George Bush: no escaping torture charges

[stalkervision]

Sooner or later, Bush will step into a country where he will be prosecuted for authorising the abuses of the 'war on terror'

http://www.guardian.co.uk/comm.../torture-george-bush (http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/cifamerica/2011/feb/08/torture-george-bush)

The United States is under an absolute obligation under the Convention Against Torture (CAT) to investigate, prosecute and punish torturers. And yet, here was the former president of the United States admitting he authorised torture. And nothing.

[GoToAway]

And the irony is that this torture produced absolutely no credible information. It was all for naught.

[Airmail109]

I heard they got Osama with information gained by torture. Anyway it will come back to haunt the USA because these rules are in place so squaddies don't end up getting captured and having their ******** hooked up to a 240v power source. One day it will happen to American troops and the American government will bleat and whine about it.

[WTE_Galway]

Originally posted by Aimail101:
I heard they got Osama with information gained by torture. Anyway it will come back to haunt the USA because these rules are in place so squaddies don't end up getting captured and having their ******** hooked up to a 240v power source. One day it will happen to American troops and the American government will bleat and whine about it.

now, now ... next you will be accusing the US of having a Jihad-like attitude, allowing war and torture in the name of truth, justice and the American version of God http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_wink.gif ... naughty, naughty ... tut, tut, tut

[GoToAway]

Originally posted by Aimail101:
I heard they got Osama with information gained by torture. You heard wrong. It has been confirmed by multiple sources that torture was not a part of the equation.


Anyway it will come back to haunt the USA because these rules are in place so squaddies don't end up getting captured and having their ******** hooked up to a 240v power source. One day it will happen to American troops and the American government will bleat and whine about it. No question about that.
But there will be much wringing of hands when a boy from Kansas gets his fingers cut off because, after all, "how could that happen?" http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_rolleyes.gif

[Airmail109]

Originally posted by WTE_Galway:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by Aimail101:
I heard they got Osama with information gained by torture. Anyway it will come back to haunt the USA because these rules are in place so squaddies don't end up getting captured and having their ******** hooked up to a 240v power source. One day it will happen to American troops and the American government will bleat and whine about it.

now, now ... next you will be accusing the US of having a Jihad-like attitude, allowing war and torture in the name of truth, justice and the American version of God http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_wink.gif ... naughty, naughty ... tut, tut, tut </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

Don't get me wrong, I mostly feel sorry for the poor 19 year old Kansas lad that GoToAway mentioned that will get it one day because the Geneva convention had gone **** up. Due the American government playing a small part in eroding said convention.

Whilst I think some Americans liken it to a holy war and I think the whole war on terrorism is a bit of a hypocritical farce, I'd much rather have Americans running the planet than see more Middle Eastern nut****s gaining strength. Afghanistan either needs massive investment in it's economy and military infrastructure or ISAF troops there keeping the head cases pinned between the ISAF forces and the Pakistanis. Whilst I hate the past 50/60 years of American interventionism and empire building, given their current situation I don't think there is anything else they could do.

Imagine if they pull out of Afghanistan tomorrow? Do you really reckon the bearded nutjobs in Europe, Yemen and Afghanistan are going to suddenly renounce violence. Perhaps the solution is a more intelligence lead approach with heavier investment in infiltration of groups residing in say Yemen and Afghanistan coupled with heavier investment in drones and special forces that can be used to assassinate certain characters we do not like. I don't know, the whole dilemma is mind bogling.

[jarink]

Originally posted by GoToAway:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by Aimail101:
I heard they got Osama with information gained by torture. You heard wrong. It has been confirmed by multiple sources that torture was not a part of the equation. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

The information about the courier started flowing from Gitmo and other places around 2003. So, Bush got a lot of the information that ultimately led to UBL's death.

[Ba5tard5word]

Bush certainly did do a good job at not catching OBL by diverting our attention to other things, like Iraq.

[Pirschjaeger]

I suspect Stalker wears a Casio. http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/shady.gif

I'll go fill the bucket. http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-mad.gif

Edit: I'll go get the popcorn. (http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/cifamerica/2011/jan/06/george-bush-torture?INTCMP=ILCNETTXT3487)

[GoToAway]

Originally posted by jarink:
The information about the courier started flowing from Gitmo and other places around 2003. So, Bush got a lot of the information that ultimately led to UBL's death. It's so sad that you view things like this like a sports match in which there's a winner and a loser.

"Bush" gave an (unlawful) order (that lead to the torture of hundreds of innocent people.)

"He" didn't get a shred of evidence about anything.

