Gives you that warm feeling inside, to know that the U.S.A. still leads the world in innovation. :mad:
You’re right; if we straightened up our methods of handling detainees, then when the U.N. special investigator showed up to complain, other countries would have to use different excuses for not changing their ways. This would make the world immeasurably different. Immeasurably.
I don’t know about you, J.C., but I want to be in the moral forefront. I want to sing with Olaf, glad and big, that there “is some shit I will not eat”. It matters. We are the Americans. If not us, who? If not now, when?
P.S. Obscure poetic reference above from e.e. cummings, “Song of Olaf”
“I sing of Olaf, glad and big…”
’luci, I agree wholeheartedly with you. To mangle Churchhill, it is up with such shit I shall not put.
I just mock the idea that somehow our morality influences anything other than our own actions. No amount of us being a nice guy will make any other country go against their own interest.
but it does make a difference.
The UN investigators have no valid response to the “yea, but the US does it”. It hampers them immeasurably, makes a mockery of what they’re attempting to do. How can they possibly even question what another small nation may or may not do, when they fail to cite teh US? It’s like the cop trying to make the case that the beat up car speeding down the road is more worth his time dealing w/than the limo doing the same thing.
Our morality giveth options, and our immorality taketh away.
The U.N., or NATO, or other bodies have the option, under normal circumstances, to put sanctions on such behavior. Tinhorn dictators won’t stop torturing and imprisoning because we’re nice guys, but they might want to be able to trade with Western countries and stuff. Maybe things like this can work, and maybe they won’t, but they’re available.
But how can any international body sanction the tinhorn dictator, when they can’t get away with sanctioning America for doing the same things? Our failure to abide by civilized norms means the dictators who do the same don’t even have to worry about the prospect of sanctions.
[hijack]
Is anyone else getting Google ads for pet flea remedies in this thread? That’s what I’m seeing right now.
[/hijack]
yes, I am, too.
I’m getting an ad for a “Limbaugh Ringtone.” I’m not sure if that is a pet flea remedy or not, but I suspect it is the sort of thing that foreign governments could claim as U.S.-based torture.
I’m getting a pointer to http://www.badpryce.org/ – but perhaps that’s because I’m in Deborah Pryce’s congressional district. If so, these ads are being very narrowly targeted.
And the horse upon in which they rode…
Understood. But you state the case too a bit extreme, of course no nation is likely to go against its own interest simply because of the shining example of the US. Goes without saying, pretty much. But at the margins, progress is made. Sometimes that is all the progress that can be made. It ain’t enough, but that is no reason not to do it. Besides, my motives are selfish: I hunger for the pride in my nation I once had. Let us lead, if they follow, they follow. I believe that they will, but that is faith, not strategy.
My post was meant to clarify, not to contradict.
Look, if we’ve got a ticking time bomb, we’ve got to be able to resort to alternative interrogation methods! 
You mean the same way they can’t sanction the tinhorn dictator, when they can’t get away with sanctioning China for doing the same things?
Sorry, dude. As much as you want this to have real world consequences for someone other than the detainees, it just doesn’t. No country gives a shit about morality, and no country ever will. Excuses for behavior will always be found, and burnished gold reasons to do what’s in the best interest will always be available.
In that case, the US should not be spouting rubbish about bringing democracy to the Middle East, or saving the world from terrorism. They should accept that countries like Iran and North Korea are just acting in theirv own self interest, and only do something about it when it directly impacts on the US – not worrying about other coutries that may be affected, like IUsreal and Jaoan.
Unfortunately, it’s in the U.S.'s self-interest to spout that ‘rubbish’, because it’s in the U.S.'s best interest to keep Iran and North Korea from doing things that would be destructive to the U.S.'s business partners and business interests, but it’s an easier sell to the American public to do these things for ‘moral’ reasons.
So, you don’t think that US treatment of detainees might be destructive to the US’s business interests? For example, might not it make it harder for the US to do business in some parts of the world?
Sure, but wouldn’t it be in our own best interest to not sink to the levels of the thugs and despots?
Quit yer whining. All good Americans are safe from torture. If you wake up to find a car battery wired to your balls and a shoe-stretcher up your ass, you either ain’t good, ain’t American, or both, you terrorist-loving hippie mother fucker.
I think the problem is that the US is so overwhelming in its influence and status, so very very big, that when the UN, HRW or Amnesty highlights Upper Monbollokia for torturing its enemies, or imprisoning without trial those it arbitrarily deems terrorists, they no longer stand out as the assholes they are, because there’s a much bigger asshole on the block - and therefore a much greater chance of them successfully playing the tu quoque fallacy card.