re: #272 Irenike

The “reprecussions” from waterboarding him was that thousands more innocent lives were saved. What “accountability” should those interrogators face? They deserve high praise for saving thousands of innocent lives. They can proudly look society in the eye (whoever “society” is) and say: “I helped keep you safe.”

Then they should do so in the light of day, explain themselves, give their evidence that their techniques worked, and that it was the only way such information could have been obtained. If all that is true, then they may ultimately be absolved of their conduct. But that is up to the people to decide after a thorough investigation has taken place. And by the people, I mean us, I mean American society.

re: #273 buzzsawmonkey

Why do you think such people should be “accountable?” For what should they be “accountable,” to whom, and on what basis?

It is a bedrock principle that we are all accountable for our actions. If someone is accused of doing something unlawful, at the very least an investigation should be made, with the presumption of innocence.

Once you answer that, perhaps you will explain what you consider to be effective interrogation which does not rise (or sink) to the level of torture, and which does not mandate “accountability.” Then, perhaps, you will explain what you consider the demarcation line between torture and non-torture to be.

I believe that all those who are prisoners of our society are entitled to the same guarantees under our laws and treaties, regardless of their affiliation with terrorist groups. I realize this is an unpopular position but it is one that I still firmly hold. Any form of forced interrogation that leads to psychological or physical harm, even if fleeting, is in itself a form of torture. Nothing beyond “name, rank, and serial number” is what we should be beholden to. I wouldn’t want anything more done to any American troops; we should hold ourselves to the same standards.

Saying this, I understand that the waters get murky, that mere psychological intimidation is generally accepted as not torture by treaties. This is distressing to me but it is nonetheless the law. However, the same laws explicitly describe physical harm as torture, and illegal.

We are a nation of laws, not of men, and no man is above the law. This is another bedrock principle. If these principles can be discarded, then they are worthless. I refuse to accept that. I refuse to accept that the principles my country stands on can be so callously thrown away. I am too proud of and too enamored with America to accept it.