Some years back, Mod-Blog had a small debate about the morality and legality of using Waterboarding as an "interrogation technique" for terrorists. At the time, some were strongly of the opinion that it was torture, and others were of the opinion that anything went when trying to prevent the death of civilians. I found myself starting off supporting it, and then as I researched more I wound up opposing the practice as clearly torture. But it may not have been the worst practice going on at Gitmo.
The Obama administration has begun declassifying memos from the GWB years showing what they did and did not consider acceptable means of "enhanced interrogation."
http://www.cnn.com/2009/POLITICS/04/16/us.torture.documents/index.html
I think in the end that George W. Bush will be judged well by history for Iraq and Afghanistan. I think he even may get away from being entirely blamed for the economic collapse. But I think he will be reviled for all time for the introduction of torture into the lexicon of "acceptable means" for extracting information. By introducing "enhanced interrogation" for terrorists, he has opened the door to using it on anyone. And we are already seeing many Bush-era "bent rules" being used against the very people he hoped to protect. We must always remember that the ends can NEVER justify the means, no matter how noble.
3 comments:
I think many of these things have gone on for generations. It is just in this era of revealing everything that these things are becoming known.
Do does "we've always done it" make it any more moral? The difference here is GWB tried to claim it was not only "necessary" but "legal and consistent with American principles".
I think GWB will be remembered for his drastic expansion of the federal government (ie: DNS), this expansion of executive powers (ie: warrantless wiretaps), and the destruction of the identity and principles of the GOP.
Post a Comment