<body><script type="text/javascript"> function setAttributeOnload(object, attribute, val) { if(window.addEventListener) { window.addEventListener('load', function(){ object[attribute] = val; }, false); } else { window.attachEvent('onload', function(){ object[attribute] = val; }); } } </script> <div id="navbar-iframe-container"></div> <script type="text/javascript" src="https://apis.google.com/js/platform.js"></script> <script type="text/javascript"> gapi.load("gapi.iframes:gapi.iframes.style.bubble", function() { if (gapi.iframes && gapi.iframes.getContext) { gapi.iframes.getContext().openChild({ url: 'https://www.blogger.com/navbar.g?targetBlogID\x3d12988030\x26blogName\x3dDon\x27t+Trust+Snakes\x26publishMode\x3dPUBLISH_MODE_BLOGSPOT\x26navbarType\x3dBLUE\x26layoutType\x3dCLASSIC\x26searchRoot\x3dhttps://donttrustsnakes.blogspot.com/search\x26blogLocale\x3den_US\x26v\x3d2\x26homepageUrl\x3dhttp://donttrustsnakes.blogspot.com/\x26vt\x3d-4673447362931781663', where: document.getElementById("navbar-iframe-container"), id: "navbar-iframe" }); } }); </script>


DON’T

TRUST

SNAKES

“I know where I'm headed.”
ROGER THORNHILL


« Home »


Sunday, November 13, 2005

Doing our worst?

The new accepted wisdom seems to be that the United States is engaged in torturing Al Qaeda suspects, most likely in the "black site" facilities in Eastern European countries recently revealed by the Washington Post. In legal memos, the Administration has explored various legal strategies (structuring custody arrangements, exploiting loopholes, etc.) for justifying a range of custodial and interrogation options that don't quite square with Marquis of Queensbury rules, or at least the standards for criminal suspects who are U.S. citizens. The President has said "we do not torture," but not many people seem to believe that.

Is it logical to presume that the U.S. is doing any kind of awful thing whose legality government lawyers have explored, or for which we have some infrastructure in place? If we do not renounce every practice that could be called torture, or if we spend lawyer time exploring what that potentially very inclusive term means as a matter of international law, or if we develop arguments about the extent of presidential power, is that evidence that we are doing the bad things, or planning to?

I don't know, but consider this:

The U.S. has never ruled out a nuclear first strike. We have a huge investment in Trident ballistic missile submarines and other weapons systems that can uncharitably be called first-strike weapons. There are undoubtedly "black programs," classified legal memos and what-not related to a first strike that would startle us if we knew about them. Does that mean we are planning to execute a first strike, ever have or ever will?


posted at 11:13 AM

0 Comments:

Post a Comment

<< Home