Nor did Obama fly into Pakistan and put a round through bin Laden's head.

Grow up. These are politicians. This isn't a game. It's a situation that has literally ruined the lives of millions of people. It doesn't matter which "side" you root for--we've all lost.

[PhantomKira]

Originally posted by GoToAway:
This isn't a game. It's a situation that has literally ruined the lives of millions of people. It doesn't matter which "side" you root for--we've all lost.

+1

[M_Gunz]

We could also be experiencing sporadic, semi-regular terrorist attacks, just as one possible alternative.

There's this thing about fighting clean against an enemy who fights dirty. The clean fighter almost always loses.

[Airmail109]

Originally posted by M_Gunz:
We could also be experiencing sporadic, semi-regular terrorist attacks, just as one possible alternative.

There's this thing about fighting clean against an enemy who fights dirty. The clean fighter almost always loses.

Yeah but if your trying to be the leader of the free world and lecturing China on human rights abuses then you should lead by example.

[bun-bun195333]

Yippppeeeee - political threads are legal again...

Here is my favorite Bollywood clip (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Vr6swr0_10Q)

and this is what my desktop looks like right now....

http://macsdev.files.wordpress.com/2008/03/space-desktop.png

[bun-bun195333]

but I'm thinking about switching to this one...

http://1.bp.blogspot.com/-jbt1GaYNp6A/TaGl82a-sVI/AAAAAAAAI6s/UFt3TcbKyxg/s1600/Mac%2BSpace%2BDesktop%2BApple%2BCosmic%2BPictures-jagodunya-unique-wallpapers-desktop-wallpapers-1920-latest-2011-horro-wallpapers-widescreen-wallpapers-windows-7-vista-xp-vector-ipod-apple-buildings-roads-mac.jpeg

[bun-bun195333]

this must be a very big lake to float a planet...

http://www.more-wallpaper-images.info/img/1303589191-Desktop-wallpapers22.jpg

[Von_Rat]

Originally posted by stalkervision:
Sooner or later, Bush will step into a country where he will be prosecuted for authorising the abuses of the 'war on terror'



.


aint never going to happen.

any country that is close ally of the US, or is strong enough to deter american military reprisals for such an act, will have to much to lose from lost trade or other economic sanctions which would surely follow.

note: im totally against torture in any form. imo water boarding WAS torture.

[WTE_Galway]

Originally posted by Von_Rat:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by stalkervision:
Sooner or later, Bush will step into a country where he will be prosecuted for authorising the abuses of the 'war on terror'



.


aint never going to happen.

any country that is close ally of the US, or is strong enough to deter american military reprisals for such an act, will have to much to lose from lost trade or other economic sanctions which would surely follow.

note: im totally against torture in any form. imo water boarding WAS torture. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>


meh ... he can probably just plead whatever amendment exempts you from prosecution on the grounds of stupidity http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_wink.gif

[Pudfark]

You guys have a point here....America should have skipped the torture...and gone to the Nuclear Arsenal...it would have been a lot cheaper. Not to mention the positive effects of global warming and a marked reduction in the price of gas...

Definitely a missed opportunity...ya think?

When your enemy says there are no rules...there are no rules...

Y'all feel free to throw "Roberts Rules of Order" at the problem...I wish you well in that endeavor...

[raaaid]

Originally posted by bun-bun195333:
this must be a very big lake to float a planet...

http://www.more-wallpaper-images.info/img/1303589191-Desktop-wallpapers22.jpg

hey you could get that effect photographing the moon on the horizont on the sea with a big zoom

i know space pictures are fake so may be those are real http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_smile.gif

[stalkervision]

You have to wonder a little about our country when we justify attacking other countries with dictators because they torture people and then we do it our own selves when we believe it suits our purposes.

[MB_Avro_UK]

Hi all,

The moral high ground is easy to occupy when you're not dying in a trench.

Example. As a result of torture inflicted on a prisoner in another country, the British government is informed that a suicide attack will be made on a named school in London tomorrow.

What do the British authorities do?

If they evacuate the school and place armed guards outside,are they supporting the torture of prisoners by validating the process? Or should the 'intelligence' be ignored as it encourages torture?

And terrorists rejoice in the dilemmas they impose on us and the divisions they create. Terrorist play the long game, whilst we live in the 'now'.

Best Regards,
MB_Avro

[GoToAway]

Originally posted by MB_Avro_UK:
Hi all,

The moral high ground is easy to occupy when you're not dying in a trench.

Example. As a result of torture inflicted on a prisoner in another country, the British government is informed that a suicide attack will be made on a named school in London tomorrow.

