YOUR COMMENTS

Just to clarify, Bush’s White House did make a series of disastrous mistakes with the ‘enhanced interrogations’ policy. The initial enhanced interrogation techniques memos were written for the case of interrogating a single Al-Quieda operative in the Afghanistan theater. The Administration probably approved of their use else where in Afghanistan/Pakistan and at Guantanamo Bay. The memos did not mention Iraq and probably were not intended for use in that theater. Did the military err in allowing them to be applied there? Or did the Bush Administration subsequently approve of it? Unknown.

Regardless the enhanced interrogation techniques were poorly controlled in the field and devolved into actual torture at Abu Graib prison (that went beyond the Administration’s initially approved methods but was checked too little too late by the Administration). This gave the US a bad name, helped Al-Quieda recruit, and prolonged the war, costing many lives.
- Jim, Manchester

Melvin in Keene,
I disagree, there can be (and have been many examples of) pre-arranged rules in warfare. Al-Quieda (and other irregular forces) should be given the opportunity to adopt to the Geneva Conventions (or other convention) prior to enactment of any tactics that go beyond the Uniform Code of Military Justice. Only if/when they fail to do so should ‘enhanced tactics’ be applied. In fact the Bush administration did provide this opportunity, not thru direct diplomacy but, though media discussions prior to inking its ‘enhanced interrogation’ memos.
- Jim, Manchester

Melvin in Keene,
I disagree, there can be (and have been many examples of) pre-arranged rules in warfare. Al-Quieda (and other irregular forces) should be given the opportunity to adopt to the Geneva Conventions (or other convention) prior to enactment of any tactics that go beyond the Uniform Code of Military Justice. Only if/when they fail to do so should enhanced tactics be applied. In fact the Bush administration did provide this opportunity, not thru direct diplomacy but, though media discussions prior to inking its ‘enhanced interrogation’ memos.

Further, I believe the US should discuss these ‘enhanced interrogation’ tactics much more openly than the Bush administration did (without specifying them too exactly in public so that the enemy can’t train for them or specifically counter strategize) and sell the fact that our tactics are specifically designed to be less brutal, less lightly used, less lethal and cause less collateral damage than our enemies and that we would gladly adopt even kindler and gentler tactics/rules of conduct, if only our enemy would agree to do the same. This improves ally recruitment & retention, troop morale, and world diplomatic standing by showing that we are both serious and moral.

If we responded as you propose we would have to genocide every Muslim on the planet before all was said and done, because they would all signup to defend their fellow Muslim terrorists against the ‘American terrorist.’ If we respond ‘eye for eye and tooth for tooth,’ as Israel does, we play into Al-Quieda’s hand by helping them recruit and enter a never ending cycle of tit for tat, losing our European allies in the process. If we respond via one-sided adherence to the Geneva Convention as Obama & Co have proposed, we will miss opportunities to kill and capture terrorists and thus, waste the lives not only of our soldiers, but of those caught in the crossfire of war zones.

‘Turn the other check’ and ‘heaping on burning coals’ is an appropriate response to insults, theft and even sometimes even assault. It is not the appropriate response to flying passenger jets into skyscrapers, suicide bombings of market places, beheading of war correspondents and POW’s, and intent to kill or convert the entire world to a demonic religion. I actually thought the Bush administration found a pretty good balance between the Judeo-Christian moral codes; ‘eye for eye’ and ‘turn the other check.’ So for the left to say Bush did not uphold our values (and then applaud Obama for having three starving Somalis just out trying to collect a little ransom money shot dead) is pure partisan horse puckey.
- Jim, Manchester

Ruth in Bedford,
In the examples you cite, unarmed people were killed and maimed. 1000’s in the Confederate prison at Andersonvile, 10,000’s by mustard gas in WWI, millions by the Nazis, and 100’s at My Lai in Vietnam. The Bush administration ‘enchanced interrogation techniques’ in Afghanistan, Iraq, and Guantanamo Bay plus ‘extraordinary renditions’ program resulted in exactly zero deaths and zero maiming. That would have been forbidden under the legal guidelines set out by the Justice Dept. That is the difference here. Think before you call the people defending your nation, life and liberty names, please.
- Jim, Manchester

