Lets Debate It

From Economist:
"These kinds of debates [on torture and detainees] didn't really happen during the last administration, and not just because detainees were being sent to Cuba. The Bush administration's stance was that anything was justified in the war on terror, so it didn't do to ask questions. But Barack Obama has set some ground rules, and that leads politicians to believe that they can set a few more to protect their own political bases. So a lot more war-on-terror policy making is happening in public, and in Congress, than might help the administration."

TW: I think the above is important to keep in mind amidst the back and forth occurring since W. Bush left office. One advantage of brooking no dissent and hiding what you are doing is the debate is inherently limited. As a result Americans have not had to face up to the questions of whether we tortured and if so do they support it and whether we are prepared to live with places like Guantanamo etc. The debate about did we torture is a cynical fandango based upon our country trying to "torture" whilst not getting the perpetrators in legal jeopardy and tarnishing our nation's reputation too badly. We tortured, I know it, you know it and the rest of the world most definitely knows its. Having people like the guy below appear on TV and dance only makes us all appear stupid and/or liars.


TW: The fundamental question remains should the United States of America support state sanctioned torture in pursuit of security. Dick Cheney will apparently make the bull case on Thursday to a conservative think tank audience. This is a a good thing as it puts the question front and center. Some will trade vast liberties in pursuit of ephemeral security. I do not, it is really no more complex than paranoia will destroia.