January 18, 2006: Looking for information on Ray Nagin’s Chocolate Factory? Follow this link!
——————————————————————————————————————–
“It’s time to be honest about doing terrible things …” so writes Charles Krauthammer in his article “The Truth about Torture.” I agree, especially in light of John McCain’s politically motivated, loop-hole-filled amendment to extend portions of the U.S. Bill of Rights to unlawful combatants.
Total War
War is indeed a terrible thing and as displayed through a number of selected historical citations and quotes, Krauthammer argues the moral merits and reasons for taking prisoners of war – and the exceptions accepted by most civilized societies.
This to me is a good argument gone astray. War is an obscenity – making any tool of this beast equally obscene. The best we can hope for regardless of methods is that one prosecute it as swiftly, powerfully and terribly as possible to break the will of one’s opponents with as little judgement to both sides as possible. Done effectively once, the threat of overwhelming force should be enough to to compel new opponents into compromise and/or to collaborate a workable solution to avoid the storm altogether.
One need only compare the avoidance of a nuclear attack by all potential confligrants during the Cold War against the politically induced unfinished-war ongoing in Korea.
Torture as a Tool
First let me say that I’m all for prosecuting the idiots perpetrating the abuses at Abu Ghraib. Such acts only strengthen the resolve of one’s enemies and provide nothing useful to the captors. Second, though there is a huge difference between ‘beating the snot’ out of a detainee with a rubber truncheon and keeping them awake for 48 hours through bright lights and rock music – though I suspect neither is very effective in harvesting information from death-cult Islamofascists.
Like war, the idea behind any torture is to break the will of one’s opponents – either to give up valuable data – or to give-up taking arms against someone else. It is with deterrence in mind that I find myself miffed at McCain’s myopic act. Removing the torture option from the table – or at least the threat of it – encourages opponents of Iraqi freedom to continue acting as illegal combatants now that the most significant peril of such an act has been removed.
Worse, it now puts legal combatants in a position of either slaying on site someone otherwise spared for data – or taking on the expense of slowly brain-washing the insurgent, boiling the frog into a ‘dependent state’ with “three meals a day, superior medical care, and provision to pray five times a day.” In the case of the latter, I propose throwing in select TV shows to insure said terrorist are psychologically tortured into “entitlement thinking.”
Trust me, once we start exporting a few “Ophra-ized” insurgents back to their countries, their leadeship will wish we had hung the criminals as one usually does all spies in a time of war. But I digress …
“Who would Jesus Torture?”
Though I’ve already offered enough food for thought, I figure why not roll out a banquet? To wit, I’d like to bring into the picture a meme I’ve recently heard from “progressive Christians” (progressive being synonymous with liberal in this context). “Who would Jesus torture?” is asked, often followed by trying to paint a disagreeing party into admitting that they see Jesus teachings as irrelevant to the ‘real world’ the same way one asks “so, do you still beat your wife?”
However, instead of bantering about faulty bumper-sticker theology, I would suggest a more reasonable and productive approach would be to discuss whether or not torture is a legitimate tool of war – and if so to what degree? Put in terms of a progressive pundit, if I believe in ‘total war’ then don’t I also condone ‘total torture?’
To answer that question, the Christian needs to ask themselves, what does the entire Bible say about war? After all, Jesus did not “come to abolish the Law or the Prophets” rather He came “to fulfill them.” Considering the timeframe of this statement, I have to conclude this includes many of the examples in the Old Testament to God’s people in the art of total war – coupled with Paul’s recognition in the New Testament of the authority of Earthly government to prosecute war totally.
Sword of the Lord
Figuring some of you are seeing red by now, allow me temper this a bit so we don’t debate the wrong extremes – I personally believe ‘Total War’ should never be taken on lightly – and only as a last resort. As Christians, it should not be taken on by any one individual, but only by the mechanism God ordained to maintain the rule of law, government. As the late Ray Stedman writes in his article “Ten Propositions Concerning War:”
“The Church does not bear a sword (her weapons are mighty spiritual weapons). The State, on the other hand, does bear a sword.”
Considering the history of prolonged pain and misery brought about by partially prosecuted wars, and considering the Biblical warnings against leaving one’s enemies the ability to regroup – the real question isn’t “who would Jesus torture” but whether or not war is an option to believers.
Put another way, either as Christians we buy into the whole “Sword of the Lord” concept, condoning government to practice “total war” – or we are compelled to practice complete pacifism. Trying to have it both ways, as politicians and Christian intellectuals are pone to do, cruelly costs everyone more in lives and suffering both in the short and long term.
Of course that’s just my puny perspective. I’m hoping raging debate will ensue. And just in case it doesn’t, I’ve listed over at blogs4God what other Christian bloggers have to say on the topic of torture. Believe it or not – there is no one consensus but instead many interesting arguments that should be entertained.
