The other day, I asked my six-year old son why he loves America. He responded thusly: "Because we torture." OK, I'm lying. I don't have a son, but I thought it best to start out with a bang.
But if you were to ask a six-year old child why he or she loves America, would you not be taken aback even slightly if the response was: "Because we torture?" Yes, from the mouths of babes, even a fool can discern that torture, and all it represents, rings out as ghastly, barbaric, and an unquestionable violation to the conscience of a civilized people.
To defend this sentiment, I hereby assert the following:
Rule #1: If you have to rename it in order to clean it up a bit, it's wrong. Don't believe me? Try these on for size. "Genocide." Good gosh, it even sounds nasty. What say we use "ethnic cleansing" instead? After all "ethnic" is good, right? Think "multicultural." Better yet "cuisine." And "cleansing?" Who but a slob would object? So "ethnic cleansing" it is!
I'm certain "forced prostitution" conjured up all things sordid in the minds of the Japanese military during World War II. "Let's call them 'comfort women' instead" was their likely reply. Ahhhhh, "comfort." Isn't that so much nicer? Cozy, in fact.
Let's try "final solution" shall we, in honor of the Nazis? "Solutions" are always great, are they not? And a "final" one? Even better! No more being mired in "What to do? What to do?"
Which, of course, leads us to "torture." Why, I get shivers up my spine just thinking about it, smacking as it does of barbarism. Let's call it "enhanced interrogation techniques" instead, shall we? "Enhancements" are always good, right? Whether of the pen*ile variety or what have you. "Interrogation?" Hey, we're just seeking the truth here, are we not? And as for "technique?" Be honest now. Doesn’t the term itself evoke images of the most highly skilled artisan? Who could argue against that? "Enhanced interrogation techniques" it shall be!
Rule #2: Torture is, how shall I put this, not very Christian. File this one under "Duh," unless of course I somehow misheard my childhood Catholic teachings about "turning the other cheek" and "loving one's enemies." Am I wrong here? Was I asleep during catechism, thus missing the part where the flock of wide-eyed innocents nestled at the knee of Jesus were regaled by the Son of God as to the virtues of water-boarding or stripping one's enemies naked and piling them into fleshy photo-op pyramids? Maybe I am wrong about this. Seriously, correct me if I am.
Rule #3: Barbarism begets barbarism. If you care about American soldiers, truly care about them, ask yourself this question. Which scenario imperils U.S. forces more should they be captured by our enemies: one where their captors know THEIR fellow soldiers have not been mistreated by U.S. forces or one where they know they have been? Simplifying it even further: who would you yourself (hypothetically of course...) lean toward torturing: someone who treated you decently while you were held at their absolute mercy or someone who took every opportunity to brutalize you, oftentimes solely to amuse themselves? The answer should be clear.
Rule #4: The "ticking bomb scenario" is born of fear and fear alone, shaming the "home of the brave." Far too often, this limp hypothetical is tossed out as if somehow it represents reality as we know it when it should be readily recognized for what it truly is: the frightened conjurings of someone watching far too many episodes of "24." For starters, has the ticking bomb scenario ever once occurred in our nation's history? Have we ever once been faced with a situation wherein we know we have only so much time before the ticking (dirty? nuclear?) bomb explodes, thus requiring us to torture the apprehended scoundrel who (and here's the really laughable part) has, in true Snidely Whiplash fashion, readily acknowledged a bomb plot already underway, thus inviting himself to be tortured in order so that we might learn both when the bomb is set to explode in addition to its location? The entire situation is too ludicrous to even warrant serious discussion.
Rule #5: If anything qualifies as unforgivable, torture might well be it. I have seen footage of sailors who survived the bombing of Pearl Harbor making peace with the former Japanese pilots who dropped the very bombs upon them, killing their shipmates. Why do they do it, you ask? Because they know that the very nature of war is to kill your enemy. It is, dare I say, a soldier's duty? They understand that they, too, would have dropped bombs on the Japanese if given the chance. (I can recall two rather large ones offhand.…) Yet, I have seen December 7th anniversary programs wherein survivors of the Japanese attack on Pearl Harbor (granted, not all of them and probably not the majority) have made peace with their onetime enemy. Now ask yourself this: do you think the poor fellow who has been tortured is, assuming he survives, going to be in a "forgiving mood?" I think not. In fact, his GRANDchildren won't be in a forgiving mood! And on this one you can bet the proverbial farm, if you're not sure an "enemy combatant" is a terrorist and you torture him to find out, guess what? If he wasn't a terrorist bent on America's destruction before you started, I assure you he is now. Congratulations! In your "war on terror" you've just created that which you fear most: a terrorist!
Rule #6: It is fallacious reasoning to assert that torture is warranted when done "to protect America." Why? The answer is found in the premise itself. "To protect America." And what exactly is America? It is, I assure you, much more than a land mass between Maine and California. It is a set of ideals -- one of them not being the most inhuman of acts, i.e. torturing another person -- fought and died for by generations past, all of whom have their memory urinated upon every time one claims that torture is in the best interest of a presumably civilized nation.
In the end, the argument by certain powers-that-be that they are engaging in torture -- excuse me, "enhanced interrogation techniques" -- to protect Americans should be met with the following reply by anyone clinging to even the most jaded sense of decency: "Stop. As a brave American, I'll take my chances."
BILL
