Bin Laden is dead

[Enoch]

Yeah, it certainly says something about the present state of our polity that pretty much everybody has taken this development and pointed towards it as evidence justifying that they were right all along. They do so with dreadfully incomplete information, while the people who are in a position to know the truth would be prosecuted for saying a word of it.

 

On the torture stuff generally, here's the take of one Republican with personal experience in the area.

[Wrath of Dagon]

I don't know if it really should matter whether the torturing was effective or not. Is that how we want to get the job done? The answer from the mainstream was a resounding no, as the waterboarding incidents have been met with a very negative backlash.

 

I know there are plenty of times in war where morality takes a back seat, but we do need to maintain some measure of decency.

So because of our sense of decency we should let KSM's plans go forward and let thousands more people die because we don't want to distress the scumbag? Btw, rigorous interrogation such as waterboarding isn't torture, torture is infliction of pain or injury, which is against the rules.

[Monte Carlo]

This sort of discussions on righteous revenge always make me wonder who, here, professes to be a Christian or subscribes to Christian values.

 

I'm a lapsed Jewish-Pagan-atheist, therefore I'm residually part-badass Old Testament hombre with some fairly scary Dark Ages notions of vengeance, scattered with a mixture of Hobbesian realism and disdain for organised religion.

 

What I'm saying is that I wished they'd gut-shot him and left him somewhere for a long time, while vultures circled overhead.

[Calax]

I don't know if it really should matter whether the torturing was effective or not. Is that how we want to get the job done? The answer from the mainstream was a resounding no, as the waterboarding incidents have been met with a very negative backlash.

 

I know there are plenty of times in war where morality takes a back seat, but we do need to maintain some measure of decency.

So because of our sense of decency we should let KSM's plans go forward and let thousands more people die because we don't want to distress the scumbag? Btw, rigorous interrogation such as waterboarding isn't torture, torture is infliction of pain or injury, which is against the rules.

It's torture, as defined by US who persecuted Japanese soldiers who waterboarded US marines... and we sentenced them to death by hanging

 

http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2007/11/29/...in3554687.shtml

[Hurlshort]

Yeah, it certainly says something about the present state of our polity that pretty much everybody has taken this development and pointed towards it as evidence justifying that they were right all along. They do so with dreadfully incomplete information, while the people who are in a position to know the truth would be prosecuted for saying a word of it.

 

On the torture stuff generally, here's the take of one Republican with personal experience in the area.

 

Fantastic read, I'm a huge fan of John McCain. I would have voted for him if he didn't chose an absolute bonehead for a running mate.

 

I hope Dagon reads that, I think it is more articulate than any response I can give.

[Gorgon]

Ron Paul is tha man. I mean his theories are crazy, but they are all of them consistent and free of media fluff.

[Gorgon]

Wrong thread but Ron Paul is still the awesomest of all the republicans

[Wrath of Dagon]

I don't know if it really should matter whether the torturing was effective or not. Is that how we want to get the job done? The answer from the mainstream was a resounding no, as the waterboarding incidents have been met with a very negative backlash.

 

I know there are plenty of times in war where morality takes a back seat, but we do need to maintain some measure of decency.

So because of our sense of decency we should let KSM's plans go forward and let thousands more people die because we don't want to distress the scumbag? Btw, rigorous interrogation such as waterboarding isn't torture, torture is infliction of pain or injury, which is against the rules.

It's torture, as defined by US who persecuted Japanese soldiers who waterboarded US marines... and we sentenced them to death by hanging

 

http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2007/11/29/...in3554687.shtml

That's bull, Americans were legitimate prisoners of war, thus all they have to tell you is name, rank, and serial number. Forcing them to disclose anything else is a war crime. The terrorists were illegal enemy combatants, and interrogating them was necessary to save innocent civilians who they indiscriminately attack. The two situations aren't equivalent at all, and this isn't the only bone headed thing McCain has said and done, but I voted for him anyway as the lesser of two evils.

[Calax]

So... it's ok for us to waterboard people to save our own citizens, but not ok for another nation to do it to us to save their own citizens.

 

Nice double standard there son.

 

Also, with more details on the Japanese sentencing etc

http://www.politifact.com/truth-o-meter/st...-waterboarding/

Edited May 12, 2011 by Calax

[Wrath of Dagon]

Do you understand the difference between a legal prisoner of war, with full rights under the Geneva convention, and a terrorist? Apparently not.

[Calax]

I know that both are afforded basic rights of a criminal, under any circumstances and referring to them as "enemy combatants" and keeping them off US soil denies them protections that they would have received either as a domestic criminal, or as a soldier fighting in a war.

 

Even if they're not soldiers in the conventional sense of working under the auspices of another country, they should then be treated as domestic criminals, and put through the american court systems. Both of these routs would enforce protection against torture, and water boarding (if you decide it's not torture), and make those two actions a crime.

