Tyler+Stark+RP+Post+7

Working Title: The Morality and Effectiveness of Enhanced Interrogation

According to Andrew Sullivan the interrogation tactics used by the Bush administration are equivalent to those used by the Nazi's during WWII. He also points out that the defense used by the Bush and Nazi leadership are eerily similar. Oddly though he says "I'm not" when responding to possible accusations of putting the Bush administration on the same level as Hitler. Although oddly in his closing he goes on to say that the "techniques are indistinguishable" and that they were "clearly war-crimes in 1948." To me the way Sullivan spends the whole article detailing the similarity of the administrations and their tactics when working with prisoners and then right at the end claims that they are not similar weakens his point. People clearly know the leap he is trying to make and the ending facade just makes him appear weak and not completely dedicated to his position. In closing I think he makes a weak argument simply because he is not willing to follow through with what appears to be his premise, and could've argued more effectively against the methods by not ever bringing up Hitler because that's such a hard and sensitive argument to make.

Works Cited: Sullivan, Andrew. ""Verschärfte Vernehmung"" //The Atlantic //. Atlantic Media Company, 29 May 2007. Web. 04 June 2014.