Will A.I. condemn this Human Rights Abuse?

If you were on top,

and promulgating a policy which you knew was trouble for those caught implementing said policy, and trouble for yourself if anyone knew you had anything to do with it,

Wouldn't you be careful to set it up so that you wouldn't get caught if the actual implementers got caught?

Wouldn't you set people up to take a fall, in order for the strength of the armed forces to remain uncompromised? By which, you mean none of the top guys, including you, lose their jobs or are punished?

Couldn't you argue that it would weaken the army and the nation by allowing information that could lead to impeachments and scandal to be released?'

Isn't that how you would sleep at night?

Cycloptichorn

From your links and mine, it looks like we have agreement that abuse and torture took place at Abu Ghraib, but was not authorized by any member of the Bush administration, or the Pentagon from the looks of things.

Your opinion is something I can not change, but the facts speak for themselves. You believe Sanchez and others were not capable of acting alone. I believe thay were. You hate the Bush administration and will go to any lengths necessary to demonize and castigate them. I do not.

One wonders if you can grasp the concept of something being informative (i.e., "giving information"), but inaccurate at the same time? Perhaps a better characterization would have been "inaccurately informative"?




I'm sure you understand that if you don't like being called a horse's patooty, all you have do do is stop acting like an a$$.