<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/plusone.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\x3d6863946\x26blogName\x3dChan\x27ad+Bahraini\x26publishMode\x3dPUBLISH_MODE_BLOGSPOT\x26navbarType\x3dSILVER\x26layoutType\x3dCLASSIC\x26searchRoot\x3dhttp://chanadbahraini.blogspot.com/search\x26blogLocale\x3den_GB\x26v\x3d2\x26homepageUrl\x3dhttp://chanadbahraini.blogspot.com/\x26vt\x3d-567579915618070581', where: document.getElementById("navbar-iframe-container"), id: "navbar-iframe" }); } }); </script>

Chan'ad Bahraini

(Scomberomorous maculatus Bahrainius)

Note: This page has moved to a new address. Please click on the following URL to get there: http://chanad.weblogs.us/index.php?s=Eating my words. Sorry for the trouble.

Eating my words

Thursday, June 24, 2004
A while back I complained that George W Bush was being quite ambiguous in his view on whether torture could ever be justified. I felt that he had only condemned the actions of Abu Ghraib for not complying with US law, but it seemed like he did not want to talk of whether torture could ever be justified regardless of legalities.

Well yesterday W laid out in unambiguous terms what my concerns were. He said (according to CNN):
"Look, let me make very clear the position of my government and our country," Bush said Tuesday in the Oval Office.

"We do not condone torture. I have never ordered torture. I will never order torture. The values of this country are such that torture is not a part of our soul and our being."
That statement does make me feel more comfortable. It doesn't get rid of all of the questions around the whole torture issue, and that the US has been trying to get war crimes immunity for it soldiers in action around the world. However, it does make me feel slightly better knowing that the administration is at least willing to present itself as being morally against torture under any conditions.

« Home | Previous »
| Previous »
| Previous »
| Previous »
| Previous »
| Previous »
| Previous »
| Previous »
| Previous »
| Previous »

:

To view the trackbacks to this entry click here.

The URL to TrackBack this post is: http://haloscan.com/tb/chanad/108804002999081002

4 Responses to 'Eating my words'


Anonymous Anonymous says:

How can I put this?...WE DON'T TORTURE PEOPLE! As it immoral and really does't work. We'll leave the torturing to the likes of Al Qaeda and Saddam Hussein. I was a Securtiy Policeman in the USAF and the US military has VERY strong rules on what you can and cannot do to a POW, violate them and you'll find yourself up shitcheek so fast your head will spin. As the scumbags from Abu Ghraib can testify.
As for the war crimes immunity issuse, The reason America is fighting this is we don't want our soldiers placed at the mercy of anti-Americans, and put on trial for political reasons, IMO it would take the French about 10-15 mins. to bring some Ameican soldier up on charges.    

Blogger Chanad says:

I know that there are many people like you who abhor torture. And you obviously know more about the workings of the US military than I do. That said, my main concern is that there does exist a movement which tries to justify torture in special cases, such us David Horowitz et al. And their proposals aren't all that outrageous either, based on sound arguments. But it is based on Utilitarian thinking, and I'm afraid I personally just don't believe that the ends could ever justify the means (praise Kant!). That's my problem with it.

In general though, in all societies we find it easier to lower our standards if we've been attacked, even without being aware with it ourselves. In this part of the world we have a much bigger torture problem than in the US, which needs to be addressed.    

Anonymous Anonymous says:

Are you talking about this artice?
"Liberals Hand Terrorists A Victory"

There is a difference between being aggressive and torture.
There are a couple of place you might want to lookThe Dept. of Defence has a pdf file with Sec Rumsfeld's memo on this. Also Yahoo News
http://story.news.yahoo.com/fc?cid=34&tmpl=fc&in=US&cat=US_Armed_Forces
Steve    

Anonymous Anonymous says:
6/25/2004 03:48:00 pm

On the surface, it would seem appropriate that no government's forces should be immune for war crimes, but I have a feeling there is a pretty broad definition of war crimes not just abuse or torture. If we are sending forces from different governments someplace under various commands, stuff can go wrong pretty fast even if they are there for peacekeeping or aid purposes. Back to the UN site for more info I guess.

I hope the press stays on top of this, without driving us nuts with it as they have done; because somewhere up the line, people turned a blind eye to the abuse, and that's unacceptable.

M    

Leave a Reply:

» To leave new comments, please go to the new address of this page.