Torturing prisoners

Your editorial "Think Twice" I find troublesome. The editorial harshly condemns the congressional Democrats for trying to prosecute the policy makers who devised policy for torture under the Bush administration. It wisely discusses the political pitfalls of such a partisan trial to the Democrats and the President. The editorial states that "if they (congressional Democrats) are determined to subject Bush administration officials to an inquest that they should do so with an impartial panel..." The Dispatch Editorial page is missing the big picture by fixating on the partisan bloodsport which has consumed our country for the last 20 years.

Torturing prisoners is not just mere grist for the partisan blood sport mill like extra-marital affairs, bribery, graft and the other issues which rise and fall during our brief news cycles. The decision to torture prisoners, which came out of the oval office, is unprecedented in our over 200 year history. Washington refrained from torture despite the knowledge that if he lost he would be hanged by the British. FDR, despite fighting a Fascist military machine which was engulfing Europe also refrained from torture.

Although George W Bush clearly authorized these torture policies the details began to trickle out to the American people shortly thereafter. The first reports of torture were seen by all Americans when we viewed the shocking Abu Ghraib pictures 5 years ago. By the 2004 election we knew about the waterboarding and other techniques although more details were to follow. Bush was reelected with a clear electoral and popular vote majority. By 2006 the overall picture of the torture policy was clear and the congress was overhauled by the voters to Democratic majorities. Despite this there were few calls for serious accountability for the torture policy beyond a vocal minority. If the vast majority of Americans were adamantly opposed to torture, Bush would not have been reelected in 2004 or after 2004 overwhelming pressure would have been placed on congress to end the policy or pursue impeachment of the president. This did not occur. Although this policy w as initiated by the White House, our response, or lack thereof, made it the policy of the country and its citizens.

The harms of this policy have been many. The outrage to torture has galvanized our enemies. It has increased the burdens upon our soldiers in the field in the Middle East trying to build relations with friendly Muslims. It has weakened our long held position as a beacon of freedom to the world. It has sown doubt amongst our allies. It has increased the political cost to our allies when they stand shoulder to shoulder with us on security issues.

This issue can not be wished away. When our president chose to torture and we reluctantly followed, a line was crossed that had not been crossed before in our history. In order to resume our moral leadership position, this issue will need to be fully aired out. Prosecuting administration lawyers will not suffice. Only a nonpartisan truth commission will suffice. The names of Jon Yoo and Jay Bybee will be forgotten by the time Obama leaves office. Our decision to torture will still be remembered when my grandchildren have grandchildren. We may want to wish this episode away without any painful examination, but if we follow the "bury it" path, we will pay for it years later.

David Sharkis, Worthington

http://www.dispatch.com/live/content/editorials/stories/2009/04/30/webletters.html?sid=101