Are Americans Being “Good Germans” As Anti-Torture And Other Values Fade?
Once upon a time, there was a phrase that truly was cringe-worthy. It was as trite as when someone would say (as if it was profound) “we don’t want to sit around singing Kumbaya.”
The phrase is “they’re just being Good Germans.” It’s a phrase that was hideously overused during the Vietnam War (for those of us who remember) and now in the Iraq war….which has shaped up as this generation’s Vietnam war.
But New York Times columnist Frank Rich has now made it legitimate again in a column that is that asks readers to stop and see how far the United States has come — or fallen. His use of the words “Gestapo tactics” and “Good Germans” will be red flags to some, but he’s clearly speaking about a descent of long-held American values here and not just throwing lash-out adjectives around.
And, indeed, if you look at Point A as where we were X number of years ago in terms of American steadfast values and Point B where we are now, there is a perceptible shift – not one that has come with any big announcement, but via a series of teeny baby steps taken as if no steps were taken at all.
The thrust of his piece is at its end:
Our moral trajectory over the Bush years could not be better dramatized than it was by a reunion of an elite group of two dozen World War II veterans in Washington this month. They were participants in a top-secret operation to interrogate some 4,000 Nazi prisoners of war. Until now, they have kept silent, but America’s recent record prompted them to talk to The Washington Post.
“We got more information out of a German general with a game of chess or Ping-Pong than they do today, with their torture,†said Henry Kolm, 90, an M.I.T. physicist whose interrogation of Rudolf Hess, Hitler’s deputy, took place over a chessboard. George Frenkel, 87, recalled that he “never laid hands on anyone†in his many interrogations, adding, “I’m proud to say I never compromised my humanity.â€
Our humanity has been compromised by those who use Gestapo tactics in our war. The longer we stand idly by while they do so, the more we resemble those “good Germans†who professed ignorance of their own Gestapo. It’s up to us to wake up our somnambulant Congress to challenge administration policy every day. Let the war’s last supporters filibuster all night if they want to. There is nothing left to lose except whatever remains of our country’s good name.
The beginning is where he also notes a common administration response and the reason he felt this column’s time had come:
“BUSH lies†doesn’t cut it anymore. It’s time to confront the darker reality that we are lying to ourselves.
Ten days ago The Times unearthed yet another round of secret Department of Justice memos countenancing torture. President Bush gave his standard response: “This government does not torture people.†Of course, it all depends on what the meaning of “torture†is. The whole point of these memos is to repeatedly recalibrate the definition so Mr. Bush can keep pleading innocent.
And that has been a modus operandi not just of the administration, but going back to Mr. Bush’s 2000 Presidential campaign.
When he ran against Arizona Senator John McCain, who was widely seen then as a reformer, Mr. Bush reformulated his campaign at one time and appeared behind signs that said he was “reformer with results.” But after Mr. Bush was elected, it turned out some of those reforms were not such great reforms after all.
Administration environmental policies have been given names to sound like great environmental policies, but check with any number of prestigious, independent environmental organizations and they’ll tell you that the administration is considered to have one of the poorest records on environmental issues. Similarly, the administration insists it is not saying Saddam Hussein was involved with 911 but it has repeatedly suggested just that even as it denied it was doing so.
It’s the use of language to recast and deny. But if previous definitions were used or not shifted and tossed away, it is clear on several fronts that this administration has made many significant shifts which claiming it was doing no such thing. Rich writes:
By any legal standards except those rubber-stamped by Alberto Gonzales, we are practicing torture, and we have known we are doing so ever since photographic proof emerged from Abu Ghraib more than three years ago. As Andrew Sullivan, once a Bush cheerleader, observed last weekend in The Sunday Times of London, America’s “enhanced interrogation†techniques have a grotesque provenance: “Verschärfte Vernehmung, enhanced or intensified interrogation, was the exact term innovated by the Gestapo to describe what became known as the ‘third degree.’ It left no marks. It included hypothermia, stress positions and long-time sleep deprivation.â€
Still, the drill remains the same. The administration gives its alibi (Abu Ghraib was just a few bad apples). A few members of Congress squawk. The debate is labeled “politics.†We turn the page.
