The Right: we’re fine with torture
30 April 2009
by
lolife
Filed under
Politics
I can’t think of any other explanation. If you listen to Cheney or the guys at Powerline, the only impression you can be left with is, if torture works, we should use it.
Obama may be criticized for trying to thread the needle on this one. He doesn’t want to start a witch hunt on the previous administration. Yet he wants to end torture for 2 reasons: 1) it’s inhumane and endangers our service-men and -women and damages our reputation abroad; and 2) it is not effective.
The Right is picking on #2 — it IS effective they say. To quote Dick Cheney: so? Lots of illegal and immoral things are effective. The vast majority of us don’t do those things regardless of their efficacy. We prefer to hold our head up high.
So why is the Right taking this position? I guess a pro-torture agenda is consistent with their general policy of government utterly dominated by the military. It also works well with their nation-building agenda and their preemptive military aggression strategy. In fact, I’m surprised that they try to finesse the issue at all! Just come out and say it: if we think you have information we need, we will torture you to get it. Just say it, you pussies.
PS – I found it interesting, in light of my previous post, that the above-linked Powerline post starts by being complimentary towards Obama.
30 April 2009 @ 7:58 pm
Obama is in a very difficult situation. According to the Geneva Convention, if there is evidence of torture within a country, and the Government of that country does not investigate and deal with it from within, any other country can, given suitable evidence, bring the individuals up on charges (ie…war crimes, torture etc…)
Recent comments by Cond. Rice do not bode well for her or the rest of the administration. She is trying to distance herself from the acts of the Bush Administration. Most recently evoking the “Nixon/Frost- If the president says to do it then it must be legal” defense.
IMHO the discussion needs to be whether or not the actions the US has taken can be defined as “torture”. There is no justification for torture and there is no such definition of “torture lite”…or just a little bit of torture.
The defense of “we were justified because of the 3000 deaths of 911″ just do not make it right. The defense of “attacks on US soil” do not make it right. ( at least historically….I fear that this administration truly believed, as Nixon believed)
Obama can not dodge this issue. He may get a pass from the American public, as we are all just happy the past 8 years are over, but in the “court of global opinion” he will suffer considerable diplomatic pressure/problems etc…
Apparently Spain could very well be the first country to bring some sort of charges against the Bush Administration…(this last part I heard on MSNBC so it could be a pile of crap….I think they are to the left as Fox News is to the right….)
We also have several internal investigations underway and we are seeing and will see key members of the Bush Administration start to roll over…..
I have been sickened by the Rights praise of Bush being, currently, silent on the torture issue. I think he knows that the future could be very difficult for him.
19 May 2009 @ 3:38 pm
This issue is so simple it’s laughable. A policy of torture is morally wrong. Whether it is an effective way to obtain information or not should not enter into the picture. Our public policy has to be NO TORTURE…end of story. Our military has been water-boarding a lot of people they “suspect” may have general knowledge of “possible” future attacks, not “specific knowledge of imminent attacks”.. This has occured with the explicit authority of our highest officials which makes it official policy. Bad idea numb nuts! You just surrendered up the moral high ground and gave permission to the rest of the world to do the same to our service men and women.
Now, that said, I know the proponents of toture will start spouting the “24″ scenario “what if the terrorist has a nuke planted in New York City” bullshit ….. we all know what we’d do as individuals to stop that disaster from occuring if we knew such an attack were imminent…. regardless of the official policy. I suspect that if any one prevented the deaths of thousands by making an individual decision to torture someone with knowledge of an imminent attack, all would be forgiven. I hope we have that fantasy put to rest once and for all….because it is a fucking fantasy!
20 May 2009 @ 8:32 pm
Levi,
You might want to try and at least get your facts straight. When I see posts like yours it just makes me ill because misinformed people like you have given us this disaster of a President. And yes I mean Obama, he is a disaster and it’s just going to get worse.
How many people were waterboarded? “A lot” of people you say???
The answer??? 3, yup, three.
fishdweeb…
You, along with our fine host, Mr. lolife, are another prime example of the myopic left. You state “we are all just happy the past 8 years are over.” What liberal bubble do you live in? Let me guess, you are either student or faculty at Columbia, yes? Or maybe you work for the NYT??? You really need to get out more. Maybe go do some “teabagging.”
