This letter is associated with the following article:
Letters
Thursday, December 4, 2008 12:00 AM

Why do Feinstein and Wyden sound much different on the torture issue now?

The two Senators spent the year emphatically insisting that the CIA's interrogators comply with the Army Field Manual. With Democrats in control, they're not so emphatic any longer

Read other letters about this article

  • Thursday, December 4, 2008 01:47 PM

    Once again I'll ask for that elusive practical answer: Would you have permitted the torture of one person if it would have prevented the Holocaust? Wbgonne

    No. Not even if you said stop WWI and WWII and all those deaths.

    I would never commit evil simply to try to change the future. (it would be trying to change the future according to your hypo)

    This sort of argument we all did in college after Jack Black and a quarter pound of weed. It is meaningless. It is like the first grader who was asking questions after his school practiced a "code red lock down drill"; he asked what would happen if the school was taken a mile in the air by a tornado. The teacher told him in that case he should pray, because everyone would be going to school heaven real quick.

Most Active Letters Threads

685

Obama's exceedingly familiar justifications for escalation

The "new" approach to Afghanistan touted by White House officials seems quite old
592

The commendably missing element from Obama's speech

There was no pretense that human rights is our goal, or the likely outcome, in escalating the war
543

The crazy, irrational beliefs of Muslims

Tom Friedman explains the real problem: stupid Muslims think the U.S. is about war and aggression.
440

The face of rotted Washington

Evan Bayh demands more debt-financed war - fought by others - while boasting that he's a stern "deficit hawk."
314

Yes, it's Obama's war now

An uninspiring speech sells a dubious policy, but progressives who feel betrayed have only themselves to blame

View all »

Letters Help

Currently in Salon