# Rank Hypocrisy over Guantanamo **URL:** \ **Category:** Great Debates\ **Created:** [June 1, 2014, 6:18am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/rank-hypocrisy-over-guantanamo/689754 "2014-06-01T06:18:37Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 12\ **Page:** 6
**Author:** ![XT](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/xt/32/456_2.png) [@XT](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/XT)\ **Post date:** [June 2, 2014, 5:47pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/rank-hypocrisy-over-guantanamo/689754/101 "2014-06-02T17:47:29Z")
> [@Pjen](#): > > It’s a bit like Reagan invading Grenada without caring about it being British Protected. If a person qualifies for consular protection from Britain one would expect a reasonable ally to agree that with them. The US is obviously not a reasonable ally, but will always act purely in its own domestic interests. Well yeah…just like every other country. All countries act in their own interest first. Honestly, if the UK has an issue with that then they need to do what’s best for their own over-riding interest and the protection of their citizens. If that means distancing themselves from the US, then that’s fine. Perhaps they need to look at France as a model for distancing themselves from the US while still maintaining cordial enough relations to still work together when their two interests coincide. And this is not me being snarky or tongue in cheek but seriously, they have to do what’s best for them. Regardless, I’m still not seeing the hypocrisy involved in this vertical aspect. Is that all you want to discuss, or did you want to broaden the discussion? It seems that’s really what you are focused on and want to discuss, if so then I’ll bow out since I don’t know that much about this one case. ---
**Author:** ![Pjen](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/p/3d9bf3/32.png) [@Pjen](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Pjen)\ **Post date:** [June 2, 2014, 9:42pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/rank-hypocrisy-over-guantanamo/689754/102 "2014-06-02T21:42:28Z")
> [@XT](#): > > Well yeah…just like every other country. All countries act in their own interest first. Honestly, if the UK has an issue with that then they need to do what’s best for their own over-riding interest and the protection of their citizens. If that means distancing themselves from the US, then that’s fine. Perhaps they need to look at France as a model for distancing themselves from the US while still maintaining cordial enough relations to still work together when their two interests coincide. And this is not me being snarky or tongue in cheek but seriously, they have to do what’s best for them. > > Regardless, I’m still not seeing the hypocrisy involved in this vertical aspect. Is that all you want to discuss, or did you want to broaden the discussion? It seems that’s really what you are focused on and want to discuss, if so then I’ll bow out since I don’t know that much about this one case. I get it. all that matters in International Relations is self interest and power. I had thought that Character and Values played some part in it. Now I shall not feel so bad when the Taliban take 30 American soldiers hostage and barter for the other Guantanamo detainees; they will only be looking after their own first. ---
**Author:** ![XT](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/xt/32/456_2.png) [@XT](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/XT)\ **Post date:** [June 2, 2014, 9:50pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/rank-hypocrisy-over-guantanamo/689754/103 "2014-06-02T21:50:50Z")
[QUOTE=Pjen] I had thought that Character and Values played some part in it. [/QUOTE] You, ah, really thought this? I mean…really? > [@](#): > > Now I shall not feel so bad when the Taliban take 30 American soldiers hostage and barter for the other Guantanamo detainees; they will only be looking after their own first. Oh, come on. You wouldn’t have felt bad about that before, and in fact would have been nodding your head with vindication if not joy. My statement there didn’t make one whit of difference (or seemingly have anything to do with your retort here), even if you did think that nation states did things based on ‘Character and Values’ or unicorn wishes and dragon dreams. 😛 But I see you don’t actually want to debate or even discuss anything seriously, so I’ll just leave you to it then. ---
**Author:** ![BrainGlutton](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/82dd89/32.png) [@BrainGlutton](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/BrainGlutton)\ **Post date:** [June 2, 2014, 10:23pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/rank-hypocrisy-over-guantanamo/689754/104 "2014-06-02T22:23:05Z")
> [@Pjen](#): > > That is not the hypocrisy. The hypocrisy is allowing five avowed senior Taliban members to go free, to allow the release of an illegally confined American and at the same time illegally detaining a Brit who at worst was a low level fighter and probably was not even involved. > > The message is that it is OK to detain a low risk Brit and at the same time as releasing five highly dangerous Taliban to free one American. The message is that they do not have the same market value, that is all. ---
