General Discussion
In reply to the discussion: The Dumpster Fire of Obama's Moral Authority [View all]mindwalker_i
(4,407 posts)You're being deliberately obtuse. Will's article makes the case, convincingly, that Obama has said torture was okay because we were scared. The thumbs down says that that person agrees with the president. If one agrees with the president when the president says torture was ok, that person agrees that torture was ok.
Your comment about prosecutors "taking a lot of factors into account," and especially the part about, "And whether he believes the perpetrators are guilty is just one," says, essentially, that yeah, people are guilty of committing torture but there are "other factors" that prevent him from prosecuting it. So, yeah, the government tortured people, going against the Geneva convention against torture and against our constitution, but there are "other factors" that mean we aren't going to prosecute. What are those "other factors?" You leave that wide open for interpretation.
How about we apply this to other issues, like domestic spying? Yeah, the government might be guilty of spying on all of us, but there are "other factors" that mean they don't have to be prosecuted. Even though they continue doing it. Spying on us all has bad effects on a democracy - in essence, it gives the government way too much power over the people. That's kind of why we had this constitution in the first place.
by making the excuse that there were "other factors" which prevent prosecution of the most egregious lawlessness committed by the government, you are endorsing destruction of democracy by giving government unlimited power over citizens.