Good points. I don’t know many facts about this but I suspect that your claims about the involvement of other countries, including Italy.
However I am concerned that many in this country are twisting the war on terror into an opportunity to operate above the law. We have declared a war where almost anyone can be categorized an enemy, while at the same time abandoning international law (Geneva Convention, et. al.) All because this war is “different.”
It’s a dangerous situation, and at this point I’m in favor of just about anything that may provide more accountability to those that prosecute this “war.”[/quote]
Pri: I’ll tell you, I’m torn on this subject. As a former soldier, I oppose torture and I know from first-hand experience that it doesn’t work as an intelligence gathering tool (interrogation is far more effective, although its also far more time consuming).
However, that being said, torture is highly effective when it comes to sending a message. I worked for three years doing counterinsurgency work and I will tell you that there are definitely times when torture is called upon. Is it right? Probably not. Is it legal (as defined by UCMJ, Army Field Manual(s) and Geneva)? Nope. Which calls to mind that line in “Apocalypse Now” about trying to hand out speeding tickets at the Indy 500.
Its a slippery slope and I don’t have the answers. I know that privacy in this country is now largely a lost reality and due to the encroachment of government on our civil liberties in the name/guise of “security” (and we all know the saying about trading liberty for security: You wind up with neither).
During my time in Salvador, I worked with guys that had done time with MACV-SOG and the Phoenix Program in Vietnam. Both of those programs pretty much threw the rule book out the window, but were hugely effective. We duplicated certain aspects of those programs and I know the danger that comes with winning a “different” kind of war. But finding that right balance, to me at least, seems damn near impossible.