There has been scarcely more response to the similarly recurrent story of apparent war crimes committed by our contractors in Iraq. Call me cynical, but when Laura Bush spoke up last week about the human rights atrocities in Burma, it seemed less an act of selfless humanitarianism than another administration maneuver to change the subject from its own abuses.
Laura Bush’s comments and motivations? That’s up for debate and no one — Rich included — can say they know she was trying to change a subject. Perhaps this happened: perhaps she WAS outraged by it. Rich almost undermines his argument by falling into the discredit-you-opponents trap.
But the larger issue in America is that our goal posts keep changing.
And how can they change so easily?
Once upon a time there were people in both parties who were staunch partisans but had ideals that they would not toss away just to win an election or cling to power.
These ideas were steadfast and were the reason WHY they belonged to X or Y party — and the reason they were so proud to be Americans.
Those of us who have spent years of our lives overseas (in my case India, Bangladesh, Spain and covering parts of Mexico) often ran into heated criticisms and outright denunciations of the United States but we also know that the United States has long been a country considered by many in the world to be perhaps a CUT ABOVE the rest due to certain values.
These values have also been a selling point for the United States abroad. But now some of the values are falling by the wayside and, as Rich notes, many Americans really don’t seem to care.
We are now in an era when politics to many seems to be less about policy and fundamental values than defending your own party’s political players, no matter what they do.
Longtime principles are tossed out as quickly as used Kleenex. The mental adjustments are made (this MUST be right because the administration says so and because this or that talk show host or blog says so). Old values become inoperative and the new values (or non-values) are rationalized and quickly become the norm.
What’s the solution? Congress? Congress can only be part of it. And clamoring for one political party to do something about it won’t cut it, either.
It’s about Americans who are now willing to let a government or party change the rules of the game or throw away longstanding ideals and values and just go along with it. It’s about whether politics means more than just making sure your side gets in and stays in.
They used to say about conservative icon Barry Goldwater: “He’d rather be right than be President.”
Politicos of both parties seems as if they’d all rather be president — and worry about being right later on.
But so do many Americans. Torture? Many who insist what’s going on now isn’t torture KNOW in their hearts it is torture but that’s not what “their team” says so they’ll insist it isn’t and go after those who say it is.
It’s not about Americans being “Good Germans.”
It’s about Americans being bad — and negligent — trustees of long held, long cherished values.
Values that generations of American died to protect — and to perpetuate.
BUT THAT’S OUR VIEW. HERE IS A CROSS SECTION OF OTHER VIEWPOINTS (these are excerpts so click on links to read entire posts):
It’s not as if Frank Rich has a deep and abiding hatred of his nation’s leadership, or contempt for his fellow Americans. It’s just that he accuses the Bush administration of using tactics worthy of the Gestapo — the Nazi secret police headed by Heinrich Himmler — and his fellow Americans of being like citizens of Hitler’s Germany who turned a blind eye to the atrocities in their midst.
….I believe that when the history of this war is written, it will be seen that our nation waged it in accordance with some of the highest ethical standards ever observed in a major conflict. Yet Frank Rich paints our government as adopting Nazi tactics, and average Americans as akin to passive supporters of Hitler’s regime. Were it not ever-so-gauche to do so, you might call that unpatriotic.
All the exaggerations aside, I’m with American liberals on this one: I won’t compare anyone to Hitler – because Hitler was truly evil, not someone who simply went a bit too far in his desire to protect his people – but the treatment of prisoners is truly embarrassing to the US. Gitmo, Abu Ghraib, etc. have done great damage to America’s image and rightfully so. Personally I don’t understand why this hasn’t caused more outrage in the US than it has done. This is one of the major weaknesses of Bush and this is one of the errors the US has made. Enhanced interrogations techniques shouldn’t be used. Not only do experts point out that they’re not all that effective, it’s also inhumane to use them. Even the worst criminals in human history should be treated in line with human rights. All of them should have a fair trial, all of them should be treated humanely.
–The Heretik (who always has incredible original graphics on his posts):
Good Americans, we don’t torture. So our leaders say. But if we believe that, more than the dignity of a detainee’s body is lost. The bones of our civilization are broken and our morality evaporates. We have acted better when things were far worse.
