Haven't seen anything here about one of the most despicable developments - torture. I'm not talking Abu Gharib, which was stupid, but not what I'm talking about - I'm talking waterboarding and such. I find it incredible that there would even be debate that we should condone it! I lost all respect for John McCain when he caved (well, that and when he sucked up to religious whackos).
That we look for loopholes in the Geneva conventions, question whether it applies... disgusting. These hypocrites talk of VALUES?
Have you read of the Canadian citizen we believed somehow was a terrorist and sent him to Syria to be tortured? We not only practice torture, we outsource it.
For the record - I spent 16 months in Vietnam in the Marines - yes, I was aware of torture, but I stopped some, and we all knew it wasn't condoned - what will we become if we condone it? What will separate us from barbarians?
The Bush administration (and the United States of America) can now take its place in history along with the SS in Nazi Germany, and the KGB in Communist Russia! The misery, abuse, human suffering and death inflicted by the United States of America is the very same it fought to eradicate in communist block countries decades earlier. Whether in Nazi Germany, the Lubyanka in Russia or Guantanamo in the United States, torture is torture! Its immoral, its wrong, and above all it has robbed the U.S. of its moral authority throughout the civilized world. Torture is an open declaration of our cruelty, hypocrisy, and moral depravity. The Bush administration has plunged the United States into the ideological darkness of the middle ages!
The candidates that Unity08 backs must not support this form of barbarism! Disbanding this practice should be one of the core values of Unity08.
another blame america guy. you should be damn happy im not in charge of Gitmo, you'd think torture. give me a few days down there and they'll be singing like a canary.
this is war dude. havent you been watching when the terrorists cut off the heads of our citizens?
the only thing u actually know is what u jave read in some left wing organization propganda...how dare u comment on something that u have no actual facts on
Again, if we step back from the world, end our assumed role as policeman and nation-builder, don't we do much to end our need for things that inspire torture?
Its a more basic issue with Americans I think, stepping back from the overinvolvement we have in the world.
I wish we could do it, but the world has gotten a lot smaller in the last 40 years. We affect and are affected by every other country on this planet. Even if we took our ball and went home, the game would still follow us.
if we are going to single out the Bush Admin we also need to mention the carefully orchestrated and systematic genocide of the American Indian under virtually every President up until about 1890. We also need to condem America's leaders after the revolution for not abolishing the horrible practice of human slavery. We should also point out the concentration camps the government during Roosevelt's term sent Japanese-American citizes to. We might also want to point out Roosevelt knew of the NAZI death camps but did nothing to impede their operations, when air power could have drastically curtailed their efforts to ship millions of JEWS to their death. Should we blame George Bush for the actions of a few American guards more than these other American Presidents? What we should do in my opinion is expose any wrong committed by anyone and try to prevent it from happening again.
One Voice Among Many
you people dont know what torture is as John Mccain, ask other americans that have suffered REAL torture .
libs
To some people listening to elevator music is "torture". You need to define what level of coercion we are willing to accept. What little I have heard about (ie waterboarding, sleep depravation) doesn't come close to the levels of some of the examples cited in this blog. Still, we need to ask ourselves, "How far down that path can we go without damaging our own soul?" Is there a better way of getting the same intel? Or, are we willing to let that information slip by us and accept the consequences?
The methodical application of pain or threats to alter the state of mind or body for the purpose of interogation or punishment.
Bill"for what we are together"
So, good cop - bad cop would constitute torture?
Torture is different than merely being annoyed - and no, the U.S. should not involved in torturing prisoners. Ever.
Jeff C leikec@yahoo.com
All we need to do is follow the Military Code of Conduct and we will be just fine and no torture will occur.
http://milligansstew.blogspot.com
have u ever experienced anything for real or only in the media...try to get out and join the actual working american people
There is a great deal of debate as to how effective torture is - when witches confessed after torture in the Inquisition, what did it prove? That they were really witches?
If you torture someone, eventually you can get them to say anything you want to hear.
