Richard Cohen’s tortured imagination
Dave Noon has already addressed the tired and misguided literary cliche — "Call him Ishmael" — that forms the lede of Richard Cohen’s new column on why torture opponents need to address the unanswered question of how to deal with the imaginary terrorist named Ishamel who lives in his brain. But the name is the ...
Dave Noon has already addressed the tired and misguided literary cliche -- "Call him Ishmael" -- that forms the lede of Richard Cohen's new column on why torture opponents need to address the unanswered question of how to deal with the imaginary terrorist named Ishamel who lives in his brain. But the name is the least of it:
Dave Noon has already addressed the tired and misguided literary cliche — "Call him Ishmael" — that forms the lede of Richard Cohen’s new column on why torture opponents need to address the unanswered question of how to deal with the imaginary terrorist named Ishamel who lives in his brain. But the name is the least of it:
No one can possibly believe that America is now safer because of the new restrictions on enhanced interrogation and the subsequent appointment of a special prosecutor. The captured terrorist of my fertile imagination, assuming he had access to an Internet cafe, knows about the special prosecutor. He knows his interrogator is under scrutiny. What person under those circumstances is going to spill his beans?
Ah yes, the interrogator must build rapport with the captured terrorist. That might work, but it would take time. It could take a lot of time. Building rapport is clearly the preferred method, but the terrorist is going to know all about it. He will bide his time. How much time do we have?
As long as we’re playing this game, I’m going to imagine my own terrorist — call him Queequeg — who knows the clock is running and he only has to stand up to interrogation for a short time, thus rendering torture ineffective. As fun as this is, perhaps constructing hypothetical scenarios isn’t the best way to design interrogation policy.
There’s also this:
I am torn between my desire for absolute security and my abhorrence of torture.
Absolute security? That’s the trade-off? Well things certainly are straightforward in Richard Cohen’s imaginary war on terror. Why do I get the feeling that if Cohen would see the logic in nuking Imaginationland?
Joshua Keating was an associate editor at Foreign Policy. Twitter: @joshuakeating
More from Foreign Policy
Saudi-Iranian Détente Is a Wake-Up Call for America
The peace plan is a big deal—and it’s no accident that China brokered it.
The U.S.-Israel Relationship No Longer Makes Sense
If Israel and its supporters want the country to continue receiving U.S. largesse, they will need to come up with a new narrative.
Putin Is Trapped in the Sunk-Cost Fallacy of War
Moscow is grasping for meaning in a meaningless invasion.
How China’s Saudi-Iran Deal Can Serve U.S. Interests
And why there’s less to Beijing’s diplomatic breakthrough than meets the eye.
Sign up for Morning Brief
Foreign Policy’s flagship daily newsletter with what’s coming up around the world today. Delivered weekdays.
By submitting your email, you agree to the Privacy Policy and Terms of Use and to receive email correspondence from us. You may opt out at any time.
