What Is "Torture"?

[cnm]

What country did you say you were from again? Oh, that's right, you didn't. Lol.

I would like to know so that I can dig up some dirt and then lecture you about it.

Well I'll tell you that we are in trouble with war crimes accusations because our troops in Afghanistan handed over prisoners to the US believing they would be properly looked after, which of course with the chaotic and brutal US system there was no way of telling.

Our troops failed in their duty of care to their prisoners under the Geneva Conventions. Serve them right for trusting to the competence of the US, they certainly learnt better there. So, you know, we're dirty too, the difference is we know it.

Troops from the unit to which these guys belong.

 

[2aguy]

Spies and terrorists are only protected by the laws of war if the "power" which holds them is in a state of armed conflict or war, and until they are found to be an "unlawful combatant." Depending on the circumstances, they may be subject to civilian law or a military tribunal for their acts. In practice, they have often have been subjected to torture and execution. The laws of war neither approve nor condemn such acts, which fall outside their scope.[citation needed]

 

[ChrisL]

What country did you say you were from again? Oh, that's right, you didn't. Lol.

I would like to know so that I can dig up some dirt and then lecture you about it.

Well I'll tell you that we are in trouble with war crimes accusations because our troops in Afghanistan handed over prisoners to the US believing they would be properly looked after, which of course with the chaotic and brutal US system there was no war of telling.

Our troops failed in their duty of care to their prisoners under the Geneva Conventions. Serve them right for trusting to the competence of the US, they certainly learnt better there. So, you know, we're dirty too, the difference is we know it.

Troops from this unit.

Oh, you know you're dirty? Lol! Your country did the same as our country did when we handed over the prisoners to the Afghans. Those are the people who know how to deal with these kinds of savages.

 

[2aguy]

cnm...your moral compass is not only broken, it is completely missing....you guys can't make moral judgments because you are completely confused about what is right and what is wrong....how sad for you....and anyone these monsters kill....

 

[ChrisL]

What country did you say you were from again? Oh, that's right, you didn't. Lol.

I would like to know so that I can dig up some dirt and then lecture you about it.

Well I'll tell you that we are in trouble with war crimes accusations because our troops in Afghanistan handed over prisoners to the US believing they would be properly looked after, which of course with the chaotic and brutal US system there was no war of telling.

Our troops failed in their duty of care to their prisoners under the Geneva Conventions. Serve them right for trusting to the competence of the US, they certainly learnt better there. So, you know, we're dirty too, the difference is we know it.

Troops from the unit to which these guys belong.

So basically, you would sacrifice potentially THOUSANDS human lives in order to remain politically correct and not torture your precious savage lunatic from the ME, even if you KNOW he has the answers? Gotcha!

 

[ChrisL]

Gosh, we wouldn't want to give the bad guys any boo-boos.

 

[mudwhistle]

So the Dems, using the only vehicle they have left, are trotting out allegations of torture against the Bush Administration. We've been here before. In 2008 the administration released the "Torture Memos", papers detailing the Bush Administration's legal reasoning for their policies (similar papers for Obama's illegal amnesty are lacking).
Jay Bybee wrote the memo and :

It concludes that torture is only: extreme acts according to the Convention Against Torture; that severe pain (a requisite for this definition of torture) is "serious physical injury, such as organ failure, impairment of bodily function, or even death"; that prolonged mental harm is harm that must last for "months or even years";

So merely inflicting pain is not torture. Merely threatning someone is not torture.
The Bush Administration and the US did not torture anyone. There were legal guidelines in place based on statute.
As usual the Bush-haters toss all that aside and rely on their own flawed reasoning.

But Benghazi is old news now...... go figure.

 

[cnm]

But I accept that people who have reached a position without regard to the law cannot be argued from that position by arguing law.

I hear Somalia is nice.

What if some guy had kidnapped your daughter and was raping and torturing her? The police caught the guy, but he won't say where he's keeping her. He refuses to speak at all. Now what?

Give Bauer a ring. For gods' sakes.

 

[2aguy]

So basically, you would sacrifice potentially THOUSANDS human lives in order to remain politically correct and not torture your precious savage lunatic from the ME, even if you KNOW he has the answers? Gotcha!

This is an innaccurate question...remember...water boarding is harmless, it causes no physical harm, it does not kill, it does not maim, it is incredibly uncomfortable...but when it is over...all the monster has to do is use a towel to dry off...there is no harm done to the terrorist....it is not torture as we know torture....no matter how many times the libs lie about it....it was done to the 3 leaders that were captured...only them...and they gave up vital information.....

And yes....their brains are so broken they will stand by and watch 1000s of innocent men, women and children die horrifying deaths rather than run a little water up the nose of monsters who cut off the heads of children.....did you see that story that just came out.....


screw cnm....he is truly bent....and the rest of his lib buddies are as well....

