Perhaps because the real story behind Abu Ghraib and other instances of abuse are a little more complicated and because even the US Senate has said, "The abuse of detainees in U.S. custody cannot simply be attributed to the actions of "a few bad apples" acting on their own.." (http://armed-services.senate.gov/Publications/Detainee%20Report%20Final_April%2022%202009.pdf [Broken])
I think it's safe to say the US doesn't have a history of detainee abuse prior to Bush and that the treatment of Abu Ghraib detainees was not the policy of the US, even under Bush. It was a systemic problem, however, as there were things the Bush administration did that set up a bad situation. In effect, Abu Ghraib was what happens when you delegate low priority interrogations to subcontractors with little expertise and let them interpret and apply badly written guidance on their own, and, even worse, somehow let poorly trained National Guard troops believe they're working for those subcontractors.
I was never a George Bush fan - but let's be fair.
It's easy to remove September 11, 2001 from the conversation - similar to removing Pearl Harbor from a discussion of Japanese persons held on US soil - isn't it?
If you want to have a discussion comparing the US to China or Russia - that would require FULL Disclosure of the actions of all - wouldn't it?
Last edited by a moderator: