What he said:
The document reads, like so much else from the Cheney years, like a document from a South American dictatorship in the 1970s or 1980s. If someone had told me a few years ago that it had popped up in the John_Walker_Lindh_Custody Soviet archives, I would have believed him. Read the whole thing if you can. It is a distressing document. Here’s what the “CIA pros” did to prisoners (the non-CIA pros improvised the president’s directive to torture and abuse prisoners in very similar ways): stress positions, nudity, hooding, sensory deprivation, sleep deprivation, long time standing, beatings, hypothermia, and walling. They key thing, according to the CIA, is to enhance “the potential dread a high-value detainee might have of US custody”. Notice the shift from the standards of the past. In the past, the US was known for being a country whose soldiers would never mistreat prisoners; now, the US wants the world to know that US custody is something to be dreaded. That’s what Cheney did to America. He’s proud of it. If you are ever captured by a US soldier, and suspected of terrorism, you know that torture will be coming soon. The values of Washington and Eisenhower and Reagan are inverted. The reputation of the US as a defender of human rights is reversed. The point is that America must be feared for its willingness to abandon all human rights.
What is going to happen when this happens to an American soldier, and the wingnuts scream torture until the other country claims they based their interrogation techniques on Bush era memos?
Cain
My anger is reaching peak wingnut.
cain
DougJ
I knew the torture stuff would flush Sully out of his spider hole.
ChrisS
What happens when the US starts rounding right-wing militia members suspected of terrorism?
Midnight Marauder
What is going to happen when this happens to an American soldier, and the wingnuts scream torture until the other country claims they based their interrogation techniques on Bush era memos?
Peak Wingnut?
@DougJ:
I knew the torture stuff would flush Sully out of his spider hole.
Agreed. Honestly, that’s pretty much the only reason I’ve had to visit his blog the past few months (when he himself is actually writing; not Sully’s Borg.)
Jody
Simple, John.
They will say it isn’t torture when we do it, because our motives are pure.
chopper
exactly. ask WWII vets – many (at least the non-jews) would likely tell you they’d rather be captured by nazis than the japanese. because the japanese were known far and wide as being so horribly mistreating of prisoners that they made the nazis look very attractive in comparison.
i’m sure the japanese military liked having that reputation.
handy
They will call it a bunch of harmless “college pranks” and wonder what’s the big deal, libtards?
Incertus
What is going to happen when this happens to an American soldier,
They’ll call for nuclear retaliation. I don’t think I’m exaggerating here.
Irony Abounds
Just read Stephen Hayes and Andrew McCarthy (assuming you are willing to withstand the affront to humanity that those two asshats produce). They think the reports show Cheney was right! There was no torture! The CIA is now destroyed! What the hell is wrong with our country?
MikeJ
Fuck morality and the law. This is why no one should ever torture.
Cat Lady
la la la la la la can’t hear you la la la la la
/MSM
someguy
Actually Incertus, a bunch of U.S. troops have been eviscerated alive, tortured with blow torches and drills and whatnot – not whizzing drills around in the next room, BTW. None of that has any bearing on the insane dehumanizing tactics the U.S. has sunk to, I’m just sayin’ captured U.S. troops are pretty much frucked, which is just fair retaliation for us declaring a racist religious war on teh Brown Peepuls. Their resistance to us is completely understandable when you read the CIA’s torture manuals.
Dreggas
I was just thinking. I remember during the Gulf War 1 how the Iraqi’s happily surrendered to the U.S. and coalition forces. They even said they knew they’d be treated well. Due to the mass surrenders, as much as due to tactics there was very little actual bloodshed in that war (as far as troops against troops).
Think how this will play out now, and for that matter has played out given what Cheney did. You think an enemy soldier, in uniform or not, is going to throw down their weapons knowing what they may face at the hands of U.S. soldiers and/or the CIA? Hell no, torture makes you wish for death and it never comes, death is the preferred choice so you fight to the death.
