Redstate

Can't we just ship McCain back to the Hanoi Hilton?

Normally I agree with much of what you have to say, but here you are overstating the case.  I don't think McCain is saying (or continuing to say) that our troops are torturing detainees or prisoners, so much as he is saying that it is damaging to the reputation of the U.S., and potentially harmful to our military forces abroad, if we are perceived to be engaging in or condoning torture.

There's a significant difference between that and your claim that McCain says we are continuning to torture detainees.

Maybe I've missed it, but I don't think he's saying what you implied.  I would, of course, be willing to be enlightened.

Sen. John McCain claimed Wednesday that the U.S. is still torturing terrorist detainees, even as Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice visits with European leaders to assure them that the practice is banned under U.S. law.

"We've got to stop this torture," McCain told radio host Don Imus.

-----

Source: NewsMax, 12/8/05

I'll be the first to admit that NewsMax isn't the 'ne plus ultra' of news organizations, but in this case they cite the Senator on Imus. Sounds like he said it as Blanton reported it.

So we have to pass legislation in order to rebuff the perception we're torturing detainees, even though we're not torturing detainees?

We are supposed to be the good guys.  So whatever actually is defined as torture vs. say simply hard interogation is irrelevant.  What matters is perception.  If the American people hear or see something that they think is torture, then it is.  Being the good guys requires that we hold ourselves to a much higher standard and if that means overreacting to accusations then so be it.  Also, I believe that as a victim of torture himself, McCain has the absolute right to speak freely on this topic and if he feels that what is being done constitutes torture then I will believe that as well.

As terrorists kill another American hostage and blow up more Iraqi civilians and American soliders, John McCain continues to say American troops are torturing detainees. Way to egg them on, Senator.

Thank you for nailing McCain on this, Blanton.  I wish someone would explain to the terrorists that it's called waterboarding, not torture.  Oh, and sensory deprivation.  And humiliation.

I so agree that we need to stop egging them on.  Just think of the lives that would be spared if we would patiently explain to them that what we're doing falls somewhat short of torture.  

I'm sure they'd understand that we're just trying to get information using harsh interrogation techniques. They're reasonable people, after all. Right?

What matters is perception.

Well, we shouldn't perpetuate that perception by legislation that infers the perception is true. Especially when there is no evidence that the perception is true.

The perception in much of the world is that we deserved to be hit on 9/11. Should we propose legislation saying we will curb whatever we did to get attacked on 9/11?

There are already laws on the books forbidding  torture.  I think it is sick that McCain (R-Media) is using his former POW status to push this BS legislation.  This only gives fuel to these terrorists who have been trained to lie about the conditions they endure in captivity.  I wish McCain had the best interest of the Country at heart instead of his own.

him referencing the troops in that story, as Blanton contends.

We would be raking him over the coals (figuratively of course).  How is this different from Kerry saying American troops were terrorizing women and children in the dark of night?  Or Turbin Durbin comparing troops to Nazis, Soviet gulags, or Pol Pot?  McCain is implying we are torturing people.  With people like McCain in charge Howard Dean may be right- we can't win this war.

The Democratic Choice For The Republican Nomination.

Rush mentioned a former POW in the House who was tortured in Vietnam who is against the McCain bill (I guess his hand is mangled from the torture he endured).

It seems to me this representative's views (his name escapes me right now), his views should be just as valid, if not more valid, than McCain's view.

I want Rick Santorum or Sam Brownback (that is, if I can't have Alan Keyes or Pat Robertson).

:)

about how the world perceives us, but I am worried at how other Americans perceive our troops and their mission.  I would venture to say that most Americans would think waterboarding is torture and that sleep deprivation, humiliation, and the stuff that is in the Abu Graib pics is completely incompatible with our role as the good guys.  That is what matters.  

that terrorists kill American hostages because we supposedly torture terrorist captives?

of torture and abuse of detainees (many of whom are guilty of nothing but being in the wrong place at the wrong time) is NOT something John McCain is making up. It is something that is happening in the real world and it is being widely reported from diverse sources. This ethic of crude and hyper-partisan denial needs to stop right now. It is profoundly shameful, hideously unChristian and runs counter to everything that America stands for. Anyone who truly cartes about either the future of this country or about moral values in general should be as outraged about this as I am and I am appalled that there are deniers and/or apologists for something that should never, ever be linked to our nation.

