With the election of Barrak Obama as President of the United States, the CIA, FBI and other agencies found they were under scrutiny over the issue of torture as a means of extracting information from the “bad guys.” One of the key discussions in this debate is the degree to which torture can be “morally” extended and is effective in eliciting information. Even within the intelligence community, opinions differ. A case in point:
Consider … the interrogation of Khalid Shaikh Mohammed. He was waterboarded six times a day for a month. He provided information, but he certainly didn't do so quickly.
"What I get most out of the waterboarding of Khalid Shaikh Mohamed is that any approach — I don't care what it is — if you have to do it 183 times, it is not working," says Matthew Alexander. He was the military interrogator in charge of the team that ended up finding al-Qaida's No. 1 man in Iraq, without resorting to torture.
Another side of the question would concern “regular,” “light” or “enhanced’ torture that brings only temporary pain verses long range brokenness for life. Are “lasting” effects mental or physical or both?
The debate goes back and forth … does torture really work effectively to extract what we need to know from our enemies? Is it legal or, more importantly, is it right? Who should be allowed to decide? Yet one of the most important aspects of the issue of torture never seems to make it to the table … what does torture do to the person (and by extension, nation) that employs it? Given that military intelligence is vital to keeping America safe from her enemies and the brave and sacrificing warriors of our armed forces in the field deserve the best information available, what do we forfeit of our character when we employ torture to extract it? A question of equal importance is what do we forfeit if we don’t? What is the Mind of the Father Who would allow His anointed Son to be tortured on a cross?
Let us ask further what the difference is in torturing our enemy to defeat his cause or seriously wounding him in battle? A wounded enemy soldier crying in pain as the two units clash is far less of a threat to our people than a terrorist planning in secret to blow up a 1,000 of our citizens, including women and children. What is the moral difference between killing a man to protect our country or torturing him?
“I did not come to bring peace but a sword,” said Jesus (Matt. 10:34). Mary, the mother of our Lord, was promised by the prophet that because of Jesus’ destiny, “… a sword will pierce your own heart also” (Luke 2:34-35). And David praised God and said, “I love you, O Lord, my strength … you train my hands for battle … and I destroy my enemies … the Lord gives His king great victories … exalted be God, my Savior” (Psalm 18:1, 34,40,46,50).
“‘Put your sword back in its place,’ Jesus said to him, ‘for all who draw the sword will die by the sword.’” Matthew 26:52
No comments:
Post a Comment