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.
There is a profound difference between a nation endorsing the practice of torture, and incidents of brutality on the battlefield. The issue isn't about a soldier, acting on his own, brutalizing the enemy. The issue is a soldier, acting on the authority of the President of the United States, engaging in a practice which we, as a nation, had previously recognized as torture, and which we, as a nation, had agreed in international treaties, not to engage in.
Bad things happen during wars. No one is arguing that they don't. Soldiers under the stress of the battlefield cross lines. No one is arguing that they don't. Torturous conditions may occur on the battlefield. But the act of torture does not. The conscious act of torture is conducted on someone who can't fight back. Someone who is at your mercy. Torture is conducted with specific goals. To elicit information, to compel confession, to force conversion. Another poster says beheading is torture. Beheading is execution. The torture is what happens beforehand.
One of the fundamentals of being an American is that we are a humanitarian country. We have a Bill of Rights to protect the rights of the underdog, the minority, the person without power. We're not the country that tortures people we have captured, disarmed, and imprisoned. So when our country endorses the practice of torture, we've undermined everything that's supposed to be good about America. The debate over this issue isn't if torture is good or bad, it's clearly bad. The debate is whether what we gained by torture is worth what we lost. What we lost was a piece of our national identity.
This post is torture.
Now that I've settled that by saying it
case closed.
Who cares?
That's not the point.
Bad guys use women and children as human shields.
Would you advocate that we should?
You know, I feel kind'a like I'm having a flashback talking to my daughter when she was a teenager annd she would be complaining that "everyone else does it - why can't I?" and I would reply the standard answers parents have replied with for decades: "Well if everyone else jumped over a cliff would you?"
It DOESN'T matter if THEY do it.
We are NOT THEM.
The fact that we don't do the types of things they do is one of the reasons we are BETTER THAN THEM.
If we did everything THEY did, we'd be just like THEM.
It's not all that complicated.
It has to do with Right and Wrong.
Torture is WRONG.
Geeze!
This thread is the very proof that evil will ALWAYS exist in the world.
People that do evil NEVER see themselves as EVIL - even when they ARE.
They ALWAYS rationalize it.
Just as YOU are doing.
Ken
Waterboarding causes panic. No serious pain or injury.
Forcing saltwater into the stomach with a hose then
beating the torso with clubs to the point of death
WHILE waterboarding is what the Japanese did.
Not knowing that at this point requires willful ignorance
and a pathological need to hate independent of topic.
Who cares?
That's not the point.
Bad guys use women and children as human shields.
Would you advocate that we should?
Nope, because women and kids are not soldiers.
Quote:
Originally Posted by LordBalfor
You know, I feel kind'a like I'm having a flashback talking to my daughter when she was a teenager annd she would be complaining that "everyone else does it - why can't I?" and I would reply the standard answers parents have replied with for decades: "Well if everyone else jumped over a cliff would you?"
This is a poor analogy. You seem intelligent - surprised you don't see they error of your thinking here. Think about and if you still don't get it shout out and I'll fix ya up.
Quote:
Originally Posted by LordBalfor
It DOESN'T matter if THEY do it.
We are NOT THEM.
The fact that we don't do the types of things they do is one of the reasons we are BETTER THAN THEM.
If we did everything THEY did, we'd be just like THEM.
You think its a popularity contest. Its not. Its about survival in the long run. When some people hear this, they immediately use words like "fear mongering". I can assure you, its not fear or drama, its fact. The White House today is downplaying the civilian deaths, stating that the deaths this week were the result of the Taliban rounding up women and children and forcing them into homes which they knew would be bombed. Do these sound like nice people. I'd torture everyone of them if my family had been killed and I thought I could save somebody else's.
Quote:
Originally Posted by LordBalfor
It's not all that complicated.
It has to do with Right and Wrong.
Torture is WRONG.
I disagree. If we were at war with Russia, and Russia agreed to play by the "rules", I would state that we should play by the rules. I simply believe we had better be prepared to use the same tactics against our enemy that they are willing to use against us. You will have to live with that.
Quote:
Originally Posted by LordBalfor
Geeze!
This thread is the very proof that evil will ALWAYS exist in the world.
People that do evil NEVER see themselves as EVIL - even when they ARE.
They ALWAYS rationalize it.
Just as YOU are doing.