Saying that "at least we aren't as bad as the terrorists" is a really lame excuse.

Do you honestly think that if an innocent man gets his testicles electrocuted by the CIA, it's okay because we still are not as bad as the "Islamofascists"?

http://www.newyorker.com/fact/content/?050214fa_fact6

http://www.forbes.com/home/feeds/afx/2005/11/13/afx2333394.html

http://www.timecanada.com/CNOY/story.adp?year=2004

the majority of Americans think Bush lied about pre-war intell. Even though it is not true and a perception like that (or the perception our troops torture) hurts our country, should we propose legislation to curb presidential lying?

Hell No!

You put the facts out there. You don't appease critics by conceding to their accusation.

Terrorists in Iraq are killing American hostages, blowing up more Iraqi civilians, and killing more American soldiers?  I thought everything was going great there and we were winning the war?

But Blanton explicitly said that, in the part of his post that I quoted.  Try reading it again.

By saying that we SHOULDN'T be torturing terrorists we are egging them on but by ACTUALLY torturing suspects that does absolutely nothing?  

Interesting logice.

Do you seriously think an insurgent in Iraq wakes up and goes, "Well did you see what McCain said the other day?  Let's go kill some Westerners!"  Do you honestly believe that anything John McCain says in the U.S. media is responsible for providing motivation for insurgent activity?

Take a step back from the edge, man.

"I would venture to say that most Americans would think waterboarding is torture and that sleep deprivation, humiliation, and the stuff that is in the Abu Graib pics is completely incompatible with our role as the good guys."

None of this is torture but it may fall under McCain proposal.  Why don't you let the grown-ups take care of things and put your head back in the sand?

Yes, McCain has every right to say what he wants as a former POW. Lets see if this POW gets as much airtime:

http://www.mercurynews.com/mld/mercurynews/news/politics/13343975.htm

I especially like this quote: "I feel very strongly about this because I know what torture is. Torture is already against the law, and John's proposal doesn't make it any more illegal"

that they don't have television, radio, or newspapers in Iraq? Or is it your contention that nothing John McCain says is going to make it into international press?

Get a grip on reality.

The facts are that we have been using certain hard interrogation techniques on prisoners.  Pictures and descriptions of these techniques have come to light to the American people.  Whether or not these techniques meet the dictionary definition of torture is irrelevant, as if the American people believe they are torture then they are torture.  The Bush lying about intelligence is a straw man, as the only way we can know if that is true is if we had access to Bush's brain.  We do have access to information regarding interrogation and it seems most Americans are saying if it looks like torture to them than it is torture.  If you want to bbe the one going around and trying to convince people that waterboarding isn't torture, go ahead, but I doubt its going to work with most people (as a matter of fact, I bet if you described waterboarding in a generic context to every American, 80%+ would tell you that is torture).

Especially when there is no evidence that the perception is true.

No evidence that there is a perception?  Or is there a perception but the perception itself is untrue?  I don't know about the former but evidence for the latter grows by the day.

that the terrorists are watching C-Span and worrying about Beltway politics?

it doesn't matter if these techniques do not meet the literal definition of torture, all that matters is that the American people think they are torture.  We do not want to be the party advocating waterboarding, its not an election winner.

...then some clowns over here started talking about withdrawing our bedraggled, worn-out loser army immediately and the terrorists suddenly got a second wind, for some reason...

the insurgents in Iraq can even read for the most part.  Their leadership however, love the McCain/Dean/Kerry bites.  They can forward them on to Al-Jazeera to be looped ad infinitum.  If you don't think that all this rhetoric from the Dems and McCain (but I repeat myself) is hurting us and abetting the enemy, you really don't understand what we are up against.

why doesn't McCain specify who is doing the torturing and clear up his statement?

Their leadership however, love the McCain/Dean/Kerry bites.

Can you provide something that shows this is the case?

and I know it isn't torture.  And I'm not going to let an ill-informed populus, spoon-fed bilge from the MSM, alter my opinion.

