However, my main point is that torture such as waterboarding has been used and approved by the Bushies. It was torture when the Nazis and Pol Pot used it and it’s still torture when we use it.

Taguba may have been prevented from investigating the “higher-ups,” but I wouldn’t count on Hersh to ask him questions which would have yielded at odds with his theory. And anyway — and let me repeat — there was another investigation, led by Schlesinger, which, while faulting leadership, found that there “was no policy of abuse.”

There have been several investigations. And it seems that if they don’t yield the results Bush-critics want, they’ll just pretend they never happened.

As do you in your comment #32. I mention the Schlesinger report. You don’t address that and refer to an article by a Bush-critic, the accuracy of whose reporting has been called into question on more than one occasion. Perhaps Taguba couldn’t question “higher-ups.” But, the Schlesinger report followed his and he does not seem to have been as limited in his access as Taguba.

the abuses were not a result of government policy, but “rogue” soldiers

Well, Dan, when the investigating general, Taguba, was prevented from investigating any higher-ups, is it any wonder that only low level “rogue” soldiers were found responsible? From The New Yorker:

“From what I knew, troops just don’t take it upon themselves to initiate what they did without any form of knowledge of the higher-ups,” Taguba told me. His orders were clear, however: he was to investigate only the military police at Abu Ghraib, and not those above them in the chain of command. “These M.P. troops were not that creative,” he said. “Somebody was giving them guidance, but I was legally prevented from further investigation into higher authority. I was limited to a box.”

But, it’s ludicrous to keep trotting out the torture accusation without noting that our government investigates allegations of torture against those acting under color of US authority. And especially when we have the Schlesinger Commission report on Abu Ghraib showing that the abuses were not a result of government policy, but “rogue” soldiers — and lax enforcement.

It’s perfectly fair to criticize the government for not doing enough to prevent such abuses. It’s quite another to call them the perpetrators.

It’s still amazing that you would say the US shouldn’t criticize violations of international law while contending we’re saying people shouldn’t criticize the US.

The real issue is how the world media has spun the stories of torture committed under US watch. As to Abu Ghraib, it’s too bad that instead of highlighting the abuses (and suggesting they were government policy), they focused on how the Defense Department had begun an investigation of those crimes four months before they become public knowledge.

It’s that investigation (and prosecution of the perpetrators) which (in large part) gives us the moral standing to criticize torture abroad. As to Guantanamo, we keep it open to the International Red Cross–and other international inspectors.

1. You don’t care one whit about torture unless you can use accusations of it to bash the United States.

2. You conflate systematic, repeated, government-encouraged, and unpunished torture of everyone from combatants to the children of political opponents, with what the United States has done.

If either you or Jimmy Carter were making an honest evaluation, you would have to admit that the United States, even with what few examples of “torture” you can dig up, is LIGHT-YEARS ahead of Hamas, Hizbollah, Iran, Ba’athist Iraq, the Taliban, al-Qaeda, and the innumerable other groups that you, Carter, and the Democrat party have supported, endorsed, and refused to act against or criticized.

But the essence of your argument is that, because we have things that can be criticized, we’re no better than these horrible offenders — and amazingly enough, you can ALWAYS find something to criticize.

Bluntly put, Ian, both you and Carter are anti-American bigots.

As for hijacking the thread, Dan posted about Hamas violating international law. I merely suggested that the US – and that would include Carter – has no business criticizing violators of international law as we have done so ourselves when it suits us.

I also get tired of the conservative whine that al Qaeda does this or Hamas does that or Hezbollah does some other thing so the US should not be criticized for what it does. Sorry, but I think we’re better than that or at least we were until the disastrous Bushies took over. The fact that conservatives feel the need to bring us down to the level of terrorists to excuse your Dear Leader says it all.

But, it is striking that someone who has spoken out so much on the situation in the Middle East would remain silent on this issue.

Carter is a miserable irrelevancy, but his bitterness is best left as an exhibition and not as an opportunity to respond in kind.

The U.S. violated no international law in liberating Iraq from Saddam’s tyranny. And it’s not just Saddam’s repeated snubbing of Security Council resolutions. It was also his failure to live up to the cease-fire agreement [of Gulf War 1, which] effectively re-opened that war.

Ian isn’t the only one who needs such reminders.

Ahhhhhh. The sound of appeasement.

a) Saddam Hussein was in complete violation of the UN Charter, given his obvious and acknowledged weapons-building, support of terrorism, complete and systematic use of torture against even children for politically opposing him, and other aggressive actions against his neighbors

b) The UN bureaucracy and allied leftist governments who were taking bribes from Saddam in exchange for undermining any attempt to bring him into compliance were in violation of the UN Charter

c) The Secretary-General himself, given his involvement with b) and his obvious and blatant attempts to manipulate the UN bureaucracy towards Iraq for the benefit of his son, was in violation of the UN Charter

Once again, leftist Ian and Jimmy Carter demonstrate that the United States is held to a hypocritical standard that they and their fellow global leftists hold against no one else.

Furthermore, they demonstrate that the whole point of “international law” is to punish and harass the United States, while they and their leftist allies flatly ignore it.

Alas, that I participated in “hijacking” the comment thread to my own post.

Well, at least, no one has even attempted to defend the pathetic ex-president from Plains.

Regards,
Peter H.