What's getting to me about the Foley thing

[nancylebov]

As bad things go, what Foley did was only fair-to-middling bad. As a result of it, political careers will be ended and elections will probably be affected. There might be criminal charges.

At the same time, the US government has been torturing people, sometimes to death. It's quite plausible that this is still going on, what with all those prisoners being held in secret. A law has been passed making it legal to hold prisoners indefinitely in secret. This has not had nearly as much political effect as the Foley scandal, and the legitimizing of torture doesn't seem to be a big issue in the upcoming election.

I begin to suspect that I am surrounded by crazy people.

Comments

[daystreet.livejournal.com]

If you pre-emptively agree not to torture your enemy's soldiers, while they're still torturing your soldiers, you lose your bargaining position.

What bargaining position are you referring to here? That if they don't stop torturing your guys, you will start torturing theirs?

If so, it seems a pretty weak bargaining position to me. If the Enemy is torturing people, do you think they are the sort who will give a damn whether *you* are torturing people? You think these beheader guys give a hoot about who we torture (except for their propaganda purposes)?

I think in an Army v. Army situation, the military guys might care because they don't want to see their own guys tortured, but I don't think the politicians would give a damn. I frankly don't think our politicians who voted for torture would care except for the fact that it would make for great See The Evil Enemy propaganda.

[shagbark.livejournal.com]

Yes, in the current situation it seems unlikely any bargain will be made.