My family’s always been good at killing enemy combatants. Here’s why we didn’t torture them.

A couple of years ago, I’m not sure that I would have been too concerned with torturing foreign combatants. I mean, doing bad stuff to really bad people can’t be THAT bad, right? I guess that’s what most Americans think, because we approve the use of torture 2–1.

I figured being pro-whatever-it-takes-to-get-the-job-done should just be the default setting for any farm-raised, gun toting midwesterner. Here’s what changed my perspective.

After 9/11, the majority of anti-terrorist laws have not been applied to terrorists, but to drug dealers. Again, bad people who do really bad things. But, these laws, designed to be used against foreign combatants, has come home.

Which makes me ask…how long until we justify “advanced interrogation” against our own citizens? Probably not to the degree that we’ve used techniques against terrorists, but if we use our “terrorism” laws to prosecute drug dealers, then it stands to reason that the door could be open to use anti-terorism tactics against Americans for domestic crimes as well.

Throughout my family’s history, we’ve been pretty dang good at killing enemy combatants. From my Great Uncle Gerald (who killed Nazis in WWII and bled at the Battle of the Bulge) to my Great Grandfather (x5) William Poage, and ansesctor (possibly William’s Uncle) Robert Poage, who killed the British in the American Revolution. (Robert actually fought in the final battle of the war. William died about two years in.)

Killing is a terrible thing, but undoubtably less terrible than allowing genocide, or trans-Atlantic tyranny to rule over your entire life. And yes, I understand that both the drafted British Army and the German soldiers often weren’t there because they wanted to be. Sad, but usually necessary. Evil men cannot be left in power just because some men fight for them who might have been otherwise indifferent. But, there’s a difference in killing an enemy in the field, and chaining that same enemy to the floor, deprived of food, water and sleep for days.

Unfortunately, the “stakes have never been higher” argument just doesn’t hold water. When my ancestors fought the British, the Empire was guilty of killing more Americans on horrific prison ships in New York Harbor than in combat. Many of these prisoners weren’t even soldiers, but people accused of “aiding the rebels.” And yet, the Americans never flayed captured British soldiers alive, with the hope of gaining intelligence.

Yes, killing is killing, and it takes a lifelong toll on combatants who survive a war. My Great Uncle Gerald (from WWII) suffered from nightmares for the rest of his life. But I can’t imagine the mental toil he might have suffered had he torn a Nazi limb from limb.

Ironically, it’s a WWII German fighter pilot who might have taught this lesson best. On December 20th, 1943, American Charles Brown was attempting to make it back to a British airspace in a badly damaged bomber. A German plane, piloted by Hans Stigler, came up on Brown’s tail.

Instead of shooting down the American, Stigler escorted the fighter back to friendly airspace, pulled up alongside Brown’s cockpit, and saluted. Forty years later, after an extensive search by Brown, the two became lifelong friends.

When asked why he did not fire, Stigler pointed back to his early days of World War II, fighting in North Africa, when his commanding officer, Gustov Rodel, asked Stigler if he’d fire on an enemy in a parachute.

When Stigler replied “yes,” Rodel told him “if you fire upon a man in a parachute, I’ll shoot you myself.”

Rodel taught Stigler that the Rules of Engagement weren’t for the benefit of enemy, but the soldier himself. The rules were in place so that a soldier could go home, and live with himself when the war ended.

So that the soldier could stand before God with a clean conscious.

I can recount my family’s heroism with pride, because I come from a line of soldiers who were killers…but those killers followed the rules.