Those Iraqi prison photos are generating a ton of embarrassment and anger. I too think they are awful, and reflect a total command breakdown. But I think there is a broader question involved. How should prisoners like these be treated? My understanding is that most of these prisoners were not Iraqi Army POW's but instead were insurgents, terrorists or suspects who got picked up for one reason or another. I'm not sure they are entitled to Geneva Convention treatment, any more than the detainees at Gitmo. To read the press, you would think they should have been treated liked prisoners arrested in the US. That kind of sentiment may make some here feel good, but I think it is madness under the circumstances. There was another incident a few months ago where an officer got critical information by threatening to shoot a prisoner. The officer is being courtmartialed and his career is ruined. In my view, he did the right thing and should have received a medal. In short, these types of prisoners often have very useful information that will lose value quickly. It is critical for them to be softened up and interrogated in an efficient manner. My question is, where do we draw the line? At genital electrodes? At mock executions? At physical duress? At using drugs?