How did the issue go from horror at any torture to what level is accceptable? Makes you wonder if the release of the photos was on purpose in order to get torture legalized. Yeah, yeah, that would mean the Bush people would have to be smarter than they seem. However…
How the Abu Ghraib images lost their power to horrify
At the time [the photos were released], we referred to Abu Ghraib as a “scandal.” The images were a searing reproach to virtually any American with a soul and a conscience.[…]
But in hindsight, Abu Ghraib wasn’t a scandal for the Bush administration. It was a coup. Because when the Senate passes the president’s detainee bill today, we will, as a country, have yet more evidence that yesterday’s disgrace is today’s ordinary, and that—with a little time and a little help from the media—we can normalize almost anything in the span of a few short years.
So, what happened between April 2004 and September 2006 that has so deadened American outrage? What has made Democratic senators who were prepared to filibuster over a judicial nomination unwilling to do so now, or even to express horror over the brutalization of enemy prisoners? Is it that in the intervening time we have made a hero out of 24’s Jack Bauer, a man who tortures so that the rest of us may walk free? Is it that if you see enough “iconic” photos of a man in a hood with electrodes, they lose their ability to turn your stomach? Or is all the legalistic jive talk—the brazen congressional hairsplitting over abuse that results in “severe” vs. “serious” vs. “extreme” pain—numbing us to the reality of what remains unconscionable conduct?
#32: So I guess you’re also saying the Republicans who had problems with what Bush proposed are Left Wing Liberal Nuts. Nice thing to call your own people.
#31 I don’t recall hearing any of that going on at Abu Ghraib. Retired navy, where you there?
Hey Eric, the term is pressure not torture. If they change the name then its OK, see?
The classic strategy of the terrorist is to perform acts so heinous that the government or governments being attacked enacts law so repressive that the people overthrow their governments leaving the terrorists with the only organized group left amid all the chaos & ipso facto the new power. What Hezbollah is doing in south Lebanon seems to me to be a good current example.
The classic defense involves good law enforcement with professional intelligence agencies & a mobile flexible armed response where necessary. Also absolute truth by the government when communicating to its citizens is key to holding it all together. That and time. Examples – the Moro insurgency in the Philippines in the 1950s is one example, the Malay communist insurgency handled by the brits in 1960 & the brit response to IRA through the 20th century.
I have abbreviated the descriptions here, but if none of you believe me – look it up yourselves.
Now lets put the party shit aside and I’d like everyone to ask themselves three questions.
1) Do you agree with the classic definitions as stated above?
2) if #1 is a yes, then is the US following what has been to date the only strategy that works? If #1 is no I would ask you to please supply a definition you feel correct.
3) if answer 2 is no, then define what you would do?
I would just like to point anyone wondering to http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Waterboarding for information on waterboarding.
Imagine that happening to your mother, or brother. Imagine them being scared every time it rains for the rest of their lives. Imagine them being terrified to take showers. Then tell me that it’s OK.
#32 Uncle Dave shows his bias., Republican’s are not my people. However, it’s easy to identify a pinko by their script.
As usual, the level headed leftists are right, the knee-jerk right wingers are wrong, and the hippy dippy leftists are goofy.
#38 – Now let’s get to the important issue of the peculiar language of this Wikipedia entry that is linked above — “It became controversial in the early 21st century when reports surfaced that the Bush administration had used the practice in the interrogation of U.S. War on Terrorism detainees.”
Hey author of the entry – Look at your watch – It IS the early 21st Century right now.
#4. as it turns out, Southern Republicans are preverts trying to lure innocents into their preversions:
http://tinyurl.com/m3mze
obviously, there is some B&D angle to the conservative obsession with torture.
and #36. right on. if this is “doing something,” then nothing has to be better. note that all the alleged terrorist plots have been broken up, not by war waged in Iraq, but rather by good ol’ fashioned gumshoe work. the much-deprecated “law enforcement approach” that earned Kerry the odium of the Warmongers turns out to be the part that actually works.
#39: Fine. You’re not a Republican. Rather than calling me names, how about answering the underlying question: do you feel that those on the right who question Bush’s requests for the right to torture are actually leftist “pinkos” (to use your term from the 50’s)?
This stuff is sending us straight to the middle ages.
Me have biggest weapons! Me right! boohahahaha…..
A great win for Freedom! Remember a loss of ‘rights’ is a gain for Security!
Hurray!
See you in the REX84 Camps!
36. How long do you take to fight wars? I take it you thought the world also botched the war against Germany because it should have been over in, what, months? Presently the Taliban is contained in one area of Afghanistan with Canadians attacking. You’d like it to be botched though, wouldn’t you?
I guess there are no foreign terrorists in Iraq worth fighting.
So you think we should go after people like Bin Laden who mock us? Like Sadam Hussein, perhaps? Who crowed that he’d won the war against the US when the US stopped short of Baghdad. Wish granted. You remember that part of the war, don’t you? Let me refresh your memory. Strategic ally Kuwait asks for US help to defeat Iraq making an unprovoked attack. (Funny, I don’t recall seeing any “Get out of Muslim lands” signs.)
Maybe what we need when guys like Bin Laden and “they” roam around free, are for them to wear “kick me” signs to help us pick them out. It’s really quite unsporting of them all to just blend into the general population. Oh, news flash: the British don’t wear red coats any more either.
RBG
Keep voting Republican…
Don’t forget that Kuwait is a religious dictatorship. The fact that we pick and choose which dictators to overthrow and which to support makes us look like hypocrites to the rest of the world.
As your Dear Leader has found out: Just saying shit doesn’t necessarily make it true.
