A Dahlia Lithwick article led to more discussion of torture over at the Slate fray and various tedious things arise such as long discussions about waterboarding including cheap shots (e.g., you must be motivated by Bush hatred -- how f-ing tedious; the "you hate Bush" b.s. again) and overgeneralizations ("torture doesn't work," full stop). Plus talking past each other (legal claims treated as moral claims etc.). Pretty standard.
Waterboarding is a symbol. It is something that has for a long time be held to be illegal and a torturous device. The point was to see if there was some line in the sand that the other side was willing to draw. The discussion at times includes people who say they are against "torture," but wish to define it in a certain way to make sure that nothing actually done is covered. Except the bad apples. And, even they will not be prosecuted. A person in the discussion actually claimed "no one" supports torture around here. How do you deal with such fatuous argument?
Torture is a basic wrong. There is a continual attempt to make it overly complicated. Reasonable people can disagree, and all that. If something basic like waterboarding, which clear precedent holds is wrong, is on the table, the line in the sand is hazy indeed. These same people will likely often cry if some other criminal gets off because such and such criminal statute requires some interpretation. Clear precedent will be enough. Some sort of microanalysis of the terms would not be required.
But, that is what is being attempted -- a settled consensus that torture is wrong, one centuries in the making, is being attacked. Maybe in extreme cases. Hazy on what that means, exactly, and I think that same government is an oversized incompetent mess. Trust them here though! Just this once. It won't have any aftershocks; we don't take certain things off the table even if it works in some fashion. It is not like slavery or child factory labor didn't have some benefit. It isn't that tough -- rather be waterboarded than go to prison. I rather you crush my toe than spend a year in prison too. So? And, the discussion did ultimately lead the person to suggest that even in respect to beating people, the rules are "arbitrary." So, torture is an arbitrary barrier.
Anyway, more on the Slate fray. And, elsewhere.
Waterboarding is a symbol. It is something that has for a long time be held to be illegal and a torturous device. The point was to see if there was some line in the sand that the other side was willing to draw. The discussion at times includes people who say they are against "torture," but wish to define it in a certain way to make sure that nothing actually done is covered. Except the bad apples. And, even they will not be prosecuted. A person in the discussion actually claimed "no one" supports torture around here. How do you deal with such fatuous argument?
Torture is a basic wrong. There is a continual attempt to make it overly complicated. Reasonable people can disagree, and all that. If something basic like waterboarding, which clear precedent holds is wrong, is on the table, the line in the sand is hazy indeed. These same people will likely often cry if some other criminal gets off because such and such criminal statute requires some interpretation. Clear precedent will be enough. Some sort of microanalysis of the terms would not be required.
But, that is what is being attempted -- a settled consensus that torture is wrong, one centuries in the making, is being attacked. Maybe in extreme cases. Hazy on what that means, exactly, and I think that same government is an oversized incompetent mess. Trust them here though! Just this once. It won't have any aftershocks; we don't take certain things off the table even if it works in some fashion. It is not like slavery or child factory labor didn't have some benefit. It isn't that tough -- rather be waterboarded than go to prison. I rather you crush my toe than spend a year in prison too. So? And, the discussion did ultimately lead the person to suggest that even in respect to beating people, the rules are "arbitrary." So, torture is an arbitrary barrier.
Anyway, more on the Slate fray. And, elsewhere.