I hate this argument. It ignores the point that people who hate America will hate America no matter what we do, just as Democrats will always hate Republicans. If it had not been waterboarding, it would have been that we were too rude when we asked questions, or the cuffs were too tight, or they weren’t being fed enough. There is nothing, absolutely nothing, that we can ever do to make those who hate us not hate us.

That’s true, but there are many people around the world who do not hate America, and in fact look up to America as that “shining city on a hill” that Ronald Reagan talked about. I am one of them (I’m a Canadian).

I supported the United States in the Cold War precisely because of it’s ideals. We knew about the Soviet Gulag and the KGB’s notorious Lubyanka prison and that was the overriding reason for favoring the United States – because it did not torture. Human rights mattered. You should be proud of that. I agree that George Bush’s interrogation regime was nothing like as bad as the Soviet Union’s or even Cuba’s – which is why it was so maddening having to fight a rearguard action defending America on an issue about which there should have been absolutely no discussion required.

Many conservatives argue very persuasively that waterboarding is not really torture but they are missing the point. No matter how cleverly you justify the policy as a tactic it was a monumental mistake on a strategic level. It turned the whole civilized world against the United States.

No it didn’t. The actions of a few at Abu Ghraib being misrepresented as an example of “America’s policy of torture” by the America-hating media of the world is what set it off, not to mention the nice little bogus Newspuke story claiming Gitmo soldiers were putting Korans in the toilet. They saw an opportunity and grabbed it, and the usual suspects, including you, fell right into place.

I think it’s quite laughable to believe we should be so concerned about being judged by the rest of the so-called “civilized” world anyway, considering many of them do worse things than waterboard to their own citizens. But according to you, if the rest of the “civilized” world considers serving tea in a plastic cup torture, we should abandon all sanity and kowtow to their demands.

Yeah, to hell with that.

Many conservatives argue very persuasively that waterboarding is not really torture but they are missing the point. No matter how cleverly you justify the policy as a tactic it was a monumental mistake on a strategic level. It turned the whole civilized world against the United States. Soft power may be overrated, but sometimes it is the only usable power a country can exert in certain situations (see Korea, Iran etc.).

TrueNorth on March 3, 2009 at 8:06 PM

And your examples are crazy if you don’t mind my saying. NKorea? Iran? You hold these up as examples of diplomatic success stories? Last I checked President Obama just went crawling to Vladamir Putin for help vis-a-vis Iran only to get his face spat in. Last I checked that nutty little Iranian president continues, by the day, to march cheerfully on to acquiring/developing a nuclear arsenal.

Many conservatives argue very persuasively that waterboarding is not really torture but they are missing the point. No matter how cleverly you justify the policy as a tactic it was a monumental mistake on a strategic level. It turned the whole civilized world against the United States. Soft power may be overrated, but sometimes it is the only usable power a country can exert in certain situations (see Korea, Iran etc.).

TrueNorth on March 3, 2009 at 8:06 PM

Are you saying that you think we would be better off had we not extracted a “treasuretrove” of intelligence information from KSM? Information that, without question, saved American lives. All because of your false assumption that other countries would like us more? They wouldn’t be so mad at us? They would think we’re a nice country? I’ll take the information that saves American lives thank you very much.

To be sure, I believe there is one circumstance when the United States should reserve the right to torture, which will be explained later.

I am looking very forward to hearing this explanation. Not because I disagree with it but because it is a direct contradiction to cheering Bush and Obama’s statement that “The United States does not torture.” That is to say that I am very skeptical about the possibility of ever being able to justify that contradiction. It is akin to saying, “Read my lips, no new taxes” only to raise taxes. It is akin to professing the words “I do take this woman to be my wife, to … poorer, in sickness and in health, to love and to cherish, till death do us part. …” only later to abandon her when she is diagnosed with cancer.

Why don’t we have the guts to say it like it is? When George Bush made clear his position that the United States government does not condone the use of torture, I honestly referred to that position as idiotic. I do not waiver on that belief depending upon who and what party resides in the Oval Office. Naturally then, I believe Obama’s position on torture is one of idiocy as well.

If under any circumstances the use of torture can be justified. Any circumstances at all, no matter how unlikely or last resort you believe them to be. Then, say it with me, ipso facto, YOU ARE FOR TORTURE. I might be nice to say, “I am against torture” only to add a little disclaimer at the end. You might avoid a few attacks from both sides of the isles by saying it that way. You may be more pleasing to read by the majority if you say it that way. But that is the intellectually dishonest way out.

Here is the honest truth, I hope to god our President’s are lying to us in the name of political cover when the use the phrase “the United States does not torture.” Here is my position. If I were POTUS I would stand before the American people and tell them the United States will stop at nothing when it comes to protecting American citizens. We will do what works. Period. Dropping bombs on Hiroshima and Nagasaki may have been horrific acts but they entirely justifiable and we have nothing at all to apologize for. The simple fact remains, those bombs saved lives. They brought to the end a bloody war with no other end in sight. If not for those bombs millions of lives would have been lost both American and Japanese in the years following. To this day I will never say I’m against dropping bombs. No. I am for dropping bombs when necessary. They have a purpose. Torture, though horrific, is no different. It saves lives. Some people refer to waterboarding as torture, I don’t, but for the sake of argument I will proceed with their definition of torture. We waterboarded KSM in order to extract a “treasuretrove” of information which, without question, was used to save American lives. How can any reasonable American be against that? To be against that is to hold the position that you are FOR the loss of American lives in order to “protect” the likes of KSM. That position strikes me as utterly insane. It is the equivalent of being for the deaths of millions of American and Japanese lives in order to “protect” the residents of Hiroshima and Nagasaki. Only difference being, torturing the likes of KSM is far more justifiable than the mass killing of innocent foreign population centers.