Finally !!! Now I am beginning to understand this constipation.
#37, I understand where you are coming from, but I don’t agree with your argument or thrust.
I would guess that most terrorists are fighting for one of two causes, religious or nation / country.
Why do “terrorists” fight subversively? Because they fight with the weapons they have. What dim wit decided that wars must be fought using F-16s jet fighters and M1A1 Abrams tanks only. Where is it written that infantrymen must carry 120 lbs of munitions and spare socks into battle and where kevlar hats.
When a “terrorist” kills 10 civilians it is a big deal. When an F-16 blows up an apartment building, killing 50 civilians, it is collateral damage. We don’t understand the mindset of a person that would kill the 10 civilians. How can we expect anyone else to understand the mindset of one who would kill the 50? When it is your mother / sister / or other relative lying there dead, it doesn’t matter, the guy is a terrorist and you want revenge.
Killing, kidnapping, and humiliation are just recruiting more “terrorists”. Will the circle ever stop?
#24, RBG,
Four crashed passenger jets, three leveled skyscrapers and nearly 3,000 dead in one go tends to do that to some people. Others just want to do something about that.
Re-read your post and then tell me who is infected with the madness of fear. eg: “They’re lying and trying to better control their population.”
RBG
Comment by RBG — 9/29/2006 @ 11:51 am
Tell me what part of 9/11 the inmates in Abu Graib had. Not only is it wrong to blame them for what others did, but you convicted them without any trial or evidence.
Your kind let the true proponents get away and instead have killed upwards of 100,000 Iraqis and now claim they deserved it because of 9/11?
You are mad with fear.
48. Ah, but if it appears on Dvorak Uncensored, it must be true. That also applies if I write it and it is true.
“the Taliban are fighting back hard, carving out a sanctuary”
http://tinyurl.com/hb8bx
“Carving out a sanctuary” is a long way from winning a war. I’d even call that “contained.”
Here’s what we do to a contained enemy:
“Canadian troops made significant incursions into territory held by the Taliban in the Panjwaii district of southern Afghanistan.”
http://tinyurl.com/k9693
But the above doesn’t even matter. Name me one war that didn’t have setbacks throughout. Two steps forward, one step back. It’s the Afghan cha-cha. The notion that a war must only progress with success or it is a lost or invalid cause is laughable.
RBG
47. So you would leave all dictators alone or overthrow all of them at once?
RBG
51. I’m not even referring to Abu Graib. I’m responding to the supposed panic in the streets by Americans over terrorists in general and al-Qaeda in particular.
RBG
# 42: Uncle Dave. It is not name calling, it is a historic label for liberals to carry with pride…oops sorry, liberals don’t like to dawn a label. They only want to put labels on others.
Liberals are paying full price for their Citco gas and al-Qaeda’s brand of propaganda. The question that should be posed is, “If you could prevent 9-11 from happening by coercing terrorist, would you”? Liberals with there casuistry are lost in a quagmire of abstract theory.
It takes courage to cut the BS (bad sociology) and whip out the taxonomic guide to transcending ideology. Let’s see, is it; Republican vs Democrat, Liberal vs Conservative, Classic vs Romantic, Science vs Art, Nature vs Nurture? Ah Ha!, here it is, Academic vs Reality. Violence resolves conflict. The contrary opinion is wishful thinking at its worst.
#55, Liberals are paying full price for their Citco gas and al-Qaeda’s brand of propaganda.
I think liberals also pay full price for Phillips, Exxon, Texaco, BP, Marathon, and any other oil company gas. I was unaware that any of these companies were giving discounts.
What is al Quaeda’s brand of propaganda? How does it differ in style then the White House propaganda? To me, bullcrap is bullcrap regardless if it came from a radical Muslim bull or a radical Republican bull.
#55, The question that should be posed is, “If you could prevent 9-11 from happening by coercing terrorist, would you”?
Coercing is not torture. But that is quite the hypothetical question since 9/11 happened over 5 years ago. Persuading prisoners has been shown to get better intelligence then torturing them.
If we could avert another 9/11 if you gave great anal sex to each of the hijackers, would you? Of course this is an equally relevant hypothetical question and you don’t need to confess to something you don’t want to.
What the heck is your point in the last paragraph in #55? It makes no sense.
# 56 Citco’s profits are property of Venezuelan President HUGO CHAVEZ. Perhaps its time to get back to your liberal omniversity and take a civics class. You sure know your bullcrap. The liberals are the ones with the fan on turbo.
# 57: It make perfect sense. Just ask the citizens of Hiroshima and Nagasaki how the felt about Japan loosing WWII.
#58, # 56 Citco’s profits are property of Venezuelan President HUGO CHAVEZ. Perhaps its time to get back to your liberal omniversity and take a civics class.
Citgo is owned by the Republic of Venezuela. Chavez is the democratically elected President of Venezuela.
Perhaps it is time for you to take a class in geopolitical economics. The US also buys oil from Saudi Arabia. Remember where 16 of the 9/11 hijackers came from? Our allies buy oil and natural gas from Russia. Another place that isn’t known for its democratic bent or justice. More oil is sold on the world market from Libya, or did you forget Khaddafi and Lockerbe Scotland. Or how about Nigeria, Iran, or Azerbaijan.
60. I hear the USSR worked out pretty well for the USSR.
RBG
53,
I would at least stop supporting the repressive ones just to suit US policy.
#55: Yeah, whatever. I guess your refusal to answer my question is answer enough.
#57. Or torture an Iraqi to make him tell you where Sadaam was buying that yellowcake uranium. I bet we’d get answers ….