Torture

Sebastian Holsclaw has a post about the U.S. and torture. What sets it apart is that he writes as a conservative, and a supporter of the war to overthrow Saddam and the effort to build a free and democratic Iraq. And he steps out of the comfort zone to say, "The Bush administration has engaged in a very troubling pattern of legtimizing torture by dramatically expanding the practice of 'extraordinary rendition.' "

Torture is wrong. The practice of extraordinary rendition began as a classic Clintonian hairsplitting exercise in the mid 1990s to avoid the clear letter of the laws which prohibit America from using torture. This is the kind of avoidance of the law and ridiculous semantics that we decried when employed by the Clinton adminstration. It has gotten no more attractive just because Bush has decided to continue the program.

To say this is hardly a case of breaking ranks under fire. It's a matter of winning -- as we must, and shall -- without losing our souls. That necessity applies to individual soldiers, to military units, to governments, to whole societies and cultures.

I've thought often (and written occasionally) about David Hackett Fischer's "Washington's Crossing" while thinking about this matter. He describes succinctly what made the American Revolution different:

In 1776, American leaders believed that it was not enough to win the war. They also had to win in a way that was consistent with the values of their society and the principles of their cause. One of their greatest achievements in the winter campaign of 1776-77 was to manage the war in a manner that was true to the expanding humanitarian ideals of the American Revolution. ... In Congress and the army, American leaders resolved that the War of Independence would be conducted with a respect for human rights, even of the enemy. This idea grew stronger during the campaign of 1776-77, not weaker as is commonly the case in war.

...[American soldiers and civilians in 1776] set a high example, and we have much to learn from them. Much recent historical writing has served us ill in that respect. In the late twentieth century, too many scholars tried to make the American past into a record of crime and folly. Too many writers have told us that we are captives of our darker selves and helpless victims of our history. It isn't so, and never was. The story of Washington's Crossing tells us that Americans in an earlier generation were capable of acting in a higher spirit -- and so are we.

Which is why it's wrong for war supporters to turn away from a hard inquiry into what exactly our government is doing to detainees, or to quibble away any talk about torture. Not for the sake of the Geneva Accords, which truly are outdated, or to hamstring the American military -- but to protect what we cherish about ourselves. This discussion is too important to be left to the yap on the left. Hosclaw lays it out:

We are torturing non-terrorists. Perhaps some people would be willing to torture Al Qaeda members. I'm not one of them, but perhaps some are. The problem with that mindset is that we aren't just torturing Al Qaeda members. It is becoming completely obvious that some of the people being tortured are innocent. ... That is crazy. There isn't any information we are getting that could possibly justify the torture of innocent people.

Torture is ineffective. Torture isn't ineffective at getting information per se. It is ineffective at geting useful information. That is because the victim either snaps completely, or starts trying to mold his story to fit what the torturer wants to hear. There is evidence that we have relied on information obtained through torture, only to find that it was very wrong.

Torture also opens us up to the legitmate criticism that we are acting out the very barbarism that we want to fight. I think as Republicans we have heard that charge so many times employed against practices where the analogy was completely inappropriate, that we have become inured to the charge when properly employed. This is a case where the charge has force. Go watch the Nick Berg Beheading Video and then imagine the blood pouring from his neck being just like the blood oozing from the fingers of an innocent torture victim sent to his fate by the CIA. That is the barbarism we are fighting, and that is the barbarism we must not become a part of. I know we have heard the charge that we are acting "just like them" thrown at us over trivial concerns like suggesting that we pay a bit more attention to visa-holders from other countries. This is NOT THAT CASE. This is the case of saying we are acting just like them because we are torturing people--acting just like them.

I agree with Michael J. Totten that this is today's must-read.