.comment-link {margin-left:.6em;}

Nominal Me

I'm falling in love with my camera and taking photos everywhere I go. That, combined with my passions for politics, sports, religion and other things we all agree on, makes this blog persist.

My Photo
Location: Astoria, New York, United States

I'm born in Manhattan and raised in Queens.

Friday, March 11, 2005

Dealing With Terrorism

The war on terror is forcing us to ask a lot of tough questions.

Should we torture suspected terrorists? It seems clear that this is outside our ideals, if not our laws. The U.S. has often chosen to interrogate suspects outside of the U.S., in some cases "dealing" with them out of the country. Today's Wall Street Journal editorial page used this as an example today:

It happens that in the spring of 1996, the government of Sudan offered to deliver Osama bin Laden (then living in Khartoum) into U.S. custody. The Clinton Administration was aware of the threat bin Laden posed, but it worried it didn't yet have sufficient information to indict him on terrorism charges in court. Instead, the U.S. sought to have the Saudis take bin Laden and behead him.

"In the United States, we have this thing called the Constitution, so to bring him here is to bring him into the justice system," Mr. [Bill Clinton's National Security Adviser Sandy] Berger told the Washington Post in October 2001. "I don't think that was our first choice. Our first choice was to send him someplace where justice is more 'streamlined.'" In the event, the Saudis were in no mood to take bin Laden, Mr. Berger did not press the matter, and bin Laden left for Afghanistan on a chartered plane.

Here, we had a chance to kill the man that organized the September 11th attacks. Perhaps, if we had killed him then, they never would have happened. Did our morals and ideals allow the death of thousands of Americans? If so, should we reconsider them?

To make an omelet, you have to crack some eggs, right?

It's not a what if question according to the Journal:

Keep in mind that al Qaeda detainees enter U.S. custody trained to deal with U.S. interrogators, and well aware of our legal limitations. U.S. forces have found al Qaeda training manuals that explain in detail what they can expect. This removes the most powerful tool any interrogator can have in dealing with detainees, which is the anxiety that comes with uncertainty. The prospect of rendition creates that uncertainty.

Or our ideals of fairness worth the risks? If the U.S. began ignoring due process and human rights, would we even want to live here anymore?

Is this all a lose-lose proposition?

More Politics


Blogger Unknown said...

"Should we torture suspected terrorists?"

If you are talking about detainees then the answer is yes we should.

It amazes me that this country had no problem using CONTILPRO to infultrate various civil rights organizations in the 60's but now hesitates when it comes to terrorism.

Friday, 11 March, 2005  
Blogger halace said...

We could also ask should foreign nations torture captured americans? Well, yes they should. Lets all torture everybody to get what we want. After all, i would possibly tell you anything that you wanted to hear to get you to stop pulling my fingernails out with pliers.

Thursday, 08 September, 2005  
Blogger halace said...

This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.

Thursday, 08 September, 2005  

Post a Comment


<< Home