All chickenhawks are pro-torture. That's it in a nutshell. Same mindset in 1850 and you would be a Confederate operating Andersonville, pro mustard gas in WWI, pro Nazi, pro My Lai. These people aren't new, they are just the ugly underside of the human race.
- Ruth, Bedford

It's hard for me to accept waterboarding as torture when this has been done to our own soldiers as a form of training. As bad as waterboarding can be, it should fall under forms of hazing not allowed at a college frat house rather than being compared to classic forms of torture (check with John McCain to see what torture really is). Waterboarding, sleep deprivation, being placed in a cold room with no blankets, etc., should not be confused with physical beatings, breaking bones, bamboo chutes under one's finger nails, etc., that are more classic definitions of terror.

Listening to some on this debate, interrogations will soon be limited to exchanges such as "please, please, please tell me" or "if you tell me I'll be your best friend".
- Tim, Houston

Perhaps the editorial writer would like to engage in a little bit of water boarding to confirm whether or not this is really torture? After reading up on the subject and how old it is I would say it's safe to say that the next editorial would be a resounding ban of the age old technique of water boarding. I would certainly not want to subject anyone to it, but it appears that the only way to know how bad it really is to try it for yourself. To say that someone hates America because they don't believe in torture is pathetic. There is nothing American about torture. For all you Republicans out there even McCain stated that water boarding is torture and he should know.
- Terry, Manchester

Reading some of the posts here I can finally understand how the Germans were able to implement the "final solution." They frightened otherwise good people into giving up their values in the name of security. If some of these people had their way the US would be on the same downward spiral. Morals matter; torture is wrong, period.
- LJC, Manchester

Wow, I know I'm a little late tonight, but the America haters and values folks are out in force. Here's the reality in case none of you wimps read the post by Bob Kroepel: if the US is going to survive we have to be meaner, more vicious and more deadly than our enemies. Period. There are no rules in love and war. The one left standing lives.

For all of you moral people with all the values, and uppity feelings of doing the right thing so we'll be liked by everyone, get a clue. If the enemy fears us he will not attack us.


We are dealing with terrorists, not UN debating team members.

Good grief Charlie Brown, these American have lost their gonads. (With the exception of our brave fighting men and women and Bob Kroepel)
- Melvin, Keene

Mike from Vegas,

I am delighted three pirates are dead, but please check your facts: obama never ordered anyone killed. To the contrary he prohibited the captain in charge at the scene from making a call to use lethal force until Saturday as long as negotiators had an open line of communication. SEALs were expressly forbidden from being in the water during the ordeal. Hence when captain philips trusted his country and jumped from the life raft, he was ABANDONED by his country. Not one shot was fired then, nor was there a SEAL in the water to pull him out of harms way. Not until Saturday did obama allow the captain the OPTION of using lethal force if captain philips life was in jeopordy.

Again anyone who thinks these are torture, please read up on the techniques. I again volunteer to be publically subjected to any and all of the techniques to let you decide if they really are torture.
- Michael Layon, Derry

John Michigan "Second, let's admit these methods do work. They quickly obtain specific intelligence from specific individuals."
Perhaps you should start thinking for yourself instead of channeling Cheney.