What do the British authorities do?

If they evacuate the school and place armed guards outside,are they supporting the torture of prisoners by validating the process? Or should the 'intelligence' be ignored as it encourages torture?

And terrorists rejoice in the dilemmas they impose on us and the divisions they create. Terrorist play the long game, whilst we live in the 'now'.

Best Regards,
MB_Avro Your example is poor, since it's fiction.

It has repeatedly been demonstrated that torture is an unreliable method of information extraction simply because people will say anything to make it stop.

The way to win the "long" game isn't to torture people, assassinate individuals, or drop bombs on middle eastern countries.

It's to appeal to the moderates within these countries. I'm not sure why some of you can't grasp that "terrorism" isn't a state with a capital or an army with a commander. You can't destroy it on a battlefield, and by trying to do so you only make it stronger. How many hundreds of thousands of Muslims have been killed over the course of the "war on terror"? Most of them simply being "collateral damage."

What of the children of this "collateral damage"? Do you think that they're going to stop hating the countries that destroyed their homes and killed their parents simply because bin Laden is dead?

Some of you really have absolutely no idea what this fight is about, and that's precisely why it's going to continue for decades to come. You can't undermine hatred with violence. In fact, all that you can do is strengthen it.

[horseback]

What Avro said.

The whole aim of terrorism is to force the legitimate government to become oppressive & make the general public to turn against not the nutjobs who commit terroristic atrocities, but against the authorities who are (at least at first) trying to protect them from the nutjobs.

The people we have charged with protecting us are always going to be walking a fine line and there are always going to be tough choices that cannot be deferred.

Where do you draw the line, and who will we accept as the ultimate authority and judge? I doubt that we have or will ever have all the facts, so maybe that makes it easier to second guess.

cheers

horseback

[Treetop64]

Hey Bun-Bun. You could use this (http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/b/b6/Earth%27s_Location_in_the_Universe_%28JPEG%29.jpg) for your desktop. It'll help put things into perspective.

It's a big image. Click on the thumbnail and scroll left and right/up and down to see our place in the big picture.

[Bo_Nidle]

Avro's example may be fiction but it raises a valid point: Are there no conceivable circumstances that could justify the use of torture?

I do not condone torture and agree it is largely self defeating. But neither am I, or indeed, is anyone else here, privvy to what is really going on in the war against terrorism and how various successful operations have been generated by intelligence gathered by such methods.

It is a moral dilemma that does not bother the enemy in the slightest. They view our compassion as weakness and use our laws and morals against us.

And we must allow them to do so or we become as bad they are. Or do we?

Avro uses an example similar to one I have used in this argument with other people: A terrorist cell gains possession of a nuclear device and plants it in a American city. They set in to go off within 48hrs. They confirm this in a video but obviously do not say which city. One of the cell is caught. Do you:

a/ Use torture in an attempt to get him to reveal the location of the device within a time frame to allow its safe deactivation?

or

b/ Allow him full human rights and judicial process and thus allow millions to die but maintaining your sense of morality?

It is actually derived from the storyline of a film starring Samuel L Jackson called "Unthinkable". It deals with this very question.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v...Wzg8&feature=related (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=F_7b3kzWzg8&feature=related)

I do not know the answer, but then that's the dilemma is it not?

[GoToAway]

Originally posted by Bo_Nidle:
Avro's example may be fiction but it raises a valid point: Are there no conceivable circumstances that could justify the use of torture? But that isn't the issue at hand.

The issue is that torture has never proven to be a reliable method of information extraction. The circumstances in which it is employed does not change that fact. If it's not a reliable way to obtain information, then a moral dilemma can't really even exist.

If torture produced actionable information 100% of the time, then its use would be a much bigger moral quandary. But it doesn't. It rarely produces anything of value, which means that most torture is essentially torture for the sake of torture.

[bun-bun195333]

Originally posted by Treetop64:
Hey Bun-Bun. You could use this (http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/b/b6/Earth%27s_Location_in_the_Universe_%28JPEG%29.jpg) for your desktop. It'll help put things into perspective.

It's a big image. Click on the thumbnail and scroll left and right/up and down to see our place in the big picture.

Very cool... Reminded me of when I had POTS instead of a cable modem.

Universe Song (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JWVshkVF0SY)

[bun-bun195333]

Originally posted by raaaid:

hey you could get that effect photographing the moon on the horizont on the sea with a big zoom

i know space pictures are fake so may be those are real http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_smile.gif

Yep, looks real to me. http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-very-happy.gif

[RegRag1977]

Originally posted by GoToAway:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by Bo_Nidle:
Avro's example may be fiction but it raises a valid point: Are there no conceivable circumstances that could justify the use of torture? But that isn't the issue at hand.