–TMV coblogger Pete Abel at his excellent blog Central Sanity:
Rich seems to suggest that “the war’s last supporters” are synonymous with those who would excuse and/or enable torture. That implication is neither fair nor accurate.
Among others, I both condemn torture and support the mission to stabilize Iraq. I agree wholeheartedly with those like Rich and Andrew Sullivan who have rejected the Administration’s repeated attempts to liberalize definitions of what does and does not constitute torture. I further believe American leaders and citizens must take the moral high ground on these subjects, consistently, without wavering. And we do just that when we both stand against torture and advocate the prevention of the massacre in Iraq that would be prompted by a too-soon withdrawal of American forces.
Frank Rich can be officially dismissed as a serious commentator on the war (not that he ever really credibility) after this column today…..This is the classic reductio ad Hitlerum intended to cut off all debate or discussion — and as such, as per common application of Godwin’s Law, Mr. Rich loses.
Not all of us will be guilty of benign neglect. I believe the majority of the citizenry still stands for the rule of law and wants to restore legitimacy to our government and restore our nation’s values to one of clear, unbending principles.
I don’t care what party you belong to. Are you with the good of humanity or are you against it? There is no neutral position, no escape. Answer the question of whether our America, our democracy will exist. Or whether you surrender it and create an inferior second rate country in its place.
–Flopping Aces shows Al Qaeda photos of terrorist torture techniques and writes:
Frank Rich, the always hyperventilating liberal, is at it again today in this column inside the New York Times. As usual with most of the far left he calls Bush another Hitler, and the CIA his Gestapo. This time he also calls those Americans who do nothing about the Bush Administration’s use of interrogation techniques “good Germans.”
….These are the same kind of liberals who believe putting panties on one head is “torture”, and Mr. Rich also obviously believes sleep deprivation is “torture” because he can cite cases where the Germans used that technique also. Well whoopdidoo…..Do these liberals really believe that a hard core al-Qaeda agent is just going to sit down and tell us everything because we were super nice to them? Gave them some cookies and warm milk? It appears they do.
Op-ed columnist Frank Rich’s article entitled,”The Good ‘Germans’ Among Us†makes me want to bury my head in shame for what my country has done in Iraq. If this article does not move you, nothing will.
When I started to read Frank Rich’s latest piece my skin got cold. He was comparing my country and my fellow Americans to the good Germans…the Germans that turned a blind eye and professed ignorance of there Gestapo and what was happening in their country. And as I got further into what Rich was saying I realized he was right. The damage this administration has done to our country is stunning and as Rich explains, we all have to share in what has happened to this once great country. I will add, that there is no other country on this earth, that when we set our hearts and minds to fixing something…we can do it. The question is…are we willing?
Rich is another in a long list of liberals whose perspective doesn’t extend beyond the inauguration of President Bush in January 2001. It almost makes me wish that time machines actually existed, time machines that could accommodate a large number of people, so we could encourage the numerous liberal columnists, journalists, and “scholars,†among other deluded lefties, who have asserted for years that this administration is essentially a modern day American version of Nazi Germany and that our troops are supposedly merely mindless followers, to travel back to that time period in history, and have them attempt to report from the front lines what they’re observing about Hitler’s regime.
That is, of course, assuming they wouldn’t be discovered first by the Gestapo.
opinions powered by SendLove.to
24 Responses to “Are Americans Being “Good Germans” As Anti-Torture And Other Values Fade?”
Sister Toldjah obviously misses the point that she and her fellow right wing bloggers who Joe linked to as supporters of the Bush Administration are the good Germans. And am I missing something or is she basically defending the idea of using torture? I don’t see any denial of using torture but I do see the old reliable claim about how after 9-11 everything had to change because the old methods of counter-terrorism just weren’t working.
And then there’s the wonderful method of attacking people for some other reason. In her mind referring to Andrew Sullivan is a cardinal sin because according to her Sullivan didn’t turn against Bush until Bush supported the constitutional amendment to ban gay marriage.
Then there’s the failure in logic of Flopping Aces in
Does he really know anything about interrogation? Has he paid any attention to the experts in the field who have stated that the methods being encouraged by the Bush administration are not the most effective? How many of those who are having these techniques used against them are really hard core Al-Qaeda agents? Relatively few would be my guess.
