5 ms·

It was an honest mistake and arresting CIA officers for making a mistake in their job, one which they corrected and admitted to, would hardly be without implica

by aneth 16y ago

It was an honest mistake and arresting CIA officers for making a mistake in their job, one which they corrected and admitted to, would hardly be without implications.

glenstein 16y ago
Being kidnapped, flown to a prison for five months and possibly tortured, possibly sodomized is more than a "mistake." And merely admitting to having committed a human rights violation is not a substitute for following due process of law. Threatening a country with "implications" for wanting to bring the people to justice who wrongfully detained one of their citizens does not make the United States look good. Plus there are other examples, like Hilary Clinton ordering diplomats to collect private information on the U.N. Secretary General, which was likely a violation of international law. This does not make the U.S. look good.
- aneth 16y ago
  As helium said, my point is not that there is a perfect record. What is not there - a sinister plot to monopolize the world's oil, destroy Muslim society, or assassinate world leaders - is more important. That said, a broader point is in order - I don't think anyone expects perfect adherence to "international law" by the USA. Despite the weight of the phrase "international law," the actual concept is deeply ambiguous. There is no fully baked world government, so "international law" is not a direct moral parallel to domestic law in a sovereign state. As much as the UN can do for the world, it is not a proper law making body, it's not accountable to it's constituents or fairly representative of the world, and some of its most powerful members don't even represent their own constituents. It's a rough hack at providing a venue for diplomacy and world order - not a supremely powerful entity as many people would wish it to be. The phrase "violation of international law" tastes meaty, but it's just tofu.
  - jwhite 16y ago
    > I don't think anyone expects perfect adherence to "international law" by the USA. > The phrase "violation of international law" tastes meaty, but it's just tofu. Good and valid points, but mildly tongue-in-cheek my response to your first assertion is "I do!" I'm not an American, but I deeply appreciate what America has done to move the whole world towards a system that values innate human rights, the rule of law, and representative democracy [1], so when America behaves in a way that contravenes its own publicly stated values I am genuinely disappointed -- even though America owes me nothing. I agree that "international law" can't be easily defined (and therefore can't be adhered to), and it is not always easy to judge the moral value of an act, particularly without the benefit of hindsight (one of the best known examples being the decision to use nuclear weapons on Japan), but there are other cases where it is clear. If America clearly acts against its values, it weakens its credibility when it tries to promote them to the rest of the world. We can of course distinguish between America and Americans -- admitting mistakes and punishing those who commit them is the way that America can deal with them and keep its credibility with respect to its values in tact. The case of the abduction of the German citizen seems on the surface to be a fairly clear case where America should allow due process in a friendly democracy to take its course. But perhaps there are other considerations that I don't know about... either way I'm grateful to wikileaks. [1] However imperfect our democracies are, the current alternatives are a lot worse, and I'd prefer to be optimistic that we'll discover even better methods to govern people in future.
    - bh42 16y ago
      Christopher Reeve delivering the line "Truth, Justice and the American Way" as Super Man is one of the defining memories of my childhood. I worry that once Americans become cynical and scared enough to stop aspiring to that line, it will then be a short trip to a fascist or pseudo-fascist state. Naive? Perhaps, but if you don't have high and lofty ideals, then what is to be the counter weight to doing everything and anything in the name of safety?
      - anamax 16y ago
        > I worry that once Americans become cynical and scared enough to stop aspiring to that line, it will then be a short trip to a fascist or pseudo-fascist state. Ah yes, "fascism is falling on America" > Naive? Perhaps, but if you don't have high and lofty ideals, then what is to be the counter weight to doing everything and anything in the name of safety? but it always seems to land somewhere else (typically Europe). Fascism lands where it is like what has been before and the US hasn't been govt-authoritarian (yet).
- anamax 16y ago
  > Plus there are other examples, like Hilary Clinton ordering diplomats to collect private information on the U.N. Secretary General, which was likely a violation of international law. This does not make the U.S. look good. Actually, collecting such information makes HC look "not stupid". The UN represents govts, most of which are corrupt bastards killing their citizens. The UN aids and abets such activities. You can't blackmail an honest man.
rdtsc 16y ago
Just wondering, do you honestly believe that or do you not believe that, but are just patriotic and want the CIA to look good? Well it is a rhetorical question, I can guess how you'll answer it...
- aneth 16y ago
  Neither. Would it make sense that they did this intentionally?