I will never apologize for being in favor of the use of torture.

It is perhaps just a matter of time before millions of people, many of them Americans, who previously wanted to win the AfPak and Iraq wars, will want to see those places go sour, because they hate President Obama. Schadenfreude is alive and well.

They are not Americans at all then. F them.

who previously wanted to win the AfPak and Iraq wars, will want to see those places go sour, because they hate President Obama.

I would, sincerely hope that we would find no such individuals here or in other conservative circles. Unfortunately, I know they exist and they ought to be ashamed. Anyone who would hold such a position, is not a true conservative nor a patriot. “Summer soldiers” are disgusting, IMO.
While I don’t always agree with Yon (and in those times, I am, frequently, wrong and he is right), his insights and reporting is incredibly valuable. His front-line no bones about it perspective is needed. I’ve put money his way and encourage everyone to read his reports and consider doing the same.

I agree with some who say President Obama has said one thing but will do another as with rendition now still being used. And I also agree with the many commenters that water boarding and other actions outlawed in the Army Field Manual are not torture, especially since they are apparently used during training by some US military organizations. IMHO they should not be allowed by field forces as the manual requires. I can however understand but not necessarily condone “illegal” threats and physical abuse in the heat of battle when Americans lives are immediately at stake, but planned actions such as water boarding should be performed by the CIA with written approval from the executive branch; not to become a routine practice; that starts us down a slippery slope to make such actions routine.

From what I know from talking to fellow veterans who were in combat, we are fighting this war more humanely in this regard than we ever did during Vietnam or the war in the Pacific during WWII. For that we can be proud, for very few countries would even have the discussion we are having inside and outside of the military.

Neither should we take any other nation’s opinion on what we do for our security!

I wish we would treat a baby in the womb with a portion of what we give to enemy combatants! We will be held accountable in both cases.

SUGGESTION:
Ya can’t pay Yon, but he’s perhaps one of the handful of “guest writers” that Hot Air should have regularly.

Dead nuts on the money Yon!

Did I miss something, or did he say absolutely nothing in Part I . . . except to be really self-absorbed.

Honestly!

What the heck did he say???

seanrobins on March 3, 2009 at 10:26 PM

.
Bingo!
.
Started reading Mike Yon’s theater reports back in his Deuce-4 days. Found his written insights and blow by blow accounts to be thoughtful, respectful, and honest–an enlightening read which jumped off the page, informed the readers critical eye, and lodged in the guts, if not the heart!
.
I’ve read much of his stuff since, but it oftentimes feels more like swimming in mud. Not exactly sure why? Nowadays I seem to leave his pages, with the feeling that I was waterboarded, or maybe just forced to swallow too much political manure? Anyway, just don’t feel compelled to search for clarification within what seems more like a haystack of borderline sophmoric whining, manipulation, and finger pointing. IMHO, he may need to take some well earned leave-time and cool his jets for a while–maybe I should too?
.
“Let’s Roll”

When did his personal commentary become more important than actual war reportage?

Micheal, get back into the field and report from the front lines or retire because that’s the only thing that distinguishes you from thousands and thousands of other mediocre stateside “journalists”.

Then again Hugh Hewitt did a great interview with Col. Herrington on the subject, but later pulled it. Too bad. Hugh should have kept it available on his site. Now you can only find parts of it on BeliefNet.

letting a person his position

should be …letting a person know his position…

Did I miss something, or did he say absolutely nothing in Part I . . . except to be really self-absorbed.

Honestly!

What the heck did he say???

seanrobins on March 3, 2009 at 10:26 PM

What a shocker.

The thought that a writer/journalist would start a series by letting a person his position is unheard of.

I lost my tingle down my leg.

It is fair to ask, Why, if we did not torture prisoners during the first part of the war (which is just getting started), did we not come out and state, “The United States of America Does Not Torture”?

It sure is. It is also fair to ask you:
When President Bush said, “This government does not torture people” are you saying that you didn’t know he said that, that he should have literally said “The United States of America” instead of “This government”, or are you saying that Bush should’ve said it earlier?

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/21148801/

Lemme know, because I’m very interested.

It is a political and “moral” game by those out to weaken America.

Little else.

Honestly!

What the heck did he say???

I’ll be hitting the tip jar over at his blog.

Keep up the good work, Mike!

It turned the whole civilized world against the United States. — True North.

The world is not civilized! I am assuming the world you consider to be civilized eats arugula and drinks French wine. Actually, your civilized world would exterminate Jews, enslave women, keep women uneducated, blow up innocent children, restrict the freedoms we hold so dear – speech, religion. Your civilized world sells the makings of weapons of mass destruction to madmen. Your civilized world sacrifices their troops in battle with teabags and nice feelings, and hyper restrictive ROEs instead of bullets and bayonets. The most civilized countries of your civilized world rape children in Africa, instead of protecting and feeding them. Don’t inflict me with your civilized world. I don’t care what your civilized world thinks.