Rhymes with Right attempts to dismiss Frank Rich by invoking “Godwin’s Law”. My response to that would be to invoke the old phrase, “Cop Out”. Understanding and learning from history is a necessity if we are to avoid repeating it in ANY form. Artificial attempts to avoid honest scrutiny are not worthy of reasonable or mature consideration. Wake up folks.
This is, IMO, one of the most important posts to appeear at TMV,
As Americans, we really do need to stop to look at how our country has changed and to ask where we are going. The snake in the grass enabling this step-by-step change was touched on in the article, but it should be highlighted in 10 feet tall letters: the perversion of language.
It used to be that we judged text or speech by its clarity, how well an idea was expressed. Now, the opposite is true, as language is used to obscure and alter rather than clarify.
In past wars and conflicts, there was no reason to wonder what ‘torture’ means. Now the meaning is changed to suit the whims of our powers in charge.
Change the meaning enough, and the surreal situation emerges where ‘we do not torture’ is both false and true at the same time.
In such a world, can a lie be differentiated from the truth, or right from wrong? I’ve always defended the recognition of the gray areas between black and white, but NOT by changing the meaning of back or white. When our President moutss a word, we should all know what the word means!
The alarming thing is that this perversion of languate didn’t start with the ‘torture’ word. A steady trend has brought us to a point where the meaning of words no longer matters, because selling a product, a policy or an idea is accepted as valid justification. to scuttle clarity of meaning.
We are in the business of selling, not discussing and not evaluating.
That the US is now in the torture business is bad enough. That we no longer know what ‘torture’ means is far worse. How can we decide our course for the future, if we don’t have clear language to identify it?
It’s Babel and babble.
[...] House Are Americans Being “Good Germans†As Anti-Torture And Other Values Fade? » This Summary is from an article posted at The Moderate Voice » Domestic and international news [...]
What Frank Rich left out, what he always leaves out, is that the White House doesn’t directly pour its lies into the ears of America, the media is in between. Frank Rich will blame Bush, will blame all of us, but he won’t blame his buddies at the Times who sold us on the war in the first place, and will sell us on the next war.
We need to change the channel: inform ourselves by searching out dissenting voices online, instead of watching CNN and reading the NYT. For example: the IAEA found that Iran is only producing a trickle of enriched uranium, much less than they could be. Are they indicating a willingness to negotiate, or just having technical problems? We don’t know. And guess what? I had to read about it in the Financial Times, it wasn’t reported in America!
But that’s the next round of atrocities. As for the current, well, everyone knows what’s going on. We need to hit the streets and protest, except we’re all full of shit cowards. In that sense Rich’s right, we are “Good Germans.” We can whine about the Dems’ ineffectiveness all we want, but the people aren’t out there putting on the pressure and giving them the cover they need.
So we let the media turn us into imbeciles, then we sit on our asses and wonder why our government is evil. Just change!
Beaverton-
What you say is true about a lot of issues, but on some, like torture, it’s not as easy as just saying ‘change’ to the government.
Everything is secret for ‘national security’ reasons, so all that’s out in the open is circustantial, personal testimonies and the few trickles, like the torture memos, that the NYT has been able to unearth.
They can just deny, deny deny and there is no way to haul them on the carpet. What we can do now is to demand clear statements on these issues from the candidates and to make it a first tier issue in the elections.
I wasn’t telling the government to change, I was telling us to change! How else are we going to do the things you suggest? The last thing any American demanded was to hunt hispanics, not very promising, considering they were angry at their (former) employers. We need to shake off our lethargy and admit our cowardice, then hit the streets.
As Americans, we really do need to stop to look at how our country has changed and to ask where we are going. The snake in the grass enabling this step-by-step change was touched on in the article, but it should be highlighted in 10 feet tall letters: the perversion of language.
I’m lost as to your meaning. It was wrapped up in penumbras emanating from, errr…emanations or emissions or ejaculations…or…whatever.
The funny thing is that these people worried about the ‘loss of American values’ pretty much rejected all American values except those they created ex nihilo ca. 1968. To them the America of pre-1968 was Satan’s evil spawn.
