# Is Dick Cheney right? **URL:** \ **Category:** Great Debates\ **Created:** [April 21, 2009, 1:09pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-dick-cheney-right/493833 "2009-04-21T13:09:42Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 20\ **Page:** 4
**Author:** ![Sinaijon](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/dc4da7/32.png) [@Sinaijon](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Sinaijon)\ **Post date:** [April 21, 2009, 4:39pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-dick-cheney-right/493833/61 "2009-04-21T16:39:06Z")
> [@Jack\_Batty](#): > > That wouldn’t be very accurate. The strike wasn’t authorized so that civilians would die. Not that that isn’t a horrible collateral whatever it is, but the way you phrased it just isn’t the truth of the matter. Whereas, “look, we pounded this guy’s head against the wall and he told us about Achmed” is pretty much a straightforward statement. No, it’s the same. They didn’t torture suspects just for the hell of it. They tortured him in order to get Achmed, just like they killed innocent Amin to get evil Abdul. ---
**Author:** ![Fish](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/f/bc8723/32.png) [@Fish](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Fish)\ **Post date:** [April 21, 2009, 4:41pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-dick-cheney-right/493833/62 "2009-04-21T16:41:38Z")
As long as your operating premise is, “Any amount of torture can be justified by a single success,” then Cheney is correct. However, by demanding the release of any memo, Cheney has moved the goalpoasts from “how much torture is good” to “how much good”. By searching for successes you are taking Cheney’s argument at face value. ---
**Author:** ![Jack\_Batty](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/jack_batty/32/3201_2.png) [@Jack\_Batty](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Jack_Batty)\ **Post date:** [April 21, 2009, 4:42pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-dick-cheney-right/493833/63 "2009-04-21T16:42:17Z")
Yes, they tortured Achmed Sr. to get Achmed Jr. (or whatever, I’m confusing my subjects). But they didn’t authorize a military strike to kill civilians. A more apt analogy would be, we tortured Achmed Sr to get Achmed jr, and, fuck a duck, I broke my wrist doing it. ---
**Author:** ![Lemur866](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/lemur866/32/434_2.png) [@Lemur866](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Lemur866)\ **Post date:** [April 21, 2009, 4:43pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-dick-cheney-right/493833/64 "2009-04-21T16:43:37Z")
> [@Sinaijon](#): > > No, it’s the same. They didn’t torture suspects just for the hell of it. Actually, yes they did. ---
**Author:** ![Kobal2](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/kobal2/32/20_2.png) [@Kobal2](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Kobal2)\ **Post date:** [April 21, 2009, 4:48pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-dick-cheney-right/493833/65 "2009-04-21T16:48:40Z")
> [@Steve\_MB](#): > > I take the fact that he did not declassify such information when he and his allies had the chance to be sufficient evidence that such information does not, in fact, exist. Correction : it is sufficient evidence that such information did not exist _at the time_. But now ? A bit of copy/paste here, change a date there, spin around until this success seems tied _post hoc_ to covering someone in bees rather than to the actual investigation that led to it… Am I being overly cynical to expect something like that from Cheney and his CIA buddies ? ETA : [QUOTE=Whack-a-Mole] Cheney can pretend there was all sorts of juicy stuff gleaned from torture that saved thousands of American lies [/QUOTE] Such a beautiful typo 🙂 ---
**Author:** ![elucidator](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/e/8edcca/32.png) [@elucidator](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/elucidator)\ **Post date:** [April 21, 2009, 4:51pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-dick-cheney-right/493833/66 "2009-04-21T16:51:55Z")
Equivalence! We got equivalence here, everybody come see the equivalence! Obama approved a bombing that caused collateral deaths, Bush ordered “Shock and Awe” which caused (hundreds? thousands? tens of thousands? Details, pesky details…) of innocent civilians to die, they are the same! We got yer equivalence right here, come look!.. ---
