So has anyone changed their thinking on Gitmo

[ArlingtonDeac]

Again, terrorists are not lawful combatants as defined by the third Geneva Convention in 1949. Thus, the rules dont apply to them like they do POWs.

The four criteria of being part of an armed forces are:

1. distict chain of command,
2. clear and recognizable uniform,
3. carries arms openly, and
4. conducts their operations in accordance with the laws and customs of war.

Please explain to me how one person in Gitmo falls under this criteria.

Bottom line is Gitmo helped us kill enemy number one. I know liberals like RJ dont like that fact, but it's the truth. In order to kill this type of enemy, sometimes you need to pull your tampon out and go down into the dirt. This is war. You have to kill people. We dont need choir boys out there. I'm glad Obama and the CIA had the balls to do the right thing, and werent too busy worrying about offending the sensibilities of terrorists.

Have you read the Convention Against Torure? We signed.

 

[ArlingtonDeac]

A convicted terrorist has water thrown down his nose/mouth in order to simulate drowning until he reveals information that can save people's lives vs. an innocent person is kidnapped and has his head chopped off from behind with a machete.....hmmmmm.....

That just moral relativism. We reject that as a society.

 

[jhmd2000]

"Those darn facts" are that this intel did not come from torture sessions, and, in fact, came long afterwards, which pretty much shows that torture doesn't have much value, as the professionals have been saying all along.

Do we know this for certain?

 

[DodgerDeac]

We don't and probably never will. Let the debate rage on.

Do we know this for certain?

 

[jhmd2000]

Don Rumsfeld is a lying, warmongering scumbag. Nothing he says can ever be believed.

Then perhaps we should rely upon the sitting Director of Central Intelligence, who said:

"I think some of the detainees clearly were, you know, they used these enhanced interrogation techniques against some of these detainees. But I'm also saying that, you know, the debate about whether we would have gotten the same information through other approaches I think is always going to be an open question."

Director Leon Panetta (told to NBC News)

 

[Les Grossman]

Have you read the Convention Against Torure? We signed.

Yes.

 

[Les Grossman]

That just moral relativism. We reject that as a society.

First, I never knew we rejected that as a society. If anything, I think most people embrace it.

Secondly, RJ said we cant be outraged if someone is beheaded since we waterboard people. That's a direct comparison. And, an absurd one at that. Let's assume waterboarding is torture. I think we can all agree there are levels of torture. Or, there are levels of pain one can inflict on another human being. To compare waterboarding (something we perform on our own troops) to beheading an innocent civilian is just beyond dumb.

 

[LilburnDeac]

First, I never knew we rejected that as a society. If anything, I think most people embrace it.

Secondly, RJ said we cant be outraged if someone is beheaded since we waterboard people. That's a direct comparison. And, an absurd one at that. Let's assume waterboarding is torture. I think we can all agree there are levels of torture. Or, there are levels of pain one can inflict on another human being. To compare waterboarding (something we perform on our own troops) to beheading an innocent civilian is just beyond dumb.

So why don't you volunteer to experience each "level of torture"? We can start small and build up. You can tell us when we've reach an unacceptable level.

 

[jhmd2000]

So why don't you volunteer to experience each "level of torture"? We can start small and build up. You can tell us when we've reach an unacceptable level.

Level One: Listening to RJ talk about national security.

Level Two: Listening to BKF recount how Gingrich's House exercising its power of the purse resulted in balanced budgets that were only due to Clinton's leadership.

Level Three: The Cleveland State game.

 

[DodgerDeac]

So you agree that beheading and waterboarding should be considered the same level of torture? Even though beheading is murder?

So why don't you volunteer to experience each "level of torture"? We can start small and build up. You can tell us when we've reach an unacceptable level.

 

[Les Grossman]

So why don't you volunteer to experience each "level of torture"? We can start small and build up. You can tell us when we've reach an unacceptable level.

I really dont know what you were trying to do with this post. It only proves my point.

When it comes to levels of torture...I'd volunteer to be waterboarded before getting beheaded. But, that's just me. I'm sure there are plenty of idiots out there who may not be able to discern the difference, and would opt for the beheading.

 

[RJKarl]

First, I never knew we rejected that as a society. If anything, I think most people embrace it.

Secondly, RJ said we cant be outraged if someone is beheaded since we waterboard people. That's a direct comparison. And, an absurd one at that. Let's assume waterboarding is torture. I think we can all agree there are levels of torture. Or, there are levels of pain one can inflict on another human being. To compare waterboarding (something we perform on our own troops) to beheading an innocent civilian is just beyond dumb.

