If waterboarding enemy combatants at Gitmo is what it takes to uncover Islamist plots, I really don't see what the problem is. Al Qaeda aren't fussed about the Geneva Convention and I cannot see what is to be gained by America keeping to the moral high ground in the manner that anti-American groups such as Amnesty International would wish. Following their lead will only result in more 9/11 and 7/7 attacks.
Saturday 4th July 2009
-
9.15am Local Government: Should council sue parents who lie to get their children into good school? ToryDiary: CSJ report to provide "Tory blueprint for the ...
1 hour ago
2 comments:
Generally the reason why countries/individuals should stick to the moral high ground is nothing to do with gaining advantage over repugnant opponents - it is to avoid the damage it does to yourself. Otherwise you end up with the lowest common denominator. The same debate was common during the Second World War - and I think you will find Winston Churchill would not have agreed with you position of do whatever it takes.
The other thing to bear in mind is that torture often doesn't work - people tend to confess things that are not true and so you end up with misinformation. All the evidence shows that the way to beat terrorist organisations is through infiltration, intelligence and getting the political message right.
Your comments about Amnesty are very unfair - they take a strong position against all regimes that abuse human rights whatever their political complexion - and indeed it used to be standard policy that volunteers with strong political beliefs would be asked to write letters for prisoners who would be from the other side of the spectrum.
There obviously is obviously a line between robust questioning and torture - and it has to be drawn somewhere. If you don't think waterboarding crosses the line the mind boggles as to where you think the line should be drawn if at all.
I obviously agree that torture is not the answer.
I think I draw the line at permanent physical harm to the prisoner. Humiliation or psychological interrogation techniques are, in my view, not a problem - but we're all entitled to a different view. Waterboarding doesn't do the prisoner any permanent physical harm although he may be reluctant to shower or use a flannel again in the future when/if he is freed.
I am aware that the CIA has in the past used a creative interview technique which involved blind-folding a suspect, placing him into a helicopter and for the helicopter to lift a foot or two off the ground. If the prisoner didn't answer questions, he was told he faced being pushed out of the helicopter from (as he was told) hundreds of feet up. This too concentrated the mind.
Amnesty's problem is that it is a politically motivated pressure group that argues America is morally equivalent to China or Burma. For this reason it lost its credibility.
Post a Comment