Quote:
Originally Posted by Kevin
This is the United States of America and we don't torture. I don't take the simple view on too many issues, but this is one that (as I've learned more about it) I think should be a very simple analysis.
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by KSig RC
Well, I mean, I have absolutely no doubt that waterboarding did indeed reveal pertinent and usable information about threats to national security while in use during the Bush regime, at least at some point . . . Chaney might be a nutjob, but he's not an idiot, and his push is undoubtedly backed by 'facts' of some sort. The sheer amount of torture means they probably got something, even if only by the law of large numbers.
The real issue is whether acquiring this information was worth the rest - the deterioration of core American/Constitutional values, the bad publicity/face toward the radical Muslim world, steeling the resolve of enemy combatants, etc., and much like Kevin, I openly doubt the gains were worth it.
So yeah - I don't think it's nearly as simple as "water is wet", and in that vein it feels counterproductive for this FBI agent to give a ringing dismissal (on what appear to be very valid grounds) while still leaving the door open for Chaney et al. to smash a foot in with specific instances of success. This is really why idiots think that "enemies of America" deserve torture etc. - the spin is better controlled by the other side.
More simply put: "It doesn't work" is an intellectual argument, not an intuitive argument, and for idiots (who are the people we need to actually convince) it is simply rebutted by even a single instance of it "working."
|
I'm no international law or international human rights expert, but I'm not sure it's even as simple as you guys are making it. The US has been using torture for some time (KUBARK and the "Phoenix Program" are the first instances that comes to mind, although both were pre-Convention Against Torture).
I'm not saying I'm for torture...but, to be perfectly honest, I can understand the arguments for it in certain circumstances, and I know a few reasonably intelligent people (i.e. people who aren't idiots) who feel the same way.
At the end of the day, I don't know. I've never been in the military, never had to extract information from someone, and have never had to make these choices of whether or not to use these tactics. I do, however, suspect that one of the reasons we'll never see anyone from the Bush administration put on trial is because this administration, and future administrations, would endorse some methodology that could qualify as torture.