The issue is that torture has never proven to be a reliable method of information extraction. The circumstances in which it is employed does not change that fact. If it's not a reliable way to obtain information, then a moral dilemma can't really even exist.

If torture produced actionable information 100% of the time, then its use would be a much bigger moral quandary. But it doesn't. It rarely produces anything of value, which means that most torture is essentially torture for the sake of torture. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

If what you're saying is true, and if torture as you said never proved to be a reliable way to get information, then what is the real purpose of it? : "torture for the sake of torture" doesn't seem enough for me, since the Western countries clearly built institutions for it.
In my humble opinion, the purpose of it may not be intelligence gathering. But there must be a purpose. We should ask ourselves what it really means when a democratic State produces human bodies deprived of any kind of law protection in such an ostensible way. The production of "subhumans" deprived of any status that one could torture or/and kill(without being charged!): what will be the psychological effects of this fact on the tortured bodies (if they are to survive) and their relatives, and what will be the effects on the citizen of the countries that allowed it to happen?
What i mean is that it is not only those "subhumans" that were hit by the State "illegal" violence, maybe we should consider the political decision to restrict the constitutional range (ie OUR fundamental Rights) through PA and european likes as the second and complementary part of the design.

Since after all, what are those Rights we cherish and want to defend, if they can be suspended as easily as they have been? If our fundamental Rights are so easy to suspend, then what is the real nature of our so called Free Countries?

[RegRag1977]

Originally posted by Bo_Nidle:
Avro's example may be fiction but it raises a valid point: Are there no conceivable circumstances that could justify the use of torture?

I do not condone torture and agree it is largely self defeating. But neither am I, or indeed, is anyone else here, privvy to what is really going on in the war against terrorism and how various successful operations have been generated by intelligence gathered by such methods.

It is a moral dilemma that does not bother the enemy in the slightest. They view our compassion as weakness and use our laws and morals against us.

And we must allow them to do so or we become as bad they are. Or do we?

Avro uses an example similar to one I have used in this argument with other people: A terrorist cell gains possession of a nuclear device and plants it in a American city. They set in to go off within 48hrs. They confirm this in a video but obviously do not say which city. One of the cell is caught. Do you:

a/ Use torture in an attempt to get him to reveal the location of the device within a time frame to allow its safe deactivation?

or

b/ Allow him full human rights and judicial process and thus allow millions to die but maintaining your sense of morality?

It is actually derived from the storyline of a film starring Samuel L Jackson called "Unthinkable". It deals with this very question.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v...Wzg8&feature=related (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=F_7b3kzWzg8&feature=related)

I do not know the answer, but then that's the dilemma is it not?

In the movie all ends in an epic fail: torture poved inefective (the last nuke explodes) even after killing the suspect's innocent wife before him and her child, and democracy in a western country fails too, at protecting the human body by the means of laws (against violence): it allowed the suspect to be reduced to a "subhuman".

I see the nuke exploding in the end as the chaos that will come in a world where violence, be it as State violence or as terrorism, becomes the only way. Civilisation is destroyed by its (the violence's) chaotic nature.

The young woman and the terrorist's son in the end. The young woman will take care of the child by adopting it symbolically, as to show that in the end there is no difference in nature between us and them, terrorist enemies, we have violence, and we also have love: the whole movie seems to show that the difference is in degree, not in nature. Sad that the woman and the child (symbol for possible reconciliation and love) seem to die in the final explosion too. Very dark movie.

But that's only my interpretation http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_smile.gif

[Feathered_IV]

Wot. No Shemale Vids folder?


Originally posted by bun-bun195333:
but I'm thinking about switching to this one...

http://1.bp.blogspot.com/-jbt1GaYNp6A/TaGl82a-sVI/AAAAAAAAI6s/UFt3TcbKyxg/s1600/Mac%2BSpace%2BDesktop%2BApple%2BCosmic%2BPictures-jagodunya-unique-wallpapers-desktop-wallpapers-1920-latest-2011-horro-wallpapers-widescreen-wallpapers-windows-7-vista-xp-vector-ipod-apple-buildings-roads-mac.jpeg

[stalkervision]

RegRag1977
"Since after all, what are those Rights we cherish and want to defend, if they can be suspended as easily as they have been? If our fundamental Rights are so easy to suspend, then what is the real nature of our so called Free Countries?"

Good question.

