by Matt Barr

And then there's torture

The Gonzales confirmation hearings are bringing the debate over "torture" to the fore, and much has been written since I last had a chance to blog. I'll make three observations.

One, as Eugene Volokh has ably said, "This is a hard question that reasonable people can and should debate. But it seems to me that abstract arguments about moral high grounds or stooping to the enemy's level do more to weaken the argument against torture than to strengthen it." (Link via Instapundit.) While all true, I mean to highlight the first sentence (but didn't want to remove the remark from its context). If you're discussing this issue with someone who makes a frustrated sound, throws up their hands and walks away, it wasn't worth it anyway.

Two, Iraq is a signatory, along with the United States, to the Geneva Conventions; prisoners in Iraq, including at Abu Ghraib, were regarded by this country as Prisoners of War; and no Iraqi captured during the invasion of Iraq should be treated any way but humanely and decently (Geneva Conventions or no).

Three, al Qaeda is not a signatory to the Geneva Conventions; al Qaeda prisoners at Guantanamo Bay are not covered by its strictures. The point has been made over and over that that does not mean they should be tortured, and of course that's true, but what it does mean is that they're not Prisoners of War covered under the Geneva Conventions. QED. So, people need to stop saying they are. (In fact, two "legal experts" called by Sen. Leahy to testify against Gonzales conceded this point.)

A cold, practical point stemming from the above: Iraqi army detainees can tell us nothing about al Qaeda or other terrorist camps, operations, plans, cells, infrastructure, etc. In fact, POWs as envisioned by the Geneva Conventions almost to a man will be people with no reliable operational knowledge of his side's future activities. And besides, we've conquered Iraq. On the other hand, prisoners at Guantanamo Bay, who may have trained at al Qaeda camps, who may very well have operational knowledge of future al Qaeda activity, can potentially tell us a great deal that will save innocent lives. If this is an uncomfortable distinction, I'm sorry, but it's there.

Browse books from Amazon.com: