Here are some (allegedly) brief thoughts about what I call “Because..9/11 Memes”. Basically these are memes which juxtaposit the torture utilized against suspects in the war on terror with scenes from 9/11 or ISIS beheadings, in an attempt to ridicule those who concern themselves about the treatment of prisoners in the war on terror.
1. Though I am certainly not against memes (they have their place and can be useful in provoking thought), I find that the meme has often become a predictable carrier of half-truths, misleading statements, and various forms of fallacies. These sort of memes are no exception.
2. Not all of the people who have been tortured were terrorists–this is an important fact which these memes ignore. The memes imply that all of the alleged terrorists are guilty, but that clearly is not the case. So, even if torture can be justifiably used on terrorists, we must reckon seriously with the fact that some of the torture is being applied to the wrong people, after all, they are only alleged terrorists and have not had their day in court. And the battle lines are not as clear as they might have been in previous conflicts. How many wrongly accused men would you torture to get X amount of net gain in discovering potential terrorist plots?
3. Though the authors of the memes may not think waterboarding is a big deal, when you get into the areas of fear and reactionary thinking–there are no readily available brakes from taking it further. What if torture isn’t enough? Once careful ethical considerations are tossed out in the face of mere risk aversion, there are very few limits. What would the torture advocate do if rape was the only way a terrorist attack could be averted? They must have some line at which they would stop. So then, a legitimate question is this: Why stop at some point beyond waterboarding, but not before waterboarding? Of course, one could go around and around with these questions. I think to avoid the gridlock, we must ask ourselves: What are our operating principles? What is ethical? How ought we to treat our enemy (or suspected enemy) when he or she is in our custody? These memes do not help such examinations, but rather seek to sway emotions such as fear.
4. The memes usually list a few of the least ominous sounding descriptions of the torture methods utilized. However, even those are much more severe than the memes imply. What is not often mentioned is that the methods are combined with other methods, and, in some cases, used hundreds of times alongside severe physical and psychological abuse. The memes also totally miss a point that some analysts and researchers have made: torture doesn’t just affect the person being tortured. It affects the torturers too.
5. It strikes me that those who dismiss waterboarding as being “no big deal” are very detached from reality. It is a far cry from “a few drops of water.” I suspect if they had been subjected to waterboarding before an actual enemy with all the psychological/physiological implications of that, their opinion on waterboarding would change. In fact, it strikes me that a large percentage of those that have even been water boarded in a controlled training exercise are against the use of waterboarding.
6. Even if the forms of torture being utilized were theoretically justifiable to prevent a terrorist attack, it does not necessarily follow that torture is (a) the best means to that end or (b) that it will even be a successful means to the desired end. When asked to provide concrete examples, the advocates of torture tend to come up quite empty, often pulling out very questionable cases. These memes seem to suggest by implication that torture is a surefire (or at least effective) way to prevent terrorist attacks. But the truth of the assumption is not evident.
6. Though it is certainly plausible to envision a “ticking time bomb” scenario where torture saves the day, that is clearly an idealized “hollywood” outcome. It could happen, but generally in the real world, the results of torture are much less predictable, torture tends to produce unhelpful information. While there are a variety of opinions as to how useful the information actually is, there is no consistent, clear cut data that shows consistently good informational results from torture.
7. In general, it appears that some of the people who would be best “positioned” to know the reliability of torture are the quickest to speak of its limitations. Former C.I.A. director Porter Gross said “torture does not work.” F. Andy Messings, a retired U.S. Special Forces major and director of the National Defense Council said “Anybody with real combat experience understands that torture is counterproductive.” David H. Petraeus said “Some may argue that we would be more effective if we sanctioned torture or other expedient methods to obtain information from the enemy. They would be wrong. Beyond the basic fact that such actions are illegal, history shows that they also are frequently neither useful nor necessary.”
8. When I see the memes, as anachronistic as it may be, I wonder what the American founding fathers would think. They certainly were against the idea of trading liberty for security. They also were very vehemently against torture in their own context. This is significant since those most eager to defend torture are often those who are very much concerned with America’s heritage and recovering the founding vision. In a debate Patrick Henry said: “What has distinguished our ancestors?–That they would not admit of tortures, or cruel and barbarous punishment…[others] will tell you that there is such a necessity of strengthening the arm of government, that they must…extort confession by torture, in order to punish with still more relentless severity. We are then lost and undone.” George Washington was also quite against torture in his day. He said: “Treat [prisoners of war] with humanity, and let them have no reason to complain of our copying the brutal example of the British Army in their treatment of our unfortunate brethren who have fallen into their hands”. He also said: “Should any American soldier be so base and infamous as to injure any [prisoner]. . . I do most earnestly enjoin you to bring him to such severe and exemplary punishment as the enormity of the crime may require. Should it extend to death itself, it will not be disproportional to its guilt at such a time and in such a cause… for by such conduct they bring shame, disgrace and ruin to themselves and their country.” One can (rightly) argue that there are certain things about today that make the situation quite different. Fair enough. However, the same people that tend to argue for torture tend to revel in the past and the founding values. And while the situation may have changed quite a bit, there are principles that carry over and we would do well to share the founder’s vehement dislike of torture.