Honestly, George Tenet would make a far better fall guy here, IMO. He already had one foot out the door before this scandal broke, and the conduct of his agents at Abu-Gharib is obviously not the military or DOD's fault (Yes, the abusers in the pictures were soldiers, but this can still be easily sold as the CIA's fault.) It's probably not too late to pin this entire fiasco on Tenet...maybe this will happen in the coming few days? NB- I'd still much prefer to see John Asscroft take the fall, but pinning the DOJ is just too much of a stretch. No... Tenet is really the logical fall guy here.
rummy is actually a pretty smart guy. did you watch the how the senators bombarted rummy with those questions? he handled very well.
You seem to be underplaying the problem here - there appear to have been quite a few deaths in captivity, including shootings, beatings to death etc. US senators and Seymour Hersh have also mentioned rapes, killings, and child abuse - to quote one of them "we're not just talking about humiliating treatment". Does this sit lightly with you because it is "not as bad" as one of the worst civilian massacres in the history of western democracy? In addition, you are forgetting one crucial distinction - it was never US policy in Vietnam to go on killing rampages in villages and slaughter Vietnamese peasants. Lt. Calley was clearly acting against army protocol and rules of engagement, as demonstrated by the fact that a US helicopter crew landed and threatened to shoot him if he continued his rampage. Evidence so far shows that in Iraq it *is* US policy to beat, abuse, and humiliate prisoners in order to coerce information out of them. Dumb reservist prison guards are being leant on by military intelligence to rough up prisoners, as a systematic policy. The difference between one or two rogue personnel, and widespread institutionalised abuse and torture, is rather significant. For Rumsfeld to be ignorant of a deliberate systematic policy of illegal abuse of prisoners is a damning indictment of his leadership and oversight as secretary of defence. Now I don't think that Rummy sanctioned this stuff, but being completely ignorant of it, and taking no action whatsoever despite many reports over many months from impartial and respected bodies like the Red Cross , is pure management incompetence. If I were Bush, I would fire Rumsfeld immediately for gross negligence - nothing to do with beatings etc, but purely due to total ineptitude at being able to oversee and keep control of the situation. Remember that regardless of the human rights issues, this is an incredible military and PR blunder in that it exposes coalition troops to harm, including terrible torture if they should be captured, for no good reason at all. It is incompetence both on the PR side and the military side, that has massively reduced the chances of a successful outcome in Iraq. Rumsfeld's poor oversight and lack of perception has jeapordised the entire mission and the safety of the professional and courageous troops fighting it out on the ground. Finally, the fact that someone else has done something worse than you does not excuse illegal or disgraceful behaviour. Imagine if a rapist plead in the dock that he should be let off because hey, it's not like he killed somebody. This is the worst kind of logical fallacy - a cheap evasion that attempts to sweep atrocities under the carpet.
I agree with this. Tenet is a liability and far less competent than Rumsfeld. Rumsfeld *should* go, but this might weaken Bush fatally, so knifing Tenet in the back would be a good compromise. Bush's administration then avoids appearing totally unaccountable and inhumane, whilst retaining its key players and leaving the president relatively unscathed. Tenet is the moron who sold Bush on the "sure thing" of WMDs in Iraq. He is a liability and should have gone ages ago. P.S. Bush appears to be backing Rummy, so looks like he won't go after all. But *someone* has to be the fall guy.
I think it would send a very positive message to the troops if some career, ie not reservist, generals got the can over the Iraq mess. So far we have seen privates, spec's and a sergeant get in trouble, plus General Karpinski, whose main crime seemed to be being a reservist and being in charge of the MP's who were sent to the prison. I'm not sure she had actual authority over the prison itself. The military has a long and disgraceful history of letting sh*t roll downhill and covering up for the brass. This is fitting right into that pattern. Beyond the prison fiasco, it is clear to me that the occupation has been a total screwup from day one. Shouldn't someone be called to account for that? How about the Marine general who managed to turn Fallujah into a big victory for the insurgents? Or the geniuses who decided that leaving al-Sadr and his private army in place would be a good way to proceed? Rummy has his share of enemies, but people overlook the fact that many of them are generals in the Pentagon. He shook things up and they don't like it. Anyway, Bush won't fire him. He doesn't want another book to deal with.