Have we bothered to ‘ask where our country is going?’ Would that we had asked that 60 million immigrants and 2,500 Supreme Court verdicts ago.
Joe said: “Many who insist what’s going on now isn’t torture KNOW in their hearts it is torture but that’s not what “their team†says so they’ll insist it isn’t and go after those who say it is.”
No, I emphatically disagree! Frank Rich feeds his audience what they want…but to liken waterboarding, sleep deprivation and rendition to “Gestapo tactics”??!
Comments about talk about learning from history.
Have you actually read about the “Gestapo”…which was not actually the SS…but close enough?
“Gestapo tactics” are bullets in the back of the head…bullets in the face…part of the reason they resorted to Zyklon B was that Hitler’s interrogators and executioners were traumatized from days of wading LITERALLY knee deep in blood.
I am currently reading Winston Churchill’s account of his fighting on the Northwest frontier a century ago against Pathan tribesmen. Absolutely ruthless war, in which captured British soldiers were tortured and then slaughtered.
No, not “torture” in the Frank Rich definition…or in the definitions of some here…but the real deal! Mutilation…castration…then execution.
Churchill and the British responded fiercely, but they tried to retain honor. Even so, shit happened.
Churchill records how the Sikh soldiers hated the Pathan tribesmen so much that they burned a prisoner alive in an incinerator. Their British officers turned a blind eye.
There is nothing pretty about war…there never has been. Grant knew that. As did Sherman. Many Americans seem to have forgotten how assassination was a part of their conduct in WWII.
Americans are fighting today against the descendents of the Pathans. Kipling knew this war…as did Churchill…in a way Frank Rich never ever will:
“When you’re wounded and left on Afghanistan’s plains,
And the women come out to cut up what remains,
Jest roll to your rifle and blow out your brains
An’ go to your Gawd like a soldier.”
Bin Laden was right when he made the analogy between the fast horse and the slow horse years ago to illustrate how America simply does have what it takes to fight a bloody war.
You might as well pack up and go home. Leave Iraq and Afghanistan….and for that matter the Middle East. Don’t monitor any phone calls. Just hope and pray that they all leave you alone.
I think Fran Rich and the rest of the posters here have to grow up regarding torture. First of all, the torture referred to a Abu Ghrab did not result in any deaths, dimemberments or permanent disabily as far as anyone knows. Second, we have tortured enemies in all wars in the past. I personally know of it from Vietname vets and WWW 2 vets. War is hell. I fault Bush for making the asinine statement that we do not torture when we do. By comparing the US to the Nazis Rich shows his demented view of the world.
JSPencer said: “Understanding and learning from history is a necessity if we are to avoid repeating it in ANY form.”
Read the history of Britain’s First and Second Afghan wars in the 19th century. They were horror shows the likes of which Frank Rich’s liberal soul could not imagine.
In the Second Afghanistan War the entire British legation in Afghanistan and its supporting troops were slaughtered…and yes, by “innocent civilian” women and children. Only 1 Briton actually got out of Afghanistan alive.
The British retaliation was brutal, but they found themselves outclassed in ruthlessness by the Afghans.
Britain’s solution: they found a truly evil SOB whom they placed on the Afghan throne…and they got out. He deciminated the Pashtuns, earned a reputation for ruthlessness that impressed even the Afghans, and brought peace to the country.
This is not an option open to the US, as any American client would have to uphold American human rights to the levels acceptable to Frank Rich and the NYT, or else be cut off of any support.
Today, for the first time, I actually think the US will lose the War on Terror. America is being forced to fight with one hand, and two legs tied behind its back…against an opponent that respects nothing but force and victory.
The NYT attacks the “Gestapo tactics” of the American government…while alone of all the papers in New York City these past days…it ignores the sacrifice of a brave New Yorker who was honored for fighting for his country and his fellow soldiers.
You go, Frank Rich. And more power to you….
I think if we are committed to following military leaders on fighting terrorism, we should listen to them on torture too. They almost unanimously have told us that torture is ineffective, leads to false confessions, and puts our own forces in more jeopardy. The terrorists are not the first enemy that we have faced that were ruthless and had a disrespect for human life. The Japanese, Germans, North Koreans and North Vietnamese were just as vicious.