**Author:** ![Captain\_Amazing](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/c/6de8d8/32.png) [@Captain\_Amazing](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Captain_Amazing)\ **Post date:** [June 2, 2014, 11:35pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/rank-hypocrisy-over-guantanamo/689754/105 "2014-06-02T23:35:49Z")
> [@Grumman](#): > > When suicide _is_ a rational behaviour (if you’re suffering from a painful and terminal illness, for example), forcibly preventing the person from committing suicide is inhumane, even if your methods are not in themselves inhumane. > > The efforts to keep the Gitmo prisoners alive have nothing to do with the prisoners’ best interests - _at best_ it is an attempt to avoid the bad publicity of people you tortured demonstrating that they literally believe that continuing to be the victim of your torture is a fate worse than death. The question of whether somebody with a terminal illness should be allowed to commit suicide is a complicated one, and one filled with a bunch of moral ambiguity. However, that’s not the case here. And it also seems irrelevant as to whether the treatment of the Gitmo prisoners is based on their best interests or the attempt not to look bad by the US government. The US government has a duty of care towards people it holds prisoner. When a government confines somebody against their will, whether it’s a criminal in prison, an enemy soldier in a prisoner of war camp, or what have you, they have a duty to keep that person safe and healthy; both a legal duty and a moral duty. When you have somebody under your control like that, and the choice is between force feeding them and letting them die, of course you force feed them. Life is better than death. ---
**Author:** ![Grumman](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/g/43a26b/32.png) [@Grumman](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Grumman)\ **Post date:** [June 2, 2014, 11:46pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/rank-hypocrisy-over-guantanamo/689754/106 "2014-06-02T23:46:08Z")
> [@Captain\_Amazing](#): > > The US government has a duty of care towards people it holds prisoner. The US government proved they don’t give a fuck about their duty of care when they decided that repeatedly drowning people was a valid interrogation method. ---
**Author:** ![Captain\_Amazing](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/c/6de8d8/32.png) [@Captain\_Amazing](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Captain_Amazing)\ **Post date:** [June 3, 2014, 1:01am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/rank-hypocrisy-over-guantanamo/689754/107 "2014-06-03T01:01:35Z")
The fact that waterboarding is fucked up doesn’t mean that the US has any right to stand by and let its prisoners die. I mean, how is letting one of your prisoners starve to death any better than waterboarding him? They’re both barbaric. ---
**Author:** ![The\_Man\_In\_Black](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/t/bcef8e/32.png) [@The\_Man\_In\_Black](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/The_Man_In_Black)\ **Post date:** [June 3, 2014, 1:42am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/rank-hypocrisy-over-guantanamo/689754/108 "2014-06-03T01:42:26Z")
> [@Pjen](#): > > The person was detained under the mental health act and was likely to die soon. She was psychotic and unable to make rational decisions. She recovered and eventually was very grateful. I doubt that that will be the case where the feeding is merely to avoid the embarrassment of deaths at American hands. So, you tortured a person a person for there own good? I really don’t think you can call a procedure torture, and say that if the person hates you for doing it, it’s wrong, but if they eventually thank you for it, then it’s ok. ---
**Author:** ![Ravenman](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/ravenman/32/2929_2.png) [@Ravenman](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Ravenman)\ **Post date:** [June 3, 2014, 1:53am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/rank-hypocrisy-over-guantanamo/689754/109 "2014-06-03T01:53:01Z")
> [@Grumman](#): > > The US government proved they don’t give a fuck about their duty of care when they decided that repeatedly drowning people was a valid interrogation method. If you are going to assign the Obama Administration with the burden of the unjustifiable actions of the Bush Administration, does Obama also get the credit for things done by prior president like ending the Cold War, sending a man to the moon, and creating the national park system? ---
**Author:** ![Pedro](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/p/919ad9/32.png) [@Pedro](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Pedro)\ **Post date:** [June 3, 2014, 3:55am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/rank-hypocrisy-over-guantanamo/689754/110 "2014-06-03T03:55:29Z")
> [@Pjen](#): > > Well, Bergdahl was apparently not being tortured every day- it was merely done to obtain information. It’s not torture but merely “enhanced feeding techniques”. Anyway I assumed the hypocrisy was the US calling Bergdahl’s detainment illegal under whatever contrived argument suited the Administration at the time. ---
**Author:** ![Grumman](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/g/43a26b/32.png) [@Grumman](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Grumman)\ **Post date:** [June 3, 2014, 7:36am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/rank-hypocrisy-over-guantanamo/689754/111 "2014-06-03T07:36:35Z")
> [@Ravenman](#): > > If you are going to assign the Obama Administration with the burden of the unjustifiable actions of the Bush Administration, does Obama also get the credit for things done by prior president like ending the Cold War, sending a man to the moon, and creating the national park system? The Obama administration took that burden willingly when they declared that the CIA’s torturers would be immune from prosecution and that they would actively defend them from any attempt to hold them legally accountable for their crimes, and when they imprisoned John Kiriakou for bringing their crimes to light. ---
**Author:** ![Grumman](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/g/43a26b/32.png) [@Grumman](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Grumman)\ **Post date:** [June 3, 2014, 8:01am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/rank-hypocrisy-over-guantanamo/689754/113 "2014-06-03T08:01:20Z")
> [@Landskroner](#): > > does Obama also get the credit for things done by prior president like ending the Cold War:confused: You don’t get credit just because you’re sitting at the same desk as someone who once did a good thing. [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/rank-hypocrisy-over-guantanamo/689754.md?page=5)