Reply #23: It is one of the most difficult debate in a modern society, but I do not think the

[Mass]

debate should be about torture, at least on a progressive blog where we should all agree torture should not be permitted.

However, some people here have said that everybody down the food chain should be judged if they had followed the orders of their governemnt (remember it is NOT about following the order of a lieutenant or captain becoming beserk here). So, the real question is the following: when is it OK for a public servant or a soldier to refuse to carry an order when he thinks this order is wrong, but is still in accordance with the law. Now, I find this a difficult and provoking question.

Now, we are talking about the Geneva Convention, there are two types of crimes concerning the Geneva Convention, or at least two types of circumstances:

- a soldier (or an unit) on his own does something that is against the Convention.

- a country does something that is against the Convention.

While in the first part, it is OK to sue the individuals, what should be done in the second case? Now, is the US going to sue one by one every single person who took part in an act of torture (which is pretty much the implication of what some people here have been asking here) or are we going to deal with the people who were in charge (I am not saying one or two people, but I am not saying the guy on the ground who was told his government had said some techniques were OK. and I am not saying that some people who order to torture the same people 200 times should not have their acts reviewed. In fact, nobody is saying acts should not be reviewed -- well, nobody on our side at least).

Sorry, but some of the things that were said here make me angry because it is so easy to agitate big principles when you are safe behind a keyboard, but when you are on the ground, following orders that you believe are lawful, it is a different question.

Consider that from coming from somebody who grew up in Europe in the 60s -- I pretty much grew up with the notion of who should be tried and who should not --, and have known people who had to go through these dilemma. Sorry, I do not find that that easy (and not necessarily comparable with the situation nowadays in the US). Some of the choices were difficult, and I can fully understand that some of the choices made by people on the ground were difficult as well.