Quote:
Originally posted by Tyrone Slothrop
You've lost me. When I post about torture, it's because I think torture is wrong. When I post about the outlandish theories of executive power, it's because I think that they're wrong, too. In both cases, the Bush Administration backs them, but I don't bring the issue up simply to to bash it. You may be that cynical -- I'm not. Actually, my fear is that the next Administration, Democrat or Republican, will fail to change things. For example, I suspect that Hillary is a big fan of executive branch power.
Now, in addition to thinking that torture is wrong, I think that this Administration has been particularly slippery about trying to normalize torture while denying that's what they're doing. There's a pattern of the Executive Branch just doing things that people don't know about, and using that secrecy to avoid discussion and review. This seems to me a particularly Bushian brand of gutlessness, and it's what those high-school students were calling him on. Slave at least is pro-torture. Bush lacks the courage of those convictions. This stuff is underground because -- on some level -- he knows that not even the outlandish theories of presidential power could save it from popular condemnation if it was all public.
|
I disagree. I think you'd be pretty upset at the nation's reaction if all the torture was made public. I'd say 70% of people would applaud it. And those 70% would span a lot of different backgrounds.
Bush has to be slippery on the issue not because the country is anti-torture, but because his political enemies are brandishing the issue as a weapon he can't guard against. He can't come right out and say "This is not an issue of morality anymore. This is a conflict between us and them and we have to do immoral things to survive." The global community would willify him even further. His only move in this political game is to keep everything a secret.
I can;t help but think people taking your position are cynically exploting the issue because to me, it seems crystal clear that this is not an issue about the Constitution or the Dec of Independence or our freedoms so much as a simple matter of us doing the ugly things we have to do to keep an enemy under control.
We've been torturing people forever. The CIA's done it all over Latin Ameirca for years. We kill and maim children all over the world to protect our interests. It's morally wrong. But speaking in terms of survival and protecting our way of life, "morals" are irrelevant.
I hate the pre-emptive strike stuff. The idiocy of Iraq sickens me. But do I, or should I, care as much about collateral damage abroad as I do about protecting our way of life? No. Not at all.
If its Us v. Them, their rights are simply irrelevant. You think we're not doing worse to these people in the open field of battle? Torture's one of the smallest issues.
