Enhanced Interrogation vs. Assassination

A question to ponder…..how can one be opposed to waterboarding and then support assassination?  Almost everyone on the planet is happy that Osama bin Laden is dead; but not everyone is happy about the process.  Questions remain:  Why wasn’t he captured?  What took so long?  And, how was the intel collected that led to his elimination?  The media has been abuzz since the news of bin Laden’s death with opinion on what really happened and how it all went down.  I suppose there are a few skeptics that wonder if he is really dead….but that question has been laid to rest with the al-Qaeda announcement acknowledging his death and their promise of reprisal against Americans here and abroad!

So, my question is:  How can our government support assassination (murder) and not support enhanced interrogation techniques (waterboarding, etc.)?  Seems a little contradictory to me!  What about you?  Personally, I believe enhanced interrogation is perfectly permissible if the information gleaned can save American lives on the frontlines of some foreign country or save Americans domestically in our war on terrorism.  I can make a distinction between jihadists and the “run-of-the-mill,”  common criminal.  Jihadists are bent on indiscriminately killing innocents for some cause that most people cannot fathom!  They are psychological deviates with no sense of decency towards their fellowmen! 

The current administration has made a big issue about enhanced interrogation techniques….but, if one believes the media, those techniques assisted in gaining the intel that led to finding bin Laden.  And, upon getting the information, the administration issue a “kill” directive on bin Laden.  Waterboarding may seem a little inhuman, but assassination (murder) is the ultimate inhumanity for dealing with a terrorist.

Maybe it is just the political hypocrisy of both parties that really bothers me.  If we must use extreme methods to protect our country, then just do it!  Don’t hide behind rhetoric….stand tall and be proud to do whatever is required to win this war!


One response to “Enhanced Interrogation vs. Assassination

  1. A comment from a reader:

    This one is easy. First, it was a military operation, in a theater of “war.” By the internationally recognized “rules” of war (yes, they exist – ask any military man), one can in combat shoot his enemy. That is exactly what happened to Sammy B.

    As to “enhanced interrogation” (which is nothing but a fancy word for torture – just ask anyone who has undergone waterboarding), there are also rules to be followed. They are written in the Geneva Convention, which we signed long ago, and were written to protect OUR soldiers. They provide that once a “soldier” is captured, he or she must be treated in a certain manner. That includes NO torture.

    There are three takeaways from this. One, those who believe this is a “war” and not a criminal matter cannot have it both ways. If its war, certain rules apply. Two, to the extent those same folks argue that these “enhanced interrogation” techniques provided the information that led us to Sammy B, I say so what. Are we now a nation that allows any end to justify the means, no matter how abhorrent? Why then not simply go all the way put the fuckers on a rack. Or capture and kill their kids in front of them? Damn sure to get the info faster. Finally, and in response to the obvious reply that waterboarding is something less than torture, I ask then how those folks would feel were the same conducted on our soldiers, once captured in a time of war? Actually, I already have the answer. The Japanese did indeed waterboard our soldiers in WWII. In turn we treated them as war criminals, and executed them for having done so.

    A couple further thoughts:

    Consider how many people were detained and subjected to enhanced interrogation in some form or fashion, then later found to be completely innocent and released. And how about those who died while undergoing the interrogation (there were several)?

    Also, the same folks now claiming that the killing of Osama justifies the enhanced interrogation that may or may not have led to our ability to find him are now screaming that the CIA operatives under investigation should be completely exonerated. Indeed, this was a major talking point on the Fox Sunday morning news show, raised by the village idiot Liz Chaney on the ABC Sunday show, and raised at great length by the walking moron Sean Hannity this afternoon. What none of them cared to share with their viewing audiences was that the investigation is not with regard to actions in conformity with the approved enhanced interrogation techniques (agree or disagree with them), but rather whether they went far beyond what was legally permitted.

    Listen to what John McCain has to say on this. He, of all folks, should know.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )


Connecting to %s