An Internet hub with domestic and international news, analysis, original reporting, and popular features from the left, center, indies, centrists, moderates, and right
« Bob McDonnell No Fan of Gays & Feminists
Lockerbie: It’s So ‘Touching’ to See a Terrorist Return Home: Folha, Brazil »
How to Win the Anti-Torture Debate
Ryan Sager offers a tutorial, the content of which should probably be intuitive but, in the twisted present, is not necessarily so.
H/t Patrick Appel.
opinions powered by SendLove.to
12 Responses to “How to Win the Anti-Torture Debate”
Best way to win it, don't condemn torture while defending theft. I don't think people making moral arguments against torture yet who support governmental wealth redistibution policies have a whole lot of moral highground to stand on.
“don't condemn torture while defending theft”
Don't use it as a political weapon to appeal to a fringe element after saying earlier it shouldn't and won't be used that way.
Excellent article by Sager. Torture opponents hurt their argument by glibly adding “Besides, it doesn't work!” every time the topic came up. This shifted the focus from a moral question to an efficacy question, one that was almost certainly eventually going to be a loser.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=s5j3Ry8qXOI
Just subject all torture proponents to waterboarding. Case closed.
That post displays the type of logical “reasoning” that drives me absolutely insane and is so pervasive in our pseudo-intellectual discourse that passes for punditry.
“Someone like Rich Lowry can say, straightforwardly: “the likes of KSM resisted prior to the tough interrogations, then cooperated thereafter.”
Yeah he can say that, and in the pedantic debate worldview that the post was written from that might be a valid point, except in the real world there are literally hundreds upon hundreds of documents that talk about how statistically speaking torture never works because the signal to noise ratio is terrible and you never know what is true or not. Not to mention the extensively documented cases where potentially useful people were driven insane or the fact that KSM said himself that most of what he said was BS.
So if by a “losing battle” you mean that there is a time where half a decade later you can go back and cherry pick a few truthful things said under torture at the expense of reams of stuff that caused wild goose chases and caused PTSD in both the victims and perps…then yes I guess it is a losing battle. But otherwise, to even give credence to the idea that anti-torture proponents shouldn't argue it doesn't work is completely insane and contrary to hundreds of years of established consensus.
I'm sorry for going off a bit, but this topic in general drives me crazy because there is so much intellectual posturing and ostrich in the sandism when all of this stuff has been well known for hundreds of years and formalized for decades at every level of our government both domestically and in treaties.
Yes, mikkel. I guess a better question for the intelligence agencies would be, “How many goose chases did the US pursue (and how much money was spent) as a result of tortured people giving us, the torturers, false information just to get a break from the torture?”
That is decidedly not the best sentence I've ever put together. It's rather torturous. So I'll let it remain.
Even today, I'm astounded that torture is bantered around like just any other typical political football. Torture's advocates reduce the question to a simple matter of pragmatism, ignoring the moral implications in the name of effectiveness. And as mikkel states, that effectiveness has been thoroughly debunked time and again.
If effecacy is the only criteria, why not bomb the entire region of the Afghanistan/Pakistan border? I mean sure, a few innocents might be killed, but it would save American lives while maybe even getting OBL. If saving the country means giving up the basic tenets of that country, tell me again what you're trying to save?
I agree with what Mikkel said, especially about noise-to-signal ratio of torture results and the years of established consensus.
No matter how stupid something is, there is always someone who benefits from claiming that it's true.
Rather than subject all torture proponents to waterboarding, let's subject all torture opponents and their loved ones to JAM, Al-Quida, QUD and Taliban. Waterboarding works. It has saved and still saves lives today. CASE CLOSED.
But none of you carry any obligation to ensure the welfare of innocent civilians or the lives of America's soldiers so it's possible for you to take a morality stance and make this an issue. I find it appalling.
Not one of you need to worry about gathering intel necessary to prevent an IED from blowing the arms and legs off your 6 year old daughter and her schoolmates or locate a building where your kidnapped wife is being held with a dozen or so of her friends, facing the choice between strapping on an explosive vests to kill hundreds of innocent neighbors or being beheaded in front of a tripod and a digital camera. How lucky you are to be so insulated from the realities that face the people who keep your families safe.
im4america2: “But none of you carry any obligation to ensure the welfare of innocent civilians or the lives of America's soldiers so it's possible for you to take a morality stance and make this an issue. I find it appalling.”
You are right- we are not soldiers battling the enemy on the battle field. ANd I am thankful for the soldiers who put their lives at risk to protect America and our way of life. However with regards to your “it's possible to take a morality stance..” I have to say:
Torture is against US and international law and treaties. Also torture is against what America is founded upon, human dignity.
If we become like the dark age enemies we fight and lose the values of our country, then they have won.
What about the torture of innocent people who hold no secrets, but happen to be in the wrong place at the wrong time? Or those innocent people who were turned over to US military personnel by someone who just wanted a bounty? Should we torture innocent people? Because that's what we're doing…. And if we don't see ourselves as monsters for torturing innocent people then the terrorists and our enemies have already won. That's what I find appalling. Terrorists who attack our country should burn in hell. But torturing innocent people is unfathomable.
StockBoySF, do you honestly believe our military is torturing people? Do you mean to tell me that President Obama is on his way to prison? HURRAY!!! You've made my day!!!
Oh and good job supporting our troops by claiming they torture innocent people. Are you bi-polar or just another jihadist posing as an American journalist?