It continues to astound me that we have done such a bad job in our educational system that there are those who still believe that torture can be justified as long as it is done by your "own government" and that your ends are just, and therefore that justifies the means.
It is also astounding that here are those who believe that we need to just bury unpleasant and outrageous behavior. The truth must ring out its clarion call.
Torture is wrong, illegal, immoral, and stupid. Those who engaged in it, sanctioned it, and permitted it, should be either prosecuted, brought into a truth and reconciliation process (this I favor), or pardoned.
Torture was wrong when the church did it, when the king did it, when the parent did it, when Hitler did it, when Vietnam did it, when South Africa apartheid did it, and when we did it. And we, US, did engage in torture. Anything which is meant to overbear the human-will, through physical or mental deprivation or stress, is torture.
We are better than that. We need to renounce torture, proscribe it by law, and commit to never engage in it again.
Loren M. Lambert
© December 9, 2014
Comments....
John Hinckley: Personally I find the current administration's Drone program far more immoral. December 9, 2014 at 6:33pm
Loren M. Lambert: I do not agree with sub rosa, “We-trust-you-to-keep-us-safe but don't-tell-us-what-you’re-doing drone programs”. It's like giving law enforcement the power to blow up houses if a bad guy is believed to be in it. December 9, 2014 at 8:26pm
John Hinckley: I'm a whole lot less than warm and fuzzy about the secret courts and the President making a kill list (especially one that includes US citizens, guess he missed 6th Amendment day in law school) every other Thursday afternoon except in months without an "R". December 9, 2014 at 8:31pm
Loren M. Lambert: I like wars like I my surgeries--with informed consent, only when absolutely necessary, with a specific objective, executed by professionals, and only done in highly controlled circumstances. December 9, 2014 at 8:39pm
John Hinckley: and may I add, free of politics; in other words, a united front .
December 9, 2014 at 8:58pm
Barbara JolleyMumm: Jessica Lynch: I don't agree with torture either and yet when I read what this young lady went through and those that didn't survive "their interrogations" I wonder what method could be used to gain information to better protect "our interests" (when did a life become an interest). We are assuming that the mentality of these men is much like our, yet they prove over and over again that it isn't. So again I ask how should have they been interrogated.
No matter what "torture those men went through, most of those men have been returned home, to go back to terrorism. Obviously not broken and devastated men. Yes they were placed in extreme situations, their hearts pounded so painfully they feared dying, they didn't sleep, they didn't eat, they suffered indignation, yet they walk, probably without pain, they didn't die.
We place trust in those we elect, who later chair committees to approve or disapprove techniques used in extenuating circumstances, to gain information. Did they or did they not do their job, if they did why the question on torture. These are human beings holding these positions, if it is so abhorrent today why wasn't it 13 years ago.
As a citizen I do want transparency in my government, yet there are times that those we elect are doing what must be done and we need to know, as citizens, the general idea of what is being done but not a blow by blow accounting. If they feel strongly that it is wrong than don't approve it. If you do than don't later cry foul and play the blame game. Our abhorrence to "torture" is not going to save service men and women in the future from torture that ends in death.
What our actions today shows both our enmities and allies is a Nation who fears the opinion of others. So again what could be done differently. December 9, 2014 at 9:02pm
Loren M. Lambert: Dear Barbara, I think your position is horribly flawed. Unfortunately when you state something like, "We are assuming that the mentality of these men is much like our, yet they prove over and over again that it isn't," you are demonizing all of humanity and revealing the shallowness of your argument. "These men," and I'll add, "These women," exist in all societies.
Can you tell by looking at them? Some of "These men," and "These women," live among us, they are in our schools, in our businesses and in our armies and police forces. It is our moral fabric that holds us and them all in check.
Torture is despicable. It is everything contrary to the rule of law. A license to commit torture and mayhem against some is a license to commit it against all. It cannot be bounded. It defies restraint. The people who engage in it are criminals. I can tell you that in every conflict there are good people on both sides, there are true principles and loving instincts that people share in every country, state, county, province, city, village and home.