We didn't get an SPECIFIC information from waterboarding prisoners. People will say anything to stop "torture" and the information they give is considered unreliable.
That being said, I'm glad to know (Thanks UL editors) that waterboarding is not torture. I'm sure you will be called as expert witnesses on the matter. Unbelievable hubris!
- Ted, Manchester

Any one that can think for themselves knows that waterboarding is NOT torture. If it is, than any kid learning how to swim, and accidentaly get a snootful of water, has been tortured. You bleeding hearts out there need to get a thicker skin. As far as the comment about loosing our moral compass, we did that when we elected this socialist fool into office.
- vic, derry

Sorry, Tom, it's 66% via CNN polls today. I'm not surprised that you missed (ignored) it though. It doesn't jive with your delusions.
- Frank, Manchester

PS to Greg L--Tom from Dover/Foxcroft "and his ilk" don't value terrorists more than their own families. They don't value any individual; he is the "egg that must be broken to make an omelet." What they, and Obama, value exclusively is their public image.

Tom, "values-based ideologues make an argument against values"? Hardly! The overriding value to us is the DEFENSE OF THE NATION--not extending Geneva to people it deliberately does not cover (good explanation, Mike of Denver). Your preening self-righteousness (LJC's holier-than-thou "moral compass") will do no good in a world of jihadists. Lefties, you are now the government--please get serious.
- Spike, Brentwood NH

It's absurd to split hairs on what is constituted as torture or not. All torture is wrong. I don't care who is doing it.
- Terry, Manchester

Frank - Actually, it's just over one half. I appreciate your consideration, however.
- Tom, Campton

Ronald Reagan had sheriff's officers in Texas prosecuted for waterboarding arrestees to get confessions. Come on chickenhawks, tell me which war he was involved in down there. Your ability to conveniently change definitions when things don't go your way makes me puke.
- Robert, Deerfield

To Tom from Dover-Foxcroft and those of his ilk. I can only hope that the next terrorist attck on the US involves your family members because it's obvious you care more for terrorists than you do for your own family and other innocent Americans.
People like you make me sick because you cant hanle the real world and push your nonsenscicle ideas on the rest of us.
Lets hug the terrorists and wait for our children to be killed and you can continue to live with your good moral standing.
Go hug a tree.
- Greg L, Hudson

Prearranged, unilateral adherence to the Geneva conventions, such as proposed by the Obama administration, provides no incentives for opposing forces to reciprocate. Thus it places US forces in greater danger.

On every count the US has been less brutal and less barbaric than our enemies, thus we have maintained the RELATIVE high ground in this conflict. When did the left, which supports a women’s privacy over fetuses’ right to life, and gay ‘rights’ over Biblical morals, become absolute moralists?

The Taliban and Al-Quieda use US military and civilian prisoners as propaganda props, torture them, summarily execute (usually by beheading), and mutilate their corpses. Where is the outrage from the left? Why only from the right? Why do leftists want to hang neo-conservatives and appease terrorists doing these thing to our troops? Answer: The left is trying to consolidate its grip on power.
- Jim, Manchester

Mike in Denver, Please provide an article and section reference to the text of the Geneva Conventions saying it okay to summarily execute civilian fighters under the Geneva conventions. I couldn't find it.
- Jim, Manchester

A fact that many of you folks missed was that Japan started WWII, and IF Japanese soldiers were executed EXCLUSIVELY for waterboarding (I doubt it as we generally don't give out a death penalty unless someone is actually killed, my guess is they did more than just waterboarding), it remains a fact that they were the agressors. Likewise, prior to 9/11, we were not trying to overthrow the home governments of the terrorists, or invade their home countries (as Japan was trying to do to us). The burr under UBL's saddle is supposedly the U.S. deployment to Saudi Arabia in the 1990-1991 Gulf War. Well, the Saudi and Kuwaiti governments asked us to help, and we liberated Kuwait, and the Kuwaitis were grateful that we did.
- mo, derry

Tom of Dover-Foxcroft: The values are clearly there for anyone who cares to look. Torture: no. Aggressive interrogation based on years of military training programs: yes. Acts that "shock the conscience:" no. Acts that discomfort or scare captured terror operatives to elicit information about plans for future plots: yes. If your values are based on a strong predisposition to blame the US for something, anything, whenever conflict arises around the world, then I suppose we hold different values.
- Rick, Portsmouth

