Try them all...

As all great countries, America can only be great as long as the underlying idea continues to invigorate its people and the world. There is little that can be as damaging to this country as Dick Cheney's insistence—and others of his kind—that torture is justifiable policy. He recently said: "I think it's very important that we have a clear understanding that what happened here was an honorable approach to defending the nation."

But Obama words struck true when he stated that such acts corrode the character of nation: '"I do believe that it is torture," Obama said of waterboarding—damage America's moral standing, he added. “Over time that corrodes what’s best in a people," the president said in a wide-ranging news conference. "It corrodes the character of a country."'

Torture and Cheney's foul advocacy of it corrodes spirit, character and future viability of the ship of state.

It is patriotic work to counter despicable positions that tarnish the good name of the country. This is not a game of “mere” opinions that should be left to linger in the air. Moreover, true cleansing of recent and widely publicized national escapades into the sordid methods of abuse and torture can only come if individuals are prosecuted for their guilt. Yes – it was a time of national emergency. But the point of morals is that we do not lay them aside whenever it suits the moment. Furthermore, the actions of the regime were not merely to pursue questionable acts and uses of force (which all states engage in when push comes to shove) but rather to justify and seek to enduringly reassess the country's political and moral position to obviously barbaric acts. It is not so much the actual acts themselves, so much as the attempt to instill their legitimacy in the political and ethical order which is most troubling. Can this be seen as an attempt to redefine the means of government over people as such? If it is legitimate to torture a foreigner because he might pose a threat, why not torture an American citizen because he might pose a threat? Was this the next step in a slippery slope to tyranny?

To make matters worse, the sheer notion that there is a trade-off between adhering to a moral code and the safety and security of the country is preposterous. In the long run, moral action is always the most expedient and favorable course of action. It is not for no reason that moral standards emerged in human society—way beyond divine mandate, ethics exist in the animal kingdom as well, and necessarily so. For all social behavior rests on the presupposition of good will. Nothing and no-one in the universe is purely interested in self-gratification (only the imaginings of the pseudo-economists, whose models brought the house down). In fact, humans and animals are willing to sacrifice for others and we will also engage in retribution to punish those that do not adhere to the code. Punishment (as Nietzsche well knew) serves to ensure that the moral character of a group continues in-force. Otherwise, any cowboy will let everyone else down for a moment's delight.

The pragmatically short-sighted and morally bankrupt perversion of the law should very clearly be condemned. And why should this not be moved to the courts? The same can be said for the previous administrations scare tactics to beat the public and media into submission—those fantasies of ticking bombs and tragedies that can only be averted if some heroic torturer waterboards an Arab. These are means that should not be tolerated by the public, and it would be refreshing to make clear that the US presidency is not a fiefdom where would-be warlords may do what they will with utter impunity. Such behavior has tarnished how the country is perceived, augmented ill-will around the world, and made the country less safe in so far as it gives others excuses to act vengefully. And beyond all these mere reasons – these policies are wrong...