All about the double standard

It occurred to me this morning that the raving right wing (and some of us right here on DU) has/have an odd set of conflicting standards about how to prosecute a war.

1. If our civilians are killed by terrorists, we can kill as many of their civilians as we want, even if they're not from the same country as the terrorists, just so long as we can claim we're "winning" the war, whatever that means.

2. If we capture their terrorists, we can torture them, but we disagree about executing them

3. If we capture their leader, we can execute him, but we disagree about torturing him.

4. If they bash in a marine's (or ordinary citizen's) kneecaps, electrify his genitals, load him up with drugs, deprive him of sleep, make him act out sexual scenes with other naked marines on camera and have a national military trading card collection, it's clearly and indisputably torture, but if we do it to them, it's merely "college hazing".

5. It's not really torture if it's not breaking any laws, even if we have to change the laws at the last minute just in case. Torture is illegal you know.

6. We have an indisputable right to the information in a prisoner's head, by whatever means, but other nations do not have an indisputable right to the information in our soldier's and citizens heads, by any means.

7. We have a right to set up roadblocks that say "if you're close enough to read this, etc." that blow up civilians who can't read english to smithereens, and to ride through the streets of Baghdad shooting civilians with 100% impunity http://www.chris-floyd.com/fallujah/contract/, yet when they blow us up they are the evil bad guys.

Please, share your observations about double standards. I personally think it destroys our moral authority to shamelessly exercise a double standard, but worse, it puts the lives of our soldiers and of our people at risk today, and ten and twenty years from now.

We seem to think it's amusing to play adolescent games like this, but sooner or later we (you and I) are going to have to pay the piper for what those people are doing, for what half this country is condoning by inaction, by braying-ass congratulatory chain emails to each other about how much worse things would be if we weren't doing this.

Torture is never acceptible. All human life should be honored.

no matter who does it.

I've never given the US a pass on this stuff.

I have seen some of us claim that it is right to execute Saddam and guilty terrorists, and while I don't entirely disagree myself (from a practical standpoint), I can't condone it at all ethically.

I AM happy to note that DU as a whole does not support torture though, but this wasn't a comment on DU. I should have omitted that since it detracted.

My point was more to see what other "double standards" we have observed about our "foreign policy" that had been pricking at people.

America has a long history of viewing itself with an "apartness" from the rest of the world. This is now being hugely fueled by the pols who insist that we're "fighting the terrorists over there so we won't have to fight them over here."

What's the difference? We shouldn't be "fighting" them if that includes torture and dehumanization. If we resort to those tactics, haven't we debased ourselves to the point of un-civilization that we claim the "terrorists" occupy?

we have a right to take and do what we want because of who we are and everyone else is just property to do with as we please.

We've seen those relationships - they don't end well.

I grew up (still live) in the South - still remember the "Whites Only" drinking fountains and waiting rooms. I'm 100% certain that in my lifetime (course I'm 65 now, but still) our country will never heal from the wounds of those "relationships."

being shown the door? Every element you've listed is reprehensible behavior, the sort of things the US used to rail against in that "quaint" body, the United Nations, before the coup of 00.

I've seen a load of discussion on the issue of phased versus immediate withdrawal, but I haven't seen anyone who supports that kind of shit. Am I simply missing these discussions?

I don't have links but try a poll if you don't believe me

1. should we execute Saddam Hussein if found guilty?
2. should we execute terrorists found guilty?
3. should we execute suspected terrorists?

You would be surprised. Remember we ourselves come from all over the ideological spectrum on DU and there are wide differences that are evident even regionally among us.

Yes it is disturbing. Also see my reply to Bloom - BTW :hi: