All Life Is Problem Solving

(From http://www.obamamites.com)

At his first 100 days news conference this evening, President Obama received the following question from Jake Tapper of ABC News: “Thank you, Mr. President. You’ve said in the past that waterboarding, in your opinion, is torture. Torture is a violation of international law and the Geneva Conventions. Do you believe that the previous administration sanctioned torture?”

Now, I can’t imagine why Jake Tapper didn’t ask the President whether his Administration will fulfill its obligation under US Law and International Treaty to prosecute those who planned, enabled, and committed the crime of torture, but since he didn’t, Mr. Obama was able to answer in the following way:

”What I’ve said — and I will repeat — is that waterboarding violates our ideals and our values. I do believe that it is torture. I don’t think that’s just my opinion; that’s the opinion of many who’ve examined the topic. And that’s why I put an end to these practices. . .

“I was struck by an article that I was reading the other day talking about the fact that the British during World War II, when London was being bombed to smithereens, had 200 or so detainees. And Churchill said, “We don’t torture,” when the entire British — all of the British people were being subjected to unimaginable risk and threat.

“And then the reason was that Churchill understood, you start taking short-cuts, over time, that corrodes what’s — what’s best in a people. It corrodes the character of a country.”

And later on in his response he said: “I believe that waterboarding was torture. And I think that the — whatever legal rationales were used, it was a mistake.”

My reaction to this is that torture isn’t the only thing that can “corrode the character of a country.” Just as corrosive to its character is the determination to place practical, utilitarian considerations ahead of fairness and justice. I’ve blogged about this here before. It is not enough to say that torture was a mistake, or even that it was a violation of international law. One also has to say that it was a crime, that the laws prohibiting it need to be enforced, and that it is the obligation of the President under the constitution to uphold these laws, so that those who would break them in the future have some expectation that if they do, one day they will be punished, and that justice will be done. When someone refuses to say this, and when they look only forward, they corrupt the future, because however much we want to, or try to make it so, the future can never entirely escape the past.