That being said, Charles Graner was not a rogue operator, or an Abu Ghraib aberration; he was a tool - albeit a willing one - in the hands of superiors who approved of and encouraged the kinds of things that were happening there.  Does that mean he should not have been convicted, or should not serve his time?  Of course not.

But, one of the problems with the lack of accountability for those higher up the chain is that it allows those at the lower levels - like Graner - to act the scapegoat, and essentially refuse to take responsibility for whatever role they played.

As for why Graner didn't "just say no," I would ask why someone in the Bush administration didn't do that - someone like Gonzales or Yoo or Rumsfeld - instead of finding "legal" ways to foster a culture steeped in torture and humiliation and death, and then only holding those at the lowest levels accountable.

As for this:

I think he should have another punishment when he gets out:he should have to spend the rest of his life with his girlfriend, Lyndie England and their child.

The class consciousness of some folks on the left never ceases to amaze me.

I had the exact same thought, gyrfalcon.

That aside, I agree with the general consensus here, the guy is a thug and unfortunately the military seems intent on attracting, breeding, and creating thugs. But I do believe that Garner, England and the rest were acting on orders from higher-ups, or at least with the full knowledge that their little transgressions wouldn't be a problem.

"I was wrapped up in just such thoughts one morning as I was cleaning up the breakfast tray spills when, on the tier above me, I saw a guard who was doing a head count stop outside one particular cell. I was standing under the opposite tier, near the bottom of the stairs, so basically I was in the shadow. The guard lifted up the metal flap covering the crack through which could be seen the slim features of the inmate - a middle-aged black man - talking to him. Then, as soon as he'd finished, and without a single word, the guard tossed the entire contents of his coffee cup into the prisoner's face and slammed the slot shut as the scalded inmate screamed in agony. Next the guard looked around quickly to check if anyone was watching before exiting through an upper-level door to the control booth.

"Other inmates started banging on their cell doors calling for the nurse to be brought over to the scalded inmate. A few moments later, I was ordered into my cell by three officers who had come to investigate the disturbance. Once inside my cell I stood by the door and continued to watch as the three officers - one of whom was the guard who had tossed the coffee - stood in front of the black inmate's cell as he kicked wildly on his door and screamed in some Afro-Caribbean language. When he saw the guard who had scalded him he went completely berserk. The two other officers seemed to tacitly acknowledge what the inmate was trying to tell them about their colleague, but all three took it in turns to yell at him to shut up. But the more they told him to stop, the more he went off. Once the guards had given three un-responded-to commands, they went to get the `sticks and shields', so that they could enter his cell for extraction and forced medication by injection.

"The prisoners in the surrounding cells yelled at full throttle as the three guards retreated down the stairs. As the one who had begun it all passed my door I looked him right in the face and read the name on his breast pocket: `Graner'. I had no clue who this man was, but I had just witnessed him not only burn the inmate with coffee but also become unhealthily excited about getting out the riot clubs and electrified shields.

Also, there's no excuse for not going after the higher-ups.

That he was the man eager to deal out the torture and enjoy it was, as far as the higher-ups were concerned, a problem only insofar as it made for bad public relations and bad publicity.

There was no mistake when the Army assigned this job to a company of hillbillies, servile to authoritarians and masquerading as MPs, having a horrific lack of discipline, morality and honor.  No mistake.  Anyone reading their DA 2715 or taking an hour to inspect their operations would have seen they were guaranteed trouble waiting to happen.

Make no mistake:  Graner was and is a thug.  He got what a thug gets.  There is no excuse for him or his behavior.  Every military unit has at least one thug in it, sometimes in a position of authority and sometimes not.  The proper function of leadership in the unit is to carry out the missions, in an often highly-charged environment, without allowing the thuggery to take charge.  It failed of its own weakeness and was set up to fail.  What makes his case an exception is that (a) his company's leadership was weak and allowed him and his thuggishness to take over, (b) the higher levels of command wanted the behavior Graner evinced (and didn't care about the company's leadership, so long as they got thuggery), (c) he got caught and (d) he got punished for what he did.  

He should be on his knees every day, thanking his god that he comes from a society liberal enough to let the law handle him. If he came from a society that he was trying to model with his own behaviour, the only thing outside those walls he'd have to look forward to is visiting his entire bloodline and co-defendants in graveyards.

Last I heard, one objection to us hillbillies was that we just automatically defy authority!

the authority that graner defied was the whole body of US and international law, in keeping with the hillbilly tradition.

no doubt graner got under-the-table orders, which he and his buds gleefully carried out. his stupidity goes beyond that however, he and his buds also took pictures, something i submit his superiors didn't have in mind.