Posts
Forget Romney on Religion, Romney on Torture Is Worse
By François Blumenfeld-Kouchner / December 8, 2007
Michael’s recent post on Mitt Romney’s religious stance made of the later a ‘political enemy.' If his disdain for the separation of church and state wasn’t enough, Romney’s stance on torture should help make him utterly abhorrent to anyone.
During theCNN/YouTube debate, Romney stupidly attempted to spar with McCain on the subject of ‘water boarding.’ The question, as McCain eloquently puts it, is very much about what distinguishes ‘us’ from ‘them’:
My friends, this is what America is all about. This is a defining issue and, clearly, we should be able, if we want to be commander in chief of the U.S. Armed Forces, to take a definite and positive position on, and that is, we will never allow torture to take place in the United States of America.
(By the way, this seems one of only two occurrences of the word ‘defining’ in that debate.)
A quick note on the stupidity of believing that life is “24 and Jack Bauer”, as it seems many politicians seem to do on this issue (for the credibility of Romney’s reference, see here). The Atlantic has some interesting pieces about this, pitting Mark Bowden (in favour of the use of torture; credentials: wrote a coolbook; “author, journalist, screenwriter, and teacher”) against Sherwood Moran (against torture; credentials: U.S. Marine Corps Major, responsible for the interrogation of Japanese prisoners during WWII) , through Stephen Budiansky. Moran’s memoir on interrogation of prisoners was posted online by the Marine Corps Interrogator Translator Teams Association, Budiansky writes
because "many others wanted to read it" and because the original document, in the Marine Corps archives, was in such poor shape that the photocopies in circulation were difficult to decipher. (A MCITTA member) denies that current events had anything to do with either the decision to post the document or the increased interest in it.
I liked Black Hawk Down, the book as well as the film, but somehow I would tend to trust professionals of interrogation on this subject more than a blockbuster author –Bowden may have talked to people on the frontline, but what you’re reading anyway is his interpretation–and dramatisation (so if you buy the book, don’t forget to go support the actual heroes).
Ideology is what has made the U.S. distinctive all along –an ideology of freedom and of progressive moral, the individual aetiology of which (e.g., religious or not) doesn’t matter. To be certain, everything isn’t rosy and good, but unlike what’s happening in many other places, Americans are generally trying to improve things. Despite what justified critics may have been saying, for example, the conditions in Guantanamo are incredibly better than what you would find in many other places. Take France, for instance, a vocal critic of American practices in all circumstances. This year again, the European Council notes the “inhuman and degrading” conditions in French prisons. Prisoners are routinely chained to their beds in the prisons' infirmaries, where guards are present during any and all medical procedures. “Isolated” detainees receive medical treatment under constraint, and are placed naked in their cells. One prisoner had been placed in such solitary detention conditions for nineteen years. Other than the usual account of the European report, little stirs in France against such blatant injustices.
To get back to the torture question and its supposed use for intelligence purposes, one of my personal heroes wrote this back to me after I sent him Budiansky’s piece:
Thanks for the article. The claims are quite true. I interrogated/interviewed (quite different acts in my view) hundreds, perhaps 1,000+ Japanese repatriates from China, Manchuria, & Siberia; NK POWs; as well as a number of Soviet and NK espionage agents. The soft touch was always my approach. I don't think I have ever heard of Moran, but one of the Marine interrogators landed on Guam and the chief of the army interrogation team landed on Saipan were (both deceased) personal friends and both subscribed to Moran's philosophy.
I am surprised by the article's claim that so many inexperienced people were employed as interrogators. Some of the fatigue and apprehension inducing techniques they used were, in my opinion, useful and acceptable, but application of pain or bodily injury are not only personally repugnant -those techniques can cause the subject to say just anything the interrogator seems to wish to hear. Totally counter productive. One wants to extract the truth, not fabrication.
To sum up, rejecting torture as a means of interrogation is not only defining for the U.S. as a country; it is also more efficient in terms of intelligence-gathering. McCain is scoring a lot of points with me on this one.
POST A COMMENT
Whatever about that whole torture thing, but Francois!?! I knew you liked to shock, but not in that way…
Dear Anonymous Commenters,
Thank you very much for your many insults. It rings so true to try and engage someone in a debate about torture by calling him names. Clearly, shows a great respect on the part of the commenters and a desire to have a dispassionate and rational debate.
Now, I don’t think there’s really any point in my responding to you, since you don’t seem to listen anyway, but maybe this could be of interest to anyone remotely honest.