**Author:** ![Isamu](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/i/7c8e57/32.png) [@Isamu](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Isamu)\ **Post date:** [April 21, 2009, 4:52pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-dick-cheney-right/493833/67 "2009-04-21T16:52:34Z")
> [@Bricker](#): > > No one has answered the basic question. by releasing the torture techniques details without also releasing any success stories, is an unbalanced or unfair inference created? Why or why not? If there were success stories that could have been announced to the public anytime up until now without compromising national security, they should have done it already, and Cheney should have been leading the band. On the other hand, if this information is still too secret to release to the public, then Cheney is a toad for asking for it to be released just to clear his name. Why or why not? ---
**Author:** ![Sinaijon](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/dc4da7/32.png) [@Sinaijon](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Sinaijon)\ **Post date:** [April 21, 2009, 4:52pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-dick-cheney-right/493833/68 "2009-04-21T16:52:50Z")
> [@Jack\_Batty](#): > > But they didn’t authorize a military strike to kill civilians. Oh sure. Shooting missiles at houses in villages is a pure military strike, no civilians expected at all… Don’t kid yourself. They know exactly who is in the house when they strike. That’s why they consult the big dog first. If it was just some known jack boot thug terrorist, you think they’d consult with Obama first before striking? They consulted him because he’s making a judgment call if killing civilians is worth it. ---
**Author:** ![Jack\_Batty](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/jack_batty/32/3201_2.png) [@Jack\_Batty](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Jack_Batty)\ **Post date:** [April 21, 2009, 4:56pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-dick-cheney-right/493833/69 "2009-04-21T16:56:20Z")
And not a call that I would want to be the one to have to make, but it still stands that the airstrike wasn’t called for in order to kill civilians. ---
**Author:** ![Kobal2](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/kobal2/32/20_2.png) [@Kobal2](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Kobal2)\ **Post date:** [April 21, 2009, 4:57pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-dick-cheney-right/493833/70 "2009-04-21T16:57:55Z")
> [@Sinaijon](#): > > Oh sure. Shooting missiles at houses in villages is a pure military strike, no civilians expected at all… > > Don’t kid yourself. They know exactly who is in the house when they strike. That’s why they consult the big dog first. If it was just some known jack boot thug terrorist, you think they’d consult with Obama first before striking? They consulted him because he’s making a judgment call if killing civilians is worth it. Or it could be because any military action has to be approved by the Chief. Either way, boy, Obama ordered an \*airstrike \*? But… but that makes it OK to torture hundreds of innocents ! How could we have been so blind ?! ---
**Author:** ![Sinaijon](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/dc4da7/32.png) [@Sinaijon](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Sinaijon)\ **Post date:** [April 21, 2009, 5:02pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-dick-cheney-right/493833/71 "2009-04-21T17:02:25Z")
> [@Jack\_Batty](#): > > And not a call that I would want to be the one to have to make, but it still stands that the airstrike wasn’t called for in order to kill civilians. Yes, and the torture wasn’t authorized for punishment. ---
**Author:** ![elucidator](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/e/8edcca/32.png) [@elucidator](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/elucidator)\ **Post date:** [April 21, 2009, 5:04pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-dick-cheney-right/493833/72 "2009-04-21T17:04:57Z")
The cite offered by **Sinaijon** does not state that Obama ordered the missiles to be fired. It does say: > [@](#): > > …The United States does not directly acknowledge firing the missiles, which are believed to be mostly fired from drones operated by the CIA and launched from neighboring Afghanistan… My eyesight isn’t what it used to be, perhaps he will come back and advise us precisely where it says it. Failing that, its safe for us to say his “cite” is a steaming load. ---
**Author:** ![Sinaijon](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/dc4da7/32.png) [@Sinaijon](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Sinaijon)\ **Post date:** [April 21, 2009, 5:06pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-dick-cheney-right/493833/73 "2009-04-21T17:06:38Z")
> [@elucidator](#): > > Equivalence! Hardly. Numerous people claimed that the ends should never justify the means. I provided an example where it’s basically accepted that the ends _do_ justify the means. I simply used Obama’s Pakistan missile strikes because it was the most recent event to my knowledge. ---
**Author:** ![elucidator](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/e/8edcca/32.png) [@elucidator](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/elucidator)\ **Post date:** [April 21, 2009, 5:08pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-dick-cheney-right/493833/74 "2009-04-21T17:08:29Z")
> [@Sinaijon](#): > > … to my knowledge. Ahem. ---