When we have to engage in conflict we have to remember that and we have to act in ways that allow us to reach out to them, not debase ourselves by becoming indistinguishable from our enemies, to become no better than they are. We should never act in ways that turn our own people into monsters You cannot torture another human being no matter how saintly you think you are and not be destroyed by it. December 9, 2014 at 9:42pm
Loren Lambert: http://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2014/12/09/world/cia-torture-report-key-points.html?_r=0 December 9, 2014 at 10:17pm
Barbara JolleyMumm: Not to ignore your "7 key points" but her committee, her report, where was she, what was she doing, that these "atrocities " we're being carried out under her watch. 13 years ago was it politically expedient to turn a blind eye, but today it isn't. I realize she is one person but her committee was the "over site" for the CIA, why was she not questioning everyday what was going on, why was there not a representative from her committee present. That is why I question the transparency why now and not then. December 9, 2014 at 10:59pm
Loren M. Lambert: I'm not going to debate motives with you. I don't give a damn under whose watch it is revealed, nor under whose it is committed. Torture cannot be justified any more than murder no matter who commits it. Every single excuse and rationalization you use was uttered by the Inquisition, the Nazis, Pol Pot, the KKK, etc and etc. If the Pope, the LDS Prophet, or the President of the US commits it even against those that "deserve it," it is still murder.
Once someone has been arrested for a crime or captured from battle no matter whether they are the guilty spawn of Satan himself or the innocent victim of circumstances caught up in a war they did not chose, we do not torture nor have summary executions in the dark recesses by some US citizen the system has turned into a sadistic madman and executioner.
I would bemoan the day that my son or daughter were to be killed fighting in a war, but I would die a million deaths to learn he or she were used to torture another human being. We follow the law. We follow the belief that all -- yes all -- have inalienable rights. Nor will I debate with you the morality of those who commit terrorism, torture and murder and whether or not they are deserving of the same. Of course they are. That is besides the point. What they deserve and what we do to them as civilized people have no connection whatsoever.
I have one standard, not a sliding scale of morality nor rationalization of who or how righteous my cause--torture is a hideous, despicable, base, animalistic, uncivilized, debasing, corrupting, corrosive, and an evil thing. It doesn't work. It merely begets more victims, ensnares the innocent and destroys the minds and hearts of all involved with it. I can testify with every fibre in my body that those who engaged in it will destroy their families and their future relationships.
I bet the God you worship would not engage in it. In fact he submitted to it rather than to become a party to it. He suffered all so that you could have the forbearance and the heart to find the humanity in all men and say, "Forgive them, for they know not what they do," and to then find a way to see the light in others who you hate so that you too can be a light and not a spiteful pit of our most base reactionary revenge. December 10, 2014 at 9:16am
Loren M. Lambert: You have no confidence in a government entrusted to regulate your schools, clean your water, etc. Why in a million years would you want to give government the power to decide who gets to be tortured? It is so astounding? I urge you to study every regime that has used torture as a sanctioned activity and all you will find is depravity and debauchery no matter how righteous the cause and how sanctified the people. We are not the chosen people of the earth that either God or our Most Perfect status has endowed us with the right to wear the ring of power and to not be corrupted by it. It is simply a ridiculous bankrupt argument. December 10, 2014 at 12:02am
Loren M. Lambert: Love, respect, dignity and restraint will always be a greater force than hatred and fear. I can tell you because I know what happens in conflicts that there are even those that fight in war that commit atrocities that would never do so unless they thought that it was the only way to save their own life and that of their families.
You live in an ISIS controlled area and the local militia tells you that they are going to rape your daughter and wife and slit their throats in front of their eyes but you can save them by strapping on a bomb and walking into a crowd of the enemy, you may do it. You are brainwashed your whole life that you're special and blah, blah, blah and you may do despicable things but here' s the ray of hope--correct principles, practiced by righteous people can and will win the war over time. December 10, 2014 at 12:11am
Walter Platz: Why would you believe this report when they didn't interview a single person involved in the program? Those involved in the program say it's "a bunch of crap." The next time you're in court Loren, imagine your opponent giving his/her side and you are not allowed to present your side. That's the equivalent of this report. It was known, debated and I heard most of it a decade ago.
