Welcome to Scribd, the world's digital library. Read, publish, and share books and documents. See more
Download
Standard view
Full view
of .
Look up keyword
Like this
2Activity
0 of .
Results for:
No results containing your search query
P. 1
The Policy of Bad Intentions_the Bush’s Administration’s Flawed Approach in the use of Torture on the GWOT (Global War on Terror)

The Policy of Bad Intentions_the Bush’s Administration’s Flawed Approach in the use of Torture on the GWOT (Global War on Terror)

Ratings: (0)|Views: 112 |Likes:
Published by Richard L. Dixon
Much has been written about the Bush’s Administration illegal pursuit in the use of torture as a weapon of opportunity in the coercion of information from suspected Al Qaeda Operatives. Attorney General Eric Holder is correct in initiating an investigation into the possible violation of the Geneva Accord on the proper treatment of prisoners of war.
What is missing from this debate is that the use of torture violates U.S. Protocol that was set in the U.S. by the Supreme Court in re Yamashita 327 U.S. 1 (1946). This ruling by the Supreme Court held the Japanese General Tomoyuki Yamashita was criminality liable for the actions of his soldiers in the torturing of both U.S. and British prisoners of War, and civilians in their custody. Hence the term Command Responsibility was coined. Since former President George W. Bush and Vice-President Dick Cheney were in power, then under the doctrine of Command Responsibility they should be held personally accountable for their actions.
Much has been written about the Bush’s Administration illegal pursuit in the use of torture as a weapon of opportunity in the coercion of information from suspected Al Qaeda Operatives. Attorney General Eric Holder is correct in initiating an investigation into the possible violation of the Geneva Accord on the proper treatment of prisoners of war.
What is missing from this debate is that the use of torture violates U.S. Protocol that was set in the U.S. by the Supreme Court in re Yamashita 327 U.S. 1 (1946). This ruling by the Supreme Court held the Japanese General Tomoyuki Yamashita was criminality liable for the actions of his soldiers in the torturing of both U.S. and British prisoners of War, and civilians in their custody. Hence the term Command Responsibility was coined. Since former President George W. Bush and Vice-President Dick Cheney were in power, then under the doctrine of Command Responsibility they should be held personally accountable for their actions.

More info:

Categories:Types, Research
Published by: Richard L. Dixon on Sep 07, 2009
Copyright:Attribution Non-commercial

Availability:

Read on Scribd mobile: iPhone, iPad and Android.
download as DOC, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd
See more
See less

05/11/2014

pdf

text

original

 
The Policy of Bad Intentions: the Bush’s Administration’s Flawed Approach in the use of Tortureon the GWOT (Global War on Terror)By Richard L. Dixon“No matter how many times they are reminded torture is against the law and the GenevaConvention and therefore the Constitution (Article VI) Republicans can’t seem to give up thenotion that it was justifiable to break the laws in the interests of American security (and there ismuch evidence to suggest it wasn’t, or even that false confessions were forced to bring the U.S.into war with Iraq). While these Republicans forget the values they once stood for, and ignore thelaws they themselves help put in place, they cannot ignore the deeper reasons of why our Founding Fathers forbid such heinous acts, or the repercussions allowing them will have on our society.” (Catherine Mullins, June 2, 2009).I purposely started off with a quote from the John Birch Society concerning the use of torture bythe Past Bush Administration in order to dispel any myths, reservations, or accusations that theUniversal condemnation of it by both the National and International community was strictlyleftwing oriented in nature. The decision to use torture was a Command Decision by the BushAdministration and as such, He and former Vice-President Dick Cheney as well as anyone elsethat was involved should be held personally accountable for their actions. “Torture is at the heartof the deadly politics of national security. The former vice-president, as able and ruthless a politician as the country has yet produced, appears convinced of this. For if torture really was anecessary evil in what Mr. Cheney calls the "tough, mean, dirty, nasty business" of "keeping thecountry safe," then it follows that its abolition at the hands of the Obama administration will putthe country once more at risk. It was Barack Obama, after all, who on his first full day as president issued a series of historic executive orders that closed the "black site" secret prisons
 
and halted the use of "enhanced interrogation techniques" that had been practiced there, and that provided that the offshore prison at Guantánamo would be closed within a year.” (April 30,2009).The GWOT (Global War on Terror) is a war against a ruthless, invisible, and bloodthirsty enemysuch as Al Qaeda, the Taliban, and other radical Islamic Terrorist. It is a war that not only theUnited States and its allies must be victorious, but also for the sake of Moderate Islamic stateswithin the area for regional stability. With that said though, the use of torture to coerceconfessions out of suspected terrorist has done more harm than good in that it has radicalizedmore susceptible youth easily indoctrinated by hardcore ideology from recruiters of Al Qaeda to join in the fight as they characterize as the Great Satan. These foot soldiers have come from suchcountries as Morocco, Tunisia, Algeria, Egypt, Syria, Pakistan, and Chechnya. Even as ruthlessand evil they have been and continues to be, it do not give Former President Bush and his croniesthe right to violate International Law as was as the case of the Geneva Convention inauthorizing torture as a weapon of opportunity.The Bush Administration knew the consequences and hazards in authorizing the use of torture inCIA Black Cell locations that involved various CIA, military, and third party contract personnelfrom such paramilitary organizations as Blackwater. In a recently declassified memo from theJustice Department to John Rizzo Acting General Counsel of the Central Intelligence Agency, thedanger of using Waterboarding as an interrogation technique were explicitly spelled out.“We find that the use of the waterboard constitutes a threat of imminent death. As you haveexplained the waterboard procedure to us, it creates in the subject the uncontrollable physiological sensation that subject is drowning. Although the procedure will be monitored by personnel with medical training and extensive SERE school experience with this procedure that
 
will ensure the subject’s mental and physical safety, the subject is not aware of any of these precautions. From the vantage point of any reasonable person undergoing this procedure in suchcircumstances, he would feel as if he is drowning at very moment of the procedure due to theuncontrollable physiological sensation he is experiencing. Thus, this procedure cannot be viewedas too uncertain to satisfy the imminence requirement. Accordingly, it constitutes a threat of imminent death and fulfills the predicate act requirement under the statute.” (U.S. Department of Justice, August 1, 2002).The contents of that memo brings me to the next point, the decision to give the directive for theuse of torture against known Al Qaeda operatives in order to coerce information from them was acommand decision issued by Executive Decree and as such violated the legal precedence of Command Responsibility or the Yamashita standard as ruled by the U.S. Supreme Court in reYamashita 327 U.S. 1 (1946). This ruling by the Supreme Court held the Japanese GeneralTomoyuki Yamashita was criminality liable for the actions of his soldiers in the torturing of bothU.S. and British prisoners of War, and civilians in their custody.“Command responsibility is anomission modeof individual criminal liability: the superior isresponsible for crimes committed by his subordinates and for failing to prevent or punish (asopposed to crimes he ordered).
 In Re Yamashita
before a United States Military Commission,General Yamashita became the first to be charged solely on the basis of responsibility for anomission. He was commanding the 14th Area Army of Japan in the Philippines when some of theJapanese troops engaged in atrocities against thousands of civilians. As commanding officer, hewas charged with "unlawfully disregarding and failing to discharge his duty as a commander tocontrol the acts of members of his command by permitting them to commit war crimes."(Answers.com).

You're Reading a Free Preview

Download
scribd
/*********** DO NOT ALTER ANYTHING BELOW THIS LINE ! ************/ var s_code=s.t();if(s_code)document.write(s_code)//-->