Sorry, when you brought up the ugly world I assumed that was what you were talking about. I apologize if I was wrong.
Small picture, dude. The "ugly world" includes handing off people to other nations (allies of all cultures) for interrogations because either their laws allow less than honorable tactics or their governments don't answer to media and citizen. It also includes assasinations, coups, diplomatic and non-diplomatic blackmail, shady deals that would prescribe oppression and brutality in exchange for regional "stability," and covert military and CIA operations everywhere and anywhere.
And the reason such things occur is because we are dealing with an ugly world. Our international organizations refrain from designating an obvious ongoing massacre of people a genocide, because labeling it as such means that we are obligated to act. We can't afford to go on a global crusade in the first place, and in the second, "stability" and an attempt to keep from war often enough meant oppression, torture, and death for others. If we could start or lead an internal coup in another nation as an alternative to sending our troops into harms way...we do it. Congress authorized tens of millions of dollars just in 1998 to the internal overthrow of Hussein. Americans love their oil products, but love to pretend that we can get it simply by digging a 3ft hole in our backyards. We reject oppression, yet do what we have to keep the "peace" and provide that oil. Diplomats of foriegn enemy nations have been targetted by American sponsered hit squads just to ensure and end that is favorable to what we want to see.
"Torturing" an individual over informoation we more or less already know is small talk when considering what we have had to do over the last 69 years. People complain about our wars. But these wars and other events have kept us from the global catastrophies of the past.
But Americans can't be this blind. They simply wish to believe that it's an Oompa Loompa world and the American Willy Wonka is making black and white (right and wrong) decisions on their behalf. - The "
Shining Capital on the Hill" thing and all.
Well, waterboarding has only happened three times that we know of. Who knows what we don't know about? I don't think the naked pyramids at Abu Ghraib was honorable action. I certainly don't see that as some rogue fraternity house prank or a determined effort to aquire time sensitive information.
Certainly there has been more waterboarding over the decades, but it only took three for the entire world to treat us as if we were lining up Muslims to slaughter. Hundreds of thousands of Muslims tortured in Algeria by the French (which was state sponsered and authorized) takes a back seat to the "three" cases of American dastardly evil and tyranny.
You don't see Abu Ghraib as petty and stupid? Do not frat college kids perform similar stunts just to get pledged or to be hazed? That wasn't torture. That was senseless stupidity and unprofessionalism by a bunch of Reserve Army National Guardsmen who really had no business in Iraq in the first place.
No, I haven't. How do you know if someone has time sensitive information? How do you know who to torture?
There are times on the battle field where an individual may be caught setting IEDs. In his pack there may be evidence that another or two was set elsewhere. Now, before an American patrol discovers it the hard way, information must be pursuaded out of the prisoner before it is too late. Now, this doesn't necessary mean "torture," but someone's feelings may get hurt.
The other aspect of this is after incarceration far from the field. Our intel circle gets information from international sources and have a good ieda of who they have in front of them. They know their comings and goings and their associates. They know what is in the works from one degree to another. People don't give this art enough credit. They don't just grab random people up and start with a clean slate of interrogation. For example...the terrorists that were arrested recently in Britian as they attempted to board airplanes wasn;t the end of the story. They were undoubtedly "pressed" for information in case something else unheard of was going on or was about to go on.
As much as the military resents the fact that civilians question the methods the military provide our freedom and security, civilians resent the cavalier attitude of "how dare you question us" that they get as if the military was infallible.
It's not so much the "how dare you question." It's "how dare you pretend to care when it suits you." Because no matter who the politicianis or what the conflict, the military man is consistent to what he knows works.
What about it? Stupid fraternity pranks caught on tape designated as "torture" by pundits and critics looking to bash Bush over everything else going on? Besides, Abu Ghraib "had" two things going against it before the Active Duty asumed the position...."Reserve" and "National Guard." Civilians in uniform did that.
Every prisoner is afforded a Qu'ran and an appreciation to cultural and religious diet. This is afforded in Afghanistan. He is afforded his never ending prayers times throughout the day. This was at GITMO and in Abu Ghraib. Find such accomodations in foreign prisons. Of course, American politicians and foriegn critics found more interest in labels like "Gulag" and "Torture" and "Nazi" rather than portraying the situation with accuracy and honesty.