I have a feeling that even if every one of these assholes responsible for this were held accountable and thrown in prison or executed, the taint of this will follow our military and intelligence personnel for a long, long time making any future conflict bloodier.
Violet
Pretty much what Jody said. They’ll say it’s different when we did it because we were fighting The War On Terror, which is so morally superior to any other war that it warranted excessive interrogation techniques. They’ll say Our Situation Was Different. And when you say, “But torture is always wrong,” they’ll say, “This enemy was different from any other we’ve ever faced. It warranted any action necessary.”
Believe me, this is already happening. I hear it when I talk to my family members. They say that what we faced in WWII was nothing compared to what we are dealing with now, with “these Muslims who want to kill us.” And when I say that we didn’t torture prisoners in WWII and that’s part of what enabled us to have the moral high ground (nevermind that torture is always wrong), they tell me that was different. And this enemy is different. Bigger. Scarier. Must. Be. Tortured.
They really believe this stuff. They have no compunction about out government using torture. It’s shocking to me. These are good people. I have no idea how they can believe this stuff.
c u n d gulag
‘What is going to happen when this happens to an American soldier?”
One would hope that they would have the decency to STFU. But I’d bet anything that that ain’t gonna happen.
I agree with whoever said they’ll want to nuke ’em. But I want to add that they’d like to torture them first before that happens. And in even worse ways than before.
Such is the wingnut mind…
wilfred
How many times does it need to be said? They were just nigger muslims. So?
Nothing will happen to Cheney or anyone else.
Ah!: “I confess, he did it.” Nope, we’re all guilty. We let it happen. It still happens. People want absolution, it’s not coming. Make your penance your own way.
Zifnab
I’ve heard this so many times now. Over and over again we get to hear the CIA tortured at Guantanamo. The CIA tortured at secret prisons. The CIA tortured at Abu Gharab.
I don’t know why this is some sort of controversy. We’ve known the Bush Admin was torturing for nearly four years now. Do we get to prosecute anyone or not? Cause otherwise the story should be, “Obama approves of Bush War Crimes, basically pardons all participants.”
r€nato
When that happens, wingnuts will dismiss it as soshulists still afflicted with Bush Derangement Syndrome and continue braying for more torture in retaliation for the torture of American soldiers.
Jackie
@Violet: I have decided that they aren’t good people. I don’t care if they help the homeless and do good works all day. If they don’t think there is something evil about torture they don’t meet my criteria for Good People.
Dreggas
@Violet:
blahblahblah
“What is going to happen when this happens to an American soldier, and the wingnuts scream torture until the other country claims they based their interrogation techniques on Bush era memos?”
What makes you think a supporter of the torture policy would be willing to hold those two conflicting ideas simultaneously? The cognitive dissonance is too great. They will simply claim that the truth is lies and anyone who points to those so-called lies is a traitor.
They are so consumed by their ideology that facts are ancillary.
Zifnab
@c u n d gulag:
One would hope not!
I absolutely want the GOP to go apeshit insane over tortured American soldiers. Then, maybe, when Congress goes through another push to weed out the process from domestic practice, maybe we won’t see Tom Coburn filibustering it.
r€nato
@Violet:
were they not alive during the Cold War?
I think a large, powerful nation-state with thousands of nuclear weapons pointed at us is a much scarier enemy than some uneducated jihadi terrorists.
Either these ‘good people’ are nuts, or I am.
Brick Oven Bill
This author does not know history. In our most recent conflict with the Muslim world, the Philippine-American WarPhilippine-American War
, we used the traditional Shah-Tito-Hussein-Ataturk strategy of going after the families of the Muslim fighters. We put the families in concentration camps so that the fighters could not hide behind them. One tenth of the Philippine population was killed in this conflict, mostly civilians by disease. We won this conflict.
“The triple press of concentration (camps), devastation, and harassment led Abad (the Marinduque commander) …to request a truce to negotiate surrender terms… The Army pacified Marinduque not by winning the allegiance of the people, but by imposing coercive measures to control their behavior and separate them from the insurgents in the field. Ultimately, military and security measures proved to be the (essential element) of Philippine pacification.”
