Should Our Society Endorse Torture?

I hope not. But Getmo had no torture in any case.

Published on June 15, 2005 By greywar In Politics

(Update Version 2.0 : Wanderer's take on this can be found here and I think I finally got that last pesky misspelled instance of "toture" out of this article)

(Update : Torture is insanely difficult to type correctly. I think I got them all now but if not, tough.)

There is going to be a lot of political hay made about the torture occuring at Getmo for months to come and rightly so as the nation has a need to decide on what our torture policy really is. I for one oppose torture under any circumstances. Period. That being said let me finish with this : What happened at Getmo is not torture. It isn't even close to torture. I do not exaggerate when I say that my Boy Scout Initiation Hazing was more rigorous than the treatment TIME outlines here.

I would love to write a pithy commentary on this but I don't have the time or money for the net right now (AAFES can kiss my ass) so I will simply link to Lileks incredible excoriative Fisking of the wretchedly written TIME "piece" here.

Go read them both and then let me know if you think that the treatment in the TIME article constitutes "torture" and also whether you favor torture use in intelligence gathering and if so under what circumstances.

My answers would be :

No. (not even close to torture... go read some real Gulag stories for context)

No. Sinking to torture is unamerican (IMHO) and is an even more slippery slope than censorship.

and None. Ever. Not as a governmentally sponsored activity.

Personally? If I as JoeCitizen had the opportunity to torture a pedofile or rapist in order to save a life (or simply for revenge) I would happily show them just how useful a vivid imagination can be for the creative application of pain. Doing so would make me a criminal of course but Society can not afford to start condoning institutionalized torture (down that path lies madness) so I accept that criminalization.

P.S. Apparently Wanderer is on The Hard Road tour of America's Seediest Truckstops once more. If he makes it three posts in a row I might even re-blogroll him

Comments (Page 4)

Sturgee

on Jun 25, 2005

As the majority of the men in Gitmo and elsewhere haven't been convicted or even charged then they are simply guests of the US government.

They aren't "guests". They are detainees. They have sometimes been referred to as Persons Under U.S. Control (PUUC), but they are not considered "guests". As Greywar mentioned, we aren't overly concerned with convictions. The amount of evidence needed for a conviction is immense, and often the methods of obtaining the evidence would relegate the evidence as inadmissable in a "court of law". I agree that there is an issue with due process here, but having worked with some of the MI elements in Afghanistan, I can testify that some good is coming out of these detentions. Don't get me wrong, I am not trying to say that we have a 100% record in getting bad guys. Some of the folks have been innocent, which is a problem. We've been operating on the "better safe than sorry" assumption though. Hopefully, as we get better intel set up, we can reduce the number of innocents detained significantly, to prevent such horrible mistakes from happening. In the meantime, rest assured, the current system has produced positive results in the War on Terrorism.

Charles Einarson

on Jul 29, 2005

I just wish that the American news would remember what torture really is. They show photos of a frat party at gitmo while they should be showing what is happening to American prisoners.....Maybe they think its a crime to take a picture of a naked detainee and its OK to chop off the head of an American.....hmmmm.....Sometimes I wonder what side the press is on. I want the American people to see the planes crash in to the WTC, I want them to see the terrorists cut the head off of an American, I want them to be as mad as I was while watching that video on AFN while I was sitting in Baghdad. I don't want the American people to ever forget that we are fighting an enemy with no honor, no morals, and the will to do whatever they think is necessary.

www.303dsoldier.blogspot.com

stutefish

on Jul 29, 2005

I'm willing to consider any measures that break down a detainee's ability to shield his inner mind from the interrogator.

Anything from inducing anxiety to inducing physical pain is on the table, as far as I'm concerned.

My stipulations would be that such measures are undertaken under the supervision of trained and authorized interrogators, who are cross-checking the intel they obtain with other sources, in order to end the torture the moment it is no longer necessary.

Also, that the torture sessions (but not necessarily the methods) are fully documented, presented to a Senate committee for immediate but secret oversight, and that the documents are ultimately declassified, so that every score of years or so the public can see what kinds of results torture tends to have, and participate in the decision to keep using it or not.

I'm pretty sure that this is more or less the system we have right now.

Welcome Guest! Please take the time to register with us.
There are many great features available to you once you register, including:

Richer content, access to many features that are disabled for guests like commenting on the forums.
Access to a great community, with a massive database of many, many areas of interest.
Access to contests & subscription offers like exclusive emails.
It's simple, and FREE!