It's not "assuming waterbosrding is torture", it has been legally defined as torture by dozens of countries (including the US other than W and his cabal or war criminal). There is no wiggle room

Plus, we have signed treaties that say we won't torture anyone.

Furthermore, waterboarding isn't the only torture we have used. As Generals Taguba and Sanchez have written, under W, our nation used "systemic torture".

The International Red Cross wrote a report of our use of methods of torture.

The people i've mentioned specifically related how they were tortured for months while imprisoned illegally and without charges by the US under W.

Sorry you have absoiltuely NO legs to stand on.

If two highly decorated generals (including the person in charge of Iraq) say we turtured systemically, it happened.

The fact the we signed treaties promising we wouldn't act as did make us disgraceful, dishonest and war criminals.

You should be more concerned American GIs and the millions of Americans who travel overseas and their safety than defending a despicable , barbaric, criminal US regime.

What others do has no impact on our illegal actions.

 

[RJKarl]

I really dont know what you were trying to do with this post. It only proves my point.

When it comes to levels of torture...I'd volunteer to be waterboarded before getting beheaded. But, that's just me. I'm sure there are plenty of idiots out there who may not be able to discern the difference, and would opt for the beheading.

You are the ONLY person on this thread calling people names, simply because they disagree with you.

 

[RJKarl]

So you agree that beheading and waterboarding should be considered the same level of torture? Even though beheading is murder?

What you are unwilling to do is even say we broke the law.

You can be snet to jail for five year for a felony or you can get life for murder. each person is still a felon.

W and his cabal are war criminals. They knowing broke international treaties about the use of torture. There is no way around this.

 

[jhmd2000]

You are the ONLY person on this thread calling people names, simply because they disagree with you.

Well, there was one other person practicing angry name-calling.

RJKarl
Richard Joyce




Join Date: Mar 2011
Posts: 941


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Don Rumsfeld is a lying, warmongering scumbag. Nothing he says can ever be believed.

 

[Les Grossman]

What you are unwilling to do is even say we broke the law.

You can be snet to jail for five year for a felony or you can get life for murder. each person is still a felon.
W and his cabal are war criminals. They knowing broke international treaties about the use of torture. There is no way around this.

Again, thanks for proving the point. By saying one crime can get five years and another can get life, you are directly saying one crime is worse than the other.

Why cant you just admit it was ridiculous to compare waterboarding to beheading? I get you think both are wrong. But, to not admit one is far worse than the other is beyond me.

 

[DodgerDeac]

The treaty was signed in the mid 80's, well before 9/11. This is an evolving world and sometimes protocols like this and the Geneva Convention are made obsolete by the inconceivable actions that follow.

It's not "assuming waterbosrding is torture", it has been legally defined as torture by dozens of countries (including the US other than W and his cabal or war criminal). There is no wiggle room

Plus, we have signed treaties that say we won't torture anyone.

Furthermore, waterboarding isn't the only torture we have used. As Generals Taguba and Sanchez have written, under W, our nation used "systemic torture".

The International Red Cross wrote a report of our use of methods of torture.

The people i've mentioned specifically related how they were tortured for months while imprisoned illegally and without charges by the US under W.

Sorry you have absoiltuely NO legs to stand on.

If two highly decorated generals (including the person in charge of Iraq) say we turtured systemically, it happened.

The fact the we signed treaties promising we wouldn't act as did make us disgraceful, dishonest and war criminals.

You should be more concerned American GIs and the millions of Americans who travel overseas and their safety than defending a despicable , barbaric, criminal US regime.

What others do has no impact on our illegal actions.

 

[ONW]

From what I've read, it took us years to work the intelligence side of any information that was given, and the fact that they were clamming up about this particular individual created more interest as to why?

It does seem to contradict the Jack Bauer ripping out toenails for info on the ticking time bomb theory, but at the same time, maybe harsh treatment followed by a reprieve leads to such revelations. It really is an interesting study in psychology when you remove morality/ethics.

 

[ONW]

"The treaty was signed in the mid 80's, well before 9/11. This is an evolving world and sometimes protocols like this and the Geneva Convention are made obsolete by the inconceivable actions that follow."

Activist judge.

 

[RJKarl]

The treaty was signed in the mid 80's, well before 9/11. This is an evolving world and sometimes protocols like this and the Geneva Convention are made obsolete by the inconceivable actions that follow.

It's irrelevant we signed it and expect others to live up to it.

Using the same logic if a murder is committed in your neighborhoodf, you'd be OK with the police being able to kick in your door and trash your home without a warrant.

After all there is danger in your neighborhood and you want to be safe.