I didn't say it wasn't used or exploited, nor would I disagree that it's being presented by some as "indicative of the wrongheadedness of the whole enterprise."
But you said it was manipulated and I'm asking you how it was manipulated.
I have to seriously differ from your reductionism in referring to this situation as something being done by "a handful of American soldiers". The atmosphere and license for these activities came right from the top. (If you consider Gonzales and Rumsfeld the "top", as the president's counsel and secretary of defense, respectively.)
"the atmosphere and license for these activities came right from the top..."
----Ahhhh, just when you were doing so well, (especially for a Newbie) you show yourself to be someone willing to assume something you can't possibly know, but only want to believe. If all this came right from the top, I guess everyone who DIDN'T participate in the abuse should be up on charges, right? Atmosphere and license is one very wide and amorphous concept. Were there no monitors checking up on the behavior of our soldiers at Abu Ghraib every day, carrying around a playbook and demanding reports on how each and every prisoner was being treated each and every day? Of course not. Were all those prisoners wrongly imprisoned innocents who HADN'T, COULDN'T POSSIBLY HAVE participated in beheadings, incinerating coalition forces and hanging their charred remains from bridges,etc. While I was revolted by the behavior on a personal level, for the media to exploit it as if it's the most terrible thing that could have happened WITHIN THE WIDER GENERAL HORROR OF WAR
is almost laughable.