Those on the Congressional Committee briefed at the time, including Nancy Pelosi, didn't raise any objections to the enhanced interrogation and were only questioned about the techniques by one California Congresswoman Jane Harman. She only questioned but didn't object. The report now says they were lied too and information was withheld.
If it is so unpatriotic and horrible and now that the "truth" is known, why does President Obama keep those leaders in his administration involved in the program on and defends them? If it was torture, why did the Justice Department investigate the accusations and not file any charges against anyone?
Now imagine there's is a ticking time bomb with deadly, torturous, burning gas and your wife and children will die a slow, horrible, painful death if you don't find it. Would you water board the man who knows where it is? Would you be nice and sweet talk him into giving up the information when he's ready to give it up, probably after the bomb goes off? That was the decision the Bush Administration had to make. The killers weren't water boarded to convict them of a crime. They were water boarded to protect the rights and save the lives of those they planned to kill. Those involved in the program, who were not interviewed for this report, say it worked and they got information that thwarted attacks and led to the killing of Osama Bin Laden. That's their side of the story conveniently left out of this report. I also heard most of this a decade ago. December 11, 2014 at 10:22am
Loren M. Lambert Imagine that Gog and Magog were wrestling and Gog planted a nuclear weapon . . . . blah, blah, blah ---it's all bullshit, Walter, and this isn't about politics. Torture is not justified and it doesn't work. We did torture, that is not in doubt--if you were the one who had done it and you claim you can stand before the God you worship or before your family and children and claim you were acting morally, ethically, and in accordance to your principles then I think you are wrong and you need to re-evaluate your position because its indefensible. December 13, 2014 at 9:07pm
Loren M. Lambert: Water boarding is repulsive, wrong, cannot be tolerated. It’s disgusting that you defend it. December 13, 2014 at 9:07pm
Dean Probst: Are there really any rules for "war"? The side that is proactive as opposed to reactive is most likely to have fewer casualties (not just pain and suffering, but actual loss of life), and likely goes on to win the battle. “In a fair fight, I would have killed you.” – Will Turner. “Then that’s not much incentive for me to fight fair, then, is it?” – Capt. Jack Sparrow. Lossing battles with “dignity” to the likes of al Qaeda just doesn’t do anything for my moral superiority. December 11, 2014 at 5:27pm
Loren M. Lambert: Really, Dean? Is that the subject? Are you serious? Read Unbroken and come watch the movie with me and then tell me what you think about the Japanese internment camps and compare them to ours at the same time (yes I know there were few Japanese prisoners due to their do or die training).
War, police work, the law does not give a license to abandon your humanity. But that is not the subject. I don't care how many sick bastards there are on earth that would engage or champion torture, it's wrong and always will be. Those that sanctioned it like VP Dick Cheney should either be prosecuted, given amnesty after admitting his offenses, or pardoned. December 11, 2014 at 7:53pm
Marc Niceler: This isn't really a war. A war insinuates that there are tanks and planes on the other side. This is just us torturing random people. I fail to see how this makes us safer or leads to less loss of life. December 11, 2014 at 8:00pm
Dean Probst: How does waterboarding exceed the cruelty of shooting at people and dropping bombs on them? If torturing one enemy provides intel that prevents the killing of one US soldier, or even one innocent civilian, then so be it - especially if the one soldier is my son, or that civilian is family.
Various methods of torture were used in The Revolutionary War, The Civil War, and certainly in WWII to help over-throw Hitler. Loren, I understand your desire to make the world a nicer place, but it's not reality and never will be. If you believe otherwise, just come watch the next beheading on TV with me.
As for Marc's comment, where have you been the past 12 years? Times change! The battles of today (and of tomorrow) are not going to look like WWII, Korea, or Vietnam. Your enemies may not drive around in tanks and may have to hijack airplanes, but they'll kill you just the same. December 11, 2014 at 8:47pm
Loren M. Lambert: Dean, that's the difference between people like me (I'm nothing unique and there are thousands of us) and people like you (thank God you're in a minority). Because of people like me, we don't still live in a feudal state, in a Nazi police state or have the inquisition.