Part of winning is psychological- convincing those that you are trying to win over that you hold the higher moral ground. We are losing that ground and are destroying the integrity of our interrogators by ordering torture. We will look back on this as a shameful time in our history – just like we regret our years as slave owners and the decision during WWII to put Japanese-Americans in internment camps.
Krit said: “They almost unanimously have told us that torture is ineffective, leads to false confessions, and puts our own forces in more jeopardy….Part of winning is psychological- convincing those that you are trying to win over that you hold the higher moral ground.”
Krit, I disagree. The history of torture…and there is a considerable literature on the subject…reveals that it is extraordinarily effective. The NKVD, later the KGB, could usually break someone in about 3 days. Hard core ideologues and true believers took longer. Yet, in the entire history of the organization and the millions of Soviets who faced its interrogators, there were only a handful who successfully resisted.
This current meme that torture is ineffective is ahistorical. It is only now…in the past ten years of human history…that torture is considered ineffective. The ideological orientation of those making this claim clearly shapes their view.
As for “putting our own troops in jeopardy”…Krit, those few instances when US troops have been captured in Iraq by insurgents, they have been tortured (real torture), castrated, executed, and their bodies booby-trapped.
The claim that in this war “you are convincing those that you are trying to win over that you hold the higher moral ground” is another liberal meme…one that George Orwell dispatched a half-century ago.
Orwell noted that Gandhi was successful only because he was applying moral persuasion against Brits…who believe in justice, fair play, etc. He noted that against Hitler, Gandhi would have been quickly executed.
Afghans laughed at British fair play in the 19th century, and the Taliban and bin Laden mock US anxieties about “torture” today.
Let me add…I understand something of the idealism Krit, Joe, Domajot etc. express here. Really I do. I am not American, my partner is, and I find her belief in “American ideals” sometimes inspiring, and sometimes infuriating.
I think you won wars in the past barely by the hairs of your chinny, chin chins.
Roosevelt was a devious and brilliant titan, but he got lucky at Pearl Harbor.
Were it not for that, America would have kept its hands clean of foreign entanglements – American consciences would have been pure – and the Nazis and the Empire of Japan would have happily
wiped up Britain and the Soviet Union between them.
MarloweC–
You complained about the comparison between the Nazis and our own government policy, but then you turned around and defended the effectiveness of torture based on its usefulness to–the Soviets!!
I agree that torture is useful if the torturer is just looking for revenge or degradation. But it’s a terrible tool for acquiring information: whoever is being tortured will say anything to make it stop. Nor is it useful in winning hearts and minds.
No one, of course, is required to believe in American ideals.
Hey MarloweC, between the castration anxiety and quoting Kipling, you’re not coming off as well as you’d like, and coming from someone as tone-deaf as myself that’s not good, lol.
Seriously, I feel sick. To feel better, first I’ll talk about torture, then I’ll talk about the two wars (that’s right, two!) wars on terror.
Modern torture, or, “What, my drugs aren’t good enough for you!?” My understanding is that people “break,” and start saying anything to make it stop. It’s so “effective” it delivers uselessly huge amounts of information, similar to our computerized surveillance. But that’s what I know from the internet, so who knows.
The real issue is, which war on terror? That is to say, why were the British fighting the Pashtuns back in 1900? Imperialism.
Imperialism, imperialism, imperialism. Did I mention IMPERIALISM?
So if we’re going to be an aggressor nation, and try to drive deep into the heart of the Eurasian landmass as a part of the “Great Game” (War on Terror Type I), all the tools of human brutality will be “necessary” in order to quell those barbaric fucking brown people (Kipling!).
If we actually want to reduce terrorism (War on Terror Type II), we’ll want to come off nice. No torture, no invading nations, just working for stability, using our massive economic, cultural and political resources to grow democracy where we can. In places where they aren’t ready for democracy, we can lay the foundation by working for prosperity, equity and the spread of science.
And of course, in the end, equitable and democratic nations have there own sets of wussy liberals to put the brakes on their leaders’ brutal, imperial designs, reducing our need to exercise global hegemony to prevent the emergence of competitor empires. By gum, it could be a positive feed-back loop of peacefulness!
