These are all terms that in recent years have become increasingly common vocabulary in the area of transnational issues, namely terrorism. As Congressional panels and hearings begin, looking into practices of the last administration of 'acquiring' vital intelligence, a tough scenario is presented to society.
On the one hand, citizens demand, and have a right to a continuous way of life. They want to be safe and secure in the knowledge that their governments are protecting them, their quality of life, and American ideals from external aggressions and attacks. The common adages of 'do whatever it takes' and 'no matter the cost' come to mind. Has the public involuntarily granted the government carte blanche in order to remain safe and secure? There are calls for justice, investigations, prosecution. And these calls may very well be justified, but it could be seen as an attack on those whom the public empowered to protect the population.
On the other hand, one could understand an basic conflict between the American ideals being protected, and the methods employed to protect them. Some may ask, 'what is the point of protecting those ideals we hold dear, that maintain our comfortable way of life, if in the process the methods employed go in face of those same ideals?'
It is a situation that will, undoubtedly, be a prime matter during the first years of the current administration, while memories of the past are still fresh in the minds of the public, advocacy and lobby groups, and members of Congress.
I finally made it over to your blog, WCH Miller.
ReplyDeleteThis is a very relevant topic today, especially as we face a determined enemy who will stop at nothing to kill or maim in order to drive home a point. Soldiers on the battlefield can find this intimidating when an enemy will stop at nothing, regardless of the dangers facing him or her. To achieve this, even children become “weapons” and are thus expendable.
However, one cannot acquire information/intelligence from a prisoner by offering him a cup of tea. That said, excessive use of force will only let a prisoner tell you what he thinks you want to hear as long as he does not have to take more pain.
It therefore becomes a very fine line in acquiring real information and getting a lot of made-up information, simply to have the interrogation end.
Society in general do not know much about the threat they are faced with – apart from what the state wants them to know. This in itself (I believe) can lead to a lot of misinformation being pumped out by the opposition and believed by the people. In turn, this creates confusion, doubt and even concern at what measures are being used to either stop the enemy or gain intelligence.
Perhaps the state should inform the people more of what is truly happening and ensure that those who are tasked with acquiring information/intelligence are correctly trained to do their job. If not, this will continually raise doubts as to how info is gained and open the door to a lot of negative publicity.
Rgds,
Eeben