My whole point is that as I grew up - and as I was taught in the Marines - we are "the good guys" - we don't torture. If we torture, what makes us better than our enemies? I object on moral grounds. I don't want Americans that specialize in torture...
US Marine vet Vietnam 4/68 - 8/69
You are so right, Quicksilver. This has been debated for thousands of years. As a source of information it just is not any good. Cicero and Plutarch denounced it 2 thousand years ago.
If you want to use it as a punishment for say sexual assault and murder of children, maybe I would be a bit more sympathetic. Probably not, but maybe.
At some point we have to trust the voters.
do u believe u r anything but left wing liberal never interested in any bipartisan anything...this is the biggest problem with unity for most people a good idea if it is their way
Do we hire them all lawyers and have them work their way through the leagal system? That might constitute torture.
Do we chunk them a cell and forget about them? That might constitute torture.
Do we pipe elevator music into their cell and promise to change the selection if they co-operate? That might constitute torture.
What do you propose?
I would try them in a court. Most of them have been held so long now they no longer have anything of value to say.
Try them, if convicted send them to prison and be done with them.
At some point we have to trust the voters.
I think we can all agree that pulling fingernails out is torture.
I think most of us would agree waterboarding is torture based on its description. But below that, where do you draw the line?
For instance, let's say we have a new college graduate just starting his job at some intelligence agency. He has had all of the training, but no one has produced any guidance defining what is and is not allowed. He is told "Do what ever you can to get information from this suspect, but don't torture him."
You are setting him up to be the fall guy when some politician needs an issue to energize the electorate.
We need to nail down what we mean by this word and we the people need to accept the consequences of that definition.
Over 3600 years ago the Egyptians wrote down the golden rule in hieroglyphs and that wisdom--recognized so long ago--should be what leads our policies in regards to torture. When considering whether or not we should torture our enemies we must look into ourselves and ask the question, "What would we have done to our own?"
Will we set a higher standard of moral character or will we sink to the level of our enemies, using intimidation and torture to serve our purposes? It may be that a man can be broken with the right amount of pain or threats but what could possibly justify such treatment? The question isn't, "how many could lives be saved?" it is, "how many innocents will be tortured unjustly?"
History is littered with scars on the innocent, mistaken identities, and men who abuse the power at their disposal. Should we cast aside the safeguard policy of "no torture" just so we can increase the infinitesimally small probability that an enemy might give up secrets?
We must not also forget that a policy denying torture also provides for the defense of our citizens. If we never torture the soldiers of our enemies our enemies will not have a great incentive to torture our own. We may never guarantee a world without torture by setting the bar above such incivility but we can certainly put a damper on its adoption. If we want this nation to be greatest of all we must act accordingly--with liberty and justice for all.
-Riskable
"If you elect leaders that act irresponsibly toward nature you'll find that irresponsibility is the nature of our leaders."
Just not the right thing to do... regardless of the potential short term gain which may or may not be realized, in the long run, doing the right thing should win on this topic.
No to torture.
D
"Treat other as you would want to be Treated" ahhh yes this takes us back to the childhood years, with our mothers trying to teach us a valid point. I Wish it was that simple. What are we portraying to the rest of the world when we let something like this go on? Even worse we fight against the very people that don’t respect human life. Is that not hypocritical? I believe every human being should be entitled to the freedoms that we all so casually enjoy. What kind of respect as Americansw would we had gained from the world if we took it upon ourselves to try these fellow humans with the same balanced court of law that we all enjoy in this country. And how can we tell others not to do, what we do?? What is happening in places like Guantánamo Bay is embarrassing to me as American and need to be shut down immediately. Obviously there needs to be a place and time for these people, but lets do the American thing, and treat them like the human beings that they are and truly differentiate ourselfs from what we have fought against since the birth of our very fine contry.