I don't know about C-Span, specifically - but sapping the political will of your opponents is, like, Insurgency Tactics 150.  And when your opponents have a democracy, that means working on the parties out of power.

I'm mildly surprised that I even have to type this out.

If its just perception, why is McCain's promoting the perception of a US that goes around systematically torturing?  Even if he is against it, his actions and statements ascribe to a viewpoint where fact is not necessary, just popularity.

Bush said Iraq had WMD. We haven't found any WMD. There is your proof(just like the Abu Graib pictures). According to the polls, the American people perceive he lied.

Just like they perceive waterboarding is torture.

Just to clarify, I don't believe Bush lied, our troops torture (at Abu Graib, Gitmo, or anywhere else) and I don't believe the polls anymore.

I believe the CIA may interrogate coercively. More power to them.

(as a matter of fact, I bet if you described waterboarding in a generic context to every American, 80%+ would tell you that is torture).

Do you have anything to back up your assertion?

I believe if you explained waterboarding, who we are doing it to and why, most Americans would be for it. Especially if the people are reminded how captured Americans and allies are treated by the terrorists.

Zawahiri's last video tape, I have no choice but to believe they are as attuned to American politics was anyone on this list.

So yes. And to even insinuate that they aren't highly sensitive to Washington politics, as broadcast through not only al-Jazeera but our own Arabic language broadcasts by VOA, just defies commonsense.

http://today.reuters.co.uk/news/newsArticle.aspx?type=topNews&storyID=2
005-12-07T090809Z_01_KNE711042_RTRUKOC_0_UK-QAEDA-ZAWAHRI-VIDEO.xml

Some samples:

"Zawahri said the United States had suffered a defeat in Iraq and it was only a matter of time before it pulled out its troops."

Thanks you Dems

"Iraq is a catastrophe for America and Americans will leave, it will only be a matter of time.

Thanks you Dems

"I say to Bush: You entered Iraq with lies, you will lose Iraq and lie about it and you will leave with the pretext that you have completed your mission ... America only has to decide on the number of (troops) it wishes to lose before withdrawing."

Howard... is that you?

Regardless of your opinion, the administration's arrogance and refusal to answer direct questions, OR SUPPORT LEGISLATION BANNING THE USE OF TORTURE, only implies that these practices are still in use and will be continued for as long as they see fit.



This is unacceptable!



We are supposed to be leading the world by example. This is a step in the wrong direction of Human Rights progress.



OUTLAW TORUTRE PRACTICES BY ANYONE REPRESENTING THE UNITED STATES AND YOU WILL SEE A DECLINE IN THE USE OF TORTUE AGAINST US.



Continuing to allow its use as a common practice only validates it for others...



This is the sad reality...

an eye for an eye and the whole world goes blind.

fantastic - just a great model of democratic values all around

McCain has an OBLIGATION not to sensationalize the topic for political gain.

If anyone one should be clairfying the differnce between torture for torture's sake and torture for immediate tactical value - HE should.

If any person should remain silent on the topic while our people are in the hands of the butchers - HE should; and He should know why better than anyone else.

McCain should be the first person to precisely define his terms on the topic; to be very, very circumspect about his allegations concerning our troops.

He is none of these things.

Personally, I'm a little beyond weary with this self-promoting loose cannon; and am ready to see someone -  anyone - in the Republican leadership call him to task.

(a) Did you hear McCain said our troops are torturing detainees?

(b) How outrageous!  In no way do our troops torture detainees, as McCain contends.

(c) Further, McCain's claim that our troops torture detainees only eggs on the terrorists!

(d) McCain should immediately take back his claim that our troops torture detainiees!

(e) Did you hear McCain said our troops are torturing detainees?

if i didnt know better:

http://english.aljazeera.net/NR/exeres/94B17C40-260B-4CAB-B653-70845E9ED97B
.htm

it should not matter who we are doing it to.  Its either torture or its not, and I and many other Americans believe it is.  If waterboarding is ok, should police departments do it?  Again, do you really want to be the party running on a platform of advocating waterboarding?

for a little while.

