The United States, even over its relatively short history as nations go, has a considerable record of wrongdoing, as marked by treatment of Native Americans, slavery, treatment of citizens of Japanese ancestry during World War II, and most recently the acts of torture in Iraq, Guantanamo, and presumably in other locations as well. We have a responsibility, under international law and for our own history and morality, to take appropriate action against those who were responsible for these actions. This is particularly true since those who appear to have been the least guilty -- the enlisted reservists at Abu Ghraib -- have already been punished. It appears that those punished for the abuses in Abu Ghraib were unfamiliar with the laws and treaties against torture, and were acting according to orders and assurances provided by unknown civilians. Beyond that, those court martialed for those offenses, low ranking enlisted reservists, knew that they themselves were at risk if they failed to follow orders. While a soldier is obligated to refuse an illegal order, the penalities for failing to follow orders can be severe, and these reservists, untrained in penology, would not have been able to differentiate between legal interrogation techniques and torture. Colonel (formerly Brigadier General) Janis Karpinski has said that she saw a letter signed by the Secretary of Defense authorizing these interrogation methods. It seems likely that even the CIA operatives involved believed they were acting within the letter, if not the spirit of the law.

In contrast, the DoJ lawyers who gave legal cover to the use of torture had no such defense for their action. At a minimum, they had the option of resigning -- which isn't a choice offered to enlisted personnel serving in a combat zone. They had the training needed to recognize which acts qualify as torture, and quite enough time to consider the results of their actions. It appears they too were following orders, but unlike the soldiers or CIA operatives, they had no personal risk, but were simply being accomodating.

Since the Bush administration apparently felt it needed the protectivecover of these memoranda, there should be some action taken against the enablers, who were at no personal risk, and must have known the results of their actions.

The US has a history of wrong doing? Gee, I guess freeing the slaves slipped your mind through a bloody civil war. Maybe you have forgotten World War II where we saved the world from forces of evil.

Its lib hacks like you that are taking this country down the crapper led by your co-America hater Obama.

I still think the thought of waterboarding as torture is funny. Seriously? During training, our own special forces go through this practice....do you know why? because when captured, this (and worse) will happen to you. Believe me i'm not saying that just because they do it, we should. Also, I feel no pity for these poor tortured terrorists.

One last thing. ALL enlisted military members (in or out of combat zones) have an obligation to obey only lawful orders. While in a comat zone, an enlisted member will use the LOAC (law of armed conflict) to determine if an order is lawful or not.

Hoagie, we wouldn't have had to free the slaves if we hadn't first enslaved them. And how does our successes in WW2 justify the incarceration of Japanese-Americans in that same war?

Criticizing our country's flaws and mistakes does not constitute being anti-American. Having higher expectations of ourselves is a reflection of a fierce and demanding love.