Just think about it
Actually, dude, it really is that simple. We are terrorizing the "terrorists," invading their homes, etc...how on Earth does Bush expect them to react? We are just as much terrorists to "them" as "they" are to us. I am willing to treat every man, woman, and child on this earth as my family...including the "terrorists," who are no less human than you or I (newsflash, Bushies: declaring someone an "enemy combatant" does NOT erase their humanity). Better pray I don't get thrown in GITMO for that one...if I do, they'll be stomping all over my 1st Amendment rights and I'll go down fighting before I let that happen. I agree with most of what you say, except that we have no right to interfere with the internal affairs of another country or culture. Believing that everyone should be entitled to America's freedoms is one thing, forcing it on them is another altogether (Iraq).
The thing about a democracy is that is a people's government. If the people don't choose it, like in Iraq (and no one say 'they did choose it because they voted for it,' in reality they did not. They voted for "leaders" AFTER Bush had already decided to impose democracy on them; the Iraqis did not lead the coup d'etat on Saddam, we did), then it is doomed to fail.
And last but not least, let's not forget that "terrorism" is an abstract concept at best, not a tangible foe that can be defeated with military force. Al Qaeda is an enemy, "terrorists" are not.
(btw, the "bad guy" never sees himself as the bad guy)
hand me a handkerchief, i feel a tear appearing and also i have to blow my k nose.
dscof get help quickly, you are suffering from a chemical breakdown.
I'd give you a history book to read about living under Nazi or Soviet occupation in Europe.
You miss the point. We go into Iraq and kick in doors looking for weapons. We find a weapon and judge them enemy. Rough them up, ask where they got the gun, etc. I'll tell you, if I were an Iraqi, with what's going on, I'd have a weapon and want to use it against whoever was kicking in my door.
I don't want my country being the occupying force and condoning torture. We create terrorists with nearly every door we kick in.
US Marine vet Vietnam 4/68 - 8/69 5th District, NJ
Firstly, does verbal interrogation, possibly with raised voices, constitute torture? Past a point sleep deprivation becomes an issue, and that is a form of torture in my eyes. But can talking to them wiht no physical contact be a form of torture?
Secondly, when an 'enemy combatant' is taken prisoner after a battle, or in a preemptive raid, should that combatant be given a trial? After all, what are they gonna say? "I was bird hunting?" "Seriously, the bombs are to clear out the rubble in the road from my last bombs?" I doubt that their testimony will be taken seriously in that situation when held up against photos, physical evidence, and testimony gathered by our soldiers. So in those two situations (where they are clearly prepared to inflict damage on someone or something) would it make sense to spend time and money to hold a trial?
The kind of actions that have gotten every one up in arms about this torture thing are very few. The stuff in Abu Gharib was a bunch of idiot prison gaurds and independent of interrogations. As for Gitmo, the last actual problem out of there I heard about was the incident involving a Qoran and a toilet, which was wrong but "torture"? Having received interrogation training from the US Army i can safely say that the rules are very clear, physical contact is expressly forbidden except in clear cases of self defense and (even then you might get in trouble) and in many circumstances raising your voice is a no go. For Gitmo in particular, a detainee may not be woken for interrogation, can not be interrogated for more the four hours a day and never interrogated during prayer time. And the splash back from the Qoran incident is being felt too. No one is aloud to -touch- a Qoran except for a Muslim chaplain, which Gitom does not always have. The Army may have done wrong but it has definitely overcompensated. I cant say what the CIA does so fry them up all you want but leave my Army boys alone!
Michael B Aaronson
Akuai@aol.com
I don't care in the least what this Government does to captured terrorist. They are not covered under the Geneva Convention Rules, As they are not representing any Country. They are only following the teachings of a bunch of looney wahabee clerics that send these idiots out to commit suicide, and go to paradise to claim their seventy two virgins. If these false teachers of islam believe this garbage, why is it we don't hear of any of them taking the short-cut to paradise. Its because they know its a lie.
But maybe unity 08 can make a difference, other wise I don't see much hope for America. We have about half of the population that could care less about what happens here in the USA. If Nancy Pelosi and Harry Reed are the best leaders the Democrats can come up with, we might be better off as prisoners of the terrorist.
You fit right in with this administration.
So much for our long history of innocent until proven guilty. Let's bring back the Inquisition.