OUTLAW TORUTRE PRACTICES BY ANYONE REPRESENTING THE UNITED STATES AND YOU WILL SEE A DECLINE IN THE USE OF TORTUE AGAINST US.

Enumerate who exactly is torturing us now because we have allegedly committed torture, and which of those entities would treat us better in the future if we agreed to be nice to them?

"OUTLAW TORUTRE PRACTICES BY ANYONE REPRESENTING THE UNITED STATES AND YOU WILL SEE A DECLINE IN THE USE OF TORTUE AGAINST US."

...you spin widdershins three times around a lightning-struck oak tree at midnight while chanting certain incantations in Attic Greek.

What?  Sorry, I thought that we were trading magic spells.

Moe

that the high level terrorist leaders are paying attention.

But your average terrorist isn't likely paying much attention Senator John McCain.

I have tried to find actual evidence in a gazillion news sources, and come up with mostly propaganda.  Lexis Nexis be cursed.  But nasty things reporters create:

CIA terror cover-up

I blathered about it poorly.  But still come to the same conclusion.  Torture is bad.  We don't do it.  If someone gets caught doing it, we expose them.  So they don't do it.  Even when they do it.

Why can't that be our official position?  Or is it just not acceptable for the left.  Their apparent desire is to make us admit to being horrific brutalizing overlords intent on world domination.

too fine a point on it in my humble opinion.

While you are probably technically correct, whether he meant troops or CIA or Ag inspectors, it seems a bit like "depends on what the meaning of 'is' is." He said "We've got to stop ..."

since we invaded.  They say the same thing about Afghanistan.  

Lead by example, do not allow room for interpretation where it does not belong.

remember it isn't what you do or say it's what some whack-job reporter or editor wants you to have said or done.

Well thanks for the talking points version from Code Pink. Got any substance to that?

it isn't irrelevent actually. Under that approach being late with dinner would be off-limits.

I submit that John McCain probably does know very well what torture is; the North Vietnamese were by all accounts past-masters at the art. And in that case he certainly knows that what we may be doing doesn't even approach torture.

Yet we killed tens of thousands of innocent Japanese citizens when we dropped nukes on them. Should we not have done it? Even though it saved hundreds of thousands of American lives?

This is a war against an enemy that targets innocent civilians.

I would see a terrorist tortured in the worst way if it would save American life/lives. They brought this war to us. Too many among us seem to forget that.

the press and the left has been on a concerted campaign to indict the US and if it means cheapening the meaning of torture they don't care. Keeping someone awake for 24 hours is unpleasant but it doesn't hold a candle to pulling out their fingernails one at a time.

perceive the President to have lied because the press has been telling them he lied for the past two years.

I submit that if they reported the problem for what it actually was, significant discrepancies and errors in gathering and intepretation, the average American would not think the President lied.

They are a cycle or two behind.  Notice the cap on Bush's pic?  "Poll numbers continue to decline..."

deal with criminals, bank robbers, thieves, et al. The guys we are talking about are not being picked up for knocking over the local Seven-11!

then Hillary would win the presidency in 08.

...saying that Blanton is saying, "at least we aren't as bad as the terrorists" is really twisting this thread, AJB, but I'll play along.

Personally, I like it if a terrorist is uncertain whether or not his oysters will be smoked upon capture, and even if McCain's anti-torture boilerplate results in more law forbidding any US torture, all we have to do is direct the terrorists to the dubious results of McCain's campaign finance reform efforts. If McCain sticks with this anti-torture mission like he did with campign finance reform, we may even end up codifying torture into the constitution! ;)

to think that those things are torture you'd better never visit Auschwitz, you'll lose your lunch.

We could treat the terrorists to lunch at the Waldorf every day and they are going to continue doing what they do. How we behave has zero impact on them.

You're talking about the democrats, right?

Of torture is already against the law or did you miss that part?

they got the DNC talking points across.

Regardless of your opinion, the administration's arrogance and refusal to answer direct questions, OR SUPPORT LEGISLATION BANNING THE USE OF TORTURE, only implies that these practices are still in use and will be continued for as long as they see fit.

When did you stop beating your wife?