Your argument that there are criminals and murderous thugs in the world and therefore we have to torture is pure grade-school reasoning. I was in the military. I associated with soldiers that went to battle and killed people and I know many that still, in the chaos of war, did not mistreat civilians or captured enemy soldiers. I read Senator McCain's book and that of many others. They also substantiated this. You can chose how to act even in the most trying circumstances. I agree with Senator McCain and Nelson Mandela who both experienced grave torture and depravity but still don't say it justifies us acting the same.
People that think like you, Dean, and Dick Criminal Cheney, inspired by your irresponsible tripe, probably delight and get off in torturing other human beings. It is such an interesting cognitive disconnect--the government you don't trust--you do trust to decide who to torture--
I'm almost tempted to wish that you or someone close to you is innocently picked up by someone, some government, some police force that thinks you did something horrible and therefore decides to waterboard you. I've represented people that have been tortured. It's too bad that people like you have to experience such a situation so you might realize that your arguments are fatuous and ridiculous.
As for me, I don't want a government that tortures. Not only is it wrong per se, even if it were legal, I don't trust them to do it within the bounds of that law. It's just so sad too hear there are people in this modern age that think like you and ISIS.
December 11, 2014 at 10:30pm
Marc Niceler: We don't live in a Nazi police state? December 11, 2014 at 10:24pm
Loren M. Lambert: Unfortunately, Marc, because of the right-wing tendencies in humans there are excesses even in the most civilized countries, and because of that there must always be citizens, grand juries, attorneys and judges, who do not cow-tow to authority and indite, prosecute and convict when the facts and law call for it. But no, other than what are too frequent of occurrences, I don't think we live in a Nazi police state. December 11, 2014 at 10:27pm
Dean Probst: Loren, you say torture is wrong, illegal, immoral, and stupid. I agree with you. But, sad to say, it's a symptom of the world we live in. You see, chopping off people's heads, flying airplanes full of civilians into buildings, bombing subways, and assorted other daily acts of terrorism are also wrong, illegal, immoral, and stupid on an even larger scale. These acts of terror invariably affect larger numbers of much more innocent people.
If Interrogating enemy combatants under uncomfortable conditions helps stop bombings, kidnappings, etc..., then the end does in fact justify the means. You can't change the world by addressing "symptoms" anymore than you can cure cancer by giving morphine for the pain. In the bigger picture, stopping the bombings and the airplanes into buildings invariable will stop the need for the "torture" you abhor. That's how you change the world! December 13, 2014 at 10:17am
Dean Probst: On another note, a significantly larger number of convicts (those that necessitate the need for grand juries, attorneys and judges) associate themselves as liberals (left-wing). December 13, 2014 at 10:38am
Loren M. Lambert It is interesting to me that most of the debates regarding the United States’ use of torture after September 11, 2001 revolve around whether or not the torture elicited any information that prevented catastrophes and saved lives.
It would be naive to say that no one under torture has ever revealed any information helpful to the torturers. In the same way it would be naïve to say that the brutal execution methods of prior centuries; i.e. crucifixion, flailing, burying alive, disembowelment, draw and quarter etc., never dissuaded those watching from engaging in the behavior that the executioner was trying to prevent. Of course some intelligence and other information may be sought and obtained through torture.
However, my opposition to torture is not based on whether or not actionable intelligence is gained. My opposition is based upon the following known and proven realities of torture:
1) It is not inflicted in the heat of battle when self defense is a justification, but by its very nature, after the combatant or enemy has been subdued and taken into custody and thereby is often inflicted because of the desire to exact revenge and it thereby deprives human beings of human rights and dignity.
2) As has been documented in many wars, and many other conflicts, it more often than not extracts false information. This occurs not only because in reality there are many who resist jeopardizing the lives of their compatriots even when subjected to torture, but because the victim has no information to divulge and must provide information to stop the torture. Can the torturer tell when his work is done? Many seasoned warriors of the United States military and many, many other armies have indicated that if you want good intelligence from your enemy, you make him or her your friend and you demonstrate that unlike the people and persons the enemies’ leaders painted us to be, we are a people that act with decency and compassion.
