Retribution is one of the 5 primary goals of criminal law.

[Laelth]

"This is a time for reflection, not retribution." - President Obama

The other four are deterrence, rehabilitation, incapacitation, and restitution.

Cite: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Criminal_law

In releasing the torture memos, President Obama has made it harder to bring justice to those who tortured in our names, if for no other reason than it will be more difficult to find an impartial jury. Some, of course, hope that Obama intends to prosecute the torture ringleaders, and they rationalize away his declaration of immunity to lower-level CIA functionaries as merely cover for the thorough and careful accumulation of evidence that might allow successful prosecutions of the primary culprits (Rumsfeld, Cheney, Bush, etc.).

Perhaps the President is sincere in his careful parsing of the English language. Perhaps now isn't the time for retribution (opening up the possibility that later might be a good time to attain the goals of the criminal law). If that's what he intends, I can remain uncomfortably skeptical but supportive. The world needs and deserves retribution, for crimes were committed in our names for which the world rightly holds us responsible. In addition, we need deterrence. We should send a signal to others who might torture that the people of the United States will not tolerate it and will punish those who do it. If Obama is merely waiting to give the world the justice it demands, I can live with that.

But if he believe that "exposing the truth" is enough, I must respectfully disagree. Whether the Constitutional scholar, our President, will give the world justice remains to be seen. The goals of the criminal law, however, are noble and deeply ingrained in the American psyche. Torture demands criminal prosecution. If we don't prosecute those who order and condone torture, the world will continue to simmer with the anger and resentment that are the fruit of obvious injustice.

All five goals (retribution, deterrence, rehabilitation, incapacitation, and restitution) are appropriate in this case. I hope the President did not signal an intent to abandon criminal prosecutions. Only time will tell what he really meant.

:dem:

-Laelth

[Towlie]

1. It has to start somewhere. It has to start sometime.

What better place than here?
What better time than now?

[The Straight Story]

2. That is what I was trying to tell my GF about sex

What better place than here?
What better time than now?

:)

[Laelth]

5. As to sex, as opposed to prosecutions, that is a very compelling argument.

:)

:dem:

-Laelth

[Laelth]

4. The arguments I've heard ...

The arguments I have heard are that waiting allows the President (or, more specifically, the DOJ) to build popular support for prosecutions and to build a rock-solid case. Presumably, that's why it's better to wait.

If that's what the President is doing, I can live with it. I'm just not sure that's what he's doing.

:dem:

-Laelth

[pocoloco]

3. Probably won't help but........

http://www.democrats.com/no-amnesty-for-torturers

[Supersedeas]

6. these appeals for prosecution have be read in conjuction with the MCA

the MCA grants clear and specific immunity to interrogators.