 

[cnm]

How about this scenario? You know that a guy planted a bomb in a building in New York City, and it has the potential to kill THOUSANDS of people, but he won't tell you where the bomb is?

The only thing to do in that case is to watch a rerun of 24 hours

 

[cnm]

This is an innaccurate question...remember...water boarding is harmless,

That you continue to assert so makes it neither true nor legal.

 

[ChrisL]

So basically, you would sacrifice potentially THOUSANDS human lives in order to remain politically correct and not torture your precious savage lunatic from the ME, even if you KNOW he has the answers? Gotcha!

This is an innaccurate question...remember...water boarding is harmless, it causes no physical harm, it does not kill, it does not maim, it is incredibly uncomfortable...but when it is over...all the monster has to do is use a towel to dry off...there is no harm done to the terrorist....it is not torture as we know torture....no matter how many times the libs lie about it....it was done to the 3 leaders that were captured...only them...and they gave up vital information.....

And yes....their brains are so broken they will stand by and watch 1000s of innocent men, women and children die horrifying deaths rather than run a little water up the nose of monsters who cut off the heads of children.....did you see that story that just came out.....


screw cnm....he is truly bent....and the rest of his lib buddies are as well....

I agree. When the comfort of a terrorist is more important to him than the lives of innocent people, he's got issues.

 

[2aguy]

This article explains why the democrats released this report and what it has cost us....

The Feinstein Report Is Going to Cost Us National Review Online

What is the response of Senate sages to this predicament? Dianne Feinstein and her fellow Democrats saw it as the perfect time to savage the CIA, further burn America’s bridges with anti-terrorism allies, and hand jihadists a huge propaganda victory.

The Islamic State had a response, too: They beheaded four Christian children for refusing to renounce Jesus Christ.

You see where this is going, no?
The Democrats’ “torture” report is a gratuitous hit job — brought to you by the same party that, out of political calculation, aggressively undermined the American war effort in Iraq — only after voting to send our men and women into grave danger there, also out of political calculation.

To be sure, the report is a highly disturbing document. It graphically illustrates the severity of enhanced interrogation tactics used against a small group of top-tier terrorists — terrorists who were responsible for brutally murdering thousands of Americans and who, at the time of their capture, were actively plotting to kill thousands more.

Still, notwithstanding the revelation of a few new gory details, this is old news and its disclosure serves no useful purpose — it is just a settling of scores.

“Old news” is not used here in the familiar Clinton/Obama sense of acknowledging a few embarrassing scandal details on Friday night to pave the way for dismissing scandal coverage as stale by Monday morning. The CIA’s interrogation program happened over a decade ago. It was investigated by Justice Department prosecutors for years — and not once but twice. The second time, even Eric Holder, the hyper-politicized, hard-Left attorney general who had promised Obama’s base a “reckoning,” could not help but concede that the case against our intelligence agents should be dropped because the evidence was insufficient to warrant torture prosecutions.

 

[cnm]

Oh, you know you're dirty?

yup, that's the difference between us, you think your'e clean.

 

[ChrisL]

How about this scenario? You know that a guy planted a bomb in a building in New York City, and it has the potential to kill THOUSANDS of people, but he won't tell you where the bomb is?

The only thing to do in that case is to watch a rerun of 24 hours

Why don't you just answer the question. What would you do? Let all of those people perish so that you don't hurt the suspect?

 

[cnm]

So basically, you would sacrifice potentially THOUSANDS human lives in order to remain politically correct and not torture your precious savage lunatic from the ME, even if you KNOW he has the answers? Gotcha!

No, I'd ignore your childish fantasies and give you a video to watch.

 

[ChrisL]

Oh, you know you're dirty?

yup, that's the difference between us, you think your'e clean.

No, the difference is I KNOW I'm clean and I know you're dirty. Anyone who would favor the terrorist over the lives of innocent people is a politically correct psychopath. Lol!

 

[ChrisL]

So basically, you would sacrifice potentially THOUSANDS human lives in order to remain politically correct and not torture your precious savage lunatic from the ME, even if you KNOW he has the answers? Gotcha!

No, I'd ignore your childish fantasies and give you a video to watch.

IOW, you cannot answer the question without making yourself look like a complete ass. I understand.

 

[cnm]

I agree. When the comfort of a terrorist is more important to him than the lives of innocent people, he's got issues.

That your Hollywood fantasies are more real to you than actuality shows where the issues are.

 

[ChrisL]

I agree. When the comfort of a terrorist is more important to him than the lives of innocent people, he's got issues.

That your Hollywood fantasies are more real to you than actuality shows where the issues are.

Would you use torture in such a scenario or would you allow people to die on account of being politically correct? A simple yes or no will do.