But instead of seizing this opportunity to improve the world, our leaders use an attack by a handful of psychos who we trained during our last imperialistic struggle as an excuse for renewed imperial striving. Awesome. (Why would they do that?)
In case I didn’t make it clear, unless one is considering the war on terror a “clash of civilizations” (code words for imperial conquest), torture, even not-really-real torture a pussy like Frank Rich complains about, radicalizes a new generation of terrorists. In the war on terror, any victory gained by torture is a pyrrhic victory.
Does that make sense?
Komrad Marlow – Andrew Sullivan posted on this in the recent past. He also compares US(us) to Nazis methods. In the past, we won the Cold War because of “higher standards”, we didn’t try to lower ourselves to Stalinist methods. That can’t be said today, and we all are somewhat guilty for it.
Komrad M – Here is that link:
http://andrewsullivan.theatlantic.com/the_daily_dish/2007/05/verschfte_verne.html
BeavertonJB – If your interested in a technical site in regards to Iran and their enrichment go to ArmsControlWonks.com .
I guess the point is you can break someone with torture, sure. BUT they will tell you anything and everything true or not. I think I would too, eventually at least if I am honest about it. Which I think is part of the counter point that defenders of this policy are missing.
And, given what appears to be arresting and torturing people who pretty much were wrong-place wrong-time folks as much ‘bad guys’ … Ugh. For instance did you know there is apparently a bounty paid for ‘bad guys’. No? Yep, and no real bother to follow up on whether they were really bad guys or not, oh no. Just grab someone off the street, or a clan rival, and cha-ching collect some cash. Well, if you can sleep well torturing those sorts of folks then I don’t know what to say… I can’t.
That and the other little thing. This global war on terror will not be won militarily, unless you soul is so dark as to postulate ‘final solution’ type scenarios. Oh, military is a component no doubt. But at the end of the day, its about what is essentially police work and winning hearts and minds. I should not have to say much more about the obvious conclusions our actions will lead to. If you are no better than the enemy, then its danged hard to get on the morale soapbox and reach out believably. Face it folks, W lost the war on terror pretty much within months of invading Iraq.
As to what constitutes torture? Well, I would have to say waterboarding and giving people hyperthermia and sensory deprivation are indeed torture. But, if that don’t cut for you – and shame on you if it does not IMHO – how about that Afghani cab driver? Arrested and beat to death over several days by dozens of our soldiers each taking a whack at him in passing from time to time as he called out to Allah? I won’t disagree that bad things happen in war, and can recount a few I heard from GW I. But, there is a big dfifference between poop that happens periodically in the field, and a general green light to ‘go to town.’
I have heard the ‘If we just fought dirtier, we would win”, mantra for each war we did not. No, you would not win. Get real. You would just make it worse. You can at beast occupy a group that way. And, we have neither the man power nor the will (I hope!) to do so. Assuming you can do it. You are simply going to watch a boiling pot forever without rest. Look at the dictators who have done so. Sure for a time they manage, but it is always close to going boom isn’t it?
Fear is simply historically not a long term viable control method. Piss enough people off and eventualy people simply fear death less than taking up arms against you.
Attempts to excuse bad behavior by comparison to even worse behavior, is in it’s essence, nothing more than an advocacy for lower standards. I think that downward progression has been going on long enough.
This is one of the many reasons people are starting to find a principled man with long-held, untainted values like Ron Paul so attractive, regardless of his mostly Constitutional platform.
[...] The Moderate Voice: It’s not about Americans being “Good Germans.†[...]
Marlowe- Most Americans, myself and your partner included believe we have to stand for something besides higher dividends in Exxon, KBR, Halliburton, etc. Only by insisting that we maintain our standards and by holding onto the moral higher ground can we exert global leadership. Its pretty obvious that military force is a poor substitute for benevolent leadership- convincing others that they want to ally with you because it is to their benefit, and that you stand for similar values. We can’t really say that to much of the rest of the Western world after what we have done. We don’t want to have more in common with countries like Egypt, China and Burma, than we do with Canada or Europe.
