The whole torture debate right now
- Thread starter WHITE DEVIL
- Start date
that isnt the point. the u.s. is shitting on the rest of the world with these actions. basically what it says is that we will do what we want, when we want, to who we want, without reprucussion.
i agree, there are bigger issues that need to be addressed. but this would go a long way in patching relations around the world.
i agree, there are bigger issues that need to be addressed. but this would go a long way in patching relations around the world.
It wont do shit. World opinion is dictated by the fact that most countries in the world simultaneously awe and revile the United States in its position as a global power.
Bin Laden, for example, called the US a paper tiger and laughed at how technical we tried to be with our application of force, and on the same hand raised his voice in mourning over the Muslims we were killing.
European countries feel we have a grand responsibility in solving world crises but then turn and point out our shortcomings whenever we attempt it. I even stopped watching BBC America because they could not contain their hard ons whenever America fell onto bad times. It's like the entire BBC America channel is tongue in cheek.
"Well they arent so great a super power now are they?" etc
Although I still rely on BBC news and watch their world news.
Bin Laden, for example, called the US a paper tiger and laughed at how technical we tried to be with our application of force, and on the same hand raised his voice in mourning over the Muslims we were killing.
European countries feel we have a grand responsibility in solving world crises but then turn and point out our shortcomings whenever we attempt it. I even stopped watching BBC America because they could not contain their hard ons whenever America fell onto bad times. It's like the entire BBC America channel is tongue in cheek.
"Well they arent so great a super power now are they?" etc
Although I still rely on BBC news and watch their world news.
1. Do you think if we do not try or impeach Bush administration officials, the torture will be mass and widespread?
2. How many incidents of torture occurred?
3. How many people lost their lives as a result?
4. How many people are tortured and killed all over the world in other countries?
5. Was 9/11 a unique time in terms of precedent and historical context? In such situations, is it likely to assume that government officials will be counted on to take harsh or unpleasant action?
6. In the grand scheme of things, how much did CIA torture affect the world? How many people were affected by it?
2. How many incidents of torture occurred?
3. How many people lost their lives as a result?
4. How many people are tortured and killed all over the world in other countries?
5. Was 9/11 a unique time in terms of precedent and historical context? In such situations, is it likely to assume that government officials will be counted on to take harsh or unpleasant action?
6. In the grand scheme of things, how much did CIA torture affect the world? How many people were affected by it?
no, you know that wont have an effect on the torture. they are deciding on that issue because of the question that in the standards at the time, the officials were breaking the law. also those opposing torture, say those people should have known that it was 'wrong' and therefore had the duty to stand against orders..
Yes it is does not have the largest number of participants in the problem but every through a human rights perspective, no issue is too small when lives are at stake. But the problem is perceived as larger because the platform it gains amidst war and the value that can stem..
the largest concern is not the loss of life but the mental and emotional damage that can be caused.
"Also, in case it’s of interest, I have since woken up trying to push the bedcovers off my face, and if I do anything that makes me short of breath I find myself clawing at the air with a horrible sensation of smothering and claustrophobia. No doubt this will pass. As if detecting my misery and shame, one of my interrogators comfortingly said, “Any time is a long time when you’re breathing water.” I could have hugged him for saying so, and just then I was hit with a ghastly sense of the sadomasochistic dimension that underlies the relationship between the torturer and the tortured. I apply the Abraham Lincoln test for moral casuistry: “If slavery is not wrong, nothing is wrong.” Well, then, if waterboarding does not constitute torture, then there is no such thing as torture." Alex Hitchens http://www.vanityfair.com/politics/features/2008/08/hitchens200808
(good read btw) and yeah its vanity fair, they do have some credibility...
apply that to a real life situation and viola you got some fucked up damage in the head.. that may not just conveniently wear off.. soldiers that come back from war can easily be scarred by their time spent.
The United States has the duty to uphold civil rights, even when their standards are directly opposed by a nation. Although difficult to agree with if it is an enemy, i believe the US has the duty by the very nature of our country to uphold em.
just illustrates all the more reason to not worry about persecuting those participants of torture.. but doesn't remove the need for a standard
I understand your just saying that it because it affects only a few, that this issue doesnt gain merit for our time. But your perception of these few lives not of concern, should NEVER be an attitude that the US has. i dont think we should waste our time on persecuting those in question though..
Robert Baer, ex-cia (i forgot the title but very top officer) stated on Bill Maher:
One, it goes against the geneva convention
Two, it doesnt even fucking work
So it has merit on the grounds that were breakign intl law and this needs to be corrected and figured out, we may be wasting our time with torture, and so that we can establish lines, and we can persecute them...
Yes it is does not have the largest number of participants in the problem but every through a human rights perspective, no issue is too small when lives are at stake. But the problem is perceived as larger because the platform it gains amidst war and the value that can stem..
the largest concern is not the loss of life but the mental and emotional damage that can be caused.
"Also, in case it’s of interest, I have since woken up trying to push the bedcovers off my face, and if I do anything that makes me short of breath I find myself clawing at the air with a horrible sensation of smothering and claustrophobia. No doubt this will pass. As if detecting my misery and shame, one of my interrogators comfortingly said, “Any time is a long time when you’re breathing water.” I could have hugged him for saying so, and just then I was hit with a ghastly sense of the sadomasochistic dimension that underlies the relationship between the torturer and the tortured. I apply the Abraham Lincoln test for moral casuistry: “If slavery is not wrong, nothing is wrong.” Well, then, if waterboarding does not constitute torture, then there is no such thing as torture." Alex Hitchens http://www.vanityfair.com/politics/features/2008/08/hitchens200808
(good read btw) and yeah its vanity fair, they do have some credibility...
apply that to a real life situation and viola you got some fucked up damage in the head.. that may not just conveniently wear off.. soldiers that come back from war can easily be scarred by their time spent.
The United States has the duty to uphold civil rights, even when their standards are directly opposed by a nation. Although difficult to agree with if it is an enemy, i believe the US has the duty by the very nature of our country to uphold em.
just illustrates all the more reason to not worry about persecuting those participants of torture.. but doesn't remove the need for a standard
I understand your just saying that it because it affects only a few, that this issue doesnt gain merit for our time. But your perception of these few lives not of concern, should NEVER be an attitude that the US has. i dont think we should waste our time on persecuting those in question though..
Robert Baer, ex-cia (i forgot the title but very top officer) stated on Bill Maher:
One, it goes against the geneva convention
Two, it doesnt even fucking work
So it has merit on the grounds that were breakign intl law and this needs to be corrected and figured out, we may be wasting our time with torture, and so that we can establish lines, and we can persecute them...
Why let one crime exclude an other? you wouldent treat other crimnals like that and in a democratcy your supposed to be held accountable for your actions if not it is very questionable if you can call the u.s a democracy,and yes i know they have let people of the hook for years often in the name of national security but arent people starting se a pattern here.
I think the only context it doesnt matter is in the context that the foreign policy is still going to be impiralistic,Í mean just the other day 70 civiliens got killed in afghanistan so maby a couple of tortured people doesnt matter that much.the whole thing is starting to look real stupid every one should know by now that policies like these have bean carried out for years and they aint going to stop any time soon especially now with the new face lift an all.Another thing is that people dont have power over the institutions that make these kinds of decisions so the only reason for them to get indicted as i se it, is if it will serve the new policies well.
http://www.siccness.net/vb/showthread.php?t=315993
from this thread , i asked you , well tell me about Mao's beliefs and actions .
from this thread , i asked you , well tell me about Mao's beliefs and actions .