[bun-bun195333]

Originally posted by Feathered_IV:
Wot. No Shemale Vids folder?



It's a desktop. You have to add whatever folders you like later.

http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/88.gif

[bun-bun195333]

Originally posted by stalkervision:
RegRag1977<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">"Since after all, what are those Rights we cherish and want to defend, if they can be suspended as easily as they have been? If our fundamental Rights are so easy to suspend, then what is the real nature of our so called Free Countries?"

Good question. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

Sorry, Daniel Pearl and Nick Berg are not available for comment.

[bun-bun195333]

And the situation room reacts to Bin Laden's death...


http://ris.fashion.telegraph.co.uk/RichImageService.svc/imagecontent/1/TMG8497577/p/obama-war-room_1888904a.jpg

[Airmail109]

Originally posted by bun-bun195333:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by stalkervision:
RegRag1977<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">"Since after all, what are those Rights we cherish and want to defend, if they can be suspended as easily as they have been? If our fundamental Rights are so easy to suspend, then what is the real nature of our so called Free Countries?"

Good question. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

Sorry, Daniel Pearl and Nick Berg are not available for comment. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

Nick Berg traveled to Iraq knowing full well what the risks were. Your point is?

[bun-bun195333]

Originally posted by Aimail101:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by bun-bun195333:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by stalkervision:
RegRag1977<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">"Since after all, what are those Rights we cherish and want to defend, if they can be suspended as easily as they have been? If our fundamental Rights are so easy to suspend, then what is the real nature of our so called Free Countries?"

Good question. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

Sorry, Daniel Pearl and Nick Berg are not available for comment. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

Nick Berg traveled to Iraq knowing full well what the risks were. Your point is? </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

So it's ok for KSM to slice Nick Berg's head off, make a movie of it and dump his body like garbage but you're seriously concerned that the US put a little water into KSM's sinus cavities? Just asking...

[Airmail109]

Originally posted by bun-bun195333:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by Aimail101:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by bun-bun195333:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by stalkervision:
RegRag1977<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">"Since after all, what are those Rights we cherish and want to defend, if they can be suspended as easily as they have been? If our fundamental Rights are so easy to suspend, then what is the real nature of our so called Free Countries?"

Good question. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

Sorry, Daniel Pearl and Nick Berg are not available for comment. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

Nick Berg traveled to Iraq knowing full well what the risks were. Your point is? </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

So it's ok for KSM to slice Nick Berg's head off, make a movie of it and dump his body like garbage but you're seriously concerned that the US put a little water into KSM's sinus cavities? Just asking... </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

My problem with it is that you lead by setting an example. Don't want to have your soldiers nuts strapped to a car battery? Well don't torture people. We lecture China about human rights abuses and yet Guantanamo bay exists. So no, I don't believe torture should be legal. All people should be allowed to a free and fair trial whereby they are innocent until proven guilty.

[bun-bun195333]

Originally posted by Aimail101:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by bun-bun195333:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by Aimail101:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by bun-bun195333:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by stalkervision:
RegRag1977<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">"Since after all, what are those Rights we cherish and want to defend, if they can be suspended as easily as they have been? If our fundamental Rights are so easy to suspend, then what is the real nature of our so called Free Countries?"

Good question. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

Sorry, Daniel Pearl and Nick Berg are not available for comment. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

Nick Berg traveled to Iraq knowing full well what the risks were. Your point is? </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

So it's ok for KSM to slice Nick Berg's head off, make a movie of it and dump his body like garbage but you're seriously concerned that the US put a little water into KSM's sinus cavities? Just asking... </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

My problem with it is that you lead by setting an example. Don't want to have your soldiers nuts strapped to a car battery? Well don't torture people. We lecture China about human rights abuses and yet Guantanamo bay exists. So no, I don't believe torture should be legal. All people should be allowed to a free and fair trial whereby they are innocent until proven guilty. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

So you're totally cool with the Nick Berg movie? It's still out on the internet if you want to see it again.

[Bo_Nidle]

I don't think anyone who travelled to Iraq at that time actually fully appreciated that they were dealing with a terrorist mindset still locked 1000 years in the past.

Mr Berg and Mr Pearl were civilians not enemy combatants, although these maniacs make no distinction between the two. Being an "infidel" is all that counts to them.

These two men were murdered in the most hideous way imaginable. I don't think "waterboarding" and having ones head slowly sawed off are comparable.

Not even the Japanese in World War 2 were as fanatical as the Muslim extremists who are the enemy of the West now, and look at what it took to defeat them.

