2+2= ?

Let's do the math, shall we?

According to the New York Times, the Justice Department was busily sifting through laws and treaties precluding torture in order to determine that whatever Bush wanted to use as "an interrogation tactic" was pretty much fine. Pair this with an article from the same day's paper
in which the "few bad apples" in Abu Ghraib managed to radiate throughout the prison, stripping dozens upon dozens, perhaps hundreds of prisoners of both their clothing and their dignity. Here's a catalog:

The detainees said leaving prisoners naked started as far back as last July, three months before the seven soldiers now charged and their military police company arrived at the prison. It bred a culture, some soldiers say, where the abuse captured on film could happen.

Detainees were paraded naked past other prisoners and guards; some were ordered to do jumping jacks and sing "The Star-Spangled Banner" in the nude, according to a several witnesses. Also, a father and his grown son were stripped, then forced to stand and stare at each other. The International Committee of the Red Cross, visiting in October, found prisoners left naked in their cells for days, modestly trying to shield themselves behind cardboard from meals-ready-to-eat boxes.

The point here is NOT to castigate our troops, but to encourage an exercise in common sense. The Bush administration was, it now seems clear, seeking to push the envelope with respect to the use of highly questionable tactics -- and ultimately torture -- when dealing with prisoners. Abusive treatment of prisoners was not isolated, but pervasasive. Thus, the blame for the shameful activities in Abu Ghraib lies not only with the perpretrators, but also with the chain of command, and the buck ought to stop right where Truman said it did, on the President's desk. The Times' editoral page comes to roughly the same conclusion. You should too. And vote accordingly.