On Apr 21, 2009, at 9:20 AM, Chris Gehlker wrote: > > On Apr 21, 2009, at 7:55 AM, Roger Howard wrote: > >> >> On Mon, 20 Apr 2009 16:46:01 -0700, Chris Gehlker <[email protected]> >> wrote: >>> <http://www.huffingtonpost.com/marty-kaplan/bye-bye-bybee_b_189226.html >>>> >>> >>> I've seen so many posts that act as if the Torture was solely the >>> responsibility of a few bad people. The fact is that most Americans >>> had a pretty good idea of what was going on, many approved, and a >>> substantial number still do. >> >> Americans will only get it when some of our own are captured/ >> imprisoned, >> whether reasonably or not, and subjected to the same abuses. The >> outrage >> will fly. > > This is way too optimistic. Having Americans subject to torture would > only make Americans more enthusiastic toward torture themselves.
Well, sure - we'll be all for torturing others where they are to prevent the torturers torturing us here, or something. But still, we'd be all against torture of Americans... >> Even then, though, only maybe half will mentally equate it with the >> same >> scenario in reverse. American exceptionalism is blinding. > > Again, way too optimistic. The impulse to respond to cruelty with even > more cruelty is hardly limited to Americans. I strongly doubt it is > even limited to homo sapiens. > > What keeps the discussion from being productive is this notion that > torture can somehow act as truth serum. Sure, the yahoos always come back with their "24" based scenarios - it's highly attractive thinking, much as all the quick-fix ideas popular in pretty much every discussion of complex problems... like, say, the economy. But the reality is that interrogation has its place; the question is about the extent to which it can be useful. But we, not just Americans I suspect, want simple, pat, answers, and direct "solutions" to any problem. Got a bad guy who must know something useful? Well, then there's gotta be a way to get that information out of his brain, right? Maybe not, much like the logic of "Got a buncha bad guys willing to die for his cause? Well, maybe if we kill enough they'll... wait, what?" > Even the name 'Enhanced > Interrogation Technique' implies that the point was to gain > information. The point was to inflict suffering on Moslems. I think it can be both - it's a fallacy to talk about a group of hundreds of millions of people as if there is a single operating motive/intent. > I have a Moslem American friend who admits that when he say the video > of Palestinians cheering after 9/11 he 'just wanted to smash their > faces in' women and children as well as the men. I can't help but > think that simply acknowledging that the point of the torture was to > inflict suffering on those who we suspected of rejoicing in our > suffering would be a small step in the right direction. Good luck with that. _______________________________________________ OSX-Nutters mailing list | [email protected] http://lists.tit-wank.com/mailman/listinfo/osx-nutters List hosted at http://cat5.org/