OUTLAW TORUTRE [sic] PRACTICES BY ANYONE REPRESENTING THE UNITED STATES AND YOU WILL SEE A DECLINE IN THE USE OF TORTUE [sic] AGAINST US.

My bridge over the East River is still for sale.

How about we lead the world on human rights and free tens of millions from a brutal Stalinist dictator?

you disagree with Blanton, but why are you giving up?

Name the countries/entities.

Given your posts to date you may want to consider that the price of further participation.

with snarky witticism to score cheap points.

your not implying that McCain would throw over his own countries national interest for more exposure?  Perish the thought...

:-)

to this Blogger thing, but I sense sarcasm!! :O

zero airtime quite simply because his remarks don't fit the preception. The press has decided that we torture anyone we get our hands on and anyone whose opinion does not fit that belief is toast.

Dunno about that. Of course some will come back with the argument that "they volunteered for it," but one might say the same thing about those who voluntarily joined a non-uniform, non-aligned group that uses terrorism against the indigenous population as one of its tactics: "they volunteered for it."

Check out the posting by Uncle Jimbo at Blackfive regarding his SERE school experience. I think that we SHOULD have a vigorous debate about our general principles regarding interrogations, but I think you're too blithely repeating a word you've heard in the media and considering it, case closed, an example of the worst treatment of a human being that could be imagined. Certainly it's not pleasant, but, honestly, if this and other techniques are routinely used by our military to train our own fighters, I don't see how we could or should ban their use on the enemy.

"OUTLAW TORUTRE PRACTICES BY ANYONE REPRESENTING THE UNITED STATES AND YOU WILL SEE A DECLINE IN THE USE OF TORTUE AGAINST US."

Are you kidding?

How is the weather in OZ? Say hi to the Lion and Tin Man for me!

Perhaps we could call this the anti-perception bill. But if it's against perceptions maybe it should prohibit or censure them instead of actions taken or performed.  I'm still trying to figure out who or what this monolithic "world" is that should rule American foreign policy.  Anyway get set for another Sunday of All McCain marathons and maybe he and Murtha should start to date.

We are supposed to be the good guys.

We are the good guys.  The good guys could get this war over a lot faster, with much less death and destruction, by judicious use of severe tactics on the headhunters and practitioners of human sacrifice.  

And the Europes brought us the holocaust and the gulag.  I really don't care what their perception is, and I don't care to hear any of their moral posturing.  

We are at war, and the faster the terrorists are dead, the less lives and time and cost will be wasted on them.  That is moral.  Everything else is talk.

Someone mentioned the McCain fest this Sunday. How true! Maybe Johnson and Lieberman can watch it at the corner bar over a beer together!

The whack-job reporteds and editors will report what they want to report, regardless of what laws we pass (can you say "white phosporous"?.  

The only people who will be effected are the intel agents and the front-line troops who live and die depending on the quality of the intel.

And the Europes brought us the holocaust and the gulag.

Stones, houses, glass, it's a bad combination dude.

maybe he and Murtha should start to date.

Twice in one thread!

And the Europes brought us the holocaust and the gulag.

Stones, houses, glass, it's a bad combination dude.

In the interest of your continued posting career, care to explain that?

...without doing things the average citizen finds distasteful.  The practice of killing the enemy springs to mind immediately, but it doesn't stop there.

It's too bad that Mr. and Mrs. Everyman have to see these pictures while wolfing down the cornflakes and coffee, but using "hard" interrogation techniques on someone who can prevent a bomb from going off in a crowded marketplace takes precedence over middle-class sensibilities.

he's saying anything Europe says about our conduct is null and void because of their past  (and really, including the Brits and others for the holocaust and gulag is a bit much).  

We haven't exactly covered ourselves in glory in terms of our past either (internment, slavery, American Indians, Jim Crow), therefore no one should listen to our moral posturing either, under his argument.

It's not even clear she can win the nomination.

http://www.nydailynews.com/front/story/372195p-316484c.html

Too conservative to win the Dem nomination, too liberal to win the Republican nomination, but capable (IMO) of winning the presidential election were she to make it on the ticket (not that I would want that).