The best strategy, if the goal is to maintain ‘moral authority’, whatever that is, is to get out of the Middle East and isolate ourselves from the Muslim world. If we want to engage in conflict with the Muslim world, we need to lower our moral standards, and adopt a strategy similar to those that have been successfully used in the past.
Having soldiers drive around so that Muslims can set ambushes up for them and blow them up makes zero sense. It serves no purpose. It is a waste.
Zifnab
@r€nato: During the Cold War, their job was definitely a lot easier. Believing the second largest nation on earth is getting ready to sweep in with the second largest army on earth would be a lot easier than believing there’s a crazy guy with a turban and a bomb belt hiding under every rock and behind every tree.
Aris
It’s not just the wingnut press. Fresh-off-the-press headline at the Columbus Dispatch site: “CIA: Severe interrogation led to arrest of Columbus
terrorist.”
No ifs, no buts, torture works to keep us safe — although they don’t actually call it “torture”; instead it’s “severe interrogation.” And the page URL is amusingly titled “fruits_of_torture.” Resolved by major Midwestern “centrist” and serious newspaper: Torture works, kept us safe!
Time to despair yet? If not, read the comments below the article. Real Americans love torture as much as they hate health care.
____________________________________________
Roger Moore
The wingnuts will blame the problem on the release of the memos, not on the atrocities they revealed. SATSQ
SpotWeld
B.O.B…
Shut Up
Violet
@r€nato:
They were. And WWII, which is why I had that conversation with them. Unfortunately, they’re Republican through and through. I don’t think hardly anything could get them to leave the party. Very “my party, right or wrong” attitude.
And, sadly, I think they’ve fallen prey to the Glenn Beck/Rush Limbaugh types who traffic in fear. It’s an easy trap to fall into if you only listen to Fox News.
I don’t know. I love these folks. They are my family. Their attitude makes me sad.
Stefan
They really believe this stuff. They have no compunction about out government using torture. It’s shocking to me. These are good people. I have no idea how they can believe this stuff.
If they have no compunction about using torture then they are not, ipso facto, good people. Painful to accept, but it’s true. The annal of history are filled with horrific outrages committed by “good people” — wonderful friends and neighbors who’d pat their kids on the head, kiss their wives goodbye and then go off to machete an entire churchful of terrified families.
If someone said “he has no compunction about raping women. He’s good people” everyone would realize that the first sentence negates the second — the same has to apply here.
wilfred
Speaking of American prisoners:
The British were Muslims? Who knew? Seriously, we learned from the best Christians we had.
Phoenician in a time of Romans
I think a large, powerful nation-state with thousands of nuclear weapons pointed at us is a much scarier enemy than some uneducated jihadi terrorists.
Which is, of course, a good reason for China and Russia to support Iran rather than the USA…
JGabriel
John Cole @ Top:
I think we already know the answer to that one. C’mon, everybody, let’s all scream the wingnut response in unison:
.
El Cid
Do you really think that when the Reaganites were sending ‘covert’ (i.e., covert from*us*, not the locals) forces to run around Central America to work with evangelical anti-Mayan genocidalists and death squad enthusiasts, and to Southern Africa to aid apartheid fascist forces (one of Dick Cheney’s personal favorite causes) and their local anti-civilian terror forces, that they weren’t *jealous*?
Do you really imagine types like Cheney saying “Good thing we can’t just drop nuns into cellars filled with rotting bodies”? Or do you imagine them saying “This place would be a lot better off if we could do a little *more* of that”?
c u n d gulag
@Zifnab:
Good point. I hadn’t thought of that.
Mnemosyne
@wilfred:
After reading The Wordy Shipmates, you speak more truly than you know.
Obama Death Panel Chairman (formerly glocksman)
@Jody:
That’s exactly the argument I got when discussing this with a co-worker.