Tom in Campton, the answer to your question is two thirds of the American public. Get used to it; you're a minority in this country now. Maybe we should deport you.
- Frank, Manchester

Giving a good shower to terrorists that haven't washed in years is torture???? So much for "looking forward". The Left can only wallow in the past, and will never be satisfied that the evil Bush administration is out of office, they still must destroy them. If the banana republic style witch hunt goes forward, let's hold all serving in congress at the time accountable as well. Nothing more than a distraction from the real problems facing the country.
- Mae, Plaistow

Whit Howell, Rumney, NH and Bill, Moultonborough, NH say, essentially, "The United States executed Japanese soldiers for waterboarding."

Let us get something straight: The "waterboarding" that the Japanese did to American soldiers is NOT the same "waterboarding" that America has done to terrorists. The US version consists of securing the subject to a flat surface (board) and then tipping them back, placing a cloth over the nose and dripping water on the cloth so that the water drips down the nostrils, which activates the "drowning panic" response. Horrible as this may seem to squemish, the subject is never in danger of actually drowning, despite the leftist "Hollywood" versions that show something more drastic, and the great effort to make them the same in the public eye.

The version of waterboarding that was enacted on the US soldiers by the Japanese WAS a version where the subject was actually held upside-down and dunked in a bucket or tub full of water, and held under. This is NOT simultated drowing, but actual drowning, where the subject is pulled out before they drown (or not, in some cases).

So, many equate the 1940's "waterboarding" with the 2000's "waterboarding" and they have it all wrong. Harsh yes, torture, no, even if it gives them nightmares.
- Jordan Zane, Richmond, VA

The Geneva Conventions were agreed to because all nation-states saw an advantage to keeping the fighting away from civilian populations. They provide incentives for fighting in uniform, and disincentives for fighters indistinguishable from civilians.

The disincentive for not being in uniform is that fighters indistinguishable from civilians have NO Geneva Convention rights. Well, actually they are mentioned, as in being fair game for summary execution, no judge, no jury, no trial. Yep, says so in the Geneva Conventions.

So by rewarding these terrorists with rights and protections they're not entitled to we actually encourage more terrorism, more innocent civilian death - both at the hand of the terrorists and of the governments of the world trying to fight them.

The message of civilization and humanity should always be for enemies to stand up and fight like men in front of their women and children, not like cowards behind their women and children. Terrorists are the lowest scum of scum and should be treated as such by humanity.
- Mike, Denver, CO

Waterboarding violates the principles and the spirit of the Geneva conventions. I know most of you don't care about that (pesky international agreements!) but there it is.

It is also an established fact that US judges actually sentenced Japanese interrogators to DEATH for using this tactic against American servicemen during WWII. See 'Tokyo Trials'.

Even more disturbing, actually, is the sense that the most extreme waterboarding inflicted upon Sheikh Mohammed and Abu Zubaydah seems to coincide with the govt's attempts to find a connection between Al-Qaeda and Iraq, not with any intelligence about impending attacks. This suggests that the effort to push for harsher interrogation techniques was in fact political, as the Bush administration tried wildly but ultimately in vain to bolster its case for an invasion of Iraq.
- Dave, Sandwich

One man's discomfort is another man's torture.
- Don, Berlin

A decision here damns one both ways. No matter the severity, torture is torture.

However, if I have a person who has knowledge of an impending attack, or plans for such, my moral compass I'll put aside if it saves the lives of fellow Americans. No questions and without hesitation.

I have absolutely no doubts the families of those potential victims, killed or mained simply because they are Americans, would ask what techniques were used in extracting information that foiled such evil... or where we 'stand' in the world.
- Jack, Manchester

I misspoke earlier when I said Obama's $3.5 trillion budget boondoggle is "winding" its way through Congress. It is being rushed through Congress in total disregard of the Constitution, so that Obama can have a victory to celebrate his 100 days in office. This is as irresponsible and dangerous as Obama having Air Force One buzz lower Manhattan this morning for a photo op.

