General In Charge of Torture Investigation Accuses Bush WH of War Crimes
Jun 19
Must be a kooky, DFH:
The new report, he writes, “tells the largely untold human story of what happened to detainees in our custody when the Commander-in-Chief and those under him authorized a systematic regime of torture. This story is not only written in words: It is scrawled for the rest of these individual’s lives on their bodies and minds. Our national honor is stained by the indignity and inhumane treatment these men received from their captors.
“The profiles of these eleven former detainees, none of whom were ever charged with a crime or told why they were detained, are tragic and brutal rebuttals to those who claim that torture is ever justified. Through the experiences of these men in Iraq, Afghanistan, and Guantanamo Bay, we can see the full-scope of the damage this illegal and unsound policy has inflicted –both on America’s institutions and our nation’s founding values, which the military, intelligence services, and our justice system are duty-bound to defend.
“In order for these individuals to suffer the wanton cruelty to which they were subjected, a government policy was promulgated to the field whereby the Geneva Conventions and the Uniform Code of Military Justice were disregarded. The UN Convention Against Torture was indiscriminately ignored. . . .
“After years of disclosures by government investigations, media accounts, and reports from human rights organizations, there is no longer any doubt as to whether the current administration has committed war crimes. The only question that remains to be answered is whether those who ordered the use of torture will be held to account.”
War crimes are war crimes, and torture is torture and equally bad whether it is practiced by Pinochet’s goons or under the order of a US President. We have to stop making excuses like “well, they aren’t as bad as Pinochet!”. That may be true, but it is also irrelevant. Once you make torture, once you make unlimited, unchecked detention part of your normal procedure you have crossed the line into abuse. And you cannot limit abuse once you have crossed that line, as our own experience in Gitmo and Iraq have shown. These people should be pariahs and we have to start treating them like such if we are ever going to prevent these things from happening again.
#1 by Ted at June 19th, 2008
| Quote
Oh, Kevin, you still don’t get it. Note that in the piece you have quoted above, the General does not draw parallels to Stalin or Pinochet or anyone else for that matter. He does not introduce that hyperbole and thus avoids weakening his argument by opening up the possible debate of degrees of criminal conduct. He states facts and draws a conclusion that war crimes have been committed. A very effective presentation, and one that was picked up by the MSM and is now receiving widespread attention. He has achieved his objective without indulging himself in a worst person in the history of the world competition.
#2 by Big U at June 19th, 2008
| Quote
“We have to stop making excuses like “well, they aren’t as bad as Pinochet!”. That may be true, but it is also irrelevant.”
And therein lies the problem. I don’t hear people using that as an excuse. Maybe I’m reading the wrong places but I haven’t heard that or read that.
Now, if it is irrelevant to say they aren’t as bad as (pick whatever name), then it stands to reason that it is also irrelevant to say they are in the same league as (pick whatever name). Yet you have now done it in two consecutive blogs displaying a personally established willingness to use a double-standard that is just as wrong on the left as it is on the right. This reduces the credibility of all of your other arguments on issues because it shows a willingness to skirt the rules you are so insistent that others use.
The general laid out a very clear argument. Let it stand on its own merits.
#3 by Kevin at June 19th, 2008
| Quote
“I don’t hear people using that as an excuse”
You and Ted did it. Instead of discussing the issue, you and Ted attacked me for pointing out the similarities between Bush and people who have used similar tactics. And that right there means that we cannot treat these actions with the seriousness they deserve becasue we immediately treat any discussion of their seriousness, any attempt to point out just how serious, as automatically out of bounds, as automatically kooky.
I am not serious becasue I point out how serious these actions really are.
#4 by DavidD at June 19th, 2008
| Quote
Such testimony leads to a brief flicker of hope that our own Pinochets will pay for their crimes. But then it fades away again.
#5 by Ted at June 19th, 2008
| Quote
We attacked you? You liken Bush to Stalin and then when it is pointed out this is not an effective way to get the point across you consider yourself attacked? Can you see the least bit of irony there?
#6 by Kevin at June 19th, 2008
| Quote
I didn’t realize kooky was a compliment
Would disputed serve better? Argued?
#7 by Big U at June 19th, 2008
| Quote
Actually Kevin,
1. If you read things clearly, you would have seen that I AGREED with you in regards to the issue. There was not really anything left to discuss regarding the fact that the Bush administration needs to be dealt with. I didn’t dispute that fact in any way shape or form.
2. I was not using anything as an excuse. What I was saying was comparing the two was foolish and over-the-top. That’s not making any kind of an excuse for the actions and to suggest it was is the kind of twisting that I have come to expect from those on the left. A very slight twist, but a twist none-the-less. (those on the right tend to be in your face with overexagerations while those on the left tend to rely on slight twists, at least in my experience).
You say you need to make comparisons to be able to treat the actions properly. I say you don’t. If the actions are punishable, they are punishable. Period. Comparing them or ranking them in consideration of what others have done is incredibly crass and results in facts being replaced by perception. I would think the facts and circumstances are what needs to be dealt with here. I know the justice system likes to compare things usually in an attempt to increase (prosecution) or decrease (defense) the sentences but in reality that has little to nothing to do with international crimes. If comparisons start to be made, as you have done, the focus is taken off of the real problem, as it has been.
#8 by Kevin at June 19th, 2008
| Quote
1)Yes, but the agreement was in passing to your larger point. And I still say its not complete agreement.
No, comparisons are helpful becasue they put thing in terms people can understand and they give a clear picture of the danger. Look, Bush has had people tortured, he has had political opponents prosecuted for being political opponents, has restricted the travel rights of citizens, has spied on citizens without warrants, and has American citizens arrested and held without warrant or charge. Thats in addition to the foreign policy. Those are the actions of a dictator, and comparing them to well known dictators helps to establish that, and thus how dangerous those actions really are.
#9 by Ted at June 19th, 2008
| Quote
Some of my best friends are kooks.
#10 by Big U at June 19th, 2008
| Quote
I’m thinking Kevin and I will have to agree to disagree on these points. I have been on jury duty in the past and watched as lawyers tried to twist us and the judge to ignore the details by focusing on comparisons. I’ve seen comparisons made to events that happen all the time. And in reality, unless dealing with someone who has lived through what is being compared, the comparison simply clouds things.
In my mind, to compare the actions of dictators who killed any and all dissenters to what Bush has done is way over the top. Ask someone who lived through the holocaust or find someone whose parents survived the forced starvation in the Ukraine and ask them if what the Bush administration is doing now compares to that.
#11 by Kevin at June 19th, 2008
| Quote
Big U
I think we are just going to disagree. And the point wa snever that they were exactly the same, or that they were similiar enough to be auseful comparison of the danger.
But ask someone who was tortured by Pinochet, or ask someone who arrested without trial in Chile or the Soviet Union, and I think you’ll get a different answer.
#12 by LarryE at June 19th, 2008
| Quote
I don’t hear people using that as an excuse.
For my part, I’d say every time a complaint about torture or other criminality by the US gets a response anything along the lines of “Oh yeah? Well why don’t you go to fill-in-the-blank and see what happens?” they are using precisely the “we’re not as bad as them” excuse.
#13 by digglahhh at June 20th, 2008
| Quote
I agree, Larry.
I’d add that, especially when these contentions surround economic, and equality of opportunity issues, the “better than ___” argument is spouted without even considering the role we had in crippling _____’s economy. This is extremely common in discussing South American immigration issues.
At the end of the day, better than Pinochet isn’t something I’d go around putting on campaign buttons. So, we haven’t engaged in mass public executions - congratu-fucking-lations!