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.
The US Ratified the UN Convention Against Torture on October 21, 1994. That is a fact and is not in dispute, and we ought to simply ignore trolls or troublemakers who want to debate it.
Now, I heard that the other night that Hannity says he is willing to be water boarded for charity, I say lets see it.
The thing about water-boarding is that most people believe it works because, it would work on them. Very few people under go resistance training or have the ability to endure this naturally, so it is only understandable that they believe it provides sound information.
I wonder if all those people who support this will also then support the United States apologizing to those Japanese and Korean soldiers (among many others) who we prosecuted and even put to death for doing the same. Would they support paying reparations to these people who are obviously in their right to do so, if we deem this a worthy thing? I suspect not.
How many US civilians were murdered by terrorists prior to 1901? That Geneva Convention stuff is a nice standard to adhere to when fighting a conventional war with uniformed soldiers who also play by the rules.
We weren't fighting uniformed enemies in the Phillipines or Vietnam, but we still prosecuted waterboarders. Nice try.
The Geneva Convention is a red herring. The UN Convention Against Torture is not the Geneva Convention. Nor do our domestic laws against torture have anything to do with the Geneva Convention.
Quote:
Perhaps you are too blind with hate for the United States to see that.
If the United States is filled with people who justify torturing prisoners, yes, I hate the United States, we are a terrorist nation and we deserve whatever anyone can dish out. Unfortunately, it's not only psychotic freaks like you who die when we're attacked.
We signed it in 1988. We ratified it in 1994. We weren't engaging in symbolism. We were obligating ourselves, and we took our time in going about it. Try again.
I do not have to "try again" a silly UN document does not override the US Constitution nor does it dictate the national security policy of this country. It was symbolic, nothing else.
The Convention has been ratified or acceded to by the following 107 States: Afghanistan, Albania, Algeria, Antigua and Barbuda, Argentina, Armenia, Australia, Austria, Azerbaijan, Bangladesh, Belarus, Belize, Benin, Bosnia and Herzegovina, Brazil, Bulgaria, Burundi, Cambodia, Cameroon, Canada, Cape Verde, Chad, Chile, China, Colombia, Costa Rica, Côte d'Ivoire, Croatia, Cuba, Cyprus, Czech Republic, Democratic Republic of the Congo, Denmark, Ecuador, Egypt, El Salvador, Estonia, Ethiopia, Finland, France, Georgia, Germany, Greece, Guatemala, Guinea, Guyana, Honduras, Hungary, Iceland, Israel, Italy, Jordan, Kazakhstan, Kenya, Kuwait, Kyrgyzstan, Latvia, Libya, Liechtenstein, Lithuania, Luxembourg, Malawi, Malta, Mauritius, Mexico, Moldova, Monaco, Morocco, Namibia, Nepal, Netherlands, New Zealand, Niger, Norway, Panama, Paraguay, Peru, Philippines, Poland, Portugal, Republic of Korea, Romania, Russian Federation, Saudi Arabia, Senegal, Seychelles, Slovak Republic, Slovenia, Somalia, Spain, Sri Lanka, Sweden, Switzerland, Tajikistan, The former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia, Togo, Tunisia, Turkey, Uganda, Ukraine, United Kingdom, United States, Uruguay, Uzbekistan, Venezuela, Yemen and Yugoslavia.
The UN is not the beginning, middle and end of authority in this world, and certainly not with the USA. 0bama just flipped off the UN by not even bothering to attend the latest UN Summit, and even countries that did attend - walked out.
If you want Iran, Syria, Sudan, Russia, China, Cuba et al... dictating US policy to us, forgive me if I disagree, 0bama certainly disagrees.
I do not have to "try again" a silly UN document does not override the US Constitution nor does it dictate the national security policy of this country. It was symbolic, nothing else.
Oddly enough, the United States government doesn't take international treaties and agreements that it signs onto quite so lightly. We actually consider those treaties and agreements as being incorporated into our laws. Which is why we specifically qualified our signing by noting that the United States would pass laws and enforce policies in accordance with the terms of this agreement. The reports we've subsequently submitted to the United Nations on our conforming to this agreement (it loses its symbolism when you actually have to change laws and the UN provides you with evaluations on your compliance and recommends various actions and you, in turn, have to submit reports to the UN following up on their recommendations) demonstrate that there is more than symbolism involved. Visit the UN website and take a gander at how symbolic they consider this international agreement.
The UN is not the beginning, middle and end of authority in this world, and certainly not with the USA. 0bama just flipped off the UN by not even bothering to attend the latest UN Summit, and even countries that did attend - walked out.
If you want Iran, Syria, Sudan, Russia, China, Cuba et al... dictating US policy to us, forgive me if I disagree, 0bama certainly disagrees.
No one is dictating policy to the US. However, we signed and ratified an international agreement, an agreement that commits us to implementing policies as outlined in that agreement. You may think that the US's word means nothing to the international community, but if we start breaking our legal obligations, then why should other countries honor their promises to us?
The Middle East has been infuriated with the USA for over 30 years possibly 60 years starting with our position in regards to Israel.
The moment they would meet me and my wife, they would be infuriated that we are not Muslims, and how dare my wife be out in public w/o her full length potato sack and veil.
NOUN:
Philosophy
1. The theory that the self is the only thing that can be known and verified.
2. The theory or view that the self is the only reality.
You may not have heard, but the law does not depend on Wapasha's "definition" of anything. This is not a government of Wapasha, by Wapasha, and for Wapasha.
Waterboarding is criminal. We've prosecuted people for it since 1901. Split hairs about whether it's torture according to your refined definition all you like; it doesn't change one syllable of the law.
Prosecuted military personnel for using it on captured enemy soldiers. Zubaydah and his lik are not soldiers.
According to you, I am not even entitled to my own opinions. Waterboarding was declared NOT torture and made legal for use on terrorists under president Bush, and I agree with him. so much for "The theory or view that the self is the only reality".
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.
