The Ghosts of Abu Ghraib

After watching this movie, I was in shock, angry and agitated at what I saw. And as I observed the reactions of others around me, I also saw the same or similar reactions. There were a lot of things that just stuck with me after watching this movie.
The US government justified their "any means necessary" torture policy by asserting that the captured where not prisoners of war but unlawful combatants. And since the Al-Qaeada did not abide by the rules of the Geneva convention, it was seen as okay to treat them as criminals. However, two wrongs do not make a right. Just because these terrorist groups are not following these rules,does it mean that the U.S. doesn't follow these rules because these terrorist are not? No, The United States is known to advocate for human rights and to dismiss the rules of the Geneva Convention when dealing with this alleged terrorist puts us in the same category as them. This goes along with the military keeping the prisoners wife and children in the prison to get information. That is just inhumane and tells the rest of the world that this is what we do as Americans.
Some of the things that the prisoners went through was unbearable and caused more psychological and emotional pain than physical pain. And what is even more unfortunate, is that most if not all of these prisoner had no information that would be helpful to the military. These individuals will be scared for life for no reason at all. The "curing" of mental or emotional or psychological pain is far more difficult than curing physical pain. With that in mind, I get help but be frustrated and angry at that one female soldier that kept on justifying her reasons for taking those humiliating pictures. I almost felt like she did not regret taking those pictures expect that she served some time.

What also bothered me was the fact that the lower-ranking officers were punished, but the high-ranking officials like General Miller and Secretary of State Rumsfield were not. The lower-ranking officers were pretty much used as scapegoats for Abu Ghraib and I believe that in order to show that this kind of despicable behavior should not and will not be allowed those high-ranking officers should be held accountable and punished. They were the ones who were the mastermind of this whole operation, not the low-ranking officers who got punished for what they were told to do.
Many would argue that they would never inflict such inhumane torture to prisoners if they were told to do so by a high-ranking official, but can we really say what we would do in a situation such as that of Abu Ghraib? Can we say that we will not act in the same way as the prison guards did? Well, when we are angry, afraid, and feel threatened do we do? I am by no means justifying what was done, I am just contemplating what would have made this soldiers go along with everything.
The question that still remains to be answered: should pain or torture be used to for social or political ends?

I guess my answer to this question is it depends on the situation. And as easy as it is to answer this question in typing the same is not true in reality. If we think about, our society as well as many others use pain (emotional, psychological, physical, mental, etc) as way to keep order and peace. Is it the type of pain used to torture someone that makes the difference in whether this torture should be allowed or not? If so, how would one categorize capital punishment???? Is is a form of torture? If so should it be allowed?