No, we are all not happy. There are many, many of us who are far from happy and guess what? Our numbers are growing every day as the policies of this President and the Democratic majority manifest themselves. So, maybe you should all take your heads out of the sand, or out of your asses, and look around. Your positions and your “majority” are not as comfy as you might think.
And BTW… The argument on the right is not that torture is OK if it get’s results, or that “a little bit of torture” is OK. The argument is that IT’S NOT TORTURE” and it has never been ruled in any court, or decided by anybody that it constitutes torture. The administration went to great lengths to make sure of the legality of their actions. Even your sacred Nancy Pelosi (what a giant loser) was briefed and gave no objection at the time.
So, if you want to whine and cry foul, and take people to court, or whatever, just please make sure that a crime has been committed.
Did you know that we waterboard our own people? Navy Seals, special ops guys, CIA agents, as part of their training? Would you say we torture them? Do we torture our own people? If not, what is the difference, please explain it to me. The attorney general (the feckless Eric Holder) was asked this question and guess what, he couldn’t answer it. Can you say deer in the headlights?
You guys are lame.
Love,
micadelic “the hated”
20 May 2009 @ 9:53 pm
btw lolife…
You really need to read the Powerline post you cite and be honest about it. I would imagine that many of your readers don’t bother to read the article yu link to, just your opinion of it.
From the Powerline article…
And they go on to preface their argument by saying…
Yet you try and spin it by saying that “I can’t think of any other explanation. If you listen to Cheney or the guys at Powerline, the only impression you can be left with is, if torture works, we should use it.”
Really, that’s the ONLY impression you can be left with?
Wow.
21 May 2009 @ 12:52 am
micadelic, I’ll just ask you this — are you OK with our enemies treating our soldiers the same way we treat them? water boarding, sleep deprivation, humiliation, loud music, disgusting food, “stress positions”…the list goes on. I personally don’t think we should subject these prisoners, scum though some of them may be, to any of this shit. The technique of mistreating people to gain information is one I am willing to live without, even if it creates additional risk for American citizens. What is your stance on the actual issue?
21 May 2009 @ 7:25 am
um, dood, they CUT THEIR FUCKING HEADS OFF.
We are playing against an enemy who follows no rules, will do ANYTHING including killing innocent children, women, anyone who stands in their way. We, on the other hand, poor some water down their face to convince them they should tell us where the next attack might be coming from. WE ARE NOT EQUAL TO THEM. We are better, we are more civilized, we are more respectful of laws and human rights. Look at frerakin’ Gitmo, that is the most humanely run prison camp in the history of earth. Our guards where gloves when they handle the Koran, the prisoners get better health care than most Americans, etc, etc. Would our soldiers, if captured, get anywhere near that kind of treatment anywhere in the world?
If our soldiers were plotting the purposeful deaths of innocent women and children, planting car bombs in public places, and engaging in the kinds of tactics that out enemy engages in, then yes, I would not blame our enemies for using whatever means necessary, short of actual physical harm such as cutting off fingers, heads, whatever, to find out about additional attacks. We would deserve it, and so do they.
It is not torture and I am fine with them using these techniques on real live murdering malicious evil fucktards.
21 May 2009 @ 4:33 pm
So you are pro-mistreatment of human beings. I am anti-mistreatment of human beings. I just wanted to know where we stood.
When our soldiers are captured, we want the Geneva Conventions followed. Yet we won’t follow them. We want our soldiers unharmed by their captors. Yet we harm our prisoners, some of them literally tortured to death. Some of them tormented to suicide. None of them given anything like due process. We don’t even know who half of them are or what they did.
We don’t stick up for just the rights of the just, we stick up for the rights of everyone. Or some of us do, I guess.
I’m not a pacifist. I’m OK with our soldiers killing people who are trying to kill them. I am not sympathetic to the cause of your average person in Gitmo. But I will not ever support torture or things that closely resemble torture for anyone for any reason. Neither should you.
