Posted on 02/15/2006 12:21:05 PM PST by B-Chan
To my liberal friends:
In light of the publication of what are purported to be photos of the torture of enemy prisoners by U.S. forces, I offer the following opinions:
1. Torture is illegal under both civil and military law. If these prisoners were tortured they were tortured in contravention of both law and regulations. This sort of thing was not and never had been official military policy. If these prisoners were tortured, it was a failure, yes-- but a failure of some small part of the system, not an indictment of the country or the military as a whole.2. War is evil, but it is not the ultimate evil. It is ugly, but it is not the ultimate ugliness. War involves deliberately and coldly killing and mutilating people and destroying their lives as an alternative to submission to or toleration of some greater evil on their part. Those of us who have not been to war may sometimes forget this. When civilized people with no military experience are exposed to the bloody realities of war, they naturally recoil in shock, which can overpower the rational knowledge that sometimes wars have to be fought. It is for this reason that the details and images of military operations are kept from the public -- not out of shame, but out of a desire to avoid destroying public morale. For example, the Pentagon strictly forbade the news media from showing images of dead or injured soldiers during World War II because they knew such images would harm the will of Americans to see the war through to victory, and we had to stop Hitler and the Japanese.
3. The authenticity and provenance of these photos is yet to be examined. We have no idea of the context in which these images were produced or the circumstances by which they were obtained.
4. Torture of prisoners for the sake of sadism is a war crime, and those engaging in it or authorizing it should be prosecuted as war criminals. But torture of prisoners for the sake of obtaining information that can save civilians or military personnel from death or injury is not a crime. Yes, torture is always a moral evil -- but in some cases it is the lesser of two moral evils. In cases where the choice is between torturing a prisoner and the possibility of a greater evil occurring (e.g. the death of innocents, allies, etc.), the officer authorizing the torture has a moral obligation to torture the enemy until the needed information is obtained and verified, and then submit his/her decision to torture to the judgment of the law and those civil and military authorities authorized to determine if he or she has committed a crime. If under the law a crime has been committed, the torturer is then morally obligated to accept punishment without objection. This is a warrior's duty.
5. Speaking out against the war before the war begins is not disloyalty. We have the moral obligation to speak out against war or any other national policy to which we object -- but this speaking out must be peaceable and directed through our elected representatives. Once our representatives in Congress and the President which we elected have decided to go to war, the time for speaking out has ended. Once war begins, the nation has decided to go to war; from that point on, the citizens of a nation must be united behind the struggle for victory. Those who cannot in good conscience support or participate in the war effort ("conscientious objectors") are obligated to refuse to do so, but otherwise to say or do nothing against the war. If one disagrees with the decision of Congress and the President to go to war, the correct action is to work hard to elect representatives and leaders that will vote the way one likes -- not to protest and demonstrate against a war while our soldiers are fighting and dying. To do so is to damage morale, and thus is tantamount to helping the enemy.
I know none of you want to hear that, and I'm sorry if it offends any of you, but it's true.
That being said, there is nothing disloyal about protesting specific actions or policies undertaken as a part of a given war effort. Patriots have a moral obligation to protest the torture or murder of noncombatants or other war crimes. This protest, however, must be directed only at the people who commit the war crimes in question, not at the war effort as a whole.
5. Torture is the deliberate infliction of lasting and serious physical or psychological harm on a noncombatant. Putting panties on a prisoner's head is not necessarily torture. Forcing a prisoner to perform hard labor is not necessarily torture. Requiring a prisoner to eat foods outside of his or her religious or cultural norms is not necessarily torture. Disparaging a prisoner's religion, belief system, political philosophy, or appearance is not torture. Accidentally injuring a prisoner while stopping or preventing him/her from committing acts of violence, disorder, or acting on behalf of the enemy is not torture. Torture is the deliberate infliction of lasting and serious physical or psychological harm on a noncombatant.
6. Protest is one thing, but talk of 'ameriKKKan fascism" or "loss of civil liberties" in the context of this war is a sure-fire way to be ignored by sensible people. To talk about "illegal wars" or to promulgate conspiracy theories will only brand one as a nut in the minds of the public. If we truly lived under fascism, anyone objecting to the war would simply disappear; there would be no blathering on and on about "Chimpy McBusHitler" or camping out in front of the President's ranch if we really lived in a dictatorship. Yes, in time of war free speech is subject to limitation; however, free speech is not and never has been an absolute right of American citizens. Free speech is the right of the people to peaceably address their grievances against the elected government. It is not the ability to say whatever one wants whenever one wants in a consequence-free environment. According to the law, speech that presents a "clear and present danger" to public order is legally limitible. Stating one's objection to a war, peaceful picketing, etc. is not going to result in one's being arrested. However, those who engage in violent protests, public flag-burnings, abuse of soldiers or veterans, obstructions of military activities, criminal trespass, or other acts likely to cause riots, disorders, or disturbances of the peace may be criminally liable.
Finally, it is important to realize that speaking out against the war is going to earn those who so it a great deal of hostility from their fellow citizens -- and that is as it should be. The right to have a political opinion applies to everyone equally. No one has the right not to have their feelings hurt. Those who denigrate our soldiers or leaders in time of war should not be surprised when their "free speech" earns them the hostility of their fellow citizens.
In closing: my dear liberal friends, If you hate the war, keep your opinions to yourself, or prepare yourself for public hostility. It's as simple as that.
I'm going to read the whole thing later. The bits I read so far, though, earn you a big Kudos from me!
A++ on paragraph 2.
Our foreign and domestic enemies know this all to well and are quite deliberate and adept at exploiting it.
A++ on paragraph 2.
Our foreign and domestic enemies know this all too well and are quite deliberate and adept at exploiting it.
3. The authenticity and provenance of these photos is yet to be examined. We have no idea of the context in which these images were produced or the circumstances by which they were obtained.
_________________
This needs to be repeated about a hundred times or so.
Well done.
If enemy prisoners were tortured i really don't care!Winning is all that matters and by any means necessary.
Just because these guys are bleeding, it doesn't mean they were tortured. They could have been injured in transit, they could have attacked a guard, they could have been beaten by another inmate, they may have hurt themselves.
If torturing enemy prisoners is necssary to achieve victory, it is a warrior's duty to torture them -- and then accept the judgment of the law and the consequences for doing so.
But not caring? That way leads madness. We should never flinch from inflicting harm upon the enemy, whether by killing or torture, but we should NEVER allow ourselves to not care about the morality of what we are doing. We should defend our nation with joy and zeal, but we should never inflict any more harm than is absolutely necessary to win. We must at time butcher our fellow human beings -- but if we ever forget that they ARE our fellow human beings, we lose the war whether we win on the batlefield or not.
Torture of an enemy combatant (e.g. a prisoner who is withholding information needed to save lives) is evil -- but it is a sometimes-necessary evil. Torture of a genuine noncombatant -- a civilian, a wounded enemy, or a captured enemy with no critical information -- is a war crime. You'd better care about that. The American military does not commit war crimes as a matter of national policy, and those under Amercan command who do commit them will be arrested, prosecuted, and punished.
War is an ugly busness, and it will turn us ugly if we allow hatred to be our motivation instead of duty. We should kill the enemy, maim him, torture him, roast him alive with napalm or uranium atoms if we have to, may God forgive us -- but we must keep always in mind the fact that the enemy is a human being, too -- a priceless and unique artifact of the Deity -- and treat him likewise.
The military interogators are very skilled at getting information without violating international law and military regulations.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.