Who is supporting this guy?
- Tom, Campton

Hey Whit Howell in Rumney: U.S. executed Japanese soldiers for waterboarding? I'm a history buff and fairly knowlegeable about WWII and I've never heard of this. Perhaps you are correct and I am unaware of this. Can you provide proof/details such as their names, as well as your source of information. As far as I have ever heard the only Japanese ever executed by the U.S. for war crimes were Generals Homma and Yamashita.
- mp, derry

Excellent post, Craig. But is your friend serious? I wouldn't want to be his daughter. Your provide the perfect example of the warped notion of love and loyalty, as per the "liberal doctrine of nonsense." You and Spike make crystal clear exactly what frustrates so many of us--that in a debate with a liberal, logic and common sense are completely missing.

Craig's friend would rather coddle a merciless killer, instead of doing what is necessary to save the life of his own child. Likewise, our president would rather coddle our enemies, instead of fulfilling his duty, as "patron" of our nation, to keep us safe from harm. Indeed, these two are sheared from the same shabby piece of cloth.
- Susie Nickerson, Horseshoe Bay, TX (NH native)

Fact: Our Naval aviation personnel experience these "techniques" during training. Why is the fact that we routinely train our military personnel by exposing them to these techniques never mentioned in the press? Because that would completely dissolve their argument that this is torture. There is plenty of documentation on the net of what constitutes real torture. These stress techniques don't come close. The argument from the left is invalid on its face but the public doesn't know this because they won't disclose that we have been doing this to military personnel for at least 25 years. Where have the anti-torture advocates been? Not present until someone decided to apply these techniques to enemies of America. Who the left defends speaks volumes about their values.
- Keith Bluestein, Springfield VA

The United States executed Japanese soldiers for waterboarding. So why does the US get away with it? Oh yeah, I forgot, America doesn't like to play by the rules of war. This is why the world loves Canada, which follows the rules and doesn't annoy anyone... while hating the US. And if stuff like this continues, it's going to seriously backfire. We have almost no credibility in the international community. Let's not make it worse.
- Whit Howell, Rumney, NH

IMO waterboard does cross the line into "torture" and should be discontinued. The other enhanced interrogation methods are NOT torture...and in fact the Obama administration has already signalled that they'll move beyond the methods in the Army Field Manual...these tools are necessary and are not torture.

Second, let's admit these methods do work. They quickly obtain specific intelligence from specific individuals.

Finally, we MUST have a legal means of authorizing enhanced interrogation in specific circumstances. IMO the president should personally authorize it in each instance. The proliferation of WMD makes this an absolute necessity.
- JohnR, Michigan

If we lose our moral compass and resort to torture we have nothing left to defend.
- LJC, Manchester

Nonsensical debate. The methods involved are clearly not torture. Obama's release of this information is irresponsible at best and treasonous at worst, but has achieved his objective: creating a distraction from his budget which is winding its way through Congress.

Don't we all consider it contemptible when individuals define themselves by what others think about them, when individuals sacrifice their own principles and dignity in an effort to make others "like them"?

Doesn't this apply as well to a nation?
- Tom, Campton

President Obama ordered snipers to kill three teen aged pirates to ensure the life of one U.S. merchant seaman. So, why does he balk a splashing water in a terrorists face to ensure many lives?
- Mike Sorensen, Las Vegas

Lies lies lies. But if you want a carefully researched and well thought out opinion on this subject you will read, "The Banality of Bush White House Evil."

http://www.nytimes.com/2009/04/26/opinion/26rich.html?_r=1

We are going to listen to an opinion on torture from an editor who does not understand seat belts? I don't think so!
- Tom Labrie, Rochester

And what school does the writer have an MD or PHD from?

Waterboarding is torture, It is used to produce the feeling of drowning aka dying. PTSD is caused when someone has the preception of near death or feeling their life was threatened.

