By Clifford D. May, Andrew C. McCarthy
USA Today
December 15, 2005
No one favors torture. Torture is already illegal under both U.S. and international law. Nonetheless, the United States is fighting a war against ruthless enemies who obey no rules. We cannot afford to treat all of them with kid gloves all the time.
On the battlefield, we can — and do — kill our enemies. Those we don't kill but only capture should be treated humanely, despite the fact that they do not return the favor when they seize Americans. But those who have information that could save lives must be interrogated effectively. That does not imply torture. It does imply measures that the McCain amendment would ban.
Contrary to what you might have heard, "ticking time-bomb" scenarios are not uncommon. Consider the situation faced by Army Lt. Col. Allen West: Fighting near Tikrit, he captured a suspect who refused to divulge information about a planned ambush.
West fired his revolver to frighten the suspect. The trick worked. The terrorist talked. American lives were saved. And West was accused of torture, charged with assault and drummed out of the military. Next time, will an officer in the same situation decide to let Americans be killed — believing that's what Americans back home demand?
Even more common than the ticking time bomb is the scenario in which a "high-value" suspect is captured, for example a senior al-Qaeda commander who might not know about an imminent attack but who does have information on terrorist recruiting, training and communications.
In this circumstance, torture is not only unneeded but also unhelpful. But the use of "stress and duress" techniques, including rewards for cooperation and punishments for defiance, can, over time, induce a subject to reveal what he knows.
Good policy requires clarity and accountability. Though torture is to be avoided, vague terms such as "cruel" and "degrading" inevitably would be stretched to coddle terrorists unduly. Congress should instead set clear standards, consulting intelligence experts and medical professionals to flesh out which techniques should always be prohibited (for example, those likely to cause death or permanent disability), and which are permissible — and most likely to yield reliable lifesaving information.
Accountability means not leaving serious judgments to junior personnel. Harsh interrogation methods, such as covert operations under current federal law, should require approval by a high-ranking administration official.
Obviously, distinctions must be made between terrorist leaders and low-level operatives. Even so, those arguing that it is better to sacrifice the lives of U.S. troops — or even an American city — rather than cause a terrorist temporary discomfort are making a terrible mistake. They urge a self-destructive policy and a misguided morality.
Andrew C. McCarthy is a former federal prosecutor and a senior fellow at the Foundation for Defense of Democracies. Clifford D. May is president of the FDD.
9 comments:
Todays enemy is no more dangerous than enemies in the past. All of the same characteristics attributed to the "terrorists" could be said of the Nazis, the Japs, the Brits, Vietcong...
Its very hard to argue against the scenario presented. No one wants Americans to die..
The suspect mentioned was called a terrorist, but could have easily been an Iraqi patriot fighting invaders, distinction isnt made. Many of the tortured suspects have been in the wrong place at the wrong time and were tortured for what reason?
If we cannot make a distinction between ourselves and the evil that we believe we are fighting, we are no better than them and will be judged...
We are and should be better.
Come on peaceandlove. I am not for cutting fingers off, kicking the crap out of someone, or anything to that extreme. What I do agree with is sleep deprivation, sensory overload (hot, cold, music), firing a gun in the air to scare them, or whatever. They have information that we need that can save Americans from getting killed and we should do everything possible to obtain that info.
How much information do you really think we will obtain if we sit them in a nice comfy chair, make sure they are not too hot or too cold. Give them a cup of tea and ask nicely if they will tell us everything they know. Honestly, how much information will we get? Seriously? If you believe they will give us any information you have lost your mind and have no concept of reality. I really do not understand your thinking. You say you do not want Americans to die but you want to destroy any chances of our military to obtain information that, has in the past and could in the future, save lives. I really don't understand how someone who doesn't want Americans to die can possibly think the way you do.
Dont send em to an unjust war...
The answer is not to put them unnecessarily in harms way. The war in Iraq is not necessary, and has made targets of our soldiers. Iraq isnt about terrorism, so we should not be there. Thats my thought.
It doesn't matter whether you believe we should be there or not. The fact is our men and women are there. They will not be coming home anytime soon and we need to do everything possible to protect them.
Texan
You asked how we should protect our soldiers. I believe with all of my heart, that more risk is placed on them by sending them there than refraining torturing people. That is how much I care, its not cowardice, not liberalism, not immoral, nor misguided morality.
Dont put them in harms way, and they wont be harmed. Then we have the best of both worlds: unharmed soldiers and a clear conscience for not torturing people.
See the circular reasoning? We attack Iraq, they defend themselves, we torture them to find out how they defend themselves or just for the kick of it? How are we the good guy? Does it matter?
I understand that if our troops aren't there then they can't "torture" the enemy. Well we ARE there and the troops will be there for a while. So I go back to my point that it doesn't matter whether you believe this is a just war (like me) or an unjust war (like you). The fact is that our troops ARE there and we need all the information we can get in order to hopefully prevent more troops from getting killed or wounded. If this means that we must deprive captives of sleep, warmth, or scare them, then so be it.
Hi ##NAME##. I was looking for archery equipment related information and came across your blog. Very good reading! I have a archery equipment site. You can find everything about hunting rifles, scopes, bows, feeders, stands, guides for trips and more. Check it out when you can! : )
God bless America
Post a Comment