We Could Have--And Should Have--Been Uncle Samson

On The Other Hand, Why Destroy A Perfectly Good Torture Chamber?

Published on March 10, 2006 By kingbee In Politics

sadly, for as long as it remains standing, iraq's infamous abu ghraib prison is gonna be an haunting reminder about how combining hubris, executive incompetence and ideology can very easily and swiftly wrest defeat from the heart of impending victory.

contemplate for a moment or two this report about abu ghraib's current status compiled and distributed by the associated press.

The sprawling facility on the western outskirts of Baghdad will be turned over to Iraqi authorities once the prisoner transfer to Camp Cropper and other U.S. military prisons in the country is finished. The process will take several months, said Lt. Col. Barry Johnson, a U.S. military spokesman in Baghdad.

Abu Ghraib currently houses 4,537 out of the 14,589 detainees held by the U.S. military in the country. Iraqi authorities also hold prisoners at Abu Ghraib, though it is not known how many.

The U.S. government initially spoke of tearing down Abu Ghraib after it became a symbol of the scandal. Widely publicized photographs of prisoner abuse by American military guards and interrogators led to intense global criticism of the U.S. war in Iraq and helped fuel the Sunni Arab insurgency.

But Abu Ghraib was kept in service after the Iraqi government objected. Planning for the new facility at Camp Cropper began in 2004, Johnson said.

Gen. Peter Pace, chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, said the U.S. wants to turn Abu Ghraib over to the Iraqis fast as possible.

"There are facilities being built so that the U.S. can pull out of Abu Ghraib. Then it will be up to the Iraqi government to decide what they want to do. I do not know that the Iraqi government had decided. It's an Iraqi decision, I just don't know that they've made that decision."

But the Iraqis were all but certain to use Abu Ghraib as a jail for some time at least, because they do not have the money to build new ones.

first of all, how is it possible iraq hasn't enuff money to build a new prison of similar size? hell, an amount equal to the number of mysteriously missing american tax dollars we gifted (not loaned) iraq might pay for it with change left over.

secondly, please note i'm not addressing nor even alluding coyly to the shameful cruelty and deliberate degradation dealt out there during dubya's watch.

imagine for a moment how differently life in baghdad--or all of iraq for that matter--might be today if very soon after taking the city, a single commanding general, maybe a self-proclaimed brilliant gop architects or, perhaps, one of them hardass, no-guts-no-glory draft deferred cabinet member had spent about 40 seconds focusing on the potential benefits of demolishing hussein's torture factory versus almost unavoidable damage we'd do ourselves by appearing to be the different uniforms, same ol hellhole we would so quickly become.

if we'd invited iraqis to join us, they mighta wound up usefully occupied instead of looting antiquities knowing the secretary of defense coulda hardly cared less so our troops weren't gonna interfere.

as the reverend gary davis--street singer/preacher and master guitarist--laid it out well in the chorus of his 'samson & delilah':

if i had my way
if i had my way in this wicked world
if i had my way
i would tear this building down.

Comments

bakerstreet

on Mar 10, 2006

Given Iraq's history, though, how many buildings would they have to tear down? The reason for the outrage is they expected different behavior from us, not that they have a problem with horror.

That article you linked the other day mentioned an Iraqi calling for the torture of insurgents. I'm no expert in semiotics, but I have a feeling that abu garaib as a conceptualized symbol for us means something very different than it does for people in the Middle East.

In the end, most of their countries commit far worse acts as a matter of common procedure. Iraq probably will once we leave. Once we are gone what is heinous when we do it, will be humdrum when they do it. From that point of view, why build someplace new to do the same old thing?

ParaTed2k

on Mar 10, 2006

What's in a name?

A lifetime of propaganda.

??? "impending victory" ???

Since when has anyone who keeps throwing the old pictures of abuse at Abu Graib prison ever come close to acknowledging our impending victory?

Abu Graib is an icon for a group of people who will stop at nothing to make sure the U.S. is never able to point to a free Iraq, or be able to claim that freeing Iraq was a good thing.

Yes, there were crimes commited there, and those crimes have been investigated and the perpetrators have been (or are being) tried for the crimes they stand accused of. Many are already doing their prison sentences.

Ask yourself, what is there to gain from continuously putting Abu Graib in the news? Has anything happened there recently?

If you want to use your blog to point out some of the negative aspects of war in general, or the war in Iraq specifically, at least try to use recent or current events to back your point.

kingbee

on Mar 10, 2006

I have a feeling that abu garaib as a conceptualized symbol for us means something very different than it does for people in the Middle East.

i'm not an anthropologist nor psychologist so, while i never present myself in chat as either or both... more than once or twice a year, i'm having a difficult time imagining cultural constructs so expansive, unigue and compelling as to prompt anything but a strong desire to witness its own local abu gharib rendered unusable, if not demolished--no matter how ingeniously ya slice n dice it. (in spite of all that, invoking semiotics earned you one of my increasingly rare--altho no more valuable for all of that--insightful ratings ).

as i'm about to remind parated2k, this has almost nothing to do with what happened there after we gained control of abu gharaib, i'm lamenting missed opportunities.

imagine for a moment how differently life in baghdad--or all of iraq for that matter--might be today if very soon after taking the city, a single commanding general, maybe a self-proclaimed brilliant gop architects or, perhaps, one of them hardass, no-guts-no-glory draft deferred cabinet member had spent about 40 seconds focusing on the potential benefits of demolishing hussein's torture factory versus almost unavoidable damage we'd do ourselves by appearing to be the different uniforms, same ol hellhole we would so quickly become.

if we'd invited iraqis to join us, they mighta wound up usefully occupied

kingbee

on Mar 10, 2006

if i wasn't clear enuff, i apologize for confusing or misleading you. to put it very simply, we shoulda torn down abu gharaib immediately--or as guickly as possible--after our troops took control of the place. regardless of when that mighta been, we should have never kept anyone else confined there.

long before we began to use it as a prison, abu gharaib had concealed and contained too many horrors to ever be successfully rehabilitated. not only would we have sent a powerful message and possibly inspired some valuable solidarity with the person in the iraqi street. we'd also not exposed those assigned to hold & operate the prison to the risk of contracting those horrendous diseases of the soul with which the place was infested.

drmiler

on Mar 11, 2006

there were crimes commited there, and those crimes have been investigated and the perpetrators have been (or are being) tried for the crimes they stand accused of. Many are already doing their prison sentences.

Ask yourself, what is there to gain from continuously putting Abu Graib in the news? Has anything happened there recently?

If you want to use your blog to point out some of the negative aspects of war in general, or the war in Iraq specifically, at least try to use recent or current events to back your point.

if i wasn't clear enuff, i apologize for confusing or misleading you. to put it very simply, we shoulda torn down abu gharaib immediately--or as guickly as possible--after our troops took control of the place. regardless of when that mighta been, we should have never kept anyone else confined there.
long before we began to use it as a prison, abu gharaib had concealed and contained too many horrors to ever be successfully rehabilitated. not only would we have sent a powerful message and possibly inspired some valuable solidarity with the person in the iraqi street. we'd also not exposed those assigned to hold & operate the prison to the risk of contracting those horrendous diseases of the soul with which the place was infested.

QUICK write this down on a calender somewhere!!! For "once" I agree 100% with KB>

Welcome Guest! Please take the time to register with us.
There are many great features available to you once you register, including:

Richer content, access to many features that are disabled for guests like commenting on the forums.
Access to a great community, with a massive database of many, many areas of interest.
Access to contests & subscription offers like exclusive emails.
It's simple, and FREE!