Torture
So the Bush administration is going to fight.. for their right... to Tooorture. And they've already been doing it to hundreds of people for years since 9/11.
Now, let's leave aside for the moment the basic, human, moral issues this raises. How about frickin' effectiveness? We're torturing left and right but (A) we haven't caught Bin Laden, (B) we haven't put the nail in the coffin on the Taliban (remember them?), (C) we're totally losing in Iraq. Now torture seems to only hurt us in Iraq -- I don't think anyone serious (and I don't include the Bush administration here) thinks that torture helps us win hearts and minds in Iraq. But what about Bin Laden? The international community has been/was willing to give us broad discretion in taking him down. Don't forget that all the supposed "blame-America-first" crowd that opposed Iraq supported Afghanistan. I'm talking about France, Germany, the Pope, College liberals, liberal democrats, whomever.
What I'm trying to get at here is that a lot of people who strongly object to our use of torture might turn a blind eye to twisting the fingernails off an Al Qaeda killer who knows where Bin Laden is. You know what, I might have supported it. I might have been angry enough to hold the pliers. But we've been doing this for years, and it hasn't gotten us any closer to Bin Laden. Maybe it's just not the right method.
Or maybe Bush just plain used up the "America is rightfully pissed and gets to thrash around in anger a lot" capital. He used it up on Iraq, and on torturing Iraqi insurgents, and on holding as "enemy combatants" idiot seventeen-year-old fourth-son-of-third-wife Saudis we caught in Madrassas in Afghanistan -- guys who know squat. Couldn't Bush have used this capital for something useful instead?
Like say chasing down Bin Laden in northern Pakistan? Everyone knows that he's hiding there amongst the Pashtun tribesman. Couldn't Bush have used our post 9/11 capital on that? Who'd be complaining if we did a bit of torture on his bodyguards to find him? Who'd be second-guessing?
But instead Bush wants leeway to torture innocent Iraqis. Screw him. If he wants permission to violate human rights and moral norms, and least America should get something out of it. I'd sell my soul for Bin Laden's head, but not for this idiot fight in Iraq.
Now, let's leave aside for the moment the basic, human, moral issues this raises. How about frickin' effectiveness? We're torturing left and right but (A) we haven't caught Bin Laden, (B) we haven't put the nail in the coffin on the Taliban (remember them?), (C) we're totally losing in Iraq. Now torture seems to only hurt us in Iraq -- I don't think anyone serious (and I don't include the Bush administration here) thinks that torture helps us win hearts and minds in Iraq. But what about Bin Laden? The international community has been/was willing to give us broad discretion in taking him down. Don't forget that all the supposed "blame-America-first" crowd that opposed Iraq supported Afghanistan. I'm talking about France, Germany, the Pope, College liberals, liberal democrats, whomever.
What I'm trying to get at here is that a lot of people who strongly object to our use of torture might turn a blind eye to twisting the fingernails off an Al Qaeda killer who knows where Bin Laden is. You know what, I might have supported it. I might have been angry enough to hold the pliers. But we've been doing this for years, and it hasn't gotten us any closer to Bin Laden. Maybe it's just not the right method.
Or maybe Bush just plain used up the "America is rightfully pissed and gets to thrash around in anger a lot" capital. He used it up on Iraq, and on torturing Iraqi insurgents, and on holding as "enemy combatants" idiot seventeen-year-old fourth-son-of-third-wife Saudis we caught in Madrassas in Afghanistan -- guys who know squat. Couldn't Bush have used this capital for something useful instead?
Like say chasing down Bin Laden in northern Pakistan? Everyone knows that he's hiding there amongst the Pashtun tribesman. Couldn't Bush have used our post 9/11 capital on that? Who'd be complaining if we did a bit of torture on his bodyguards to find him? Who'd be second-guessing?
But instead Bush wants leeway to torture innocent Iraqis. Screw him. If he wants permission to violate human rights and moral norms, and least America should get something out of it. I'd sell my soul for Bin Laden's head, but not for this idiot fight in Iraq.