3) Few are the responsible and guilty parties in major conflicts. The real enemies in most conflicts are the few leaders who, to gain wealth, power and fame, manipulate religion, politics, and other human institutions to vilify other people, nations, or organizations. These leaders manipulate human beings that would otherwise not engage in murder and mayhem. Most caught up in battle are mere foot soldiers. While these foot soldiers may have committed horrendous acts of war, they and their extended relationships are as capable as their enemies of love, compassion, and learning that they are wrong and to then live peacefully. Torture of such individuals perpetuates the myths perpetrated by their malevolent leaders, makes them and all of their relations for ever our enemies, and leads to perpetual and unending war– just like the one currently engaged in.
4) Torture cannot be contained and made to be innocuous or civilized. If torture is meant to over bear the human will, it will always be escalated by those imposing it. Just as happened with the United States torturers, because, for example, if you start out with something as innocuous as making someone stand in a stress position, what do you do when the person does not cooperate in his or her own torture? Or is injured? You escalate the torture. This always happens. It's a vicious evil that feeds upon itself. It is inevitable.
5) Within every society are those who, when the strictures of morality and civilization breakdown, will engage in sadistic actions. When you give a government or an army or a police force the right to engage in torture, those who inevitably engage in it become quickly addicted and obsessed by it. They become sadists. And if they don’t become sadistic, they become just as damaged psychologically by the torture as the person they are victimizing. By sanctioning torture, you create within your own society the very villains you think you are fighting against.
6) In the fog of battle and chaos of war and during the imperfections of police activities, the innocent, the potential allies, the unwitting victims are mistaken for criminals, enemies and combatants. While certainly some may deserve harsh treatment, these innocents do not. And the due process that is the right of every human being to ensure culpability cannot occur with the efficiency that the gains through torture demand. It was so disturbing during 9/11 to hear people discussing courts being set up to determine whether or not somebody should be tortured. That is ridiculous. The very intelligent but flawed human beings I know that work within the legal system should never, ever be granted such power.
7) My heart, my head and every fiber of my being tells me that torture has no redeeming value.
8) Peace, civility and love should always guide our actions. While torture in the short run may gain some advantage, in the long run it destroys all who use it either in their personal relationships, in their communities, their nations, or in their wars.
9) I have a simple rule, I will not sanction any process to be imposed upon any human being that I wouldn’t think was fair if that person was innocent and that I wouldn’t want my own son and daughter to be engaged in either as a victim or as a perpetrator. I will not sanction any process that cannot be appropriately implemented by the lowliest uneducated, and untrained footsoldier in the battlefield. This is because I know what can go wrong will go wrong and I know that humans are fallible.
December 13, 2014 at 9:03pm Edited
Loren M. Lambert: So tell me Barbara JolleyMumm, how would you implement your system of torture as a last resort? And when it was not implemented as set forth, what should the consequences be. December 13, 2014 at 9:29pm
Dean Probst: Justice Scalia refers to "extreme measures" being necessary for what Paul may consider untenable and absurd. However, the definition of absurd is completely subjective, and completely influenced from your current living situation and experiences. I hope for Loren's sake (and for mine) our country does not slip into the type of violence seen in The Middle East. No matter how absurd that may seem, it is a distinct possibility I prefer not to experience. But if we do experience more homeland insecurity, I will bet my gold that many of Loren's thousands wane in their convictions. It is so easy, and artificially valiant, to condemn the actions of others from the comfort of your living room lazyboy where your greatest threat is a slippery bathtub. December 14, 2014 at 10:48am
Loren M. Lambert: There are fools even in the highest echelons of Government Dean Probst. Does that surprise you, or do you think that only such insanity arises in foreign countries that are not as "awesome" as we are? And no, we often don't know what we are made of until tested by adversity but one thing is certain, history teaches us that those who decide before hand what their decisions and actions will be when tempted by circumstances are more likely to chose the right path. Moreover, leadership does make a difference and you wont have to remind me that you would not be the one I choose to show us the better path.
