Quote:
Originally posted by Not Bob
Hank, we have had this discussion before. There is a fundamental difference between recognizing that bad things happen in a war and in enshrining those bad things as policy approved at the highest level.
I can virtually flat out guarrantee you that we didn't torture German prisoners in WWII away from the battlefield in order to learn how far along the Luftwaffe was with the heavy water project, or with where V-1s and V-2s were being aimed. And I strongly suspect (but am slightly less confident, if only because of the attitudes of the era) that the same is true about Japanese prisoners away from the battlefield.
This is not about Sergeant Rock in the hedgerows with Fritz trying to find out where the sniper that killed Gus is hiding. This is about what happens outside of the blood rage of immediate action, and decisions made in the light of cool reason. The fact that you ignore this distinction puzzles me.
|
Is your ivory tower ivory?
Abu gharib much?
This is the first war where papers and TV intrude in what's going on, and so it is upon the administartion to protect soldiers. We didn't need to protect Sgt. Rock because the NYT still saw one side as good.
Threaded Mode