Andrew Sullivan's Tortured Logic

Andrew Sullivan has been writing quite a bit about how we've treated our prisoners in the war on terror. It's a worthy topic, no doubt. There's plenty of evidence that we've gone too far, breaking international rules as well as our own. The issue should be investigated and dealt with, but we must remember it's only a part of the war, and a minor part at that. (Sullivan is not much into investigating--he's already decided our problems, common enough in war time, can be laid directly at the feet of George Bush, Donald Rumsfeld and Alberto Gonzalez--verdict first, evidence later.)

Yet, Sullivan thinks we're giving others a reason to object to the war. As he puts it, "Guantanamo and Bagram continue to undermine our cause around the world." (The link is to more Muslim protests against alleged Koran desecration.) Mr. Sullivan, point blank: is the war, which you previously thought worth fighting, no longer so because of how we run our prisons? I have to believe you still think it's worth fighting. (If not, you've simply lost your sense of perspective.)

Therefore, you should realize that we're not giving others a true reason to attack the war, but rather, an excuse, a pretext. If our prisoner situation undermines our cause, it's actually because those against us either don't understand what's happening or simply oppose us anyway. (They had no trouble protesting in large numbers well before the present scandals. And odd that they protest us so easily and don't seem even slightly concerned at regular, vicious human rights abuses from our enemies.)

So it seems to me that those who support the war, while they certainly may write about our prisons, should not let the tail wag the dog. Many people around the world believe ugly and false things about both America and the war on terror. Why not try to help them see things differently? Shrugging your shoulders and saying they have a point because of what we've done isn't merely wrong, it's dishonest.