In order for reports of torture to cause foreigners to hate the U.S., two elements are necessary:

(1) the torture.

(2) the people exposing the torture and publicizing it.

Omit either one and the problem does not exist.

So it seems to me that the muckraking journalists publicizing this are just as much to blame as the CIA; maybe moreso.

I agree, just like with the cause of all the bitterness regarding WW2. The two elements:

(1) German concentration camps

(2) people exposing them.

War crimes need to be hidden, swept under the carpet, whitewashed at any cost. Becaue that's what's important.

God Bless America.

You are a little fascist, and I don't use that label lightly. And of course your post is ridiculous, and I have to imagine you know it is.

The regular use of sanctioned torture by the United States has hurt our country far more, in a fundamental and long-term way, than 9/11 did. It is an absolute disgrace which ultimately makes us weaker, smaller, less respected and less able to fight our enemies. It is the biggest achievement of Osama bin Laden's career.

Can you explain to me why the US must now get into torture just because we are threatened by a bunch of Islamist lunatics, when Britain, when it was literally in a fight for its very own survival and its cities and citizens being bombed on a daily basis, was known for its impeccable treatment of captured Germans?

And do you also realize that the Brits were also known for their outstanding intelligence operations? As the article indicates, not being monstrous actually aids in obtaining intelligence. The Brits knew this fundamental reality.

fsilber:

In order for reports of torture to cause foreigners to hate the U.S., two elements are necessary:

(1) the torture.

(2) the people exposing the torture and publicizing it.

Omit either one and the problem does not exist.

So it seems to me that the muckraking journalists publicizing this are just as much to blame as the CIA; maybe moreso.

Wow! So the real problem is not the torture, but the reporting of torture.

Well now, if that is the case, then everyone who reports torture should be immediately arrested and held in solitary confinement until they die (or perhaps just execute them immediately just to make sure) in order to prevent news of the torture from getting to the public.

So I guess that also means that anyone helping to report torture should also be immediately imprisioned and/or executed as well because they would be accessories to the crime.

And while you are at it, anyone who happens to report any of these disappearances should also be immediately imprisioned and/or executed as well because pointed questions may expose the cover-up program.

In fact, why not just have the government watch everyone all of the time just to make sure that no one is speaking about torture at anytime. And if someone does speak about it, then that person(s) can also be immediately arrested and/or executed as well.

And finally, you will also need a system of secret trials and detention facilities in order to prevent the public from asking too many questions about what the government is up to and to quickly process those slated for immediate imprisionment and/or execution.

Golly! It is sure is a shame that the Nazis, the KGB, or Vlad the Impaler never thought of doing something that either, otherwise they may have succeeded in keeping their reputations in tact.

'fsilber' is a true genius!

In order for reports of torture to cause foreigners to hate the U.S., two elements are necessary:

(1) the torture.

(2) the people exposing the torture and publicizing it.

Omit either one and the problem does not exist.

*squints*

Is that you, Colbert? I thought you were still on vacation!

Serai:

In order for reports of torture to cause foreigners to hate the U.S., two elements are necessary:

(1) the torture.

(2) the people exposing the torture and publicizing it.

Omit either one and the problem does not exist.

*squints*

Is that you, Colbert? I thought you were still on vacation!

You win several internets!

In order for reports of torture to cause foreigners to hate the U.S., neither element is necessary. People that hate us will make up rumors that we torture, so the torture element is not necessary. And if we do in fact torture prisoners, the word will get out whether there are muckrakers or not.

The real harm of torture is internal. It is not a coincidence that the administration that was most corrupt, most secretive and most incompetent at just about everything it did in this last century was also the one that tortured prisoners for no apparent good reason.

The media had nothing to do with their bad behavior.

Torture is wrong. It's that simple. Even if nobody but the participants know about it, it's wrong. It's wrong, whether or not we get blamed or applauded for it. It's still wrong.

Bush came into office smirking about his "Moral Clarity". I didn't buy it when it was a campaign slogan and I cannot say I've been surprised that his regime would so quickly dive into the moral cesspool. What's sad is that so many of his fans are still happy to cohabitate there with them.

EbenCooke:

Torture is wrong. It's that simple. Even if nobody but the participants know about it, it's wrong. It's wrong, whether or not we get blamed or applauded for it. It's still wrong.

If we are to move beyond absolute morality to relative morality and thinking for ourselves, one good question to ask someone is, "What did you expect would happen when you did that?"

The torturers expected that they would gain the information that would keep America safe, and that their methods would remain discreet. Those who revealed the torture expected that foreigners would hate America when they heard of it, and that the torture would stop (thus reducing our information about the terrorists).

So it's really a comparison between people using evil means in the hope of achieving a good end, versus those who used good means (denouncing crime, stopping torture) in the expectation that evil would result from their actions.

fsilber:

If we are to move beyond absolute morality to relative morality and thinking for ourselves, one good question to ask someone is, "What did you expect would happen when you did that?"

The torturers expected that they would gain the information that would keep America safe, and that their methods would remain discreet. Those who revealed the torture expected that foreigners would hate America when they heard of it, and that the torture would stop (thus reducing our information about the terrorists).

So it's really a comparison between people using evil means in the hope of achieving a good end, versus those who used good means (denouncing crime, stopping torture) in the expectation that evil would result from their actions.

So you are operating from the assumption/delusion that journalists (or whomever leaked to the journalists) are actually motivated to harm the United States rather than expose a cancer on our constitution. You've been made a fool of by all the posters here, already, and you come back with this? Grow up fsilber. Join reality. Get away from the poison that deludes you.

Hellzapoppin:

fsilber:

If we are to move beyond absolute morality to relative morality and thinking for ourselves, one good question to ask someone is, "What did you expect would happen when you did that?"

The torturers expected that they would gain the information that would keep America safe, and that their methods would remain discreet. Those who revealed the torture expected that foreigners would hate America when they heard of it, and that the torture would stop (thus reducing our information about the terrorists).

So it's really a comparison between people using evil means in the hope of achieving a good end, versus those who used good means (denouncing crime, stopping torture) in the expectation that evil would result from their actions.

So you are operating from the assumption/delusion that journalists (or whomever leaked to the journalists) are actually motivated to harm the United States rather than expose a cancer on our constitution. You've been made a fool of by all the posters here, already, and you come back with this? Grow up fsilber. Join reality. Get away from the poison that deludes you.

If it were purely a moral issue, then you should have first taken issue with the author. He was the one who first suggested that on this issue we ought to be motivated by what other countries think of us.

And yes, I do believe that most of the leftists who harp on this issue are primarily motivated to hard the United States in general, and the Republicans in particular. Otherwise, the would not all these years have expressed sympathy for and solidarity with a large variety of 2nd and 3rd world torturers who hated the United States and our allies.

EbenCooke:

Torture is wrong. It's that simple. Even if nobody but the participants know about it, it's wrong. It's wrong, whether or not we get blamed or applauded for it. It's still wrong.

Is that because God said so in the Bible? Or do you imagine _not_ citing the Bible somehow _increases_ the weight of your absolute moral assertion?