Cheney and Torture--the Democrats' Gift that Keeps Giving

Reader Comments
Back to blog

Okay, I'll play. So we've got a terrorist with a bomb vest on a bus, wearing a heavy coat in warm weather to disguise it, a not-unheard-of scenario in Israel, Who do you propose we torture to uncover this dastardly plot? How likely is it that we have someone in custody who knows which bus the bomber is on? How do we distinguish him from the other 200+ "suspected terrorists" in custody? Do we simultaneously torture the innocent along with the guilty? How do we know which is which, and who is telling the truth and who is just making up a story to stop the torture? What question do we ask them -- "Know of any imminent bombing attacks?" Do we get the information we need in time to thwart the plot?
My point, which I apparently failed to make, is that the "ticking bomb" scenario, which those who think torture works use to justify it, doesn't occur in the real world.
Torture is (1) ineffective, and (2) illegal. If in a very rare scenario torture proves to be effective in defusing the ticking bomb, it is still illegal. In that case, if you are a moral person, you fess up, base your defense on the carnage you prevented, and trust the jury to reach the decision that in this moral dilemma, your action was justified. If you're not willing to do that, don't torture.

Bob of MO 1:01PM September 04, 2009

It is truly pathetic that the Obama administration thinks it has to continue to dump on Dick Cheney. He has no office. He aspires to no office. He has no power and will have no power in the future. He pulls their chain and they bark. Limbaugh (who has no power) pulls their chain and they bark. The White House needs to just shut up and do the job they were elected to do. They come off as a bunch of amateurs. I guess that's what happens when you elect someone to the Presidency who has a resume that would fit on the back of a post-it note.

Joe of MO 12:06AM September 04, 2009

As Far as I know President Obama himself is to busy to go after bush and said at one time if I remember That "we need to move on". But there is some democrats for what ever reason cannot forget about what cheney did. And he did confess and it is against all the rules of the united nations. So I do not know if it is possible for President obama to sweep it under the carpet. He can hand the matter over to the secret police or another aid but is other nations and the UN going to forget what Cheney did?.
I heard A term the other day. Lets see if I get it right "super fan" I think is what it was. But it is the most important part of the republican and democratic party because they believe whole heartily in what there party says without question. They are good little soldiers
Don D. Brock

Don D. Brock of AZ 11:12PM September 03, 2009

"Bob "in Mo.,there are many more scenarios than just the two a limited imagination can come up with .That is probably why you & or I may one day share a bus with a nervous passenger wearing a heavy jacket in warm weather.The same one your Mossad agent didn't get around to interrogating-because he was in jail.Kinda' like that old Capra film "It's a Wonderful Life" huh? P.S. remember - every time you hear a car bomb detonating -an angel is getting their wings !

KoolaidAnonymous of IN 10:19PM September 03, 2009

There are times ,"muser",when a bland stew can benefit from said "whole can of garlic".

Passerby Buttinski of CO 9:34PM September 03, 2009

Torture is an academic subject, as you assert, before going on to posit that it might actually occur in the real world. There are two places the "ticking bomb" scenario takes place: In the classroom where ethicists and philosophers dither over it, and on "24."
Interestingly, the question was recently posed to a Mossad agent in an interview. He, too, pointed out the unlikelihood of ever facing this scenario. He went on to say that if it did occur, he would torture the subject if he thought it might help and then turn himself in, as torture is illegal in Israel, as it is in the US, and place his fate in the hands of a jury.
Perhaps Cheney should do the same.

Bob of MO 4:17PM September 03, 2009

Pathetic try on your part. JDZ57 of WI put down the kool-aid before you hurt yourself and someone else. You've obviously swallowed the Democrat hook and lure. So, since you're so dismissive of Cheney and Bush then you dang well better be dismissive of Clinton's inaction as well. Let me highlight his idleness for you. All of which happened on his watch:
1993 WTC Bombing-6 dead, 1000 injured
1995 Saudi Bombing-5 US dead
1996 Khobar Towers-19 killed, 200 injured
1998 US Embassy bombings-224 killed, 5000 injured
2000 USS Cole Bombing-17 killed, 39 injured
271 died and 6239 injured and he promised to that those responsible would be hunted down and punished. Looks like he had to depend on Bush to do his dirty work for him. He's called Slick Willy for a reason.
And you want to say they sat idlely by because they were "warned"?! Everything pertaining to the "warning" reports you allude to were were vague and scattered. Kind of like your distorted sense of reality.
Oh, and by the way, if anything, you should be sending Bush and Cheney a thank-card for keeping you safe for the past 8 years.

David of ID 2:19PM September 03, 2009

Dick Cheney knows more about Washington insider politics than Obama and all his henchmen combined.
It's like a high school pitcher going against Albert Pujols.
Trying to beat-up on Cheney may work for the liberal Democrat base, but will be politically expensive because Obama will come off as smarmy to Independents and fan Republican fire.
Trust is the hardest thing to gain and easiest thing to lose. I welcome Obama's attempt to discredit Cheney because no matter what Obama and his parrots say, no one can dispute Cheney's experience and complete understanding of prior events. The only thing Obama will expend is his dwindling support among Independents.
Incidently, fickle Independents are what carried him into office and they are a massive factor for his re-election. However, once he loses Independents, he's lost them forever.

David of ID 1:09PM September 03, 2009

Just about everyone is against the concept of torture - so long as the discussion is analytical. However, if progressive, eco-socialists were trapped in a city where a nuke was ticking away, and they had the terrorist who planted the bomb - Well, torture moves from concept to survival necessity pretty fast. The only question is, would the mob of wild eyed libs have the presence of mind to not tear the guy's tongue out "before" he told them where the bomb was.
What is it they say about the difference between civilization and barbarism - One day without water, three days without food? Claw and fang are only a whisper away.

R.L. Schaefer of CA 12:53PM September 03, 2009

Nice try , but let us not forget that Reagan bolted from Lebanon after the Beruit bombings, making him the original " cut and runner" and Bush and Cheney sat idlely by as 9/11 happened. yes they were warned, and did nothing. The only thing Cheney has credence to is breaking the law.

JDZ57 of WI 12:30PM September 03, 2009