"I don't give a rat's ass if it helps. We are AMERICA! We do not f***ing torture!!"
This attitude is common among many who oppose torture. They call it "un-American," and seem to believe the U.S. never used torture until the Bush administration. But torture has long been a part of the American experience. The use of torture is endemic in unconventional conflicts fought against non-state opponents, or state adversaries who employ guerilla tactics and blend with civilian populations. From incidents of torture of Tories during the Revolutionary War, to the widespread use of it against Native Americans throughout the many Indian Wars, to the extensive use of torture in the Philippine Insurrection, its use in the Vietnam War, and of course the War on Terror, torture has been employed by Americans when it has been deemed necessary and useful. That's not even considering non-wartime uses, and of course the entire history of American slavery. If you define torture as broadly as do many torture opponents, it is also regularly used in our domestic prison system, and used to be relatively common in police interrogations throughout much of our history.
Calling torture un-American is not an argument. It's just historical ignorance.
The US has done a number of things Americans aren't proud of—slavery, Japanese internment, wars with Native Americans, Hiroshima and Nagasaki among them. (not arguing about justice, just that they aren't things we should be proud of.).
ReplyDeleteBut torture is not U.S. policy, and wasn't before Bush in any modern history I'm aware of.
You claim 'endemic use', torture of Tories, 'widespread use' against Native Americans, 'extensive use' in the Philippines, and use in Vietnam. Maybe you'll have time for footnotes later.
While I'd certainly bet that torture has been done on occasion, it was never authorized at the highest levels, and when evidence is in the open perpetrators are prosecuted for it.
Because that's what we do as a nation of laws, your disdain for legalism and the human rights of non-state actors notwithstanding.
Oh and it seems President Bush was ignorant, too. Big surprise there.
ReplyDelete"You claim 'endemic use'"
ReplyDeleteIn unconventional wars. Find me an unconventional war where no torture was used. There may be one that I can't think of at the moment, but torture is the rule rather than the exception.
"torture of Tories"
Look at some histories of the Revolutionary War. Are you familiar with "tarring & feathering," ?
"'widespread use' against Native Americans"
See any history of the Indian Wars. Torture and much worse atrocities were widespread on both sides, from colonial times right up into the 19th Century.
"extensive use' in the Philippines"
Again, any history of the Phillipine Insurrection.
"use in Vietnam"
Many eyewitness accounts, not only of U.S. torture, but of U.S. acquiesence in and supervision of torture by our South Vietnamese allies (also South Korean allied forces. Also there is signficant evidence that it was secretly used by the CIA during the Phoenix program.
"But torture is not U.S. policy, and wasn't before Bush in any modern history I'm aware of."
The Bush administration's effot to create a set of legal guidelines narrowling defining torture, and therefore effectively legalizing certain techniques is new, yes. But using it isn't.
If you say, "legalizing torture is un-American," I don't have a problem with that statement.
"Oh and it seems President Bush was ignorant, too. Big surprise there."
Not a big surprise. Also, saying "freedom from torture is an inalienable human right" is obviously ridiculous.
More ridiculous than life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness? I guess we should hope you're not responsible for protecting anyone's rights.
ReplyDeleteThe examples you cite are mobbings and actions soldiers were court martialed over. By that logic I could say "murder is American". We do, after all, have a very high murder rate for an industrialized nation.
But this is nonsense. That torture occurs does not make it policy or suggest approval by the rest of the country's population. It's long been illegal and un-American.
"More ridiculous than life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness?"
ReplyDeleteI don't believe natural rights at all. But that's a whole other argument.
"I guess we should hope you're not responsible for protecting anyone's rights."
Actually, I'm much more interested in protecting the rights of U.S. citizens than those who want to cheapen them by handing them out to alien terrorists.
"The examples you cite are mobbings and actions soldiers were court martialed over"
There are many examples and very few courts martial. Again, I suggest reading some good histories of the conflicts I mentioned.
" I could say "murder is American"."
And you would be correct. Saying murder is un-American would be a complete denial of reality.
"That torture occurs does not make it policy"
So what? That's irrelevant to my argument
"or suggest approval by the rest of the country's population"
Also irrelevant. But some of that torture I mentioned was widely tolerated.
" It's long been illegal"
Irrelevant and also in some instances untrue, depending on how you define torture.
"and un-American"
Yeah, if you want to deny the reality of U.S. history. That's one good thing about radical leftists. They at least understand that the U.S. has a long relationship with torture.
You may as well say the U.S. has a long relationship with murder. There's no point to it.
ReplyDeleteThat we've failed to dispense justice for some past crimes is no justification for extending that failure.
We remain a nation of laws, including laws that govern our handling of alien terrorists.
For all his faults, George Bush at least understood that. As do an large majority of people, American or otherwise.
Here's one poll of Americans:
By a wide margin -- 58-40% -- Americans say that torture should never be used, no matter the circumstances. Let's repeat that: "no matter the circumstance." That margin is enormous among Democrats (71-28%) and substantial among independents (56-43%). As usual these days, Republicans hold the minority view, but even among them there is substantial categorical opposition to torture (42-55%).
18 points, that's a smaller gap than I expected, but as you can see it's become a partisan issue.
I would be curious to see how many people approve of waterboarding terrorists hundreds of times.
"You may as well say the U.S. has a long relationship with murder. There's no point to it."
ReplyDeleteGranted its a fairly simple point, but just as it's silly to say murder is un-American, it is almost as silly to claim the same thing about torture.
I'm extremely skeptical of that poll. It indicates that most people lack imagination, haven't seriously thought about the issue, or are lying to pollsters. I seriously doubt whether 58% of Americans would refuse to approve the use of torture if it meant saving one of their loved ones. And that goes for the 71% of Democrats also.
You falsely equate what someone would do in a ticking-time-bomb or loved-ones-in-danger scenario with their answer to the poll question:
ReplyDelete34. Obama has said that under his administration the United States will not use torture as part of the U.S. campaign against terrorism, no matter what the circumstance. Do you support this position not to use torture, or do you think there are cases in which the United States should consider torture against terrorism suspects
Try again.
"You falsely equate what someone would do in a ticking-time-bomb or loved-ones-in-danger scenario with their answer to the poll question:"
ReplyDeleteNo, I responded to your excerpt of the poll, which is misleading, because it says "no matter the circumstances." I didn't go thru the whole poll.
"Try again."
Ok, with the full question in mind, I am not surprised that in the current climate people responded that way. But I think those numbers could easily be reversed by changing the question. And if we suffer another 9/11 level attack they will change dramatically.