|In response to this Abu Ghraib incident and what Barbara has said, I want to say this:|
By the time that Abu Ghraib happened, the citizens of the United States had seen 2,873? of its citizens incinerated and crushed to death in the most calamitous horror any of us had ever seen in real life.
They have seen those who are responsible for this crime get away scot-free, and millions of Muslims around the world cheering and hugging each other in demented glee. They have witnessed and endured the gratuitous slaughter of kinsmen and family by subscribers to a grotesque ideological presence that is utterly everywhere and nowhere at once... in hiding, laughing and snickering at us for what? Our goodness.
With all of this having been done to us, certain of our troops have had enough... they would be sheep no more. Bullied no more. When they got ahold of some of these sneaky, mustached weasels, yes... they got sadistic... and bully for them.
Hell yeah, I said it! BULLY FOR THEM. They forced a little "aversive therapy" on those sadistic, sneaky bastards... they forced a sense of consequence upon them. They presented them with the hefty bill for all the sick pleasures that they've been so richly enjoying at our troops' expense, out there in the burning, goddamn sun, to cross entire oceans to deal with a people who will not restrain themselves and who cannot -- or will not -- get their cultural shit together!
What's more, I'm going to right here and right now introduce a new concept pair into our value set: ethical versus unethical sadism.
An unethical sadist is a coward who enjoys torturing -- and not in a merely cute or playful way -- someone who has done nothing to anyone, and who by all rights is merely a good, decent, and trusting person... but to the unethical sadist, a ready plaything, an "easy mark". This is the spirit of al Qaeda: unethical sadism.
Disregard their pretty speeches about "righteous avenging" and what... those causes are false, and they know this, but they know that they won't get the tacit support of the ethical if they actually come out and say "Well, hell, our victims have done nothing to us... We just do it for shits and giggles, and hide behind our religion 'commanding us' to do so".
In contrast, an ethical sadist is one who yes, does enjoy causing suffering... but only of unethical sadists. In truth, ethical sadism is a true mode of avenging. It bears out under the weight of evidence that its actions are justified, where unethical sadism does not. When a vicious, sneaky weasel gets his rocks off by torturing you, you hurt the bastard... You make the fucker SUFFER.... AND YOU ENJOY THAT HE IS SUFFERING.
You do not hold his hand and sing "Kumbaya"... Of course, he wants you to do that, so he can hurt you some more. You do not hold a "pow-wow" and get to know each other's inner child. He's laughing at you. But if you become his worst, everlasting nightmare, he'll thank you and love you for it.
Bullies work that way... they are fundamentally cowards who only respect and cherish vulgar domination. Where there is a vacuum of this, they punish those around them for not assuming that role, by creating the need for a Marshall Dillon, by becoming a local menace that must be stopped.
The only way to really earn the respect of an unethical sadist, is to show him that you have the same dark side that he does, and much more of it... and that if he really wants it, you will be more than happy to drive some cruelty up his ass as fast and furious as a Ferrari.
So, Abu Ghraib? Pffff!.... please. They have contempt for us, not because of it, but because we are ambivalent about it.