I, too, am all for hastening the transit of an insurgent from this world to their eternal reward, but it's the use of torture and it being applied indiscriminately that I object to. If we torture, what separates us from the bad guys?
US Marine vet Vietnam 4/68 - 8/69 5th District, NJ
To even take a prisoner in this day and age invites the left to tar and feather the USA no matter what we do. I say we should simply send them back to Afganistan or Iraq and put some manor of protecting power to supervise. If we don't have the guy maybe we can get out from under this. At present we may as well give these guys the works because Uncle Sam is guilty until proven not Uncle Sam.
I have no idea what your post was trying to say....
US Marine vet Vietnam 4/68 - 8/69 5th District, NJ
First of all you can't fight Terrorism with touchy feely. Second of all they signed no convention. Third of all our Constitution gives them no rights. But even though you say it's not ok to torture Terrorists, I heard no one say it wasn't alright to torture Americans. We taser Americans to stop their free speech, we tasar helpless women in wheelchairs, we taser all the time and if you've ever had to endure taser, CS gas, Pepper spray then you would know that it is torture and you let the government get away with it every day and your silence is deafening. Terrorists no Americans yes it makes me sick.
I too have been to war Viet Nam 68-69 and have seen torture, but I have seen the enemy do much worse, heads on sticks just like radMoslims. Let's either kick their butt or shut up about it.
Did you guys hear about the hypothetical question asked to Hillary? "If a top Al-Queda official is captured and knows the where abouts of a bomb within the United States, can torture be premitted?" And in a case like that, I would have to say yes. However with the Gitmo detainees, i would say no.
We don't need to define it, it is already defined in our constitution and should apply everywhere if we are to really take it seriously. Should we just bend over and let them take away the "inalienable" rights of these people? Quicksilver is exactly right, people will say anything to stop torture, it is no viable method to get information we need, even if there was a threat of attack, and even if it was imminent, and even if this war made any sense whatsoever, it would still not be worth our time, or worth prisoners lives. It is not moral, constitutional, sensible, or practical. What it is is cruel and unusual, and appalling. As he said, what makes us better than our enemies if we resort to the same methods? If America is police to the world and setting a shining example of hope and freedom, then what message does this send?
Francic Mallon
Torture is obsolete. There are new brain scan technologies to reveal when a subject is trying to deceive.
The last time a Great Nation wore its faith on its sleeve, it was a swastika.
Simple fact, word games are being played with legalism to avoid prosecution for it, but it is basically a fact established by policy memos made public at this point.
Does it rank with Nazism or Communism at this point? Not in quantity or types of torture, as policy. That is also a simple fact.
Recent news indicates that while the public was being told "we don't torture", secret memos were issued for "advanced interrogation techniques" - torture. Now that the memos are revealed, what's the White House reply? The leakers of the memos are harming our national security!!!!
We are very close to fascism under this regime.
These Chicken Hawks disgust me.
US Marine vet Vietnam 4/68 - 8/69 5th District, NJ
Well yes, but before the 20th century, there were several examples where empires were saved by emperors. If you dont have a rational electorate, then you dont have a functional democracy. I've posted on the American Malaise to explain why. But we are where we are, and most voters are lazy, ignorant, & neurotic. No rational electorate would have let an ass like Bush take power.
Wall Street Jews & Christians (lets not pretend that the Jews did it by themselves) colluded to manipulate the markets and took the middle class for a trillion or so, fleecing IRAs & pension funds. This resulted in the middle class investing in real estate, where they thot they knew what they had.
But now, manipulation of the contracts and interest rates is driving the bankruptcy and foreclosure rates up, and this risks the stability of the entire economy. The upshot is that the investment of the middle class in the system has dramatically declined as the ownership by the Power Elite has increased, and with the revolving door, they also own the government. We have a word for when the elite owns both the economy and the government which you suggested we are headed for;"fascism".
As for "advanced interrogation techniques", I haveta wonder. FMRI brain scans make torture obsolete. Dont they know about that?