Do you believe that George W. Bush should have kept the Abu Ghraib photos secret?

[rateyes]

And, yes, I realize that some still haven't been released.

[GarbagemanLB]

1. It depends entirely on whether those who committed the acts were held accountable.

[ZombieHorde]

3. They have not been held accountable. nt

[Captain Hilts]

4. Well, no officers except the top general were held accountable. No lieutenants, majors, captains...

[Captain Hilts]

2. I kinda do as their release anger the population and further endangered our troops. nt

[rateyes]

8. IMO, it wasn't the pics that angered the population. It was that people

were tortured in our names. And, had that not been made public, it would still be going on.

[John Q. Citizen]

11. So prosecuting war crimes should stop, because then it endangers other troops?

People should be able to rape and kill civilians without fear of prosecutionn, since if you prosecute them, it endangers other soldiers?

Think about what you are saying and where that kind of secret cover up stuff leads.


Our troops would be safe if we just brought them home. if safety is what you want, I'd find other work than joining the military. It's considered a dangerous job.

If police commit crimes against civilians should it be covered up? After all, it inflames the population and innocent cops are endangered. See, once you go down that road, it becomes a cycle of bad decisions compounded.

[LittleBlue]

5. No, and neither should Obama. And if Bush was still president

you'd see 100% of this forum crying bloody murder for what Obama's just done.

[RandomThoughts]

6. People have said the leaking of the photos of Abu Grabi made the US look bad,

People say new photos will cause harm to the US.

The truth is the people that did the actions in the photos are to blame. Not those that released them.

The damage the photos could cause, was created by the people that did the actions in the photos.

[GarbagemanLB]

9. That's all fine and dandy, but when people's lives are on the line, it really doesn't matter who is

to blame initially.

[RandomThoughts]

13. You have a point,

but I could make the argument that in the long run it would save more lives to show the pictures. Or that it happened, so it should be known.

But each of those arguments are the reality of it, but the ramifications are removed from the reality by perception.

Note that I am not sure if the pictures should be shown. People should know when really terrible things were done, so they don't happen again, and so law is established.

But the visceral visual image would transfer to hate and anger, which is not the motives I support to get things done in a better way. It is as if there would be a help, but the means that supplied that help in getting things like prosecutions, might be harnessing anger and hate, which I think is wrong.

Knowing what was done, leading to compassion for any human life, leading to keeping it from being done again, is a better reason.

And of coarse the reason of reestablishing moral high ground, is also important. Not just for compassion, but for security and to have respect and effect in the world.

[AlinPA]

16. I'm not sure that the photos were leaked. Could be Bush** and republicans showing how bad-ass

the U.S. is and what will happen to U.S. enemies. Like parading prisoners and boasting. Republican rhetoric at the time defended the actions taken.

[MADem]

7. He didn't release them. They got out through other venues.

The horse was out of the barn.

If GWB had the only copies, like it or not, they would have remained secret. The problem was that jerky kids took those photos while performing their "duties."

[rateyes]

10. Had he had the only copies, should he have kept them secret?

[MADem]

12. That's an entirely different question. He would have, certainly.

If you're arguing from the perspective of Bush, hell, yes. If you're arguing from the perspective of ACLU, certainly not.

It is my belief that the pictures won't be released. I think the "backlash" argument is going to prevail.

My opinion? I don't know if release is right or not. I haven't seen the pictures. None of us have. I know that torture happened--pictures aren't going to make me "un-believe" that, or say to myself "Gee, that's not so bad, that torture depicted in those pictures."

I couldn't imagine those Lynndie England barking dog/leash/shit everywhere/pyramid pics before I saw them. I just couldn't have conceived of that behavior by US servicemembers.

I don't know what these pics might show. The argument that we need to be gone from Iraq and the 'Stan before they are released might be compelling--a judge will have to rule on that. Odds are, if the ruling goes the "wrong" way for the administration, then it'll wend its way to the Supremes, this case.

Bottom line--I'm not holding my breath on this one.

[RandomThoughts]

14. It is possible

the pictures got out in the first place, because someone wanted to stop what was happening...

[bigwillq]

15. No.

Release them.