The fact remains that even as indicated in the torture report there were many who said "Hell no," and there have been many in history that have done the same whether in Nazi Germany or Abu Ghraib. Instead of dismissing it, looking the other way, minimizing it, rationalizing it, romanticizing it and some, even glamorizing it, we all should be shouting from the top of our lungs that torture stop here and everywhere, whether on the streets of New York, in the isolations rooms of the Utah State Prison or at the dark secret locations used by the CIA. We should not cower nor hesitate simply because we inhabit our comfortable lives here in our living rooms and may not have the gravitas of a John McCain. You are simply wrong and you're lack of moral leadership is appalling and while I hope to act with decency and restraint should I be involved any such future scenarios, your indifference is irresponsible, reckless and damning. I stand in judgment because everyone is called to do so. December 14, 2014 at 3:04pm
Dean Probst: Thank you Loren. It is comforting to know that if I'm ever feeling "unjudged", I can always count on you. December 14, 2014 at 7:50pm
Loren M. Lambert: Dean Probst, I really appreciate you as a person but I view your position on torture as no different than people claiming that sometimes we just need a good lynching or two because it’s just what has to be done. I again reiterate I think torture is intolerable, despicable and would not vote or support anyone who either advocates for it or is indifferent about its probity. So Dean, while I'd vote for you to be the Mosquito abatement czar, you won't get my vote if you run for President. December 14, 2014 at 9:02pm
Paul Shepherd: The absurdity (reducto ad absurdum) I mentioned was a fallacious form of argument in which arguments are reduced to their most absurd or extreme position in order to establish the argument- for example your argument that torture is necessary because we might have a situation in which a nuclear attack could be averted. It doesn't follow that we need to maintain torture as a tool to prevent nuclear attack. The suggestion we do is naive. The intelligence community has many more effective tools at its disposal than torture. The argument doesn't work.
Whether I am comfortable in my lazy boy or not still doesn't negate my moral obligation to oppose this assault on human decency. Either we stand for human rights or we don't. I am willing to die for my convictions as well. Suggesting otherwise undervalues the commitment or the courage necessary to stand up and oppose assaults to our humanity. December 14, 2014 at 9:37pm
Loren M. Lambert: Paul, you are so eloquent. I'm not so polished. Thanks for stepping in. December 14, 2014 at 11:32pm
Dean Probst: Loren, knowing who you have voted for President in the past, I take your lack of support as a compliment. On another note:
Pew Research Center results - 51% approved CIA tactics, 28% did not.
Washington Post-ABC News results - 59% approve CIA tactics, 31% did not.
Since the definition of what constitutes torture and what does not is purely subjective, you have to go with the numbers. Meanwhile, I will start working on my WMD's (weapons of mosquito destruction). December 16, 2014 at 5:32pm
Loren M. Lambert: I suppose in Nazi Germany, the Germans approved of Hitler’s tactics otherwise they would not have been so widespread. Again, the fact that you and Dick Cheney approve of torturing another human being does not make it right. Torture is any scheme to overbear the human will. Moreover, we prosecuted Nazis and Japanese war criminals for water boarding. Ask any POW if water boarding was torture and they will tell you that it is. It's abhorrent and you are morally bankrupt for advocating for its use. And how about letting someone die of hypothermia, or choking them to death, depriving them of medical care, leaving them in solitary confinement, putting them in stress position? It's abhorrent and you are morally bankrupt for advocating for its use. December 17, 2014 at 12:06am
Paul Shepherd: The same argument could have been used to justify the gassing and incineration of the Jewish population of Germany in the 40s. After all the legitimate government of Germany had identified them as a threat. That the majority support something because they are afraid does not not give it moral primacy. If more Germans had opposed the tactics of the Nazis and SS, there might not have been a holocaust. December 17, 2014 at 9:14am
Loren M. Lambert: This is the mentality, as expressed by Dean, that most of our neighbor government, secret services, police and armies to the south, have had, whether be countries, any person, or groups, that was the left or the right or simply those just wanting to fight injustice and corruption, viewed as a threat and could be tortured, eliminated and disappeared. And enough of their populations went along, because they had the same mentality, so it has persisted. As a result; in Venezuela, Mexico, Chile, Argentina, Guatemala etc. (with possibly Costa Rica being the only exception), those countries have had bloody, repressive, stagnant, reprehensible governments, economies, and social institutions. That appears to be where we are headed. December 17, 2014 at 10:52am
Dean Probst: Loren, you say "Torture cannot be justified any more than murder..." Yet, the only thing that distinguishes murder from killing in self-defense is how the public defines it. Society has decided it is reasonable and acceptible to kill another human being to preserve the life of one more innocent. Do you see the trend? I would prefer to ask any POW if they prefer waterboarding to having their head cut off. The only POW I have known has long since passed away, but I have the feeling he would gladly accept water boarding as opposed to hearing of 140 school children being killed. December 17, 2014 at 10:53am
Loren M. Lambert: @Dean, Degrees of depravity are still just that, depravity. In reality, I have spoken with POWs, I have read their books, and at times they would have invited death rather than endure the torture. Of course there is a continuum of torture techniques from minimal physical and/or psychological impact, all the way to death.
