THIS DEBATE IS TORTURE

I'm a little late to this discussion, but I wanted to say a couple things about Obama's decision not to punish those who committed acts of torture (on the condition that they were following the guidelines outlined by Bush's "Justice" Department) ...

Let me start off by saying that I generally agree with the anger expressed by many liberals regarding Obama's actions here. I mean, the argument that "they were just following orders" didn't fly for the Nazi's in WWII, and it shouldn't fly in this situation either. Heck, even the two likable soldiers in A Few Good Men didn't get off scot-free after Nicholson admitted to giving them a "code red" (I know, I have to relate everything to movies or television ... I can't help it). Anyway, I think the reason this excuse doesn't hold water is expressed pretty well by Kieth Olbermann's Special Comment on the subject.

Having said that, I have to admit to feeling a whole lot better after reading this story in the Washington Post regarding the intense debate in the Obama administration as to whether or not they should release those torture memos. I, of course, recommend reading the whole thing, but I would like to focus on the following quotes from the article:

Five CIA directors -- including Leon E. Panetta and his four immediate predecessors -- and Obama's top counterterrorism adviser had expressed firm opposition to the release of interrogation details in four "top secret" memos in which Bush administration lawyers sanctioned harsh tactics...

...Defense Secretary Robert M. Gates had said he supported the disclosures because he saw the information's release as inevitable and because the White House was willing to promise that CIA officers would not be prosecuted for any abuse. Joint Chiefs of Staff Chairman Mike Mullen sided with Gates.

Seated in Chief of Staff Rahm Emanuel's West Wing office with about a dozen of his political, legal and security appointees, Obama requested a mini-debate in which one official was chosen to argue for releasing the memos and another was assigned to argue against doing so. When it ended, Obama dictated on the spot a draft of his announcement that the documents would be released, while most of the officials watched, according to an official who was present. The disclosure happened the next day.

So, I had two main thoughts upon reading this:

1) Even though I disagree with Obama's decision not to prosecute those people who abused the detainees, I do think Obama deserves a great deal of credit for releasing those memos at all. That took courage in my opinion.

2) How cool is it that Obama handled the situation the way he did, and how happy are we that we have a president who approaches situations this way instead of simply "going with his gut" or some such nonsense.

Finally, I do still hold out hope that there will be justice and was heartened by Barack's later statement:

With respect to those who formulated those legal decisions, I would say that that is going to be more of a decision for the Attorney General within the parameters of various laws, and I don't want to prejudge that. I think that there are a host of very complicated issues involved there.

At the end of the day, aren't those really the guys we want behind bars anyway?