Simply put, this is a prime example of a sliding scale..... Not only is flipping a lit cigarette butt in your direction and uncomfortable positions and situations now considered torture, but techniques long considered "rough handling" are now called torture by those who are really either trying to reap political hay or have been against the U.S. war stature all along. In addition, lawyers are suddenly threatened with criminal prosecution for giving their opinions to the President and a sitting judge on the ninth circuit of the Federal Appeals Court finds himself threatened with the same for his opinions when he was a lawyer for the President.
This is not only the work of fanatics, who have only political ends in mind, but also the fantasies of those who have not thoroughly thought out the results of their actions..... namely the undermining of our defenses, for no good purpose. To actually consider our actions during the last eight years, when we were dealing with non-uniformed illegal combatants, to rise to the level of Nazi concentration camps or other countries' true butchery or tortuous activities is, to my thinking, a farce not to be taken seriously. The fact that our country is taking these accusations seriously and airing them publicly is either a desperate attempt to discount the accusations or a foolish move which will weaken our ability to defend against enemies who will not appreciate our apologies and would never respond with decent treatment of our troops who are captured. This is not a war against countries or leaders who share any of our higher values. It is a war against non-uniformed illegal combatants; terrorists.
Abu Ghraib was an example of stupid and silly treatment of prisoners, who were ill treated and embarrassed without any legitimate purpose, and those who participated in the mistreatment were prosecuted. Those who act in obviously illegal ways should be dealt with. Otherwise, we now seem to think we must look at every action of every individual while at war, and look back at those actions to determine whether they should be prosecuted. Whether this is done to soldiers' battle actions or lawyers' opinions, it is guaranteed to intimidate many from performing their duties to previous levels of excellence. So we are doing this for what purpose?
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
(Matthew 5:44-45) “I say to you: Continue to love your enemies and to pray for those persecuting you; that you may prove yourselves sons of your Father who is in the heavens.”
ReplyDeleteHow does one “waterboard” his enemy and love him at the same time? The same way the “Christians” did so during the Inquisitions - to bring salvation to heretics? Perhaps as some religious zealots believed in equally dark times, this “third baptism” is a suitable means to deliver the heretic from his sins.
If the above starts you seething, you can begin to understand why the Christ was tortured and mercilessly murdered. The truths he taught are no more popular today than they were when he uttered them.
Though I wouldn't say any type of harsh interrogation is a loving treatment of one's enemies, I differ in that we are not talking about doing such things to someone who disagrees with our philosophy or religion and we are not doing such things to someone to convert them or save them. I support such things when they are used as part of a larger approach to questioning those who may have information which will help us to protect innocent lives from people who have shown they kill the innocent intentionally.
ReplyDeleteI do not wish to convert them, merely to thwart their goals of doing further harm.