1) “Waterboardings are used when training US Navy Seals”: yes, indeed, but why? Here’s the straightforward opinion of someone who was actively involved in those programs: http://smallwarsjournal.com/blog/2007/10/waterboarding-is-torture-perio/
He writes: “There is No Debate Except for Torture Apologists”
Now, my critics in this debate will probably dismiss the opinion of someone who actually was an instructor in the SERE program, as they willfully misinterpreted the statement by my “personal hero” in the post, himself a veteran interrogator of the U.S. armed forces. I would be very interested to learn what particular qualifications those critics have in this domain to refute the conclusions of professionals. I’m willing to be surprised, but I am afraid that, as both Senator McCain and Malcom Nance have stated, people see reality through a “24/Jack Bauer” lens.
2) Am I opposed to interrogation techniques that would enable intelligence gathering? As shown again in the quote from my post and the article I just linked to, this is not even the question. Torture is NOT EFFECTIVE at obtaining information. I quote my sources for this statement, and I link in the post to a critique of Governor Romney’s sources. I yet have to see anything but insults as a counter-argument.
3) Regardless of whether I would consider those to be insulting,I am baffled at being called a leftist and a Democrat in a post that supports John McCain. Is there something I don’t know? Has McCain left the GOP recently and decided to become a Communist?
4) Regardless of the commenters’ beliefs on myself and the world, I encourage them to visit the link I provided in my post and to support the ones that are really in the front line and bearing the burden of all our debates: http://nmcrs.convio.net/site/PageServer?pagename=donations_index
Well, I'm glad to see that we are in agreement that there needs to be significant prison reform in the United States as well.
Francois does, in fact, shock his own scrotum. But not for gratification purposes, only to intimidate freshman when introducing himself to his students on the first day of class.
Waterboardings are used when training US Navy Seals, so it seems that US troops are trained to withstand waterboardings.
"It is obvious that the answer would be "no" to the sexual humiliations at Guantanamo"
David Luban most be drunk when he wrote that piece because no one used sexual humiliation as an interrogation technique. If you really want to see sexual humiliation, visit a local max security prison's shower, where inmates have to take bath in front of a dozen armed guards.
I bet francois blumenfeld often shocks his own scrotum for sexual gratification.
First off…
Our own military's field manuals explicitly prohibit waterboarding because of its cruel nature. Here's a PDF of the manual for counterinsurgency techniques (you know, these things are readily available to us on account of living in an open democracy):
http://www.fas.org/irp/doddir/army/fm3-24.pdf
Again, beyond the moral implications–are we not also considering our own soldiers' welfare when banning torture? From Georgetown professor David Luban writing in the Washington Post:
"The basic Army doctrine on interrogations is the Golden Rule: Before using a tactic, interrogators should ask themselves whether they think it would be permitted if used by an enemy against American prisoners of war. Given our protests at the public display of downed American fliers in Iraq during the first Gulf War, it is obvious that the answer would be "no" to the sexual humiliations at Guantanamo."
It is, of course, interesting to note that part of the justification in going to Iraq (which I supported) was to overthrow a torturous, murderous regime. To sink to similar levels is both ineffective and a moral disgrace.
Stop this! If there is any evidence of torture–please present it. Otrherwise–stop these ridiculous allegations. Obviously, Mitt Romney and the GOP has nothing positive to say about torturing people. On the contrary, the polcies of the Dems will surely make the US much more vulnerable to torture–so what kind of tortured logic is at work here? It is almost as if the left is saying no matter how much they abuse us–we must show the world NOT only that we would never even implement a policy of aggressive interrogation–instead, we must additionally show how soft and how liberal we are by stating point blank that as a mark of our supposed willingness to be nice, no matter what, we will easily demonize anyone who even suggests this is a war.
Out traditon clearly states that when a society is so quick to be kind when we need to be cruel will inevitably be cruel when we should be kind.
My son is now grown and not an idiot. If I had a small child, I would truly be stumped on how to explain to him that in a war with terrorists who want to kill us and inflict as much damage as they can, the populace is not exactly involved on how to stop them and support the effort. Instead, I wuld not know how to explain that many people instead see the virtues of the nation tied up in how much we give courtesies and liberal treatment. These policies have nothing to do with tthe threat and everything to do with a tortured vision of our own self-image–a kind of self-hatred that is not easy to explain to someone who asks about it.
Perhaps someone on this blog whose ego is so wrapped up in how to make Gitmo an even more pleasant place can justify such a stand in terms of helping America. How it is that a candidate who will not even come close to advocating torture is so easily and recklessly accused of advocating it?