Its not just the French version of torture we need to outlaw.  Its the new INSIDIOUS TORUTRE! (to - ru - trey)  The grand cabal and star chamber (membered by oil execs, ex KGB billionaires and returned Alien abductees) has been exposed, and their hideous perversion of the rather mundane practice of torture has been exposed!  Yes, lets extend our laws to the whole world and crush this new infiltration of EVIL.

taking Leon very seriously so maybe you'll take me seriously.

You want to give the explanation another try.

Blam.

I'm equating the examples I mentioned from U.S. has done in its history with the holocaust/gulag (i.e., they are exactly as evil as one another) I am not and did not mean to (and if I gave that impression, I apologize).  And by no means am I accusing either Santiago or anyone else posting here of participating in such things.

Santiago was saying, at least in my opinion, that he doesn't care what their perception is and doesn't care to hear any of their moral posturing because, at least in part, of the holocaust and gulag.  That is, again my interpretation, because of the holocaust/gulage, they have no right to morally posture (or at least he doesn't have to listen to them because of it; which is different so I may have overstepped here in my interpretation).

The same logic could be applied to the United States' moral posturing: we have not acted morally as a nation at all times, therefore other people don't have to listen to us now.  I don't think that argument (that nations who have a poor past history cannot make current moral claims or accusations) holds water (in part because it basically applies to all nations).

This is what I took Santiago's comment to mean and may have read too much into it.

My shorthand use of glass, houses, glass was obviously for "people who live in glass houses should not throw stones," (I know you know this, but it helps the explanation).  Which itself essentially stands for the proposition that we should not say insulting things to other people because they could easily do the same thing to us.  Admittedly, an inexact application, as Santiago wasn't saying insulting things, but facts (gulag/holocaust did occur in Europe), although bad facts that people would not like to be reminded of, as we would not like to be reminded of slavery/Jim Crow (and certainly

but evidence for the latter grows by the day.

Please site the pile of US torture evidence that is mounting daily.

Oh, detention camps in other countries is not evidence of torture. That is evidence(if it is true) that there are detention camps in other countries. I just want to save you the time of referring to Gitmo, etc.

probably as close to TV that Johnson is going to get :-)

Ah, and here I thought it was us icky liberals who were supposed to be elitists....

Not that I totally agree with him, but in the context of the previous post about why we should or should not listen to European opinion, he doesn't seem that far afield, or in violation of anything I've seen here.  Where's the ruckus?

to the extent that it is subjective, and is used by political hacks to diminish our national image and resolve, is a misuse of perception.

We fire bombed civilian center in WWII, for goodness sake.

And now we are in trouble for making a guy sit in a cold room until he tells us good info on plans to blow up kids?

McCain needs to STFU.

Insurgents and would-be insurgents in Iraq wake up every day, check the latest news on al-Jazeera or CNN, and say "Wow, the Americans are saying this and that and the other thing.  Let's keep attacking them!"

Or, those same militant Islamists wake up every day, notice that there are still Americans nearby to attack, and attack them.

Blanton said no such thing.  Let's look at the part you quoted again:

As terrorists kill another American hostage and blow up more Iraqi civilians and American soliders, John McCain continues to say American troops are torturing detainees. Way to egg them on, Senator.

I defy you to show me where in that quote Blanton says terrorists are killing American hostages because (that means as a result of) we are torturing terrorist captives.

Blanton's quote is trying to make the point, lost on you, that while terrorists kill American captives, we here in the US are torturing ourselves with this stupid debate over how we treat them.

The terrorist's actions today kind of underscore the absurdity of debating the type of treatment they deserve from us.  They obviously have no such debates among themselves about the treatment of our citizens.

If you are going to respond to this, try dropping the knee jerk reactionism and the attitude and engage on the merits of the debate.  When you don't do that, you really do your screenname a disservice.

Blanton's quote is trying to make the point, lost on you, that while terrorists kill American captives, we here in the US are torturing ourselves with this stupid debate over how we treat them.

I suppose you must have a different definition of "egg them on" than I do.  Look it up, specifically the definition that reads:

egg  tr.v. egged, egg·ing, eggs

To encourage or incite to action. Used with on: The racing fans egged their favorites on.

