"People are saying that this was a full-up [forward operating base]/combat outpost, and that is absolutely false and not true. There were no walls," Preysler said, latter adding, "FOB denotes that there are walls and perimeters and all that. It?s a vehicle patrol base, temporary in nature."

But that doesn?t mean the soldiers were not prepared to take on the enemy, he said.

"Now, obviously when you halt, you start prepping your defenses, and in this case we had [observation posts] and protective wire, we had the vehicles deployed properly to take advantage of their fields of fire, and we set up like that all over the place, and we do it routinely," he said.

The Army did not "abandon" the base after the attack, as many media reporters have suggested, Preysler said.

He said the decision to move from the location following the attack was to reposition, which his men have done countless times throughout their tour, and to move closer to the local seat of government.

"If there?s no combat outpost to abandon, there?s no position to abandon," he said. "It?s a bunch of vehicles like we do on patrol anywhere and we hold up for a night and pick up any tactical positions that we have with vehicle patrol bases.

"We do that routinely.... We?re always doing that when go out and stay in an area for longer then a few hours, and that?s what it is. So there is nothing to abandon. There was no structures, there was no COP or FOB or anything like that to even abandon. So, from the get-go, that is just [expletive], and it?s not right."

The Story Is About Honor and Valor, Not Victims

If there is a shred of intellectual honesty and journalist ethics in our MSM, then this is a story that should be told with at least the amount of space and intensity given to Abu Ghraib.