I do not like to think we engage in torture but on the other hand I can also understand why it is resorted to.

If torture is so unreliable then why has it been used throughout human history, putting the subjigation/punishment reasons aside?

As for giving the enemy a reason to treat our soldiers poorly when captured? Well they aren't going to put them in POW camps no matter what we do. Capture for an "Infidel" is an automatic death sentence eventually.

But the crucial question remains: Are there any concevable circumstances that could justify the use of torture to extract information?

I think we are hiding behind our sense of morals to avoid the reality.

All in all it's a highly unpleasant world in which we find ourselves living.

[Bremspropeller]

Not even the Japanese in World War 2 were as fanatical as the Muslim extremists who are the enemy of the West now, and look at what it took to defeat them.

I don't think so:

Both were told they were fighting an evil empire and both were told they'd be going to heaven if they were killed in combat.

I don't think a Banzai-Charge or a Kamikaze-attack is any less fanatical than blowing oneself up in a café.

[GoToAway]

Originally posted by RegRag1977:
If what you're saying is true, and if torture as you said never proved to be a reliable way to get information, then what is the real purpose of it? : "torture for the sake of torture" doesn't seem enough for me, since the Western countries clearly built institutions for it. Desperation.

Extracting information from somebody that doesn't want to give it is a very difficult task. Even moreso if that information is time-sensitive. There is really no effective means of forcing a person to tell you something if they're willing to die to keep that information secret.

This is why questionable methods are employed.

You can drug your captive to remove inhibitions, but this is going to affect the quality of the information that he gives.

You can torture him for information, but again, his only goal will be to stop the torture. Sometimes the information given is accurate. More often than not, it proves to be inaccurate or at the very least incomplete.

You can isolate a captive and try to break him over time, but that takes time and also doesn't necessarily produce the desired results.


Torture is basically employed in the 21st century because people are short-sighted and want information NOW and are at a loss for other methods.


In my humble opinion, the purpose of it may not be intelligence gathering. But there must be a purpose. We should ask ourselves what it really means when a democratic State produces human bodies deprived of any kind of law protection in such an ostensible way. The production of "subhumans" deprived of any status that one could torture or/and kill(without being charged!): what will be the psychological effects of this fact on the tortured bodies (if they are to survive) and their relatives, and what will be the effects on the citizen of the countries that allowed it to happen? That's a valid point, but I'd really rather not consider the ramifications of it. They are dark indeed. I'd much rather believe that torture is a well-intentioned but misguided attempt at intelligence gathering at heart.

Because if it isn't, then we're swimming in the same moral cesspool as the terrorists.

[Pudfark]

Survivors of a life and death struggle all know this: There are no rules.

Spectators of the fight seem to think there should be rules, so there is a built in excuse for losing.

I have compassion for your feelings. However, should you take your feelings into a fight, you will lose.

No reasonable person wants to fight. However, unreasonable people start fights all the time.
So, their unreasonable conduct warrants the same.

To eliminate torture? Don't take prisoners.

[Airmail109]

Originally posted by Pudfark:
Survivors of a life and death struggle all know this: There are no rules.

Spectators of the fight seem to think there should be rules, so there is a built in excuse for losing.

I have compassion for your feelings. However, should you take your feelings into a fight, you will lose.

No reasonable person wants to fight. However, unreasonable people start fights all the time.
So, their unreasonable conduct warrants the same.

To eliminate torture? Don't take prisoners.

See holocaust for further details.

[arthursmedley]

Originally posted by Aimail101:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by Pudfark:
Survivors of a life and death struggle all know this: There are no rules.

Spectators of the fight seem to think there should be rules, so there is a built in excuse for losing.

I have compassion for your feelings. However, should you take your feelings into a fight, you will lose.

No reasonable person wants to fight. However, unreasonable people start fights all the time.
So, their unreasonable conduct warrants the same.

To eliminate torture? Don't take prisoners.

See holocaust for further details. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

Aimail, what will you do in three years time when you're a platoon commander in 2Para and you discover some of your guys have taken 'souvenirs' after a firefight?

[Airmail109]

Originally posted by arthursmedley:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by Aimail101:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by Pudfark:
Survivors of a life and death struggle all know this: There are no rules.

Spectators of the fight seem to think there should be rules, so there is a built in excuse for losing.

I have compassion for your feelings. However, should you take your feelings into a fight, you will lose.

No reasonable person wants to fight. However, unreasonable people start fights all the time.
So, their unreasonable conduct warrants the same.

To eliminate torture? Don't take prisoners.

