Abu Ghraib an abomination of power

The film relating what happed in Abu Ghraib is nothing short of disgusting. It was hard to watch the film and not have feelings of sympathy for the people who were subjected to the abuse with no legal precedent. I was a law enforcement officers for over thirty years and I was proud of the traditions that I followed and proud of the fact that I did not place anyone in a jail without probable cause to do so. I am shocked that the United States who I always thought was suppose to be the “good guy” would allow a situation like Abu Ghraib to happen, (not to mention Guantanemo). “The War on Terror” has become the catch all for the government and our political leaders to use when they want to start a program or initiative that walks all over our rights as citizens. It also has become the key that opens doors that our military use in the pursuit of “information” from people who are perceived as having information without any trace of evidence of that fact. Abu Ghraib provided the world with a look into what Americans can and will do when the leashes are unsnapped.

Abu Ghraib is an abomination of power and is a display of what people can do if left unchecked. It’s an example of the animals running the farm, or an example of good people placed into a bad situation adapting to the situation in order to survive. What we see happening in Abu Ghraib is an example of not only an abuse of power but also power that has literally gone to the heads of the people who are expected to have calm and clear thinking heads. These guards took their ability to control people further than they should have.

During the film that we watched in class, the guards tried to minimize their culpability and transfer the responsibility for their actions to the military intelligence officials and the directions they received from them. However, the “War on Terror” furor that exists in our country and the zeal at which officials want to get information has infiltrated good common sense. The overpowering desires to obtain information, from anyone, created confusion between perceived orders and actual personal debauchery. Individual have an individual responsibility to conduct themselves properly, within all laws and rules. Individuals can say no to unlawful orders, but they have to report the action to superior officers. Superior officers need to be cognizant to the actions of all the individuals in their commands, even on the midnight tour of duty. That is not to say that an overpowering group cannot direct or misdirect people for their own cause and direction.

I believe Abu Ghraib was a result of both theories. Commanders needed to ensure that personnel assigned to guarding a prison are doing just that, guarding the prison. They should not have been involved in any interrogation or softening process for the interrogators. The interrogations needed to be left to the professional interrogators and the prison guarding should have been left to professional person guards.

In comparison we see much of the same resulting behaviors from the people who took part in the Stanford Behavioral Experiment. They took their roles and participation to the extreme. The experiment however I believe is skewed and does not provide a true account of what and will occur in a similar situation. All participants knew they were in an experiment. They all know that the experiment would be ending in a short period of time. This skewed the results and brought out more of he actor in the participants. Unlike Abu Ghraib where prisoners had no idea why they were imprisoned and had no idea when they might be released.