Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Yes, shooting the leader of a nation or group you are at war with is legal and yes, waterboarding is torture and is illegal. American Soli=diers have been Courts Martialled for it and we tried germans and Japanese for it. So you are correct.
Waterboarding of illegal combatants of terrorist with no national affiliation is legal. They hide in hospitals, behind women and children and blow up or inspire other to do so in crowds of innocent people. I have no problem with it. They don't die, are not disfigured and there are no long term effects beyond some fear and maybe mental ones.
Also, they used to keep terrorists up over 180 hours straight, and that wasn't torture, but sure twisted their brains as well for a while.
How about the old bag on the head having had another person next to them and faking that they executed the guy next to them? Another way of scaring them into talking.
As it is, many found their way after being released by "THE ONE" Obama, back to the battlefield with terrorist again. So why be protective?
American Soldiers where court martialed in WW2 for rape (about 50), don't remember anything about Americans pulling fingers out and torturing.
The Germans and Japanese were cutting people open and apart while alive and awake and that is real torture, more than having to hold your breath for 45 seconds.
The Liberal Moral Compass: If it's legal, then it's moral.
Eight months ago...
Quote:
Originally Posted by AeroGuyDC
The bolded part: Did you intentionally forget that Clinton missed a golden opportunity, but reneged, while we literally had the cross-hairs on OBL? Did you intentionally forget that that precise moment could have possibly even prevented 9/11, and subsequently the war in Afghanistan?
Man, I tell ya, it's mindboggling the amount of fact that Leftists conveniently forget when they try to make a point.
Waterboarding of illegal combatants of terrorist with no national affiliation is legal.
No, it is not. And while the previous administration broke the international law (and technically proved the the USA was wrong in executing Japanese for waterboarding Americans during WWII), President Obama had put an end to water boarding in Jan 2009.
Bin Laden was a known terrorist leader who not only planned but also financed successful terrorist operations all over the world. He declared war on the U.S.A. which made him a legal target. The policy of water boarding could be applied to anyone regardless of any known act against the U.S. other than looking Muslim and it was/still is an illegal policy.
Not trying to be argumentative here, but "illegal" in what way, under whose laws? The term torture was never defined, so that anything under the sun can be labeled as "torture". If the federal government tasks dozens of lawyers to determine what is, and is not considered torture, during a war with terrorists, and which interrogation techniques would be determined as legal, and then these these authorized techniques are signed into law by the president, then this becomes US law.
If a CIA interrogator performs the approved, and legal interrogation techniques for his/her country, they should be protected from prosecution when the highly partisan, barely qualified president decides to make these techniques retroactively illegal.
For example, if the CA state police officers have been following regulations and cuffing criminals behind their backs for decades, and the new state governor comes into office and decides cuffing prisoners/suspects behind their backs is cruel and unusual treatment. If he then makes it illegal to do so, is it proper to then seek prosecution of all the state police who cuffed suspects behind their backs during the previous decades?
How surprising that you'd miss the point entirely. Shocked I tell ya.
I'm not preaching about morals. In fact, i'm preaching that Liberals find solace in the law when it conveniently fits their ideals. Water up the nose = HORRIBLE. Bullet to the brain = WONDERFUL. Only a Liberal could rationalize the difference...and that difference is based off of the law. Nevermind the fact that all the people in question are STATED ENEMIES OF THE UNITED STATES. Since you're confused, i'll spell out that what i'm preaching is actually about principles, not morals.
Par for the course. They weren't kidding when they said Einstein was a dumbass in school.
Maybe Obama can explain why some lawyers under the Bush administration are still awaiting for Eric Holden to go after them for Water Boarding...
Every one against Water Boarding...please explain why Water Boarding is worst than shooting a terrorist through the head is so much better...
I would LOVE to document the turn of events that have led you from this (in 2008), where you blame Clinton for not taking out Osama when he had a chance...
Quote:
Originally Posted by bentlebee
I think people are starting to get it and other wise there is more to come since the rep. just have to wait and do nothing and if Obama stays in the race he will wish he backed out when more facts come out. For the one blaming Bush for 9/11, if Clinton had taken the chance he got to take out Osama, there wouldn't have been a 9/11. But we can never be sure, since more crazy m....and racists and American haters are waiting to do something and I'm embarresed to see that they teach hate in a church same to what they do in the mosques.
and this...
Quote:
Originally Posted by bentlebee
I also know that Bill Clinton was in office (dem.) for 8 years and he was the joke of Europe....every night we could watch the next soap about how he made a fool out of his family and the oval office....we also saw how he had a chance to get Osama Bin Laden and didn't take that chance and we all know what happened.
the weak leader Obama...
Quote:
Originally Posted by bentlebee
Always talking like no one is looking for Osama Bin Laden...never mentioned how good it was for the Iraqi population that Saddam Hussein is gone! Probable because he shares the same name
Back to Clinton not taking care of business...
Quote:
Originally Posted by bentlebee
I like that part....We all know that Clinton had a chance to give the commend to kill Osama when they had him in view, but he waited to long!
only to return as an Osama Bin Laden sympathizer since May 2.
Yes, shooting the leader of a nation or group you are at war with is legal and yes, waterboarding is torture and is illegal. American Soli=diers have been Courts Martialled for it and we tried germans and Japanese for it. So you are correct.
Hmm, that's really interesting Boompa?
Did you happen to have a link, quote or any other proof that what you are saying is correct, or should we simply assume that whatever you post on CD is factual?
Personally, I've argued on this forum for some time that enemy combatants have no rights since they fail to identify themselves as enemies separate from civilians by wearing a uniform.
Liberals, at least while "W" was in office, consistently argued these enemy combatants were afforded protection from "torture", summary execution, indefinite detention and the like because the laws of war protected them.
Well, which is it?
If waterboarding these people is a war crime as alleged, what is execution without trial of an unarmed Bin Laden?
Tactical problems transporting a live prisoner is never justification for execution, so if UBL had rights under the GC, how is his execution justified?
How surprising that you'd miss the point entirely. Shocked I tell ya.
I'm not preaching about morals. In fact, i'm preaching that Liberals find solace in the law when it conveniently fits their ideals. Water up the nose = HORRIBLE. Bullet to the brain = WONDERFUL. Nevermind the fact that all the people in question are ENEMIES OF THE UNITED STATES. Since you're confused, i'll spell out that what i'm preaching is actually about principles, not morals.
Par for the course. They weren't kidding when they said Einstein was a dumbass in school.
You couldn't preach morals (I should have mentioned that). You're in no position to, but you try. And I certainly won't discourage you from trying. It makes for good amusement.
So, just like the OPer, why were you whining about "liberals" letting Osama go then, and now complaining when they are the ones who got him? You're simply trying to fit an argument per whim, right?
so if UBL had rights under the GC, how is his execution justified?
Liberal answer: "it just is so accept it".
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
