Was the US Military set up to take a fall?

Jeanne over at Tom Tommorow's This Modern World blog has a detailed analysis of Human Rights Watch's report on prisoner abuse by the 82nd Airborne Division near Fallujah. The most interesting thing to me is that it seems like the U.S. Military was set up by the Bush Administration with a "damned if you do, damned if you don't" approach towards prisoner handling:

Today's Washington Post ... notes that the confusion about what soldiers considered permissible at Camp Mercury is directly attributable to this administration's "evasive legalisms in response to simple questions about uncivilized conduct."

Basically, this administration has said to American soldiers: We're not going to tell you what the policy on treatment of prisoners is. You can guess. If you guess wrong...well...you lose.

But wait, there's more:

Today's NYT reports that Fishback is being pressured to give up the names of the two sergeants who also spoke to Human Rights Watch, but who have decided (probably wisely, all things considered) to remain anonymous. Investigators, he says, have shown far more interest in the names of the whistleblowers than in those who allegedly beat and starved prisoners.

... They have created a world in which it is not safe to go along, but neither is it safe to report a crime. The only people who can survive such a system are those who are ruthless enough to commit crimes, and smart enough to cover them up. Bush and Company have created a military that can't make room for decency.

There's lots of stuff there, and it's worth a read if you can eke out the time for it (unlike myself, of late). Jeanne closes with an IMO fair and balanced question:

And even if you give everyone in this administration far more benefit of the doubt than they have earned, far more than I'm able to give them, isn't it obvious that this level of dysfunction requires an investigation at the very least?