Gregg, Sununu dead wrong on torture vote

In less than a year, the United States will have a new president and a chance to begin undoing the harm done by President Bush's eight years in office. The damage is extensive.

The nation is mired in two interminable wars, the economy is in recession, the environment degraded, faith in government minimal, the national debt enormous, and America's standing in the world vastly diminished. Nothing has done more to erode good will than the Bush administration's embrace of torture as an ostensible means of gathering information.

New Hampshire Sens. Judd Gregg and John Sununu, in voting against a bill that would have prohibited water-boarding and other forms of interrogation historically considered torture, are complicit in what should be seen as crimes against humanity. Shamefully, they were joined in their opposition by Sen. John McCain, a man who knows about torture and its lack of efficacy first hand. His vote smacked of political expedience and hypocrisy.

The bill banning water-boarding passed the Senate on a 51-45 vote. Less than a week later Bush vetoed it, calling the use of harsh interrogation techniques not sanctioned in the Army Field Manual "one of the most valuable tools in the war on terror." His position is disputed by scores of generals, admirals and history itself.

Torture is a "method of the lazy, the stupid and the falsely tough," says retired admiral and Franklin Pierce Law Center President John Hutson. Since torture victims will eventually say anything to stop the pain, it fails to get results. Torture dehumanizes and makes war criminals of the torturers. It increases the likelihood that America's troops, if captured, will be tortured, if only in retribution. It fuels the hatred that breeds terrorism. It degrades the United States in the eyes of the world and in its own eyes. It makes us less as a people.

The fantasy used to peddle torture to people frightened for themselves or, as we believe of Gregg and Sununu, fearful of making a decision that could cost American lives, is that of the ticking time bomb and the terrorist who knows where it is.

The bomb in the scenario could kill thousands or perhaps millions. Torturing the terrorist with simulated drowning could save countless lives in the fantasy, which made it, Vice President Dick Cheney said, "a no brainer" for him.

The moral equation may seem clear - great pain for one versus death for many. But two flaws cancel the argument. Despite claims that future attacks have been prevented by using harsh interrogation techniques, no such "ticking time bomb" circumstance has ever been documented.

The second flaw is one of logic. A captive terrorist with the power to stop the pain by revealing a bomb that would kill millions is almost certainly willing, like the soldiers of most nations, to die to see the mission completed. And in this case, the captive faces not a return to civilian life for talking but death later or life imprisonment.

Congress will get a chance to overturn Bush's veto. That won't happen unless senators like Gregg and Sununu leave their Jack Bauer, Rambo world and accept the reality that torture is not just counterproductive but morally repugnant.

We urge Gregg and Sununu to live up to the ideals that once made this nation an exemplar and reject torture by voting to overturn Bush's veto. If not, the task will be left to a new president - and new members of what we hope is a morally responsible Congress.

Monitor Staff