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.
I don't care for war criminals regardless of gender.
Except, Im sure you dont mind Obama and his his use of a Billion dollars in cruise missiles that hit hospitals and family gatherings, and the pain and suffering it brought those people. Then there's the complete destruction of Libya and attempted ousting of the president of Syria, which led to 100,000s dead and millions in diaspora. Lets also not forget the ISIS and Al-Qaeda Terrorists he freed who returned to the battlefield to kill US soldiers and Innocent civilians.
What ever this person has done, it pales in comparison to the pain and suffering this Nobel Peace Prize winner has brought to the world. We could easily conclude that she would be a more deserving Peace Prize winner.
Plus, The concept of a 'black site', a secret prison outside of regular law enforcement operated by intelligence or state/internal security agencies has been around since the early Roman Empire.
why is it all of sudden such a big deal? Do you really think government agencies would simply give up on a system that has worked so well for over 2,000 years? Get real!
It's a big deal because it's WRONG. You do realize that your rationalization could be used to defend slavery. It's a system that has worked so well for thousands of years!
Except, Im sure you dont mind Obama and his his use of a Billion dollars in cruise missiles that hit hospitals and family gatherings, and the pain and suffering it brought those people. Then there's the complete destruction of Libya and attempted ousting of the president of Syria, which led to 100,000s dead and millions in diaspora. Lets also not forget the ISIS and Al-Qaeda Terrorists he freed who returned to the battlefield to kill US soldiers and Innocent civilians.
What ever this person has done, it pales in comparison to the pain and suffering this Nobel Peace Prize winner has brought to the world. We could easily conclude that she would be a more deserving Peace Prize winner.
Except, Im sure you dont mind Obama and his his use of a Billion dollars in cruise missiles that hit hospitals and family gatherings, and the pain and suffering it brought those people. Then there's the complete destruction of Libya and attempted ousting of the president of Syria, which led to 100,000s dead and millions in diaspora. Lets also not forget the ISIS and Al-Qaeda Terrorists he freed who returned to the battlefield to kill US soldiers and Innocent civilians.
What ever this person has done, it pales in comparison to the pain and suffering this Nobel Peace Prize winner has brought to the world. We could easily conclude that she would be a more deserving Peace Prize winner.
You forgot Vietnam massacres by USA soldiers who were never charged.
Do a search on former CIA Agent John Kiriakou who spent time in prison for discussing torture on tv. It was already being discussed and written about but he didn't realize it had never been admitted to by anyone who had ties to the CIA at the time of his interview (which was after he'd left the CIA). Bush's DOJ investigated and cleared him just before Obama was inaugurated. Then Obama's DOJ reopened the case and charged him under the Espionage Act. He was one of many "whistleblowers" accused of this, going into debt and filing bankruptcy to defend themselves, and doing time in prison under Obama's administration.
If there was no such thing as torture, none of the above would have been possible.
They were unlawful, but those massacres highlight a major difference between the USA and the rest of the world. International laws don't apply equally to the United States. The massacres in Vietnam had clear evidence, yet nothing was done about it. In the UN, the USA would have veto any resolution. No USA allied would have supported any international legal action against the United States. The USA is like a mobster that controls the international courts. The same applies to China, Russia, and all major powers. They are immune, but free to use the international courts against lesser powers.
Nothing will ever be done about black listed torture sites. The countries that these black sites reside won't cooperate and any international application of human rights abuse or UN resolution will be voted down.
They were unlawful, but those massacres highlight a major difference between the USA and the rest of the world. International laws don't apply equally to the United States. The massacres in Vietnam had clear evidence, yet nothing was done about it. In the UN, the USA would have veto any resolution. No USA allied would have supported any international legal action against the United States. The USA is like a mobster that controls the international courts. The same applies to China, Russia, and all major powers. They are immune, but free to use the international courts against lesser powers.
Nothing will ever be done about black listed torture sites. The countries that these black sites reside won't cooperate and any international application of human rights abuse or UN resolution will be voted down.
They weren't just unlawful, they were WRONG. The fact that we got away with it doesn't make it right. It was unlawful for a reason. The fact that Gina Haspel will likely never be prosecuted for her participation in black ops sites and in torture doesn't mean that she is in the right, or that she hasn't been damaged by the things she's seen and done. And the fact that the Congressional Record actually documents her participation in these things means that our government can't pretend that she is innocent of these things. Republicans might decide to approve her nomination anyway, but the public record is still there, no matter what.
They weren't just unlawful, they were WRONG. The fact that we got away with it doesn't make it right. It was unlawful for a reason. The fact that Gina Haspel will likely never be prosecuted for her participation in black ops sites and in torture doesn't mean that she is in the right, or that she hasn't been damaged by the things she's seen and done. And the fact that the Congressional Record actually documents her participation in these things means that our government can't pretend that she is innocent of these things. Republicans might decide to approve her nomination anyway, but the public record is still there, no matter what.
What is right and wrong is relative. In certain cultures what is right is wrong in other cultures. However, international laws operate under specific system, which the United States has not been charged or found guilty. Thus, the United States has not violated any laws under international laws and that is what matters not your opinion.
This right or wrong discussion will go no where. It's like discussing the Bible, creationism, or morality. Different people have their own opinion of what is right or wrong. However, the law is specific and if charges and evidence can be provided, then a person can be found guilty. Until such a time that Gina can be found guilty, there is no legal bases for your accusation. You are entitled to your moral opinion, but in court you have no case.
Unless you want to continue this discussion from a purely legal point, there is no point in continuing this discussion due to the moral relativism.
What is right and wrong is relative. In certain cultures what is right is wrong in other cultures. However, international laws operate under specific system, which the United States has not been charged or found guilty. Thus, the United States has not violated any laws under international laws and that is what matters not your opinion.
This right or wrong discussion will go no where. It's like discussing the Bible, creationism, or morality. Different people have their own opinion of what is right or wrong. However, the law is specific and if charges and evidence can be provided, then a person can be found guilty. Until such a time that Gina can be found guilty, there is no legal bases for your accusation. You are entitled to your moral opinion, but in court you have no case.
Unless you want to continue this discussion from a purely legal point, there is no point in continuing this discussion due to the moral relativism.
It's not relative in this conversation. Kudos to you though for trying to use smoke and mirrors.
The United States has violated international laws. Whether we've been charged or found guilty or not does not negate the actions we've taken.
The right and wrong discussion is important to have, because it helps to define who we are as a nation. Our actions aren't always honorable. Our acknowledgement of that fact, and our efforts in the future to do the right thing are important.
I'm not accusing Ms Haspel of wrong-doing. I'm referencing the Congressional Record, which documents her participation in programs that the CIA conducted which were a violation of international law.
Your logic isn't logic. Your arguments wouldn't stand up in any court.
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.
