TV if that’s the case?
I’ll give Jesurgislac’s comment all the response it deserves.
Moving on.
Edward, I’m saying that the prison torture and abuse is what it is, and it should be addressed on its own merits. Of course the perception of what happened is important — but we can only deal with the perception based on what really happened. If some dishonest person is going to slip some rape porn in with the prison photos, and some Muslims are going to believe that they’re all legit, there’s little we can do about that. But if they’re that ready to believe that the porn stuff is real, they probably already didn’t like Americans much anyway, and this is just a drop in a larger bucket of thinking that we’re evil. They would have believed it even if this had never broken publicly. They probably would have believed it even if it had never happened at all.
By the way, Jesurgislac, if you’re trying to pick a fight with me based on the often-corrected misimpression — often-corrected directly to you, in fact — that I am either a Bush voter, a Republican or a conservative, you’re barking up the wrong damned tree. I don’t expect you to remember or care, because I don’t think you’d recognize honesty if you were bathing it and I think you like to pick fights with anyone who doesn’t reflexively agree with you, but there it is nonetheless. Do with it what you will.
But if they’re that ready to believe that the porn stuff is real, they probably already didn’t like Americans much anyway, and this is just a drop in a larger bucket of thinking that we’re evil.
Actually, I think Edward’s point is that before Abu Ghraib, this statement was probably true, but now, the Iraqis who were inclined to give America the benefit of the doubt when they heard this kind of stuff are more likely to accept it. Every story of abuse at the hands of US troops has instantly become more plausible, and the burden of proof has been shifted to America’s defenders.
Could not have written it better myself KenB…
“…I am only marginally more interested in “how atrocious Muslims believe what happened is” than I am in whether Indymedia thinks Bush had Paul Wellstone’s plane sabotaged or whether Jerry Falwell thinks Bill Clinton was a coke dealer.”
Interesting difference being that few of Paul Wellstone’s, or Jerry Falwell’s, enthusiasts actually have a lot of RPGs which they tend to shoot at US soldiers every day.
I might have missed that development, of course, and taken to not giving a damn about those of our soldiers killed this way.
Edward,
Yes you could have — don’t sell yourself short. And I’m waiting for the day when I start yet another post with “I think Edward was saying…” and you tell me that actually you weren’t saying any such thing and would I kindly stick to just speaking for myself from now on.