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.
Military training - preparing them for being a prisoner of war.
It was tough but, they got through it OK
Good point. Many years ago, I was "tear-gassed" in boot camp. Not pleasant, but good training in being able to "get through it". I'm sure it would be called "torture", though, if we used it at Guantanamo.
The US government felt it was torture in WW2. In fact they charged a Japanese officer with war crimes for carrying out waterboarding. He was sentenced to 15 years of hard labor.
Twenty-one years earlier, in 1947, the United States charged a Japanese officer, Yukio Asano, with war crimes for carrying out another form of waterboarding on a U.S. civilian. The subject was strapped on a stretcher that was tilted so that his feet were in the air and head near the floor, and small amounts of water were poured over his face, leaving him gasping for air until he agreed to talk.
"Asano was sentenced to 15 years of hard labor," Sen. Edward M. Kennedy (D-Mass.) told his colleagues last Thursday during the debate on military commissions legislation. "We punished people with 15 years of hard labor when waterboarding was used against Americans in World War II," he said.
Maybe the thread should have been stated differently to include:
1. Is there any value that would come from this type of torture?
2. Will accurate truthful information be given?
3. Should a nation of our assumed high standards waterboard?
It's all relative...pulling out only one fingernail isn't as bad as pulling all five.
Chopping off one finger isn't as bad as chopping off the hand.
Poking out one eye with a pencil isn't as bad as poking out both eyes.
Sounds like good ole Gestapo tactics and rationale.
Hopefully, neither you, nor I will ever have to decide these questions first-hand---or in the protection of OUR families.
Torture, according to international law, is "any act by which severe pain or suffering, whether physical or mental, is intentionally inflicted on a person for such purposes as obtaining from him or a third person information or a confession, punishing him for an act he or a third person has committed or is suspected of having committed, or intimidating or coercing him or a third person, or for any reason based on discrimination of any kind, when such pain or suffering is inflicted by or at the instigation of or with the consent or acquiescence of a public official or other person acting in an official capacity. It does not include pain or suffering arising only from, inherent in or incidental to lawful sanctions.
So, yes, waterboarding is torture. Keep in mind the country that wins calls it "advanced interrogation techniques" and the losing side calls it torture (as well as most of the neutral countries). Be thankful that you are on the winning side. Problem is, torture is recognized by the Geneva Convention therefore, then if we are violating it, should we just dismiss the Geneva Convention and have it that all countries can commit torture? It seems some American's are okay with other countries committing torture on our soldiers and civilians. By saying we condone torture does that not also say we condone torture of our own people by enemies and by those within our own government. The destruction of evidence (i.e. the videotapes) is too prevent war crime prosecution of those who carried out the order. However, this does not protect us against civil liabilities and should one of them sue us, well, we will be in a load of crap from lawsuits. Its only a matter of time before that happens. Whether we should use waterboarding or not (i.e. torture) to get information from the enemy, is a tough question. Are we ready for the price because we are short-sighted to see the future. When America isn't as powerful in the future and some country attacks us, will they be lenient or follow or own past mistakes and torture us for whatever information we may or many not have or just for pure enjoyment of it. Much like missing American P.O.W. in Vietnam, only time will tell if those imprisoned in Abu Gharib will ever be set free. And if they do, be prepared for international courts and civil lawsuits. Calling enemy soldiers as terrorists has always been a little funny to me. I am sure if we release them, some will continue to fight unless the situation in Iraq resolves (i.e. not for a long time)...
Last edited by evilnewbie; 12-08-2007 at 09:03 PM..
Hopefully, neither you, nor I will ever have to decide these questions first-hand---or in the protection of OUR families.
I don't think there is anything that can justify torture.
Reminds me of a Frank Zappa song, "What's the Ugliest Part Of Your Body".
It has some interesting lyrics.
I don't think there is anything that can justify torture..
As a Catholic, I'd say your attitude is very "Christ-like"...and I'm not sure I could ever match your character. If this is truly your attitude, you're to be commended.
However, I can't get past the scenario of "what if my inocent 10-year old was kidnapped--and I had the kidnapper---would I 'twist his arm' or 'sit on his chest' to get him to reveal her wherabouts?" I'm afraid I'd have to.
Obviously, the whole subject of torture is one Americans aren't comfortable with. We can't 'see ourselves' ever resorting to this. But in an ever-changing world, when fighting enemies of all sorts, how long can we adhere to this? I don't know.
Torture may not always provide the answer you’re looking for. Is harsh torture ever warranted ? Torture to the point at which someone is killed because they didn’t know the answers you were looking for!
torture is recognized by the Geneva Convention therefore, then if we are violating it, should we just dismiss the Geneva Convention and have it that all countries can commit torture? It seems some American's are okay with other countries committing torture on our soldiers and civilians. By saying we condone torture does that not also say we condone torture of our own people by enemies and by those within our own government. The destruction of evidence (i.e. the videotapes) is too prevent war crime prosecution of those who carried out the order.
Absoluty correct. Do most that agree with ex attorney general Gonzales when he stated the Geneva Convention is "quant" realize that if we are not following the Geneva Convention, then others will not follow it when it comes to our soldiers.
The Detainee Treatment Act was created to stop inhuman & degrading treatment of the detainees INCLUDING those in CIA custody.
The CIA was so concerned that its operations may be subject to legal charges that some of its employees puchased liability insurance.
Then the tapes were destroyed.....hm
Military training - preparing them for being a prisoner of war.
It was tough but, they got through it OK
Naturally, however, it's much easier to get through an episode where the bulk of the suffering is a result of fear, rather than externally-inflicted pain, when the fear is removed by having the procedure done by your buddies.
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.
it's an unthinkable torture!