Blanton is explicitly saying that McCain is inciting the terrorists by saying that we are torturing captives.  Hence, the belief must be that the terrorists act because of our supposed torture.

If you come away with a different reading, well, that's life.  But the man wrote what he wrote clearly enough.

The Brits had a lot to do with the holocaust and the gulag; they helped us defeat them, a fact you socialists choose to avoid.  Notice that the Brits, Australians, countries newly freed from your socialist Soviet Empire, and Asians are also helping us defeat the terrorists, but the socialists in Old Europe and Russia couldn't be bothered, they were too busy counting their take from Saddam's bribe money and dealing with Iran while Iran builds nuclear weapons.  

The Anglos have historically taken a leadership position on the all the social problems including slavery and colonialism.  Everybody else trailed behind and last in line are the socialists, the last slave empire we destroyed.  And you socialists still try to take advantage of our freedoms to impose your silly rules and destroy our values, particularly family values.  Keep it up, socialist, we are not through rebuilding the world yet.  

is, who is it that determines that an individual is "worthy", for lack of a better word, of being tortured?

And, if we refuse to refute torture as a tactic, don't we lose the right to be outraged over the actions of terrorists towards our troops?  We may say, "well, we only torture 'bad guys'", but isn't that the terrorists justification when he plants a bomb in a road Iraq? "We only kill the bad guys"?

PLEASE understand, I am in no way calling our troops evil or trying to equate them with terrorists, just asking some questions. I want to hear your opinions, fire away.

Ok, bad analogy.

Do you really believe the honorable government of VietNam would torture a US citizen?  I can't believe that would be true, after all we left the south without spare parts or money when they asked us to.

don't we lose the right to be outraged over the actions of terrorists towards our troops?

Well, we're not torturing anyone (except the Democrats maybe) so it's kind of a moot point. Torture is illegal and we are not doing it regardless of what the press says. We may be treating these clowns harshly but that's not the same as torture.

But let's play your game for a second. Do you honestly think that if Zarqawi gets his hands on one of our soldiers, sailors, airmen, Marines or Coast Guardsmen he will treat them with kid gloves because he knows we don't torture prisoners. And conversely that he will beat them and slash their throats because he found out we've pulled the wings off of one of his flies?

Get serious. It isn't happening and it wouldn't make any difference in Zarqawi's behavior one way or the other. These are terrorists we're talking about, not embezzlers or con men.

The real world includes such things as humiliation and sleep deprivation and even (GASP!) Hard Labour on a daily basis no matter what you do.  

Interesting mental image ...

but isn't that the terrorists justification when he plants a bomb in a road Iraq? "We only kill the bad guys"?

What do the terrorists say when they kill Muslims?

We don't kill civilians on purpose, not ours or theirs. There is no moral equivalency between us and them.

We can refute using torture all over the place, but in extreme circumstances the President has to have that as an option. I'm not advocating torture, but A)coersive interrogation is not torture and B)if some extreme circumstance calls for torture, the President shouldn't have to worry about imprisonment to save lives.

That you misread him, Toke.  He said that evidence for the existence of a perception and that said perception is untrue is growing...

So if we are not torturing, what the problem with passing a law on not torturing? That would shut up a lot of critics and give us good PR.

What makes you think its political gain.

Is it surprizing that as a victim of torture believes torture should be outlawed?

now that Nick has snuffed you but if he hadn't

I'm equating the examples I mentioned from U.S. has done in its history with the holocaust/gulag

It's pretty hard to justify a travesty of a statement that compares the mechanical and deliberate murder of tens of millions of people with  virtually any other event in history.

I thought his explanation was just fine.  He had an opinion of another post, and he stated it using a pretty common aphorism.  And in my opinion, that particular adage doesn't remotely qualify as a personal attack.

If he got the boot on the sole basis of that glass houses comment, I'm pretty sorry to see somebody banned from the conversation over something so harmless.

Iraqi terror suspects are neither guilty nor innocent.  The US Military is not the local police on steroids.  The purpose of the army and the CIA is not the investigation, prosecution, and punishment of crime.