When I accused him of using the same situational ethics that he’s so fond of accusing liberals of, he literally became red-faced and stormed off after sputtering that he didn’t want to discuss it anymore.
Tsulagi
Yep.
That, and also American civilian citizens. If a U.S. citizen is in another country and authorities there think there is a 1% chance that person could be a potential risk to their security, then wingnuttian logic would dictate they lock them up and enhance the shit out them in interrogation. They should be good with that. What’s a few hundred waterboardings and years of detention without charges? And if China wants to rendition a U.S. citizen citing their national security, hell we should file the flight plan for them.
Bin Laden sneered at our secular ideals and said after 9/11 we would abandon them. Real American of Bush and Cheney to show just how gutless able-bodied buttboys they could be working to give bin Laden a proof of concept.
@chopper:
IIRC from past reading of POW treatment by Germany and Japan, the figure was something like 92% of American POWs survived German detention. I remember the number struck me as larger than I would have expected given that even in a relatively young population x-number will die each year to natural causes. Legitimate accidents too. And of those wounded before capture, even if they received adequate medical attention you could expect some to die later from being in a weakened state. Some would have died during escape attempts.
However, with the Japanese I believe the survival rate was around 36%. Always wondered how much that factored in former Army officer Truman’s decision to drop atomic bombs rather than launch an invasion.
joe from Lowell
Think about what it’s going to mean for the next unit of American infantrymen tasked with taking a strongly-defended position for the enemy to have a “dread of US custody.”
There is a story about two Special Forces personnel in the first Gulf War capturing an entire battalion of Iraqi soldiers with a bullhorn.
So much for that.
aimai
“What is going to happen when it happens to an American soldier?””
Look, for sane, moral, law abiding people the first rule is that you don’t do to other people what you don’t want them to do to you. Civilization demands that there be one law for everyone. The important thing is that we carry our civilization within us and that we choose for ourselves to remain true to our humanity. Our morality is pro-active, not re-active.
But for modern american conservatives the rule is “do unto others before they do unto you.” Morality is situational–the act isn’t good or bad a priori. We know that something is wrong because it is bad for *us*, and we know that something is good because we are doing it and we are good people.
So when something bad happens to one of our soldiers–when he or she is tortured or beheaded, the right wing will simply say that this bad act, committed by bad people on a “good” person simply retroactively legitimizes our torture and killing of bad people. They were going to do this grievous shit to us as soon as they could so at least we got our licks in. Too bad, so sad, about our soldier/sailor/marine/national guard guy. But it would have happened anyway because those bad people always do that bad shit.
aimai
Riggsveda
How the hell did the “values of…Reagan” get in there? The man had the morals of a crocodile.
bishophicks
“What is going to happen when this happens to an American soldier…”?
Obviously, if it happens to an American soldier it means the enemy doesn’t fear us enough and we have to torture our prisoners even more. And if Obama doesn’t see it that way then he’s a pussy.
I wrote the following almost 3 years ago and it’s still true:
“Right now, Bush/Cheney are pretending to scratch their heads over the Geneva Convention’s ban on torture, saying that it’s “unclear”. It’s not. We should treat prisoners the way we believe our soldiers should be treated if captured. Torture (you can pretend it’s “harsh interrogation”, but it’s torture) is wrong for many reasons. It’s morally wrong, and if we are in part fighting to convince people that “our way” is better, “our way” shouldn’t include immoral acts. It also violates the law (signed treaties are the “supreme law of the land”). It is true that the people we are fighting didn’t sign the Geneva Conventions, but that doesn’t negate the fact that WE did. Torture also doesn’t work. You might get some good information, but you’ll also get whatever information your victim thinks will get you to stop torturing him. It also endangers our soldiers in two ways: 1) if we torture prisoners, our current and future enemies will torture our soldiers in turn, and 2) an enemy who believes they will be treated well will surrender more easily while one who believes capture leads to torture and perhaps death will fight longer and harder. So torture makes our troops’ job harder and automatically raises the stakes for them if they are captured. Nice job. Captured enemies are also eventually returned when the war is over. Japanese and German soldiers returned with stories of decent treatment which boosted our reputation and helped us win hearts and minds. Sixty years later both countries are strong allies. What stories will our current prisoners return to their families with? We’ve already seen the pictures.”
