I am no historian. I have taken some history classes but I confess that whatever American history I know comes mostly from self-study.
I am no lawyer. I don't think I've ever taken any classes regarding the law. What I know about the law and the Constitution I again picked up through self-study.
I like to consider myself a reality-based liberal Democrat who believes in facts, despises hypocrisy, and tries my best to come to position regarding political issues after rigorous thought. I am certainly a staunch Democrat and, despite my best efforts to be fair-minded, I often find myself driven and blinded by partisanship.
Having said that, I ask these following questions with an open-mind, an open-spirit, and open-heart. I am open to being persuaded one way or the other. But ultimately, I am hoping that others here will help me debate some issues that I sense might, just MIGHT have relevance to this debate about torture.
Most here at DailyKos would probably agree that Lincoln and FDR are two of our greatest Presidents, if not our two greatest. Nevertheless, in the course of their respectively fighting the Civil War and WWII, both took actions that I understand were considered gross violations of civil liberties and the Constitution: Lincoln suspended the writ of habeas corpus and FDR forcibly relocated Japanese-Americans to internment camps. Neither Lincoln nor FDR were ever charged or prosecuted for these violations. Of course, both Presidents died before each of their wars ended, so we will never know whether their acts would have been investigated and whether such investigations might have led to their or those in their governments being prosecuted, perhaps even impeached.
Here are my questions: do you guys believe Lincoln and FDR and those in their governments deserved to be prosecuted for these gross violations? Are the nature of Lincoln's and FDR's misdeeds of a nature wholly different than those of Bush and his government and therefore the comparison is not justified? If you do not think Lincoln and FDR deserved to be prosecuted, is it because their legacies were on balance far greater than Bush's? Was torture under the Bush administration worse because it was a war crime? I'm not sure if Lincoln's and FDR's actions were considered war crimes. Perhaps because Lincoln and FDR were on the winning side, the victors are not subjected to prosecutions the same way the Japanese were prosecuted after WWII for acts of torture. Then again - and I say this as a poor student of history - did not Lincoln proclaim "with malice toward none" and as a result he did not seek vengeance against the rebellious, even treasonous Confederate soldiers? Historian Lee Kennett, in a book on Sherman, wrote:
"[H]ad the Confederates somehow won, had their victory put them in position to bring their chief opponents before some sort of tribunal, they would have found themselves justified . . . in stringing up President Lincoln and the entire Union high command for violation of the laws of war, specifically for waging war against noncombatants."
I'm assuming Lincoln could have done the same, but he didn't for the good of the nation. Why is our situation different from the that era?
I do not ask these questions to be snarky or accusatory. I ask them because I believe in consistency. I most definitely believe all documents pertaining to torture should be released. I support the study of what led to the decision by the Bush administration to torture. It appears there is a good argument for Jay Bybee to be removed from the bench. I am even open to being persuaded that certain people in the Bush administration deserve to be prosecuted if the evidence warrants it.
I understand the vehemence with which many argue that some in the Bush administration deserve to be held legally accountable because no one in our country is above the law. I also understand that some believe that without prosecutions laws again could be broken and the Constitution could be violated once again if we as a country face future security threats. But I also want to feel assured that going that extra step - prosecution and such - has precedence and that that is the only path we must follow to right these wrongs and feel our country is morally cleansed.