We were able to keep much of the world on our side during the CW because we were not the Soviets, and did not use the KGB’s tactics. The Marshall Plan did more good to build alliances than any action by CIA interrogators ever could have. There was an article in WaPo last week discussing how WWII interrogators got information. It wasn’t through torture. These men took pride in their ability to get information from enemy captives by using their wits, not force. Sometimes they would reach out to isolated depressed men in friendship, and learn a great deal. Other times they would use deception and tricks. But when they came home, they could live with what they had done to contribute to winning the war.
If we act like the terrorists, we become them. We already see the lines blurred with the BW scandal, where employees felt free to fire with no provocation, because there was no threat of retribution.
Show me one ex-military commander or Sec of State that recommends torture. This isn’t just about the current conflict, but future ones. Senator McCain is one of the biggest war hawks out there, and also one of the biggest opponents to torture. He’s been on the receiving end of the argument, and argues that approving torture degrades our side. Colin Powell- still a respected voice of experience has also rejected this route.
Oh- And I disagree that we barely won WWII by our chinny chin chin. Both Germany and Japan lost in a devastating, overwhelming defeat. Roosevelt had moral authority and the American people solidly behind him after Pearl Harbor, and that made us a lot stronger in the effort than we have been in any war since then. Almost every observer has admitted that the wars since then were lost in the court of public opinion- not on the battlefield. And you can’t win in the court of public opinion, when your people are divided over issues like torture, loss of habeas corpus and secret prisons.
It may be correct for the WWII interrogator vets to say that they got more and better information out of Nazi commanders by a game of ping pong or chess than through torture or, ahem, “enhanced interrogation.” But that doesn’t mean that the Americans and the Brits didn’t use torture during WWII and, more importantly, during the postwar occupation.
The current New York Review of Books contains a review (by Patricia Meehan) of Giles MacDonogh’s book After the Reich: The Brutal History of the Allied Occupation (Basic Books). A subscription is required to view the article, but the URL is http://www.nybooks.com/articles/20693
According to the review, this book documents the history of brutality and torture used by the Allies against former Nazi soldiers and commanders (as well as German civilians, if my memory is correct).
Naomi Klein, among others, has also documented the continuing American use of torture (by us or by our proxies around the globe, trained by US military, CIA and other agents). See, for example, “Torture’s Dirty Secret: It Works” in the 30-May-2005 issue of The Nation, http://www.thenation.com/doc/20050530/klein
I’m not intending to condone the current American use of torture, or saying that it shouldn’t stop. And arguably the Bush policy is, basically, former American torture policy on steroids. It’s therefore an open question whether current policy can correctly be classified as an aberration, as so many critics from both the center and the left (and even, occasionally, the right) have preferred to claim over the last 5 years or so, or rather merely an extension and intensification of previous policy.
Naomi Klein’s point is that, as is widely recognized by experts, torture is an exceptionally poor method for obtaining accurate information. But it is an exceptionally _good_ method for achieving two aims: (1) obtaining answers from prisoners that the interrogator has PREVIOUSLY determined to be the “right” or “desired” answer (“Yes, Yes! I am a witch! I am a Communist! I am a Jew! I am Al Qaeda! So are all my friends! Here are their names! I’ll say anything, just stop hurting me!); and (2) social control — the fear of being tortured among ordinary civilians tends to keep us in line and prevent us from doing — or even thinking — things that are too “subversive.” (Klein: “When this intense surveillance is paired with the ever-present threat of torture, the message is clear: You are being watched, your neighbor may be a spy, the government can find out anything about you. If you misstep, you could disappear onto a plane bound for Syria [like Maher Arar], or into ‘the deep dark hole that is Guantánamo Bay….’”) Torture is, ultimately, an instrument of terror, and one the United States, its clients and its proxies, have used continuously. The pro-torture folks posting on this forum (e.g. MarloweC @13) will never acknowledge this, but any objective analysis of torture will determine this to be the case.
I personally believe that torture policy, like so much Bush policy, is less an aberration than an extension and intensification of previous policy. It’s politically convenient, since Bush is so incredibly bad on so many things, to describe these policies as aberrant. But politically convenient positions are not necessarily accurate. Ultimately, if we are serious about being anti-torture, and endorsing similar American values, we need to be honest about our own history and complicity.