As saddening revelations of how much the US practiced torture during the Bush years come to light, former Vice President Cheney has been vigorously defending the Bush administration. This is his right and his privilege; I am not concerned with how well he is observing Washington custom of letting a new administration serve without initial dissent.
The crux of Cheney's case is that the harsh interrogration techniques approved by the Bush administration--waterboarding, shackling, slamming against walls,--were justified, because there have been no successful terrorist attacks on US soil since September 11, 2001. To make an omelette you've got to break eggs; to keep America safe you've got to smash heads.
Of course I am thankful that no attacks have occurred in the US since 2001. But America is not the whole world. Since 2001 London, Madrid, Saudi Arabia, Jordan and Bali have all endured Al Quaeda attacks; that is what I remember without doing any research. And this is not even counting the heavy presence of Al Quaeda in Iraq up to a few years ago, which produced such atrocities as US soldiers strung up to die in town squares.
Al Queada's aim is to topple the entire Western world, as well as parts of the Islamic world deemed to be apostate. The US is just part of the earth, not all of it. From this perspective, the only way you could judge the harsh interrogation methods a success--leaving aside ethical questions about whether such methods are ever justified--would be if there were no attacks anywhere.
That's a mighty tall standard, for sure. But it's a mighty big world.
Recent Comments