 

Was the Unabomber a terrorist? If so, why was he then tossed into the American legal system? Same with Tim McVeigh. Sure, they were technically US citizens, but then why does the fifth and sixth amendments specifically say

No person shall be held to answer for a capital, or otherwise infamous crime, unless on a presentment or indictment of a Grand Jury, except in cases arising in the land or naval forces, or in the Militia, when in actual service in time of War or public danger; nor shall any person be subject for the same offence to be twice put in jeopardy of life or limb; nor shall be compelled in any criminal case to be a witness against himself, nor be deprived of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor shall private property be taken for public use, without just compensation.

 

In all criminal prosecutions, the accused shall enjoy the right to a speedy and public trial, by an impartial jury of the State and district wherein the crime shall have been committed, which district shall have been previously ascertained by law, and to be informed of the nature and cause of the accusation; to be confronted with the witnesses against him; to have compulsory process for obtaining witnesses in his favor, and to have the Assistance of Counsel for his defense.

 

Note that neither of these uses the word "citizen" to denote who the rights apply to. Same with the eighth and ninth amendments in reference to "cruel and unusual punishments" and the "protection of rights not specifically enumerated within the constitution".

 

In any case, Water boarding is torture and/or Cruel and Unusual punishment. In either case illegal and unconstitutional. And (to yank this sucker back to my original point) has not been shown to be beneficial by a study by the CIA itself, and it's possible it was detrimental to the collection of intelligence by the agencies associated with the programs.

[Hurlshort]

Do you understand the difference between a legal prisoner of war, with full rights under the Geneva convention, and a terrorist? Apparently not.

 

It's ok to admit you are wrong every once in awhile WoD. The Geneva convention was also established after WW2, so I'm not sure what you are getting at there.

[Enoch]

The Geneva convention was also established after WW2.

That's not true. The basis of the conventions generally in force now were negotiated in 1949, but there were predecessor treaties going back as early as the 1860s.

[Hurlshort]

The Geneva convention was also established after WW2.

That's not true. The basis of the conventions generally in force now were negotiated in 1949, but there were predecessor treaties going back as early as the 1860s.

 

Ok, sure. I still don't understand how that makes waterboarding not torture, or whatever WoD's point is.

[Monte Carlo]

The enemy combatant thing was an on-the-fly device by the Bush administration and wouldn't stand up in any non-American court. Why put it in Cuba FFS?

 

Having said that I can see why they did it and fully support the concept of enhanced interrogation.

 

Would you rather be an American captured in Iran or an Iranian captured in America?

[Wrath of Dagon]

Of course being an enemy combatant is completely different than being a common criminal. If that wasn't the case, you could never kill an enemy combatant unless he's already pointing a gun directly at you. According to Calax, under the Constitution we're apparently required to read the enemy their fifth amendment rights before engaging in battle. The Constitution was not meant to make rules of war, only civilian law.

[Calax]

Either their soldiers in a war, or civilians engaged in a criminal action, not between.

[Tale]

Either their soldiers in a war, or civilians engaged in a criminal action, not between.

Which one am I allowed to torture? It's that one.

[Calax]

Neither.

 

Also think about the number lost because of the recruits that joined the various terrorist organizations specifically because of the fact that we use torture.

Edited May 12, 2011 by Calax

[Hurlshort]

Jack Bauer disagrees!

Edited May 12, 2011 by Hurlshot

[Tale]

Neither

That's not what I asked.

[Monte Carlo]

Neither.

 

Also think about the number lost because of the recruits that joined the various terrorist organizations specifically because of the fact that we use torture.

 

95% of them would've got involved anyway. Next.

[Zoraptor]

Would you rather be an American captured in Iran or an Iranian captured in America?

AT LEAST WE'RE BETTER THAN IRAN!!! CELEBRATE OUR ENLIGHTENMENT!!!

 

THEN AGAIN, IRAN IS OK TOO BECAUSE VLACH VLAD TEPES WAS WORSE!!!

 

OH NO BUT GENGHIZ KHAN WAS WORSE THAN VLACH VLAD SO HE'S ACTUALLY OK TOO!!!

 

Good lord above the "at least we're better than" argument is a load of horse excrement. Yeah, I'm a greater humanitarian than Adolf Hitler/ Stalin/ Pol Pot/ Caligula/ Torquemada/ Timur. Wow, such an achievement. I'll just add that to my CV so next time I apply for a job there won't be any dispute about my personal qualities.

 

:1440x900 rolleyes:

Edited May 13, 2011 by Zoraptor

[Malcador]

:1440x900 rolleyes:

 

Pft, low res scum.

[GreasyDogMeat]

Jack Bauer disagrees!

Alpha Protocol 2 with main character voiced by Kiefer Sutherland = best game ever. Instead of Suave, Professional & Aggressive it would be yell, shoot knee cap or water board.