Monday, June 20, 2005

NOTE TO JAMES LIKEKS
Just because some liberal critics get overblown and compare Guantanomo to the Soviet gulags, or Nazi concentration camps, or Saddam's prisons, does not make "not as bad as the gulags" or "not as bad as Nazi concentration camps," or "not as bad as Saddam's prisons" the new moral standard for how prisoners are treated.

Cherry-picking some passages...


There was just something ineffably sinister about a detention camp. Never mind that the people sent there were “Unlawful combatants,” a phrase that would seem to bestow, well, a lack of adherence to the very notions of international law the Gitmo-detainee advocates hold dear.


The problem with this designation is that it's a tad tautoological. Who's "illegal?" Whoever we say is.


nyway. Here’s the deal. We decide what constitutes torture, and identify it as the following: insufficient air conditioning, excess air conditioning, sleep deprivation, being chained to the floor, and other forms of psychological stress. The United States is free to use these techniques against hardened terrorists. Those who disagree with the techniques sign a register that records their complaints. When the terrorist finally spills the details of a forthcoming attack, on, say, Chicago, the people who signed the register and live in Chicago are required to report to the Disintegration Chamber. Very simple. Everyone’s happy.


Huh? So, the deal is that the US gets to use these techniques, and we get to die if they work? What, pray tell, is the consequence if thse techiniques are applied to someone who is not a actually a "hardened terrorist?" (there's another one of those tautological terms again). What are the consequences if using these techniques turns more law-abiding citizens into "hardened terrorists?" What if one of these "hardened terrorists", desperate to end this hostile treatment, gives false or misleading information, wasting the US's time and resources?

If I were a proponenet of the Iraq war, I'd excercise a little bit more humility before expecting people to take my claims of who is a hardened terrorist, and "When the terrorists finally spills the details..." at face value. Maybe we should find Saddam's WMD's first before spelling out what your critics should do when your next claim turns out to be true.

Oh, that's right...
Post a Comment