Therefor waterboarding CAN cause PTSD which is a medically accepted diagnosis and therefor waterboarding IS TORTURE and therefor illegal as current laws are written.

If we want the right to waterboard then we need to change our laws, otherwise President Obama is write to not allow it.
- Robert, Dover, NH

I had a discussion with a friend the other day regarding these advanced interrogation techniques. His position was mostly a parroting of the extreme left media. "It made us less safe, it's why the world hates us, principles." and so on. Finally it occurred to me to ask him this. "Would you use these techniques to save your mother, or your child or if you knew it would provide information that saved the lives of 1000 people?" After a moment or two of stunned confusion, he replied, "No, I wouldn't."

It was then that I realized that I could no longer have a logical debate with him about the usefulness of such techniques. When a person chooses to see the world in distinct black and white, right and wrong, you have to come to terms with the fact that that person is not living in the real world.

I ended the debate with my friend by saying this, "If I knew that water-boarding someone would save your life I would do it. You might not like it, but I have a feeling your wife and son would."
- Craig D, Manchester

Agreed, the techniques listed, including the infamous waterboarding, are NOT torture. In fact, when obama released the "torture techniques" he espoused to Bush, he should have also released information indicating that our own American troops have been subject to the same techniques. In Palm Desert, California where some of our troops are taught how to evade enemy capture and how to resist torture techniques they are exposed to the very same ones we used on terrorists. Please don't take my word for this, research it yourself and come to your own conclusion.

I am publically volunteering to be subjected to waterboarding and all of the other listed torture techniques. They are instruments used to solicit valuable information from our enemies. Perhaps instead of waterboarding we should offer them cotton candy. How would that work?
- Michael Layon, Derry

So the conservative, values-based ideologues make an argument against values. Interesting, sad but interesting.
- Tom, Dover-Foxcroft, Me.

I don't care what other people in other countries think about what we here in the US must do to protect the innocent individuals amongst us from criminals and terrorists.

I don' care what techniques are used to extract information from captured/suspected criminals and terrorists.

I don't care what the techniques are/are not called—I only care that they work.
- Bob Kroepel, New Durham, NH

Your editorial does not address relevant news items already in play on this topic. First, the US included water boarding in their prosecution of the Japanese for war crimes. What changed that makes it OK now? Second, the FBI director reports the most valuable information came before the (non?) torture, not because of it. The real debate must be; is violating international treaty justified, by an attempt to make us safer? In aviation, any FAA rule may be violated in an emergency, but the pilot must explain themselves. The same should apply here. Let’s see some transparency and some truth, attributes that seem to be more of a priority with this administration than the last.
- Bill, Moultonborough, NH

Obama has expressed his preference to see Americans die over treating a terrorist to what amounts to college hazing. Perhaps WE should be apologizing for HIS actions.
- Jonathan, Bedford

"It makes us less safe." It makes Obama look better. The real-world effects of this decision, and the history of success against jihadists, do not concern them; any more than the logical consequences of making seat belts mandatory (yesterday's editorial).

Like the difference between declining to carry a weapon and having your senator give the bad guys a guarantee that all the good guys are unarmed--announcing this decision to the world elevates stupidity to palpable danger.

Either the decision will be as meaningless as Obama's stage production of "combing the budget for waste and fraud"--Severin on 96.9 suggests that Obama would waterboard to save his own daughters, and is merely a hypocrite, not a traitor--or the decision will result in actual cases where the nation's security is surrendered to Kissy-Face politics.

An extra rotten tomato for your man, John McAmnesty, who knows real torture first-hand and last year conceded the point that embarrassment and discomfort of captured Muslim murderers is torture--and insisted that jihadists won't torture our prisoners if we simply treat theirs nicely. The Democrats lied and McAmnesty replied, "I'm a politician: Can we split the difference?" What makes a real war hero so willing to surrender before big battles?
- Spike, Brentwood NH