Quote:
Originally posted by Secret_Agent_Man
So, what is your position today?
Approving harsh interrogation tactics, and potentially "torture" against suspected terrorists was/would be "a mistake"?
|
Certainly understandable that you could reach that conclusion, but no.
While convoluted, I think her argument* has gone something like this.
1. Torture?
That's not torture, you morons! It's a party! Hey, who forgot to bring the rum?
2. Well, Ok, maybe it's not a party for the raped, maimed or dead detainees. Still, this is just the isolted acts of a few untrained National Guard detainees. No one authorized this, for godsakes.
3. Well, even if they did, sometimes ya gotta break some eggs to make an omlette, ya know what I'm saying?**
4. Well, even if they DID violate the Geneva Convention, the GC is just for pussies anyway. Just because we've been a party to the various GCs
for over 120 years is no reason for us to avoid leaving it in a fucking roadside ditch when it no longer serves our purposes, right?***
Gattigap
*I rather pointedly limited this to NotMe, but my general recollection is that variants of these arguments have been made by many on this board. Anyone wishing to embrace or leave them, I'd be glad to be corrected.
** Given that GWB has completely condemned the use of torture and the administration in running at high speed from the torture memos, please note that arguments #3 and #4 are even more conservative positions than the Bushies are willing to take. Well done, Not Me! This year you'll get an extra set of ammo in your stocking for that one.
*** As proof of the silver lining in every cloud, at least this will make people forget Kyoto, et al.
