Washington Unaccountable - Robert Parry

http://www.consortiumnews.com/2004/050704.html

Washington the Unaccountable
By Robert Parry
May 7, 2004

What is perhaps most striking about the Iraq debacle – what distinguishes it from almost any other geopolitical disaster in modern history – is the lack of accountability so far from those in government who dreamt up the policies and those in the news media who played along.

Throughout American history, leaders who screwed up on the battlefield, in particular, paid with their careers. Abraham Lincoln went through a revolving door of Union commanders who were blamed for the Civil War’s early defeats. John F. Kennedy shook up the Central Intelligence Agency after the Bay of Pigs fiasco. Ronald Reagan fired subordinates implicated in the Iran-Contra Affair. But now a perverse system of rewards and punishments has taken hold in Washington, protecting those who get it wrong and banishing those who get it right.

People who raised early questions about the Iraq War, such as former weapons inspector Scott Ritter, were subjected to ugly attacks before the war and now have largely disappeared from view although their skepticism proved prescient. Conversely, government officials who smugly marched American troops off to war and journalists who bought the government's lies, to date, have flourished. The only accountability so far is being directed against lower-level military personnel who committed individual abuses, such as the guards at the Abu Ghraib prison and their immediate superiors.

At the top, George W. Bush has turned his refusal to apologize for his own mistakes almost into a political fetish, a stubbornness that has made him even more beloved by many of his supporters. Only grudgingly, in the face of an international firestorm, did he say Thursday that he "was sorry for the humiliation suffered by Iraqi prisoners" at Abu Ghraib. As of the writing of this article, Bush has dug in his heels and refused to hold any of his senior political-military people accountable.

more@link

As the Commander-in-chief of the armed forces, Bush is the one who is truly accountable. However, he won't take any responsibility, shrugging it off as an anomaly practiced by the enlisted. And he will attempt to make an example of the enlisted men and women in order to deflect criticism from himself and the top brass.

The existence of the photographs is evidence of something far worse than an anomaly, however. It suggests that the soldiers were comfortable in making them. It means that they were unconcerned about the risk of consequences.

Taken to the logical conclusion would mean that this type of behavior was sanctioned by the leaders.

Hopefully the military courts will allow the public to witness the trials. I am certain that the truth is far worse than what is now public knowledge. There are soldiers who will be willing to divulge the details of how the senior leadership sanctioned such activity.

Bush and Rumsfeld certainly must have known that this activity was taking place. The problem was that the activities were made public.

I may be wrong, but it is very likely that Bush's outrage in taking Rumsfeld to task was not in the horrors of the atrocities at Abu Gharib, but the fact that photos were made and divulged to the news media.

Why else is Bush keeping Rumsfeld on? If Bush were truly outraged by the atrocities, he would have fired Rumsfeld and held the top brass of the Army accountable. From the top levels of leadership.

This type of behavior has no place in a civilized nation.

Bush as commander-in-chief is the one who is ultimately responsible. It is up to us as voters to ensure he is defeated.

Bush certainly held Saddam accountable for the atrocities done by Saddam's insubordinates at Abu Gharib. Bush needs to live by the same standards he puts on others.