The overseas part of the intelligence apparatus and the military exist to provide security, not law-- that is why we don't allow them to play on their home turf.  

Aliens and foreigners in combat areas who might be a threat to US security are not criminal suspects who face judicial punishment.  They are greater or lesser threats to US security and the lives of our serving men.  They are not entitled to Geneva rights unless their own governments have broken diplomatic relations with the US.  They are entitled only to be treated according the rules of engagement.  If the CIA were to grab some schlubb and play radio with his privates in order to find a bomb we shouldn't punish the agent unless he was enjoying it or wasting time when he should have been playing radio with somebody more dangerous.

US citizens, soldiers, sailors, and etc will continue to be tortured by our enemies no matter what we do.  Pretending that the strongest military power can force the weaker to combat us symmetrically is idiocy.  There is never an advantage for another nation or terror group at war with the US not to torture an American.  Until we can find one (if there is one at all) then deterrence is stupidity in inaction.

A 3rd Clinton Campaign is a terrifying possibility when looked at from the Military's perspective.  We Don't want her in the WH again.

over and over again related to the Palestinians and the Israelis.  How can you tell who is a good guy when both sides are fighting in the gutter?  Remember that war is fought at the level of the side willing to sink to the lowest level. There was a time when wars were fought by "honorable" people and you could accept their sword and their word that they would not try to escape.  Questioning them was out of the question.

The answer can be derived by asking the question -- what side will commit the first renewed hostile act after a truce?  The answer is that neither the US nor Israel would initiate a hostile act if the other side were to refrain from their hostilities.  Can you say that for Al Qaeda or one of the Palestinian terror organizations?  

With this dynamic in play, do you really believe the terror groups would change their tactics if we were to refute torture? Well we will find out, because it seems that we have just refuted terror.  Care to guess what the fate of the captives being held with the release of prisoners as their ransom?  Or who will commit the next hostile act?

The point here is that one side will sink to the level of blowing up innocent civilians, and it is foolish to believe they will act with honor in any other aspect of the battle.

I don't think Blanton was trying to say that the terrorists killed that hostage because of what McCain said.  Terrorists torture because they're barbaric, not because of anything the US does.  Blanton's original point was that McCain's statements make us look weak and ultimately give the terrorists hope that we don't have the stomach for the fight.  Anyhow, that wasn't my original question to you.  I asked if by this

I so agree that we need to stop egging them on.  Just think of the lives that would be spared if we would patiently explain to them that what we're doing falls somewhat short of torture.  

I'm sure they'd understand that we're just trying to get information using harsh interrogation techniques. They're reasonable people, after all. Right?

you were implying that terrorists kill American captives because of our actions.  You chose to be sarcastic in responding to Blanton becuase you seem to believe that we are torturing captives and that this is the reason why American captives get killed.  Hence my question.  

Before anyone ever said anything about the US and alleged torture of captives, four US contractors were subjected to some pretty brutal treatment in Fallujah.  The people who did this did it out of sadism and for the sick thrill of subduing the infidel.

or statements on our part.

any instances of proven torture of captives in US custody?

that every detainee should have legal representation.  As soon as the Solomon Amendment is upheld, the military needs to haul it into the law schools and start hiring like crazy.  At the very least, every infantry company should have a "Detainee Defense Attorney" attached to it along with an interpreter who can speak the local language and interface with only the DDA.  No questioning should be allowed until the Detainee's counsel has completely explained his/her international rights including the right to counsel and the right to not incriminate themselves.

The next logical extension of this policy is to have international judges on site at points of conflict so that detainees can be properly arraigned in a reasonable period, less than 24 hours from detention.  At that point, a "bail" determination should be made concerning a ROR release or whether the detainee should be offered reasonable bail to assure his/her appearance at trial.  Since we make war against poor nations, bail could be handled in several ways.  One would be to have the detainee sign a promissory note in the full amount of the bail, promising to appear.  Another would be to set bail at the value of the money the detainee had when detained.  A third would be to set up a bail fund which would be funded by the US Government.

Don't kid yourself.  You've got two choices.  Support the above or be the party of waterboarding.  And you are absolutely wrong about the s