President Obama leaves door open for torture prosecutions

[Batman]

This morning, the president left open the possibility od prosecuting the former administration's officials that helped create the basis for extreme interrogation techniques.

Is this a good idea or could it negatively affect the war on terror?

Personally, I think it is a good idea and they should be prosecuted, especially Alberto Gonzalez. I admit there are some very pragmatic reasons to not pursue the prosecutions but in my mind the use of torture was one of the biggest causes of the USs loss of respect around the world and the sooner we right that wrong the faster the US regains its position in the world's stage, which will be necessary considering the new problems arising internationally.

[Harlequin]

The war on terror is essentially a PR construct. This is a great idea.

[jali]

I'm very happy with this decision. The ends (despite that criminal Cheyney's PR attempt) don't justify the means.

[featherlou]

On the surface it seems like a good idea to me. Isn't there a Geneva Convention and stuff like that to prevent torture of prisoners? Weren't a whole bunch of former Nazis prosecuted after WWII? Americans don't get a pass just because they really wanted to torture prisoners.

ETA: US Americans refusing to take the blame for the global economic collapse is hurting your reputation as a country, too.

[The J Word]

I think the Geneva Convention deals with POWs and not Enemy Combatants.
Bush/Cheney weren't the morons people think they were.

[SpazCat]

It's a wonderful idea. Done right, it'll help the US regain some of its moral standing. A small part, but better than what we've got now.

Unfortunately I don't trust the floundering GOP to not muck it up somewhere. I admire Obama for wanting to make any prosecution bipartisan, but I don't see that happening for a while.

[Inigo Montoya]

It's a terrific idea. We will never know the truth about this whole war on terror and who was behind all of it--we get the official news stories and some rumors. But the US Intelligence machine is not broken, there are details CRUCIAL to judgment that we will never be allowed to see. The boundaries of the enhanced interrogation techniques were clearly defined and reasons for those boundaries were clearly stated. It would be fairly easy to identify when the letter and the spirit of the order was violated. So the dungeoneers who were 'in the know' regarding the information they wanted and from whom they wanted it can fall neatly into two camps: those who were doing their very unpleasant job, and sadists.

[annehere]

I'm confused: wasn't there just an article recently where O said any "interrogation tactics" (which I read to mean "torture-style interrogation") that were used within the "guidelines of interrogation" of the last administration shouldn't be prosecuted because within those guidelines it was considered legal? Or something like that? Correct me, because I must not have something right...

[Inigo Montoya]

The reasoning he gave was like: those guys need to know that they can do what's asked of them without fear of reprisals later on. But he was very clear that once they got outside of what was being asked, then they were dog food.