by aneth 16y ago

It was an honest mistake and arresting CIA officers for making a mistake in their job, one which they corrected and admitted to, would hardly be without implications.

glenstein 16y ago

Being kidnapped, flown to a prison for five months and possibly tortured, possibly sodomized is more than a "mistake." And merely admitting to having committed a human rights violation is not a substitute for following due process of law. Threatening a country with "implications" for wanting to bring the people to justice who wrongfully detained one of their citizens does not make the United States look good. Plus there are other examples, like Hilary Clinton ordering diplomats to collect private information on the U.N. Secretary General, which was likely a violation of international law. This does not make the U.S. look good.

aneth 16y ago
As helium said, my point is not that there is a perfect record. What is not there - a sinister plot to monopolize the world's oil, destroy Muslim society, or assassinate world leaders - is more important. That said, a broader point is in order - I don't think anyone expects perfect adherence to "international law" by the USA. Despite the weight of the phrase "international law," the actual concept is deeply ambiguous. There is no fully baked world government, so "international law" is not a direct moral parallel to domestic law in a sovereign state. As much as the UN can do for the world, it is not a proper law making body, it's not accountable to it's constituents or fairly representative of the world, and some of its most powerful members don't even represent their own constituents. It's a rough hack at providing a venue for diplomacy and world order - not a supremely powerful entity as many people would wish it to be. The phrase "violation of international law" tastes meaty, but it's just tofu.
- jwhite 16y ago
  > I don't think anyone expects perfect adherence to "international law" by the USA. > The phrase "violation of international law" tastes meaty, but it's just tofu. Good and valid points, but mildly tongue-in-cheek my response to your first assertion is "I do!" I'm not an American, but I deeply appreciate what America has done to move the whole world towards a system that values innate human rights, the rule of law, and representative democracy [1], so when America behaves in a way that contravenes its own publicly stated values I am genuinely disappointed -- even though America owes me nothing. I agree that "international law" can't be easily defined (and therefore can't be adhered to), and it is not always easy to judge the moral value of an act, particularly without the benefit of hindsight (one of the best known examples being the decision to use nuclear weapons on Japan), but there are other cases where it is clear. If America clearly acts against its values, it weakens its credibility when it tries to promote them to the rest of the world. We can of course distinguish between America and Americans -- admitting mistakes and punishing those who commit them is the way that America can deal with them and keep its credibility with respect to its values in tact. The case of the abduction of the German citizen seems on the surface to be a fairly clear case where America should allow due process in a friendly democracy to take its course. But perhaps there are other considerations that I don't know about... either way I'm grateful to wikileaks. [1] However imperfect our democracies are, the current alternatives are a lot worse, and I'd prefer to be optimistic that we'll discover even better methods to govern people in future.
  - bh42 16y ago
    Christopher Reeve delivering the line "Truth, Justice and the American Way" as Super Man is one of the defining memories of my childhood. I worry that once Americans become cynical and scared enough to stop aspiring to that line, it will then be a short trip to a fascist or pseudo-fascist state. Naive? Perhaps, but if you don't have high and lofty ideals, then what is to be the counter weight to doing everything and anything in the name of safety?
    - anamax 16y ago
      > I worry that once Americans become cynical and scared enough to stop aspiring to that line, it will then be a short trip to a fascist or pseudo-fascist state. Ah yes, "fascism is falling on America" > Naive? Perhaps, but if you don't have high and lofty ideals, then what is to be the counter weight to doing everything and anything in the name of safety? but it always seems to land somewhere else (typically Europe). Fascism lands where it is like what has been before and the US hasn't been govt-authoritarian (yet).
anamax 16y ago
> Plus there are other examples, like Hilary Clinton ordering diplomats to collect private information on the U.N. Secretary General, which was likely a violation of international law. This does not make the U.S. look good. Actually, collecting such information makes HC look "not stupid". The UN represents govts, most of which are corrupt bastards killing their citizens. The UN aids and abets such activities. You can't blackmail an honest man.

rdtsc 16y ago

Just wondering, do you honestly believe that or do you not believe that, but are just patriotic and want the CIA to look good? Well it is a rhetorical question, I can guess how you'll answer it...

aneth 16y ago
Neither. Would it make sense that they did this intentionally?