There is nothing discordant about an agreement that “people flying airplanes into buildings and those killing 140 school children” should be fought and brought to justice, vs. asserting that once a suspected/alleged POW, enemy combatant, or criminal is arrested and brought into captivity, not be tortured, but be processed according to the rule of law. That is the only way to ensure that we, the US and humanity, win over the long run.
I get it, you're an eye for an eye guy with no exceptions and with no proof--it's enough that someone suspects or someone identifies you as a guilty party--then torture and death are justified. That is the world in many areas of the middle east. I don't want that world. We don't need to debase us to their level--that is what makes us free.
December 17, 2014 at 11:09am
Loren M. Lambert: There will always be those that want mob/vigilante/lynching justice--or to fly airplanes into buildings because of some real or imagined wrong. We should not be the angry mob. December 17, 2014 at 11:11am
Dean Probst: Loren, you are wong on one assumption - I do require some level of proof. Being captured as a volunteer enemy fighter in battle is that proof. Logically, and legally, you can't volunarily go to war carrying a gun and claim ignorance, or innocence. The rule of law does not always require long drawn out court battles in front of judge and jury before taking action.
There are countless examples in our legal system where "extreme measures" are acceptible and prudent when loss of life is imminent, or public safety is at risk. As is the case with most everything, certainly these measures can be misused and abused. But the potential for abuse in no way invalidates their potential worth. If we accepted that premise, then all medicinal drugs would be outlawed.
I'm not a sadist that believes others should be tortured just for the sake of causing pain and humiliation, and I'm certainly not in support of mob justice or government sackings (again, please be relevant). But yes, I feel strongly that extreme interrogations do have their place in achieving peace and winning in the long run. One consistency in human history is that good endings have always required some less than humane means. I'm a realist, not an idealist. December 17, 2014 at 12:04pm
Loren M. Lambert: Dean, the problem is I think you are naïve regarding how power is exerted and exercised. If you think everyone that dons a uniform does so voluntarily you are sorely mistaken. That is why most militaries rightfully or wrongfully so have strict laws of conscription, desertion, and absence without leave. If you can be shot and tortured for leaving a religion, country, military, or a group, then it cannot be completely voluntary.
So let's get to the brass tacks Mr. Propst, what tactics would you authorize, under what circumstances, and who gets to employ them? December 17, 2014 at 2:34pm
Loren M. Lambert: Furthermore if you think everyone that fights under orders and the leadership of others is beyond recall--meaning, incapable of understanding the depravity or erroneous ways of their leadership, you are also wrong. There's a big difference between a mentally deprived individual who uses power illicitly or is criminally pathological, and those that are caught up in battles between warring factions. In either case, true principles and universal ideals can and will prevail over deranged belief systems used to justify tyranny. December 17, 2014 at 2:38pm
Dean Probst: My different perspective does not make me naive. Since it is reported most members of Al Qaeda and ISIS are not natives of Afghanistan or Iraq, I am hard pressed to believe they are fighting against their will. Since you asked, I am at peace letting the CIA do their job in gathering intelligence. If we are going to fight a war and do so with minimal collateral damage, we need to obtain as much intelligence as possible in order to give American soldiers the best possibility for success. Every POW should be catalogued and it understood where they fit in the chain of command. Where there is probable cause that a POW does possess pertinent information, I am still at peace if they are made uncomfortable in an attempt to obtain that information.
