*** ORBUSMAX GUEST OP/ED ***
MORE ABSURDITY FROM THE NEW YORK TIMES - By Edward L. Daley
May 7, 2004
A New York Times editorial
(http://www.nytimes.com/2004/05/05/opinion/05WED1.html) published on May
5th and titled 'The Torture Photos' begins with the following words. "It
seems gloomily possible that in years to come, when people in the Middle
East recall the invasion of Iraq, they will speak not of lost American
lives or the toppling of a brutal dictator. The most enduring image of
the occupation may be those pictures of grinning American soldiers
torturing Iraqi prisoners."
Now, I don't know who the author of this piece is, because the Times
on-line edition doesn't include the name of the author... maybe the
print edition does, but I don't actually pay to read this sort of tripe,
so I wouldn't know. Be that as it may, while the author could be one of
several people on the editorial staff, the individual responsible for
its publication is the editorial page editor, Gail Collins, so I will
treat her as if she actually wrote it.
Ms. Collins asserts that the people of the Middle East may have stronger
remembrances of images of American soldiers "torturing" Iraqi prisoners
than lost American lives. In the first place, let me just point out that
it's highly unlikely American sacrifices will ever be their primary
concern, no matter what happens in Iraq. Oh, they may well remember the
deaths of our soldiers, but I doubt those memories will be accompanied
by a sense of regret or sadness on the part of most Middle Easterners.
Secondly, anyone who looks back on this time in history and gives these
few isolated incidents of abuse by Americans a super ordinate place in
their memory, above the multitude of other events surrounding the
invasion and rebuilding of Iraq, is not someone who's opinion I very
much value. While the incidents in question are not something I condone,
when one compares them to the countless atrocities perpetrated by our
enemies against both coalition troops and innocent civilians alike, I
find it difficult to feel lasting sympathy for the enemy prisoners who
were mistreated.
Sure, it shouldn't have happened, and the people responsible should be
punished, but let's not forget who we're talking about here. The victims
of this abuse were un-uniformed enemy combatants, who were caught
fighting on the side of Saddamite guerillas and terrorists! Do I need to
remind this woman what these people are all about or the sort of acts
they are capable of committing?
The article continues with the assertion that such potential abuses by
our soldiers were things that "the Bush administration should have
worried about long ago, and taken far more care to avert." Excuse me,
but I think this administration has had a few more pressing concerns
than the welfare of our enemies up to this point. Clearly it is not the
policy of the United States to abuse prisoners of war, but the fact
remains that it happens. It has happened in every military conflict in
world history and it will continue to happen in the future. Heck, even
John Kerry admitted to committing war atrocities during his short tour
in Vietnam. The dynamics involved aren't too hard to wrap your brain
around. You see, soldiers HATE THEIR ENEMIES! Sometimes that hatred
overwhelms people in high stress situations, and they act out in
unprofessional and even contemptible ways.
President Bush is not responsible for the wrongful acts of these
individuals. They knew damned well that what they were doing was wrong,
and even the claim by some that they were ordered to commit these acts
does not excuse them from responsibility. No soldier is compelled to
carry out an illegal order. Every one of them knows that, and frankly,
the soldiers in the photographs which started this whole controversy
don't look like they were acting under duress. In fact, they look
downright pleased with themselves. Should the president have drafted an
order to every man and woman in the military reiterating the rules of
prisoner treatment, even though they are all aware of those rules?
At some point you have to leave soldiers alone to do the jobs they have
been trained for. When one of them screws up, you punish them and move
on. What you don't do is run around pointing the finger at everyone else
for the misdeeds of that individual. Unless it is clear that someone of
a higher rank ordered them to commit a crime, they alone are responsible
for what they do. Of course, the concept of personal responsibility
doesn't sit well with the liberal media. People like Gail Collins seem
to think that the president should be held accountable for what a small
percentage of soldiers do. That's sort of like blaming Bill Gates when
your local computer store salesman overcharges you for the latest
version of Windows.
Ms. Collins also remarks in her article that Bush has characterized the
incidents in question as "the aberrant work of a handful of men and
women", although as many as 20 investigations into abuse claims are
currently underway in Iraq and Afghanistan. Considering the fact that
we're talking about a fighting force of around 150,000 soldiers, I'd say
that the president's portrayal of these events is pretty accurate. A
larger percentage of college students commit serious crimes every year
than our soldiers in the field do, if these numbers are any measure.
I also noticed that Ms. Collins questioned the veracity of Secretary of
Defense Donald Rumsfeld when he stated that accusations of a cover-up
were unfounded. While she admits the military announced to the public in
January that it was investigating prisoner of war abuse claims, Collins
seems to be under the impression that because she and her Bush-hating
cronies at the New York Times were not given specifics about these
cases, Rummy has been trying to pull a fast one. Perhaps it never
occurred to her that allegations of abuse, primarily by terrorists and
their sympathizers, does not mean that such acts actually took place in
most of those cases, and that prematurely releasing sensitive
information about these investigations might unnecessarily inflame the
already unstable situation in Iraq.
In the final paragraph of her editorial, Gail Collins goes so far as to
say that the Bush administration has been "cheerfully denying" that it
has made miscalculations concerning it's execution of the war. This sort
of rhetoric is just plain idiotic. Suggesting that the president or any
person in his administration has behaved in some way other than
seriously when it comes to addressing the countless life and death
issues surrounding the war in Iraq is childish at best. It's just
another cheap shot taken at the president for political reasons by a
person with no viable point of view and no sense of decency.
-----------------------------------------------------------
Edward L. Daley is the owner/operator of the news website The Daley Times-Post.