I cannot express how bewildering this comment is. The article in question is about using torture as a training tool -- inflicting brain damage on a person so that folks will learn the valuable skill of beating up defenseless people. Then this comment comes along and complains about the optics of it. Why? Because it undermines "Western civilization". And what's the problem with that? Because then Western civilization loses its "moral high ground". And what will that lead to? That the right- and left-wing -- those good-for-nothings that want to "bring down the current horrible governance and figure out things later" -- will opportunistically use that against the shining city on the hill called Western Civilization.
Whether this torture business is right or wrong is not even part of the discussion, and might not even be relevant -- the whole point is that the angelic Western Civilization might be beset by the devilish "anti-establishment movement".
No it's not about optics and I don't see any value in discussing if torture is right or wrong as it is an age old question. Since I'm not happy about it, I'm obviously on the "torture is wrong" camp and I have no intention of listening about the virtues of torture. Also, an expression of sympathies about the victim will only bloat the text and weaken the point I find important. What's the point of everyone repeating how horrible torture is? I think that must be given.
> Also, an expression of sympathies about the victim will only bloat the text and weaken the point I find important.
The point being about optics. Not about the suffering caused by torture.
> What's the point of everyone repeating how horrible torture is? I think that must be given.
It hasn't been obvious ever since the start of the War on Terror. At least not according to the Bush regime and people like Sam Harris or shows like 24. But me making that point might undermine the moral high ground of W. Civ.
What about parent comment did you think had to do with optics? By my reading it has everything to do with the actual behavior itself, which they call "atrocities."
You can achieve a moral high ground based on your actions. And that's the only way to do it, in fact. But that clearly has nothing to do with this post since it is about example No. 19281 of the CIA doing some heinous shit.
And what's the apparent takeaway from that? That Western Civ might lose its moral high ground. But what about example No. 19280 of the CIA doing some henious shit? What about No. 19279? ...
Whether this torture business is right or wrong is not even part of the discussion, and might not even be relevant -- the whole point is that the angelic Western Civilization might be beset by the devilish "anti-establishment movement".