We assume, perhaps safely, that our the torturers working for our government are the "good guys,"

[JDPriestly]

and that the people being tortured are the "evil-doers." And so, we and many Americans think the torture program was OK. Maybe it wasn't even torture, many think.

But even if that is true today, to judge the ethics and morality of the torture program for its universal and ultimate value, we have to ask, what if the tables are turned?

What if the people doing the torturing, the people trying to find information through torture or "enhanced interrogation" are the "evil-doers"? And what if those "evil-doers" are as convinced as we are that they, not we are the good guys?

What then?

If torture is OK because, after all, it is being used to help the good guys, then can the "evil-doers" justify it by arguing that after all, they are in fact the good guys and therefore it is OK for them to use torture?

Laws have to be applied universally or at least written and obeyed as if they should or could be applied universally.

There can't be one law for the good guys and a different law for the evil-doers.

There can't be one code of behavior, one set of rules for good guys and another for evil-doers.

That is a big mistake that we make.

We don't want to be tortured or to have our soldiers tortured. We should not be torturing others. One law should apply to all.

[The Velveteen Ocelot]

1. If we are torturing people we are not the good guys.

Good guys don't torture people. If you do evil you're an evil-doer just like your adversary. “Beware that, when fighting monsters, you yourself do not become a monster."

[JDPriestly]

2. Thanks. I'm trying to understand how people justify torture, why they approve of it and then

show them why their reasoning and their justification is mistaken.

[sabrina 1]

3. Those are good questions. Every country thinks they are the good guys.

We heard that we were going to Iraq to 'shut down Saddam's Torture Chambers'. I remember that well, right wingers USED it to try to show us 'liberals' how 'hypocritical' we were, that we didn't want to stop the evil Saddam from torturing people.

I remember the rumors of torture by US troops starting in late 2003 and I didn't believe it because despite how I felt about Cheney/Bush I didn't think even THEY would stoop to that level.

A few months later it was proven to be true, in fact in Jan of 2004 it was reported that a 'few soldiers' had engaged in abusive behavior towards detainees and had been apprehended and removed from their duties.

And then came Abu Ghraib. I remember asking those right wingers if they still thought we had gone there to 'shut down Saddam's torture chambers' on the mixed forum I was posting on at the time.

There was silence for a while. Then Rush gave them their talking points and I'm sure you know some of them. 'It was just hazing', 'wearing underwear on your head isn't torture' etc etc.

I'm sure Saddam felt he was a good guy too. That he used torture in order to protect his country and I'm sure a lot of Iraqis believed that also.

By excusing torture and refusing to prosecute the criminals, trying to understand them, we have provided every dictator in the world with the ability to say to us the next time we try to lecture THEM on human rights, that we should mind our own business.

[SamKnause]

4. There are 3 interviews

on Democracy Now that explains everything the citizens of the U.S. need to know about our torture program.

I advise everyone to watch it and pass it on.

It explains why psychologists were involved.

It explains how the CIA has taught the torture program to our allies.

It explains how the CIA torture programs have been used against Latin America.

It explains that torture is now written into American law.

Please watch and spread far and wide.

http://democracynow.org/

The 3 interviews are on the front page dated December 16th, 2014.