THE DIFFERENCE BETWEEN TORTURE AND INTERROGATION

Every so often someone on a Congressional committee or subcommittee gets on a soapbox to wail about US forces (military or intelligence) torturing captured enemies of our country. But all the lawyer-speak in the US Code – “cruel, unusual and/or degrading treatment” - is nebulous, ephemeral and ambiguous.

Common-sense Americans know what torture is:
- Having sharp objects (like pins or needles or toothpicks or nails) driven under your fingernails or toe-nails – that’s torture;
- Having your fingernails or toe-nails yanked out by force – that’s torture;
- Having your tongue burned with hot instruments or cut out – that’s torture;
- Having your eyes blinded or cut out – that’s torture;
- Having your ears cut off – that’s torture;
- Having your head cut off with a sword – that’s torture;
- Having electrical shock administered to your private parts or your body – that’s torture;
- Being incarcerated under conditions like the French used at Devil’s Island – that’s torture;
- Being treated like captured Americans were treated by the Japanese in WWII, the North Koreans during the Korean War, the North Vietnamese during the Vietnam conflict, and other enemies at various times and places whose humanity is questionable at best - that’s torture;

I could go on and on, but I think you get the idea. On the other hand, some of the forms of interrogation our defenders use to obtain information from captured enemies may not, and should not, be enjoyable. No sworn enemy of our nation ever ‘gave up the goods’ after we gave them cookies and milk and then asked, “Please – just tell us what we need to know.” It just doesn’t work that way.

If our Congressional leaders were as eager to protect our citizens and our country as they are our enemies, I for one, would feel a lot more secure.