Ken
I am not rationalizing the decision. The decision is already rational. Do you rationalize your decision to stop at a red light and go when its green?
I disagree. If we were at war with Russia, and Russia agreed to play by the "rules", I would state that we should play by the rules. I simply believe we had better be prepared to use the same tactics against our enemy that they are willing to use against us. You will have to live with that.
The bad guys NEVER play by the rules - that's part of what makes them BAD GUYS, so by your logic we would NEVER play by the rules either.
I won't accept that. We're better than that.
Quote:
Originally Posted by GOPATTA2D
I am not rationalizing the decision. The decision is already rational. Do you rationalize your decision to stop at a red light and go when its green?
Sure you are.
THAT'S the nature of rationalization - there's always some reason for doing what you are doing.
Rationalization definition:
1: to bring into accord with reason or cause something to seem reasonable: as a: to substitute a natural for a supernatural explanation of <rationalize a myth> b: to attribute (one's actions) to rational and creditable motives without analysis of true and especially unconscious motives <rationalized his dislike of his brother> ; broadly
2: to create an excuse or more attractive explanation for <rationalize the problem>2: to free (a mathematical expression) from irrational parts <rationalize a denominator>
3: to apply the principles of scientific management to (as an industry or its operations) for a desired result (as increased efficiency)intransitive verb
4: to provide plausible but untrue reasons for conduct
And when our enemies torture our soldiers, still good?
'Cause it's way harder to protest enemies torturing us, when we're doing it too.
I will give you points though, for openly taking the moral low-ground, rather than pretending you still have the moral high-ground.
You can protest all you like. It doesn't really change anything when you are dealing with people who have no problem murdering children to make a political point.
How did that strategy work out in Viet Nam, Korea, WW2? Or anywhere for that matter? Can you provide one example of an enemy of the US that did not torture our legitimate troops because we didn't torture their combatants. How about an Islamic terrorist organization?
Those of us who were paying attention will remember that I specifically pointed out non-uniformed enemies are not given the same protections under international treaties as legitimate soldiers. In fact, a soldier who changes into civilian attire during war is either a deserter or a spy. Both are typically executed during war.
No, it's not an urban legend, although many on the right claim it didn't happen because "the U.S." didn't do it. The trials and executions were carried out as part of a "winning powers" coalition, just like the Nuremburg trials were. The name was The International Military Tribunal For The Far East. For further reference try watching; "Judgement At Nuremburg", or try your local library.
She also wrote;
Why, exactly do you consider this a "witch hunt"? The CIA admitted their agents and contractors did it, admittedly they acted on what they thought was legitimate legal advice from their superiors, we have solide evidence that the President's, Vice President's and Pentagon's legal counsel worked together to create the legal brief that led to that advice being given. The real question is; Were these lawyers giving their best legal advice, or were they giving their bosses what they wanted to hear?
Are you aware that the US has treaties wherein we agree that it's torture and we will not torture? This is why Spain's Attorney General is investigating, some of those held at Gitmo were Spanish citizens. Somehow those funny Spaniards have the quaint idea that torturing their citizens ANYWHERE, under ANY LEGAL FICTION is probably a crime against their citizens.
And;
Two points regarding this statement; Why do you think they don't? Are they somehow sub-human? Also, you might have some (semi) legitimate point had those (or even a majority of those) held been "swept up on the battlefields" as GW Bush kept claiming. In fact more than a simple majority of them were "grudge" prisoners, with probably no relationship with terrorists or even those with terrorists sympathies (before they were tortured), but were picked up because a local village big-shot saw an opportunity to get rid of an enemy, or make some quick cash, OR BOTH.
golfgod
Thank you for your thoughtful response. The specific question I had was, Does anyone actually have evidence that Japanese soldiers were executed for water boarding? Since you have included no links or quotes, I assume you were also unable to find a valid and reliable confirmation of a sentence of death for this act.
As for the rest, Are you able to support any of your assertions with evidence?
One of the earlier posters indicated that the Japanese used a method of forced ingestion that also used salt water instead of fresh water. We didn't do that.
The OP made a claim that the Japanese were not executed for water boarding.
I don't know if they were or not but so far all the rantings from you guys still has not produced any evidence.
So just name calling and saying it happened is not quite going to do it.
Actually, I just said I couldn't verify it. If it happened, I should be able to find some reliable evidence.
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.
