**Update2** Points well taken EO. One comment however - to suggest that Iraqi prisoners somehow do not qualify as POWs is difficult for me to accept. We attack, invade, and occupy a sovereign nation without direct provocation. Some Iraqis (the number now is estimated at 200K) choose to fight us. Some of those are taken prisoner. How are they not afforded POW status? Sounds shady to me. **Update** We are not talking about the barbarism of the enemy. They are animals. We are not talking about if their treatment of prisoners is worse than ours. Of course it is. We are not talking about if the US helps out around the world - we are the biggest donor in history. We are not talking about our reputation around the world. We are talking, clear and simple, about torture. Do you support it (ever or in just this case), or do you not? So what's it going to be???? **Original Comment** The more the facts come out, the more that it's clear that what was happening at Abu Ghraib was torture. At least five prisoners died under interrogation, and up to 18 more deaths following interrogations are being investigated. The practices used at Abu Ghraib (sodomizing with broomsticks, electrical shock, sleep deprivation, dog attacks, etc), were also used in other military prisons in places like Guantanamo Bay and Afghanistan. In other words, this wasn't a handful of bad seeds playing practical jokes - this was the methodical, systemic use of torture to gain information. Those that wish to defend these actions can say that this doesn't compare to atrocities committed by fundamentalists to prisoners, or the atrocities committed by Saddam. I agree. They might also say that this is a new kind of enemy, so the old rules don't apply. I don't agree. But let's call a spade a spade. This administration has condoned the use of torture as a means of gaining intelligence. My opinion on the matter? I think its immoral, unamerican, and disgraceful. It pisses me off when I think that the man who authorized this policy, Donald Rumsfeld, is still employed, and the man that created the legal justification for these practices is now our attorney general. Do you think that Americans haven't been morally strong enough to face up to tough and scary foes before without abandoning our commitment to the rule of law? What about Hitler? What about the Viet Cong? By being so quick to abandon our commitment to rule of law and give in to barbaric practices, we are doing a disservice to our military, legal, and moral heritage. One final point lest we forget - the reason that we sign treaties like the Geneva Convention is to protect our troops - if that's not important, I don't know what is.