22 May 2009 @ 10:02 pm
Even assuming that the Geneva conventions were not followed to the letter (which is debatable), Taliban fighters and especially Al Q’aeda fighters have excluded themselves from protection of those conventions because of their tactics. You cannot engage in illegal activities (such as car bombs, cutting off peoples heads, flying airliners full of innocent people into public buildings killing thousands) and then cry foul when you are treated harshly with “enhanced interrogation techniques.” Sorry, once you cross that line, you don’t get to use the Geneva Conventions card.
Even though we made every effort to stay on the good side of that line as well. We gave those fucktards more consideration then they deserved IMHO.
22 May 2009 @ 10:13 pm
PS – Yes, I am pro-mistreatment of evil, murderous, soulless, human beings with no regard for human life.
All other human beings, I’m pretty much anti-mistreatment of them.
Just so we’re clear. Because for you to try and characterize me as a person who is for the mistreatment of human beings would be equal to me characterizing you as a person who is for the killing of babies.
So let’s please stay away from the rhetoric and try and have an intellectually honest debate.
25 May 2009 @ 8:12 pm
You are seriously confused. I’m not defending the tactics of terrorists. I’m talking about our actions. Their actions are for sure detestable. But how are we better if we take glee in abusing these people? The high road is harder, Michael, but worth it. That is what saddens me the most about people who think like you. They plunge right down to the low road whenever the going gets tough. We should not be abusing people in custody. Period.
As far as the abortion bait goes, I don’t believe they are babies. I think people who claim they are babies are uninformed and oddly uncaring about the rights of the mother, who is for sure a human being. I prefer that people don’t have abortions but making them illegal is insane.
4 June 2009 @ 3:42 pm
Micadelic… your party’s last presidential candidate has a lot more cred on the torture issue than you or Rush or Hannity or any of the other right wing talking heads. Based on his own experience (having actually been tortured) he has stated unequivocally that waterboarding is torture. Here’s the link….see for yourself.
http://gatewaypundit.blogspot.com/2009/05/mccain-speaks-out-against-waterboarding.html
It is torture and our official policy has to be NO FUCKING TORTURE! The fact that the CIA only admits it tortured three guys is not an arguement.
6 June 2009 @ 9:02 pm
Levi,
Whether or not McCain says waterboarding is torture does not make it so. I disagree with McCain on many things and this is one of them.
The CIA does not admit it tortured anybody.
6 June 2009 @ 9:09 pm
Michael – who “takes glee” in abusing anybody? You mis-characterize and then hurl insults based on your mis-characterization. Typical.
And dood, I’m not confused at all and your constant stooping to ad hominem attacks just illustrates the weakness of your positions.
8 June 2009 @ 12:08 pm
More defensive and substance-free arguments from micadelic.
Dude you said “I am pro-mistreatment of …” What exactly am I mischaracterizing? You guys want to
tortureenhanced interrogate these guys. What insults did I hurl? I think I characterized your argument quite accurately. You think Obama is a pussy for taking the high road. I think he’s a leader.9 June 2009 @ 7:04 am
concerning your current discussion. I found this to be of interest.
I viewed the entire speach and instanly ordered a copy of the book.
Chapter 12 on “un-reported Iraqi deaths” is where this link should take you.
http://fora.tv/2009/05/20/Censored_2009_The_Top_25_Censored_Stories_of_2007-08#%20
9 June 2009 @ 7:05 am
I must have screwed up the link….my link takes you to the “top” of the presentation…scroll down to chapter 12….
10 June 2009 @ 2:36 pm
Micadelic,
John McCain is a hell of a lot more qualified to render an opinion on what is and what is not torture than you or any other right wing commentators. Whether you agree or disagree that waterboarding falls within a legalistic definition of torture really misses the point and illustrates the arrogance of the right in this country. This is not about a definition of torture or whether the legacy of Goerge Bush, Dick Cheny and the rest of the GOP will be tarnished (because who really gives a fuck about that besides them?). This arguement is about the moral standing of the US in a global context. In order to be credible on important issues like human rights the US must walk the walk. By engaging in conduct that would be considered torture by a majority of people (including both of our last presidential candidates), we have failed to walk that walk…….and if you continue to disagree with me I will hold your head under water until you pass out……time after time after time. Not to worry the red hot poker up your ass isn’t torture…..Rush said so. Come on man! Think for yourself on this one!