Beyond making the crazy accusation–will anyone defend this? Or are we to conclude that the accusation is all that there is to say?
–Z
Damn it, Adam, I thought you were more progressive than that. You think putting electrodes on someone’s scrotum is wrong? Which clubs have you been to lately? Seems you don’t know how to have fun anymore!
Ok…do you respect basic human decency? Ethics? Morality?
As far as the end of your second paragraph, I really have no idea even what you are asking me? Are you asking me if I think shocking someone by putting electrodes on their balls is wrong, well then yes, I do.
Regarding that happy fun time activity, water boarding, please know this. It has also been utilized by groups such as Spanish Inquisitors, the Gestapo, the French in Algeria and the Khmer Rouge. I expect enough from my country to not want to keep such company.
I can just hear the Anonymous crowd now…." Look kids, let's go spend the day at that new waterboarding park in Rockford". Hours of fun for the whole family….bring Aunt Edna too!
Sounds like somebody may be all wet…… but it isn't Francois, the Leftist Frenchman
Waterboarding is obviously not torture. Now, thanks to the critics–it cannot be used. BTW, we do not play cricket with the terrorists and they do not sign to the Geneva Convention.
Did I miss something Francois? Are you not French? I thought that is what was indicated.
haha..awesome. Anonymous, you do realize that the IDF allows gays and lesbians to serve in its highest ranks, no?
Adam, the Misogynist Homosexual Feminist Socialist Neocon Zionist (TM). Even better!
ZBird, I like that. Is your super-costume with “Z” going to be in the image of your rooster avatar? that would be pretty sweet.
If you like international treaties and democracy so much, why don't we just let Israelis and Arabs vote on whether Israel should exist or not.
I can trademark "Zbird, the Kapo who's Dating a Shikse (TM)." My super-hero outfit will feature a giant "Z" on my chest.
–Z
Only if I'm allowed to trademark Adam, the Mysogynst Feminist Socialist Neocon Zionist. We can be a really confused crime fighting duo.
Do you think I should trademark it? Maybe I should also incorporate some earlier qualifiers that were applied to me? As in: François, the Zionist Neocon Leftist Frenchman. (TM).
haha…Francois, the Leftist Frenchman. Wonders never cease…
The mere debate about waterboarding has ruled it out as a potential technique for use against terrorists. It is plainly obvious that any potential future terrorist has a full description and knowledge of the practice and will know two things: 1) now, after all the publicity–it could never be used even in an emergency 2) if for some reason it was employed–they would know that it is not torture and only is a technique designed to make the person relent and give up information. Therefore, the technique has been redenered useless by the crazy publicity.
America does not engage in torture as a matter of policy. The assumption that a known terrorist could be the target of very aggressive interrogation techniques is not only a possibility–I would want it to be a guarantee of any state interested in the protection of its civilization against the kind of brutal terrorists that are planning to attack right now.
The leftist Frenchman who has written this thread readily admits Guantonomo is too soft in comparison to other countries. We need no comparisons. The standard is whether or not aggressive interrogations work and if they do, there is no sane argument to reduce them–including waterboarding if it was an option. That option, tragically, has been killed and this is a scandal that weakens American interests.
Immensely impressive excremental comments. As always, I particularly admire the anonymous commenter’s ability to thoroughly ignore what is actually being said.
Yes, clearly I am saying that the military should broadcast its tactics via public radio, how could anyone not get that from what I am saying.
"More than anything, the pro-torture/pro-secrecy crowd (often the same groups I would say) don't actually trust democracy, why else would they support non-democratic methodologies?"
War is not democracy. Have IDF broadcast all their battle tactics on public radio, then see how long they'll last on the battlefield.
Does waterboarding cause pain or bodily injury? no, it causes fatigue and apprehension. None of the interrogation techniques used on guantanamo bay detainees was designed to extract information by inflicting pain or bodily injury. So it seems to me your personal hero is advocating torture.
In some ways I feel like this should be a fairly central issue for candidates (particularly those looking to distinguish themselves) to rally around. More than anything, the pro-torture/pro-secrecy crowd (often the same groups I would say) don't actually trust democracy, why else would they support non-democratic methodologies? This is one of my favorite arguments that was made by Daniel Patrick Moynihan against the excesses and ultimately immoral actions of the CIA–that such secret missions are inherently incompatible with a democracy. And as you point out above, are ultimately ineffectual. Certainly McCain would know this point perhaps more than anyone else.
Wanna post your own comments? Gotta log in first!