See holocaust for further details. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

Aimail, what will you do in three years time when you're a platoon commander in 2Para and you discover some of your guys have taken 'souvenirs' after a firefight? </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

What like Gurkhas cutting dead talibans heads off? That doesn't bother me. Just hypocrisy. You'll find plenty of squaddies that were outraged by the Afghanistan kill team fiasco.

[arthursmedley]

No, I'm not talking about Gurkhas I'm asking what YOU will do when YOU are OC and it's your guys doing a bit of needlework.

Or your platoon has just over run it's objective, your company commander wants you to exploit forward but you know it's booby-trapped ahead. At your feet is a wounded baddy. He knows where the good stuff is but he ain't telling....without some persuading.
Your platoon sgt wants to persuade him to talk as he dosen't want to risk his young guys getting their heads blown off.

What you gonna do?

[stalkervision]

just saw this. I will add it here.

McCain says torture did not lead to bin Laden

"This is a moral debate. It is about who we are," says Ariz. Republican, former POW

WASHINGTON — Waterboarding and other harsh interrogation techniques were not a factor in tracking down Osama bin Laden, a leading Republican senator insisted Thursday.

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/43...litics-more_politics (http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/43007276/ns/politics-more_politics)

"Not only did the use of enhanced interrogation techniques on Khalid Sheikh Mohammed not provide us with key leads on bin Laden's courier, Abu Ahmed, it actually produced false and misleading information," McCain said. He called on Mukasey and others to correct their misstatements.

[Airmail109]

Originally posted by arthursmedley:
No, I'm not talking about Gurkhas I'm asking what YOU will do when YOU are OC and it's your guys doing a bit of needlework.

Or your platoon has just over run it's objective, your company commander wants you to exploit forward but you know it's booby-trapped ahead. At your feet is a wounded baddy. He knows where the good stuff is but he ain't telling....without some persuading.
Your platoon sgt wants to persuade him to talk as he dosen't want to risk his young guys getting their heads blown off.

What you gonna do?

I don't think torture should be a national policy, it should be discouraged wherever possible. Anything done should be unofficial, encouraging it and saying that it's okay is a slippery slope. I'm going to counter question you to deal with this. Why compromise your ideals if he doesn't mind dying and give's you information leading to one of your squads getting blown to bits? I probably wouldn't trust a damn thing the guy said.

If it was a conventional enemy grunt who didn't feel like dying? Well, does with holding medical aid count as torture because I'm betting he'd probably quite like a morphine shot.

Thirdly I'd be badgering my superior for some bomb dogs depending on what sort of situation your talking about.

Fourthly if my platoon Sgt was so worried on this occasion, I'd avoid likely routes to be mined, it also depends what assets I have. Do I have a big **** off Chally with anti-mine equipment, dogs, UAVs, UGV's, ANA cannon fodder? What's the new objective and how fast does it need to be taken?

My point is that it should not be policy or actively encouraged, so that torture becomes normal.

[horseback]

I think that this boils down to whether one thinks that what is moral for one to decide for himself can be applied to a larger scale.

I personally made choices for myself (quit jobs, told Persons In Authority that they were wrong and how, risked my own personal safety and welfare for the sake of Principles I Held Dear, etc.) when I was a young and single man that I would never have made as a married man and father responsible for the well-being and safety of others.

On the other hand, I have also been considerably more ruthless about protecting my wife, children and our property than I would have been acting on my own behalf. I have done more than merely threaten violence to persons representing a threat to them, and I have not 'let it go' on a few occasions when people in positions of responsiblity abused my kids' rights at school or failed to protect them the way their job required them to do.

I have no conscience problems with that; first because I can't ask anyone else to pay for my principles, no matter how valid and right I think they are, and second because it was my primary responsibility to protect and serve my family and almost else on this earth could come before that responsibility.

Acting for myself, I have the luxury of playing by the rules, but if I am placed in the position of fighting for my family, then the Marquis of Queensbury and the Spirit of Fair Play in general can kiss my fat pimply arse.

Now, if I have to be much less concerned with my own convenience and pride and much more active in seeking the welfare and happiness of only three other people, however dear (or not) they may be to me, what is the weight of responsiblity for the lives and welfare of dozens, hundreds, thousands or millions of people to the person or persons they look to for leadership and protection?

cheers

horseback

[M_Gunz]

There's been torture all these years because there have always been sick minds able to get their big chance to hurt people.

[Pudfark]

A bit of a conundrum?

"Do unto others as you would have them do unto you"?

"An eye for an eye and a tooth for a tooth"?

Bottom line?
Any time you are reacting to something?
You're already losing...

