Andrew Sullivan is yet again calling the president a "war criminal." This time in response to today's New York Times article revealing that the Bush administration has subjected terror suspects captured abroad to 'severe' and 'brutal' interrogations.
And for what? The Times indicts the Bush administration for exposing terrorists captured abroad to "head-slapping, simulated drowning and frigid temperatures." Boo hoo. And why does the Times consider this such a dangerous policy? The reporters end the story with this quote, from former Navy lawyer John Hutson, which they must believe to be compelling:
"The problem is, once you've got a legal opinion that says such a technique is O.K., what happens when one of our people is captured and they do it to him? How do we protest then?" he asked.
As Jules Crittenden notes in response:
[The] article neglects to mention we are fighting an enemy that considers powerdrills into kneecaps and videotaped beheading of captives business as usual. That in fact, we have yet to face an enemy in the modern era that observes anything approaching the standards we do. Germany, Japan, North Korea, North Vietnam, Iran, Iraq. Disorientation, isolation, beatings, starvation, summary executions, torture â€¦ of the bone-breaking, organ-smashing, electrocuting, bloody-drawing variety.
That is, real torture. And it trivializes the seriousness of it to apply the word to "head-slapping, simulated drowning and frigid temperatures." It also trivializes the seriousness of real war crimes for someone to throw around the charge so promiscuously. A quick search of Sullivan's blog for "war criminal" turns up 34 hits, all of them referring to members of the Bush administration. No doubt hit number 35 will be Andrew's attack on the war criminals of the Worldwide Standard.