**Author:** ![Sinaijon](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/dc4da7/32.png) [@Sinaijon](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Sinaijon)\ **Post date:** [April 21, 2009, 5:09pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-dick-cheney-right/493833/75 "2009-04-21T17:09:08Z")
> [@elucidator](#): > > T > My eyesight isn’t what it used to be Try taking of your rose colored glasses. Your cite (ha!) will improve vastly. But in case it doesn’t, try this one as well: > **[President orders air strikes on villages in tribal area](https://www.theguardian.com/world/2009/jan/24/pakistan-barack-obama-air-strike)** > > Barack Obama gives go-ahead for missile strikes against suspected militants in Pakistan, leading to at least 18 deaths ---
**Author:** ![Steve\_MB](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/steve_mb/32/5339_2.png) [@Steve\_MB](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Steve_MB)\ **Post date:** [April 21, 2009, 5:09pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-dick-cheney-right/493833/76 "2009-04-21T17:09:26Z")
> [@Bricker](#): > > No one has answered the basic question. by releasing the torture techniques details without also releasing any success stories, is an unbalanced or unfair inference created? No. > [@](#): > > Why or why not? For the same reason the equation 16/64 = 1/4, derived by cancelling out the “6” in the numerator and denominator, is a “success story” and yet is utterly irrelevant to the question of whether or not cancelling out digits in this manner is a valid mathematical procedure. ---
**Author:** ![BrainGlutton](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/82dd89/32.png) [@BrainGlutton](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/BrainGlutton)\ **Post date:** [April 21, 2009, 5:10pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-dick-cheney-right/493833/77 "2009-04-21T17:10:35Z")
> [@Sinaijon](#): > > No, it’s the same. They didn’t torture suspects just for the hell of it. They tortured him in order to get Achmed, just like they killed innocent Amin to get evil Abdul. True, no doubt, but irrelevant. ---
**Author:** ![Jack\_Batty](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/jack_batty/32/3201_2.png) [@Jack\_Batty](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Jack_Batty)\ **Post date:** [April 21, 2009, 5:11pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-dick-cheney-right/493833/78 "2009-04-21T17:11:09Z")
> [@Sinaijon](#): > > Yes, and the torture wasn’t authorized for punishment. You are completely losing me here. Torture was authorized. It is punishment. Two separate but equally true statements. I don’t really get the analogy you’re trying to make with a military strike in which collatoral deaths occur. For the record, I’m not really in favor of military strikes in which collatoral deaths occur either. ---
**Author:** ![Kobal2](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/kobal2/32/20_2.png) [@Kobal2](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Kobal2)\ **Post date:** [April 21, 2009, 5:15pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-dick-cheney-right/493833/79 "2009-04-21T17:15:54Z")
> [@Sinaijon](#): > > Hardly. Numerous people claimed that the ends should never justify the means. I provided an example where it’s basically accepted that the ends _do_ justify the means. I simply used Obama’s Pakistan missile strikes because it was the most recent event to my knowledge. You seem to assume everyone accepts the necessity or justifiability of “collateral damage” (what a charming euphemism, isn’t it ?). Even if that were somehow true : some ends justify some means, torture is a mean to an end, ergo torture is justified/justifiable consitutes a faulty syllogism. ---
**Author:** ![elucidator](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/e/8edcca/32.png) [@elucidator](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/elucidator)\ **Post date:** [April 21, 2009, 5:19pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-dick-cheney-right/493833/80 "2009-04-21T17:19:49Z")
> [@Sinaijon](#): > > Try taking of your rose colored glasses. Your cite (ha!) will improve vastly… Horseshit. Your cite didn’t say what you claimed it said. Period. Full stop. > [@](#): > > …But in case it doesn’t, try this one as well: > > [President orders air strikes on villages in tribal area | Pakistan | The Guardian](http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2009/jan/24/pakistan-barack-obama-air-strike) Much better! See how easy that is, once you’ve been busted? Now go, and sin no more… [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-dick-cheney-right/493833.md?page=3) [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-dick-cheney-right/493833.md?page=5)