A big problem with the debate surrounding the permissibility of waterboarding as a valid interrogation technique is the utter disingenuousness of the arguments made on both major poles of this issue.
First, on the Right. Waterboading is not just “simulated drowning.” It is repetitive, controlled asphyxiation, and in certain circumstances is probably torture. Think of it this way: if you were abducted and waterboarded for your ATM and other passwords, how would you describe the experience? Would you say they interrogated you? Would you say they assaulted you? Would you say they tortured you for information?
In the case of the waterboarded Jihadis, the goal is to make them feel distress in the extreme. If that were being done to you, would you feel tortured?
The other false defense for waterboarding is that our own troops go through waterboarding as a part of their training. Are we torturing them? The answer to that question is likely no. When a military trainee endures waterboarding, they know the discomfort is only temporary.
In the case of the waterboarded Jihadis, they had no idea how many times per day, or for how many consecutive days, they would face repeated near-death asphyxiation. That can be torturous, and that’s the point of the exercise.
The political Right should free itself of this flimsy defense and admit that in extreme “ticking time-bomb” scenarios, where thousands or millions of American lives are on the line, some kind of very extreme interrogation is permitted.
That brings us to the moral giants on the Left, who want to retrospectively persecute from on high the public servants who faced a terrifying post 9/11 environment with courage, and an unwavering commitment to preventing the next wave of Jihad on our homeland.
The Left wraps itself in the grand moral cloak of anti-torture, implying that anyone who supports waterboarding is sadistically immoral, no different than the terrorist. The Left rises above all this ugliness and rejects it all on principle.
That is both convenient, and an immoral coward’s cop-out. Which American or allied city would you sacrifice at the altar of your unstained moral suit of armor? Think of it this way: imagine you are charged with interrogating someone who you know has information about impending attacks. In order to ensure that you maintained your moral high ground, no waterboarding is allowed.
Would you feel as comfortable in your moral clarity if a devastating terror attack as big or bigger than 9/11 followed? What if you could have prevented the attack by waterboarding the Jihadi who had planned it?
If the position of the Left is going to be that the infliction of extreme physical/mental distress on a foreign enemy terrorist is not to be permitted – even when American lives are in imminent jeopardy – they should be compelled to say that out loud on the record.
Only then can we have an honest debate about the permissibility of waterboarding.
Well said, thanks.
I have to say, I think your argument against the right is a little soft. ATM deal? Just as likely to have a gun pointed to my head. I’d be scared pooh-less, fearing for my life,and shaken up for some time afterwards. I’d feel violated. In that instance, I’m innocent and they’re the bad guys. No comparison. We’re not jacking up innocent people for cash.
As it applies to interrogation, anything (Barry Manilow?)we do would be torture…IF WE GO TOO FAR. Once you get information, the interrogation should be over. Continuing afterwards would be torture. Making it continual irrespective of actually gaining intelligence (just for the helluvit) would be torture. John McCain can’t raise his arms past a certain point. That was torture. These guys are still walking and talking and crying about their Korans being flushed down the crapper. That’s not torture. Finally, they started it. You don’t want extreme measures used on you? Stay off the battlefield and don’t come over here with plans for a dirty bomb in your socks.
Who was really tortured?
Kalid Sheik Mohammed or Daniel Pearl?
Guitanguran on May 16, 2009 8:07 am
Well said.
My husband was a Naval Aviator who was waterboarded. It was very unpleasant, but a lot easier to handle than having one’s head sawed off.
It also had no lasting after effects, and that appears to be the case with the Jihadis, too.
BTW, my husband had no idea when he would be waterboarded, nor did he know how many times he would be waterboarded.
“Finally, they started it. You don’t want extreme measures used on you? Stay off the battlefield and don’t come over here with plans for a dirty bomb in your socks.”
Excellent advice.
Very well said, the original article and the comments. Though I could certainly not encourage wide spread use of waterboarding, I absolutely would not want to elminate the option either. There are some very bad people around the world, far worse than most Americans can begin to understand or accept.
Buster
What’s the G.D. ever-lovin’ difference if it’s torture?
We’re at WAR goddamn it, and these bastards cut people’s head’s off!!
AFAIC. now that we’ve extracted what info we could from these cretins, they should all be executed for war crimes. Then we could close down the Gitmo stockade and save some money. Oh yeah – invite all the Arab “leaders” to witness the hangings too. And bury the bodies with pig entrails. Be sure the ‘leaders’ see it.
All the prisoners together are not worth the life of one American soldier.
The “left” just does’t get it. The people tortured (yes, TORTURED, if you want to call it that) weren’t the average jihadists. They’re not soldiers to whom the Geneva Conventions apply, either. Beyond those facts, anyone who still screams against waterboarding or other extreme tactics should ask themselves one question. If they still say “no,” they’re either lying or from some other world. The question: would you waterboard a person to save the life of your child/wife/mother? Yeah…I thought so.
The people(leftists)complaining about torture have never worn a uniform, in most cases, and won’t ever wear a uniform. They’ve never been WB’d and probably never will, but they sure know how bad it is.
The idea that torture is unAmerican would come as a surprise to the members of the “trail of tears”(Cherokee Indians) and both sides in the (un)Civil War.