I'm referring to interrogation, not humiliation as was displayed at Abu Ghraid. As a check and balance, information and situations should be reported regularly to superiors at all levels - up to and including the President. Society has recognized that the most heinous of acts, killing a person, can be necessary and acceptable when innocent life and public safety are at risk. Applying reason and logic, methods such as water boarding a person can also be necessary and acceptable. Terrorism is the ultimate stage for loss of innocent life, and war the ultimate risk of public safety. Preventing terrorism by extremists, and fighting a war against same requires extreme measures. December 17, 2014 at 10:12pm
Loren M. Lambert: That's pretty sad, Dean. December 17, 2014 at 11:49pm
Dean Probst: Yes Loren, it is a sad situation when we need to do physical battle against people that believe their definition of morality is superior and thus feel the need to stand in judgement of others - taking the next step beyond shouting on the rooftops to using coercion to get others to think, act, and live "worthily". That mentality of superiority is truly sad, and accounts for a lot of the hatred in this world.
You say you let peace, civility, and love guide your actions. Those are noble values right up there with "trustworthy, loyal, helpful,...". The problem with your values is that reality transforms each into a paradox. Obtaining peace frequently requires drastic actions that independently would be defined as unpeaceful, maintaining civility often requires acts that independently are uncivilized, and as every parent knows, loving others often requires making decisions that independently seem counter. I accept that. I'm a realist that realizes the lack of control we have over others and our environment requires us to often act contrary to our values in order to achieve our values. If that makes you feel sad, "oh well...".
History (reality) has taught us that peaceful solutions to confict are few and far between, and I don't see that changing in my lifetime. All I can use to defend how much unrest and uncivility, and even how much water boarding, I am willing to accept is to step back and envision if we will eventually be at a better place than we currently are at today. I hope so, but more importantly, I believe so.
Certainly, there will be abuses any time one person sits in a position of authority of another. This is true whether we are talking about wardens abusing prisoners, police abusing suspects, and even bosses abusing their employees. However, for that better place to ever be realized, I need to trust in others; and, I anticipate abuses will be the exception and not the rule. December 18, 2014 at 1:09pm
Loren M. Lambert: No, it's sad there are those that think we need to debase ourselves to the level of those we decry as immoral and thereby succumb to the same immorality. December 18, 2014 at 4:37pm
Dean Probst: Where do individual rights come from? Oh, that's right, they are granted by society, the collective, the "many". Individual rights do not exist without consideration of the "greater good". Your rights granted by The Constitution were defined by the "many", and as we have seen, can surely be changed by the "many". One day, you have the right to drink alcohol, the next you don't because society changed it's mind. One day you are sitting home free to do as you please, the next day you are drafted into service to protect the greater good.
If you truly believe your individual rights trump the needs of society, perhaps you should go live on an island. As the logical Mr. Spock said, “the needs of the many will always outweigh the needs of the few.”, and always take precedence over the needs and rights of the individual.
If society should fall, then your rights perish along with it. If we should find ourselves at war with Russia, do you really think losing the war with our morals intact serves a greater good? Go ahead and explain that one... December 18, 2014 at 8:27pm
Loren M. Lambert: Winning a war and torturing the people you are fighting are not the same thing. December 18, 2014 at 9:30pm
Dean Probst: Loren, you are right. Winning a war and using torture to obtain intelligence from the people we are fighting are not the same thing. If we truly are not willing to go to battle with the same terribleness as our enemy, then we may as well wave the white flag now and surrender the freedoms and rights we so dearly cherish. The enemies we are facing today, and those we will likely face in the near future have a voracity for evil unlike anything we have ever experienced, and that evil is coming home. Water boarding is going to look like a walk in the park. December 19, 2014 at 12:00am
Loren M. Lambert: That's bullshit Dean. Destroying the threat, human and economical have no connection to torturing or subjugating them after they are conquered. The two have nothing to do with each other. Torture rarely works and 90% of the time the torturers simply chase ghosts and misinformation, and then they excalate the torture. Good night. December 19, 2014 at 12:17am
