The Maverick Conservative

Remember "Drity Harry" (the original in the series, with Clint Eastwood saying:  "Did I fire six shots, or only five.  You know, in the excitement I don't know myself--pointing his cannon of a gun at the perp--but this is about the most powerful handgun made.  It will blow a hole clear through you.  So the question is:  Do you feel LUCKY today.  Well, do you?  PUNK.").

Near the beginning of "Dirty Harry", Harry has tracked down the psycho perp that has buried a girl alive with limited air.  If the girl was to have ANY chnace, Harry had to find her IMMEDIATELY.  He caught the perp, after shattering his arm (or leg, I don't remember which).  The perp would not tell WHEERE he had buried the girl alive.  Harry STEPPED on the injured member, grinding it into the gound (torture).  The perp told where the girl was.

I have no problem with that, even though I know that the law cannot endorse that kind of thing.  In the smae situation, i hope I would have the guts to do what Clint Eastwood's character did.

Waterboarding was used on only a FEW top Al Qaeda leaders who had been captured, not long after 9/11.  It evidently SAVED AMERICAN LIVES by revealing Al Qaeda operations that threatened thousands of Americans (operations which were disrupted and never successfully completed).  This happened because waterboarding WORKED, within 35 minutes on one suspect--WITHOUT leaving any permanent damage.

So is waterboarding torture?  I don't know.  I know that, in certain circumstances, I would use it without hesitation.  It is a LIE that torture does not "work".  It DOES work, especially if you are really interested in INFORMATION. 

Why does torture have such a bad reputation?  It is NOT just because it is barbaric (although that is part of it, to be sure).  The atomic bomb is more barbaric than torture (as was the FIRE BOMBING of Tokyo and Dresden).   In history, however, torture has been mainly used to GET CONFESSIONS, and for SADISTIC PLEASURE.  The "goal" has been the torture itself, and the ACCURACY of the results has been irrelevant to the torturers.  They just want to inflict pain, and have the broken creatures say what the torturers want said.  There is just no excuse, ever, for anything resembling that kind of torture.

But "waterboarding" is NOT designed to inflict substantial pain and anguish OVER TIME.  It is NOT designed to obtain confessions (as we have used it, in the few instances we have used it).  It is designed to GET INFORMATION QUICKLY, which means that the admittedly substantial FEAR and MENTAL ANGUISH induced by waterboarding is a SHORT TERM thing.

Is waterboarding torture, as distinguished from shining a bright light on a "suspect", keeping the suspect awake, putting the suspect in an uncomfortable chair, etc.?  What about Janet Reno's FBI at Waco?  Remember the LOUD NOISE trucks trying to keep the people awake and on edge.  Was THAT torture?  Is intensive interrogation itself usually a sort of low grade torture?  Is waterboarding worse or BETTER than other types of intense interrogation.  Does it not get information QUICKER, with LESS anguish in the long run?

Is waterboarding torture?  Unlike Democrats (and John McCain), I am not sure.   I know it should not be used routinely.  But there are circumstances where I would use it (say a bomb about to go off--nuclear or otherwise--killing hundreds or thousands of people).

That is why I did not even refer to this question in my entries on the INSANITY of continusously TRASHING this country over a FEW instances of interrogation after 9/11.  What SENSE does it make.  To want to PROSECUTE people over waterboarding, OR over destroying those tapes, is INSANE.  People who want to do that ARE NOT ON OUR SIDE.  Anyone who thinks those tapes should ever have been made public is CERTIFIABLE, and WANTS to get Americans KILLED.  Yet, there are many Democrats who fit this description.

We can debate whether waterboarding is torture, and whether it should ever be done.  We can disagfree.  I don't disrespect those people (like McCain) who insist that waterboarding is torture.  I DISRESPECT those people who OBSESS over the idea that a few instances of waterboarding make this an EVIL COUNTRY, and that everyone who had anything to do with it (even though it SAVED American lives) should be INVESTIGATED and PROSECUTED.   Nope.  That is INSANE.  I don't respect that.  Those people HATE this country.   They have often let HATRED of President Bush eat their brain away to the point that they make no sense at all. 

There is no reason to be "investigating" or "prosecuting" previous, isolated instances of waterboarding.  To the extent we should be arguing about it at all (I would not, frankly), we should be arguing about whether it should be done in the FUTURE, or whether it makes more sense NOT to really ITEMIZE exactly what types of interrogation will and will not be done.  What makes CONGRESS the best place to devise an interrogation manual?  If waterboarding is that heinous, let Congress prohibit waterboarding.  But for CONGRESS to decide exactly what types of interrogation should be used is, again, INSANE.  

However, it is well established that Democrats in Congress have mostly gone INSANE--captives of teh extreme, anti-American left.

|  Add to del.icio.us |  digg this