I like John McCain, mostly. And while I respect his Vietnam experience it doesn't make him the definitive oracle on whether various interrogation techniques work or not. McCain's proposed amendment to ban "stressful" interrogation techniques will in the end (as the WSJ editorial board said) make capture by the US not such an intimidating event. I have no doubt if you got a list of interrogation techniques that McCain approved of, then told them to Kennedy, Durbin, Boxer, etc. as techniques that Karl Rove suggests, they would unanimously call them torture. This is a case where people have already made up there mind...with no real research or a thoughtful analysis. It's clear to me that if we capture a bad guy, give him tea and crumpets and ask him to give up his compadres our success rate will be close to zero. However, if we make things uncomfortable, and break them down mentally there's no question the success rate will be better than the twinkie approach.
I suspect most cream puff liberals are you willing to sacrifice their family, their town or yours by insisting we employ a soft approach to interrogation. To them the notion of being righteous is more important than the discomfort of a bad guy here and there. Sorry, not me, break out the cattle prod.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
No comments:
Post a Comment