If you need/want to win?
You don't meet force with equal force.
You meet the force with superior force.

If you think that's a bunch of bull?
Reference Germany and Japan circa 1945.

[Airmail109]

Originally posted by Pudfark:
A bit of a conundrum?

"Do unto others as you would have them do unto you"?

"An eye for an eye and a tooth for a tooth"?

Bottom line?
Any time you are reacting to something?
You're already losing...

If you need/want to win?
You don't meet force with equal force.
You meet the force with superior force.

If you think that's a bunch of bull?
Reference Germany and Japan circa 1945.

So what shall we do? A bit of total war? For every US soldier killed walk into an Afghan village, take it's inhabitants for a walk down the road and then make them dig their own graves in a field and machine gun them? Yes it would probably work but now your worse than them as well.

So your fighting for democracy and liberty, yet your willing to sell it out for the sake of the war your fighting to protect it? RIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIGHT.

[M_Gunz]

They are fighting for power, to keep those who have it on top. Are you sure you're ready to join a military?

BTW Aimail, how many years have you been in university and spell the way you do?

[Pudfark]

Originally posted by Aimail101:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by Pudfark:
A bit of a conundrum?

"Do unto others as you would have them do unto you"?

"An eye for an eye and a tooth for a tooth"?

Bottom line?
Any time you are reacting to something?
You're already losing...

If you need/want to win?
You don't meet force with equal force.
You meet the force with superior force.

If you think that's a bunch of bull?
Reference Germany and Japan circa 1945.

So what shall we do? A bit of total war? For every US soldier killed walk into an Afghan village, take it's inhabitants for a walk down the road and then make them dig their own graves in a field and machine gun them? Yes it would probably work but now your worse than them as well.

So your fighting for democracy and liberty, yet your willing to sell it out for the sake of the war your fighting to protect it? RIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIGHT. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

Airmail, I'm not picking on you personally...just your ideas. It would seem, I'm about 2 1/2 times your age..no disrespect meant by that.

You seem to totally miss or deliberately ignore my point...which is?
Folks cannot afford to fight a long term bullet and bomb type war, especially with troops on the ground...and yes, precision munitions have made it a bit cheaper. However, it is still not "affordable"...So, you use what you have...the U.S. is just about out of money...so to put it bluntly...when you're out of rocks, you throw the boulders that you have saved for that rainy day....with the world unrest and over population? Precipitation is in the forecast...

The next world war? Will not be fought by troops. Though, they will be targeted, along with large metropolitan areas.

I wish that the above was not true..History will repeat itself..and the Boom will be bigger...

[Airmail109]

Originally posted by M_Gunz:
They are fighting for power, to keep those who have it on top. Are you sure you're ready to join a military?

BTW Aimail, how many years have you been in university and spell the way you do?

3 so far and I don't care for spelling on a forum. You should have a look at your grammar in that last sentence. Plus I've been up all night doing work. Like a lot of people I won't be joining because I'm a patriot.

You have plenty of other options that don't don't involve starting world war three.

[Pudfark]

You have plenty of other options that don't don't involve starting world war three.
I can grasp the "you" part a bit...How about the "them" part...
I would really like to hear the options part?
If the options involve the U.N. or a League of Nations thingy...I hope I don't aspirate on the contents of my stomach...

[stalkervision]

I had to post this here because it's so darn funny.

enjoy ! http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_biggrin.gif


http://images2.dailykos.com/i/user/2722/TMW2011-05-11colorFRONT.png

[Von_Rat]

I don't think torture should be a national policy, it should be discouraged wherever possible. Anything done should be unofficial, encouraging it and saying that it's okay is a slippery slope.
__________________________________________________ ____________


+1

imo thats why the us has organizations like the CIA. they are supposed to do the dirty work that sometimes needs doing, so that the us doesn't have to corrupt its ideals by doing something like legalizing torture.

yes im aware that that is being hypricritical, but im a pragmatist at heart and i realize sometimes dirty nasty things do need to be done, but in don't want them to be legalized.

this whole legalizing torture mess started because the CIA didnt want its people prosecuted if what they were doing became known.

im sorry, but imo thats one of their jobs, and the risk of jail if caught, should be in the job descrpition.

note; in my previous post i should of said im totally against "legalizing" torture in any form.

[M_Gunz]

Besides which, in these budget-conscious days the results we got are poor to negative for the price. Not that I think for a second that advocates of torture will ever count up all the false leads and missed opportunities made from torture 'intel'.

[Crazy_Goanna]

Bugga___ all we have down here is the controversy over 'boat people'