James F. Elliott
“I don’t know why this is some sort of controversy. We’ve known the Bush Admin was torturing for nearly four years now. Do we get to prosecute anyone or not? Cause otherwise the story should be, “Obama approves of Bush War Crimes, basically pardons all participants.”
/signed
par4
If it isn’t prosecuted to the full extent of the law there will come a day when the govt. starts torturing it’s own citizens. Absolute certainty.
kay
@par4:
You almost have to.
The fact is, we have domestic terrorists. The conservative argument simply doesn’t make any sense unless you torture domestic terrorists to uncover information that could prevent an attack.
If there’s another terrorist attack in the US, home-grown variety, every single American who supports torture of non-Americans has to ask why the conspiracy wasn’t uncovered with a waterboarding session.
Dick Cheney think the most effective way to garner information is to torture people. He has to extend that to Americans, or his argument doesn’t make any sense. If he doesn’t extend it to Americans, it isn’t about safety, because that distinction doesn’t make any sense in this context.
Legalize
“If it isn’t prosecuted to the full extent of the law there will come a day when the govt. starts torturing it’s own citizens. Absolute certainty.”
Too late: http://www.time.com/time/nation/article/0,8599,1565798,00.html
JoyceH
@Dreggas:
I was just thinking. I remember during the Gulf War 1 how the Iraqi’s happily surrendered to the U.S. and coalition forces. They even said they knew they’d be treated well. Due to the mass surrenders, as much as due to tactics there was very little actual bloodshed in that war (as far as troops against troops).
Exactly. Right around the time the torture story first broke, I saw a fellow on television talking about it. He said he knew an old man who’d been a German draftee in WWII. Said as he was going off the basic training, his uncles, WWI vets, took him aside and told him, “Be brave, fight in the front lines – and surrender to the first American you see.”
All wars are fought by draftees who would just as soon not be fighting. Our long tradition of humane treatment of POWs has probably saved countless American lives by making it easy for soldiers on the other side to surrender. The Doughboys’ humane treatment of prisoners in WWI wound up saving the lives of who knows how many of their own sons a generation later.
Who do you suppose will be willing to surrender to the Americans now?
chuck
They will still claim it’s torture because SHUT UP that’s why.
Oh, and USA! USA! USA! USA! Also.
lizzy
“What is going to happen when this happens to an American soldier, and the wingnuts scream torture until the other country claims they based their interrogation techniques on Bush era memos?”
They will blame Obama and the liberal press for releasing and publishing the documents, silly.
Brian Griffin
@Roger Moore:
yep, they’ll just say it’s Obama’s fault.
tc125231
@Brick Oven Bill: As is udual with halfwits, or people with hidden agendas, your selection of history is quite narrow.
This IS a departure. It WILL negatively affect the treatment of our personnel. That is not to say that it is a permanent and irreparable, or has never occurred before.
The fact that you follow moral standing with the phrase “whatever that is” portarys a fairly limited grasp of the scope of realpolitik.
But for you, obtuseness is norm.
So carry on. Nobody can stop your foolishness anyway.
Blue Raven
@Brick Oven Bill: Fuck off. Die in a fire. Give your keyboard to a monkey who can actually type sense.
Bill Zebub
The values of Reagan? What, munching jellybeans and shitting his diaper? What other values are we talking about? Go say that shit to someone in Central America, Sullivan, you fucking overstuffed sack of shit. Tell ’em about Rios Montt getting “a bum rap” and how the Contras were “the moral equivalent of the Founding Fathers.”
Why do intelligent people still waste time on that useless fucking moron and his nonexistent insights? Aren’t there tons of bloggers who deserve the attention more?