What Is "Torture"?

[Uncensored2008]

What is Torture?

I'm glad someone posted this earlier saying that Liberals use these tactics:

Honest and Dishonest Debate US Message Board - Political Discussion Forum

Claiming well-defined words are vague or ill-defined. This is a mirror image of #30. It is a favorite of those who do wrong but seek to avoid the consequences or responsibility by asserting that what is wright or wrong is merely a mater of each individual’s opinion. Try that in court and see how far its gets you. This is also akin to #22: rejecting facts or logic as mere opinion.

You mean like what the meaning of "is" is, Comrade?

 

[The Rabbi]

This situation is a classic case of the Perfect being the enemy of the Good, while providing aid and comfort to the Bad.

People forget the atmosphere after 9/11 when the American public would have supported pulling the fingernails out of people to keep them safe.

 

[cnm]

Repeating the same failed arguments makes you look stupid. OK, itmakes you look MORE stupid, because your arguments are nonsense.

Yeah? Show where the Bush administration's legal arguments for torture hold sway then. It should be easy if my argument is false.

We both know that's never going to happen, you're just going to keep on denying because it's all that's left for you to do.

 

[boedicca]

This situation is a classic case of the Perfect being the enemy of the Good, while providing aid and comfort to the Bad.

People forget the atmosphere after 9/11 when the American public would have supported pulling the fingernails out of people to keep them safe.

Indeed. And yet we didn't go to such extremes.

It's truly pathetic to see this revisionist history which ignores the atrocities done by the people who were interrogated.

 

[Uncensored2008]

And yet it is a war crime.

Not against unlawful combatants (spies) Comrade. He could have cut their nuts off and shot them under the Geneva convention.

 

[Uncensored2008]

Is it a war crime or just a misunderstanding of international treaty obligations? Maybe it's both things at once......

Or maybe you're just lying?

Probably you're just too stupid to grasp that the party bosses are lying to you - not that you would care - party above all, right Comrade?

 

[boedicca]

And yet it is a war crime.

Not against unlawful combatants (spies) Comrade. He could have cut their nuts off and shot them under the Geneva convention.

I don't see AQ and ISIS abiding by the Geneva Convention.

Just sayin'.

 

[cnm]

It's truly pathetic to see this revisionist history which ignores the atrocities done by the people who were interrogated.

Yeah? The atrocities done by the 26 - at least - 'innocent' people who were interrogated?

You guys are a hoot.

 

[The Rabbi]

Repeating the same failed arguments makes you look stupid. OK, itmakes you look MORE stupid, because your arguments are nonsense.

Yeah? Show where the Bush administration's legal arguments for torture hold sway then. It should be easy if my argument is false.

We both know that's never going to happen, you're just going to keep on denying because it's all that's left for you to do.

Repeating your argument in a different fashion makes you look stupid.
The Bush Administration carefully examined the statute, treaties, history, and interpreation and set guidelines for what was acceptable and what wasnt. That a later administration disagreed does not negate the validity of what was done. If the Bush Administration were wrong, there would have been prosecutions.
How many people have been prosecuted for torture based on those memos?

 

[cnm]

I don't see AQ and ISIS abiding by the Geneva Convention.

Just sayin'.

I agree you're putting the US on the same level as Al Qaeda and ISIS. Well done.

 

[boedicca]

It's truly pathetic to see this revisionist history which ignores the atrocities done by the people who were interrogated.

Yeah? The atrocities done by the 26 - at least - 'innocent' people who were interrogated?

You guys are a hoot.

Which is worse: interrogating a known terrorist via non-lethal methods or killing him and dozens of innocent people with a drone?

Which is worse: interrogating a know terrorist via non-lethal methods or beheading civilians and offering to return their bodies to their families for $1M?

 

[The Rabbi]

It's truly pathetic to see this revisionist history which ignores the atrocities done by the people who were interrogated.

Yeah? The atrocities done by the 26 - at least - 'innocent' people who were interrogated?

You guys are a hoot.

You dont think terrorism is an atrocity?
This is the problem: Libs want to feel moral at the expense of others. In this case at the expense of people who would have died in successful plots that were foiled by the information obtained.

 

[cnm]

If the Bush Administration were wrong, there would have been prosecutions.
How many people have been prosecuted for torture based on those memos?

That the US will not honour its treaty obligations to prosecute perpetrators of war crimes is understood. That's what all this is about.

 

[cnm]

Which is worse: interrogating a known terrorist via non-lethal methods or killing him and dozens of innocent people with a drone?

Which is worse: interrogating a know terrorist via non-lethal methods or beheading civilians and offering to return their bodies to their families for $1M?

I can see you're comfortable comparing US behaviour with that of those you label terrorists. The rest of the world sees it also.

 

[The Rabbi]

I don't see AQ and ISIS abiding by the Geneva Convention.

Just sayin'.

I agree you're putting the US on the same level as Al Qaeda and ISIS. Well done.

She actually was distinguishing them.
You have issues with reading comprehension, dontcha?

 

[boedicca]

I don't see AQ and ISIS abiding by the Geneva Convention.

Just sayin'.

I agree you're putting the US on the same level as Al Qaeda and ISIS. Well done.

Your disgusting moral relativism is showing, bub.

I'll agree that Obama has moved the U.S. close to them via drone executions, but hasn't reached the point of beheading journalists.

 

[cnm]

You dont think terrorism is an atrocity?
This is the problem: Libs want to feel moral at the expense of others. In this case at the expense of people who would have died in successful plots that were foiled by the information obtained.

You think atrocities are done by innocent people? This gets better and better.

 

[The Rabbi]

If the Bush Administration were wrong, there would have been prosecutions.
How many people have been prosecuted for torture based on those memos?

That the US will not honour its treaty obligations to prosecute perpetrators of war crimes is understood. That's what all this is about.

WTF? It isnt a treaty issue, Sparky. You quoted the US Code section. It would be a criminal offense if what you said were true.
It isnt. Whch is why there have been no prosecutions.

 

[boedicca]

Which is worse: interrogating a known terrorist via non-lethal methods or killing him and dozens of innocent people with a drone?

Which is worse: interrogating a know terrorist via non-lethal methods or beheading civilians and offering to return their bodies to their families for $1M?

I can see you're comfortable comparing US behaviour with that of those you label terrorists. The rest of the world sees it also.

You are a moron. Aren't you late for your occupying today?

 

[The Rabbi]

You dont think terrorism is an atrocity?
This is the problem: Libs want to feel moral at the expense of others. In this case at the expense of people who would have died in successful plots that were foiled by the information obtained.

You think atrocities are done by innocent people? This gets better and better.

WTF are you talking about? You are becoming increasingly unhinged as you lose this debate.

 

[cnm]

I don't see AQ and ISIS abiding by the Geneva Convention.

Just sayin'.

I agree you're putting the US on the same level as Al Qaeda and ISIS. Well done.

She actually was distinguishing them.
You have issues with reading comprehension, dontcha?

The US doesn't abide by the Geneva Convention. Comparable to those it calls terrorists.

Still, I understand the requirement to seek a very low bar to compare your behaviour against. I mean if you can't call yourself better than those you call terrorist who can you call yourself better than?