And now for something completely different
Check out this article about the torture debate from The Wall Street Journal.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
Check out this article about the torture debate from The Wall Street Journal.
Posted by
Rich
at
12:10 PM
Thanks, Rich. Nothing like some good bush administration apologist journalism. Are you kidding? Is this how you see the world?
ReplyDeleteWell, first of all, I wanted to see if anyone was paying attention. Looks like at least one person was (and this same person was willing to call me out, but not to provide his/her name...interesting...also, something you might like better: http://www.slate.com/id/2132195/nav/tap1/) Second of all, I do agree with some of the points set forth by the WSJ article. Namely that the McCain Amendment shouldn't pass in its current form. Unfortunately there are certain times when torture is justifiable and even necessary (the classic "ticking time bomb" scenario for example). For more on this, check out Charles Krauthammer's much talked about piece. Sadly, in the modern world, the work of only a few men can destroy the lives of thousands and change the course of world history. Don't you think that if making a known criminal suffer for a little while might prevent a major terrorist attack, it is worth it? (Sorry if I might be over-simplifying things in certain cases, but individual scenarios are important when the McCain Amendment proposes a complete ban.)
ReplyDeleteyou gotta put this in a bigger perspective. Do I have a problem with known Al-Qaeda members being rough-housed a little. No. But in case you haven't noticed, the war on terror isn't exactly against al Qaeda anymore. Should Iraqi militants who would pose no threat to our national security once we exit this hellish quagmire--should they be tortured by us? Hell no. The very presence of a "torture debate" itself places the whole terrorism issue in a context that favors the administration. We shouldn't even be over there in the position to torture. We should be spending the hundreds of billions of dollars that are going to nation building on shoring up our ports--on actually improving our national security. What a disgusting time to rally around this poor excuse for a president and his misguided worldview. Shame on you.
ReplyDeleteand you're right about the work of a few destroying the lives of thousands...The Bush/Cheney team has reached the 30,000 mark according to their own estimates.
ReplyDeleteOr does 30,000 dead innocents only matter if they're American? Get your head out of the WSJ and think a little about the real world we live in.
ReplyDeletefirst, who are you? second, i am not trying to say that i am a major bush supporter or that i think that the war on iraq was necessarily a good idea (although some good has unquestionably come out of it, along with a lot of bad). in this case, i am just discussing the issue of the effectiveness and necessity (or ineffectiveness and unnecessariness) of torture as a part of american policy in general. torture should be a last resort in dire circumstances, but it should be something that is available against known terrorists. i don't want to get into a debate about the iraq war in general because i probably do not know enough about it and it's already discussed often enough by people who know a lot more about it than i do.
ReplyDeleteWhen we were 6, Rich made a clay figure of Dick Cheney in art class
ReplyDeletedan--incredible comment.
ReplyDeleteRich...We're living in a Post Abu-Gharib world, and you're wanting to discuss torture in a vacuum that doesn't include Iraq? The Mccain resolution is a piece of realist legislation, one that goes beyond your ideal example of how torture can be perfectly used against terrorism into the real world of whether we trust flawed people commissioned by flawed presidents for flawed reasons to always make the right decisions about when it's okay to commit human rights violations in the name of national security. I hate to see someone as smart as you get drawn into the black and white thinking of the neocons. You don't know enough about the Iraq war to talk about it? Are you a torture expert or something. Who do you think does know enough about the Iraq war? The administration that's botched everything they've done there? The democrats who don't have the vision to offered a comprehensive, unified solution. The press whose idea of analysis is to be a microphone for both sides of the spin? I can't believe that you of all people would just cling to your little pro-torture WSJ corner and claim ignorance as establishment officials less intelligent than you screw up the world in your name.
ReplyDeletei have been sufficiently humbled to not post anything at all political anymore. i will keep those thoughts to myself. if it makes you feel any better, i think that dick cheney is power-hungry and money-grubbing and bush is just a nice guy who probably shouldn't be president (not to say that either of his opponents in the last two elections would have particularly good either...but let's not go there).
ReplyDeleteGeorge Bush, just a "nice" guy?...Are you using nice when you mean to say he's not a master stratgeic planner. Yeah, I agree, but come on, it doesn't take an expert personality reader to see that bush is a punk.
ReplyDeletedon't you know that i'm a moderate on the facebook??? a moderate i say!!!
ReplyDeletewell, i think anonymous is being a bit harsh on you there, rich, but i have to agree with everything he has to say, right down to bush being an ignorant, vindictive, petulant fool. or did i at that part?
ReplyDelete'at' that part? god am i lame!
ReplyDelete