Previous  1  2  3  4  5  6  Next

Torture is hard for me. I think it is necessary at times, but generally should not be used.

   

Well, I can see Dr Morbid has chosen to keep on with his dreckfest. You keep this up and I'll keep slamming you down. No it's not ok to torture anybody and it's not necessary to prevent casualties as I'm sure you warped sense of logic leads you to believe.

You have failed at making anything at all in terms of argumentive thought, a civilized and coherent reply or anything relating on salient points given to you which you so far have either ignored at your convenience or know we are right and still choose to play this game. How is that our fault?

Neither do you so what makes you so right? Oh please tell us. Might want to remember that when you go out hunting for "suspects".

Yet here in civilized Western society you advocate torture in order to be just like them....hmm hmm is this your sense of a civilized state of mind? Ohhhh the irony. If you have trouble defining irony, look back to english 101.

How's that "How to be like Terrorists" book coming along? Finished yet?

   

don't care to read more war mongering drivel, but i stand by my statement.

   

Amen to that.



And then they have to be in uniform. Otherwise they can be considered as spies and their lives are forfeit under that same treaty. Since there is no international convention on the treatment of spies one can conclude that torturing spies or non-uniformed combatants is admissible.

My own ROE state that an enemy in uniform is accorded rights beyond Geneva. With regards to uniformed enemy soldiers I am not allowed to deliberately shoot them in such a way as to create unnecessary pain or suffering. Gut shooting an enemy soldier can get me a life prison term. I'm also required to render all possible aid to enemy wounded whenever practicable.

Some puke who runs into a street and chucks a grenade at a crowd?

I can start at his ankles and work my way up, take a break at lunchtime, and then do his arms before leaving him for the dogs. Street dogs are pretty nasty in Iraq, btw.

The lesson here?

Want Geneva Convention protections? Then put on a uniform like a man and then expect to be treated like one if the time comes. Both the US & Britain have excellent reputations with the Iraqi Army folks that we captured. Our biggest problem in 1991 was the sheer volume of guys surrendering to us because we treated them better as prisoners than their own officers treated them as soldiers. I was on the second string in 91 and had to seriously hesitate when Iraqis came at me armed. Unless they pointed at me I had to resist the God-given urge to shoot because 95% of the time they were surrendering.

It is damned embarrassing to be a shooter and have 30 guys drive up on you in a tank, dismount and search for you and just as you think the poop is about to hit the fan they find you and pick you up and put you on the tank and ask which way to the US line? When this happened to me it was so commonplace that no one on our side cared. It was just 30 more Iraqis to clothe, house, and feed.

These guys who are coming in from Syria and etc. to stir things up are not soldiers.

They endanger civilians by attacking uniformed soldiers while looking like a civilian and then making ALL civilians potential threats.

They deserve no concern of mine as they have no concern for anyone else at all.

   

Oh, well, goodbye then.

   

torture is never justified

   

Agreed. But do change the "generally" to "extremely rarely" and we'll be on the same page.

But when it comes time to do so, then do it.

   

Yeah that's what I meant. Only in extreme cases should it be used.

   

Any conditions allowing for torture, will eventually be set lower and lower until torture is always acceptable regardless of the scenario, name a nation which uses torture, which has not devolved into the worst form of government.

So come on, tell me, how is torture justified, when any nation which considers using it does so at the expense of due process, and a country which lacks due process truly has no freedoms which can be assured.

   

In most cases I do agree. You usually can get someone to talk just by being nice to them. People like to talk especially if they think that talking will get them out of a jam.

Then you get hard cases who are willing to die before they will talk and what they know can save lives: our guys and theirs most of the time.

If they are in uniform when they come into custody then torture is not an option in any circumstance. That's a good thing.

But what if it's a known al Qaeda perp and you find him with traces of VX gas?

Do you get all nice with him and risk that he's going to deploy VX gas *anywhere*????

Do you torture one man or do you submit tens of thousands of people to the ungodly tortures of VX exposure?

Be sure to tell the families of the dead how you stood on principle instead of torturing a filthy killer to save their husbands, wives, sons, daughters, etc.

   

Under the geneva convention you need to first try them and prove that they are a spy, then the geneva convention no longer applies. However, generations of US bans on torture, the US laws, rules and regulations still apply.

And if a single civilian was tortured, then rumsfeld and bush are responsible, regardless or his knowledge, regardless of their actions. That is what the geneva convention states.

   

what about sodium penethol, or how bout vodka? that's the most pleasant way i can think of to make someone talk.

   

Britain, France, USA, Canada (according to these Canadians http://www.fathers.ca/ ), Belgium, Italy, Israel, and a whole host of muslim governments...unless you'd like to go there and make my day by pointing out how muslim governments *all* endorse torture (even Turkey - 'moderate' muslim government).

All have been accused of torture in recent years and all have acknowledged using acknowledged forms of torture. Sleep deprivation is used in Canada and Belgium as an interviewing technique and the technique is considered torture by Amnesty International.

   

Legally, that's chemical torture.

   

ONE MORE TIME,

The Geneva Convention ONLY applies to people who are in uniform when they are captured.

This point of international law was reaffirmed when Panama's Noriega demanded Geneva rights and The Hague found that he was not in uniform when he was captured and was therefore not protected by Geneva.

   

Previous  1  2  3  4  5  6  Next