Terrorism is the new communism – A real republican responds…

I have copied below the complete text from a guy ‘david’ who has the balls to actually defend torture as a justified practice. Ill try to overlook his personal attacks (like I’m simple minded). Why is it that people have to attack the person rather than their ideas and facts?

Just saw the edward murrow movie. Sounds like mccarthyism. I must be a communist or worse a defender of terrorists.

Funny that after the movie my parents used the same argument as david below that these are ‘different’ times, the enemy doesn’t where a uniform, we can’t protect individual rights when many lives are at stake. Terrorism is the new communism.

My point to them and my new friend david is that a country that allows its govt to resort to torture and denying individual civil rights has lost the very freedoms it hopes to protect.

Like edward murrow I am willing to stand up and say this is not ok. If I must face personal attacks I welcome them. But david you’ll have to fire some heavier guns. Common, dude, you’re still using the WMD defense when bush has even given that one up!

And how about pointing to one breakthrough from all this torture?

And you say these are enemy combatants. How do you know that?

Suicide missions all over the world? As a jew I am more sympathetic to this than most, having to watch innocent israelis get blown up by terrorists every week. I realize that like israel america may have to take new measures to protect itself. However, israel has to answer for its actions and so should we.

You say I should propose an alternative. How about giving these people fair representation (as we are doing for saddam)? How about returning most of them to their home countries? We didn’t even keep the nazi soldiers imprisoned this long after perpetrating the holocaust!

And david, just what valuable information do you think we’re going to learn from some guy who has been living in a cave in afganistan? Compare this potential to the damage we’ve caused to our intl reputation. Think how many more enemies we’ve created. Do you really feel safer now than on 9/12/01? I sure don’t.

You say you’re sickened by my moral indignation. I’m sickened by my lack of indignation. I’m sickened for standing by while a bunch of corrupt, lying, religious wackos have turned our country into the most feared and hated nation since rome, attacking any dissenter as unamerican. THEY are unamerican.

(Here’s david’s comments unedited…)

“What nonsense! … I’m sorry you feel that our elimination of dictatorial control over two countries (one responsible for systematic extermination of hundreds of thousands, the other easily the most repressive in the world), enabling democratic reform, rule of law, etc. can earn comparisons to Hitler and Stalin in your simple mind. How pathetic.

If you want to argue whether terrorists, captured on the battlefield, are entitled to U.S. Constitutional rights- you better come prepared for a long discussion. That is a ridiculous concept. Am I against torture- of course, who isn’t- but the question remains how do we treat an enemy that is not responsible to any nation, but an ideology?

Geneva, and any other International Convention, were not set up for this form of warfare. You are dealing with an enemy that has systematically unleashed suicide missions all over the world. They cowardly target civilians to terrorize and inflict the worst form of reaction from a government- appeasement. Putting aside the WMD argument (falling into the wrong hands and killing thousands of innocents), do you really think that tying our hands, in interrogating terrorists, who may have knowledge that helps prevent losses similar to those experienced on 9/11 is smart policy? If you say yes, then check your head. Thousands of innocent civilians vs. the rights of a terrorist…hmm?

If you want to have a serious debate, pose a solution. Otherwise, the moral indignation you pose is sickening.”

Sent wirelessly via BlackBerry from T-Mobile.

2 thoughts on “Terrorism is the new communism – A real republican responds…

  1. If you want to have a serious debate, pose a solution.

    Bull! The burden is on David to prove that torture itself is a solution. The solution Marc proposes is, stop using a tactic that doesn’t work. It’s been shown over and over that torture doesn’t work.
    And the “well, look at how they behave” defense is a straw man. If the USA is to be the inspirational beacon of liberty and justice we all know it is, we have to actually behave better than our enemies, not just say it. The battle for stability in Iraq is not about munitions and troop movements, it’s about winning the hearts and minds of the people who live there. If we behave as badly as the terrorists, then a reasonable person can conclude that it’s just two sides of the same coin – and then it’s only a battle propaganda. Our only hope is if they choose the Western values because they are actually better than the terrorists, not because we have a gun to their heads.

  2. Here is an excerpt from the washington post about the lack of effectiveness of torture:
    it is easy to find experienced U.S. officers who argue precisely the opposite. Meet, for example, retired Air Force Col. John Rothrock, who, as a young captain, headed a combat interrogation team in Vietnam. More than once he was faced with a ticking time-bomb scenario: a captured Vietcong guerrilla who knew of plans to kill Americans. What was done in such cases was “not nice,” he says. “But we did not physically abuse them.” Rothrock used psychology, the shock of capture and of the unexpected. Once, he let a prisoner see a wounded comrade die. Yet — as he remembers saying to the “desperate and honorable officers” who wanted him to move faster — “if I take a Bunsen burner to the guy’s genitals, he’s going to tell you just about anything,” which would be pointless. Rothrock, who is no squishy liberal, says that he doesn’t know “any professional intelligence officers of my generation who would think this is a good idea.”
    Or listen to Army Col. Stuart Herrington, a military intelligence specialist who conducted interrogations in Vietnam, Panama and Iraq during Desert Storm, and who was sent by the Pentagon in 2003 — long before Abu Ghraib — to assess interrogations in Iraq. Aside from its immorality and its illegality, says Herrington, torture is simply “not a good way to get information.” In his experience, nine out of 10 people can be persuaded to talk with no “stress methods” at all, let alone cruel and unusual ones. Asked whether that would be true of religiously motivated fanatics, he says that the “batting average” might be lower: “perhaps six out of ten.” And if you beat up the remaining four? “They’ll just tell you anything to get you to stop.”
    it doesnt work it’s immoral and it tarnishes our image worldwide and…worst of all…when the US does it, it says to the rest of the world that they can torture, too.

Leave a Reply

Please log in using one of these methods to post your comment:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s