The Costs of War -- 9/28/06
A couple of things to note with regard to the Iraq war.
First, as I noted below in discussing the compromise between the White House and the Senate on the interrogation bill, it looks like Pres. Bush is getting much of what he wants, including quick passage of the bill so that he can sign it before Republican congresspeople go home to campaign against any Democrats who vote against it. The House voted on the bill yesterday and the Senate, having voted down Democratic amendments to beef up detainee rights, is set to do so today. (Charles Babbington, House Approves Bill on Detainees, 9/28/06)
An editorial in the more liberal New York Times is solidly against the bill but so is one in the usually-supportive-of-the-Iraqi-war Washington Post.
Andrew Sullivan, a conservative libertarian critic of a war he once supported, has a link on his blog to a YouTube of military, religious, and intelligence experts testifying before Congress on the harmful effects of the behavior that this bill will allow the military and the CIA to engage in. Sullivan’s blog is kind of eccentric since he covers a variety of issues, but it is the go-to place for anti-torture links and debate on the subject. He often gives a hearing to his critics, so it is not just one-sided (though there is no doubt about where he stands.)
Jonah Goldberg, in the conservative National Review Online, is one of Sullivan’s critics, claiming that he fails to consider some of the reasons why we engage in coercive interrogation techniques and thinks we are too quick to call them torture. (When Push Comes to Torture, NRO, 9/27/06)
As you read this stuff, think about the issues raised in Chapter 5 of KTR (p. 157) on the trade-offs between security and freedom. Thomas Hobbes showed what kind of government fearful people would choose – a Leviathan that protects them but demands all their rights in exchange. Anything short of that demands debate about how much freedom, how much security. By urging the quick passage of this bill as an election ploy and threatening to stop all interrogations if it isn’t passed, Bush is silencing the debate that should accompany any decision to reduce the liberties America values. Even Goldberg concludes his essay with these words:
“In the recent debate over torture, everybody decided to kick the can down the road on what torture is and isn’t. This argument will be forced on us again, no matter how much we try to avoid it. We’ll be sorry we didn’t take the debate more seriously when we had the chance.”
~~~
Another issue to follow today is the partial release by Pres. Bush, yesterday, of the NIE (National Intelligence Estimate), a report prepared by the US intelligence community that basically says that the Iraq war has had a negative effect on US safety. (Mark Mazzetti, Backing Policy, President Issues Terror Estimate, 9/26/06)
The report, issued in April, was leaked to the New York Times last weekend. Amid calls from Democrats that the report should be made public, Bush declassified a few pages of it, and now the two parties are both trying to spin the results their way. Most analysis seems to support the Democratic contention that the report paints a grim picture of the war and the impact it has had in breeding new supporters of terror. Here is the New York Times’ take, but you can find similar views in the rest of the mainstream media: David Sanger, Study Doesn’t Share Bush’s Optimism on Terror Fight, 9/26/06)
If Republican members of Congress plan to go home and campaign on Democrats softness on terrorism, the Democrats are headed home to complain that the Republicans’ policies are increasing it. Hold on to your hats and get ready for a wild ride to Election Day. The NYT has a nice piece on the increasingly negative campaign commercials that candidates are airing this season: Adam Nagourney, Theme of Campaign Ads: Don’t Be Nice, 9/26/06