Recently declassified documents into “enhanced interrogation techniques” used in the war on terror have people from opposing political viewpoints equally angered.
President Obama recently released part of a 2004 CIA inspector general’s report into interrogation methods. Critics of the Bush administration have escalated their calls for prosecutions of those who authorized what they are calling torture. Obama’s critics, however, have claimed he has diminished national security.
The question of what interrogators have done to extract information from terrorist suspects becomes murkier as time passes. Now it appears tactics even more dubious than water-boarding were used, and it’s indeed very troubling.
The guidelines for what’s acceptable when questioning suspects need to be clarified. We as a nation don’t condone torture, and those who engaged in it must be prosecuted.
Some will say our ability to gather life-saving intelligence has ben compromised, but don’t listen to them.
Yes, the report also showed information obtained that showed additional acts of terrorism were planned. But we don’t know if what constituted enhanced interrogation techniques were used to get this intelligence or if we could have gotten the same information through other means.
And it’s also unknown if any of these plots were advanced to the point where they would likely have been carried out. Were these plots on the verge of becoming reality, or were they still in the early stages of planning? And if so, would other investigative methods have uncovered the plot before it was hatched?
We cannot say we promote law and order, civilization and human rights if we violate all these principles in pursuit of security. There is a reason we don’t tolerate torture against our own citizens when it comes to law enforcement — it doesn’t work. We shouldn’t dole out on others that which we don’t believe is acceptable for us.