Page 3 of 3 FirstFirst 123
Results 41 to 45 of 45
  1. #41  
    It's getting awfully heated in this thread. (I also don't think you have to be a Dem/Rep to be for/against torturing or limiting torture.)

    Just an observation: IMO I think the Senate wants to set the example for the rest of the world.

    If one of our objectives is to create stable, democratic governments which ideally would be friendly to the U.S., doesn't it make sense that we be consistent on the ideal of freedom and democracy? (including 'rights').

    I think it's obvious to at least some posters in this thread that they are 'ok' with torturing people. (define torture how you will)

    I personally am not. That doesn't mean that there can't be a good utilitarian argument made for doing it...but a lot of the times that means we have to assume different 'what if' scenarios.

    'This guy might know...let's torture him just in case.' I think we can all see the danger in that kind of reasoning.

    Ultimately my point is...if you agree that we are not treating the prisoners 'hard' enough to get the intel we need, imagine for one moment that the particular prisoner was an American being tortured by AQ. If you are ok with our guys being tortured with the same means, then I guess arguably it might be ok.

    I wouldn't so therefore I am against it.
    Palm III-->Palm IIIxe-->Palm 505-->Samsung i300-->Treo 600-->PPC 6600-->Treo 650-->Treo 700wx-->BB Pearl--> BB Curve

  2. #42  
    I imagine we have different conceptions of torture. If we're pulling fingernails out and shocking prisoners to get info - that's wrong and should be punished if discovered. I don't think sleep-deprivation and similar tactics are torture, but under the UN convention they would appear to be. The abuses at Abu Ghraib were dealt with judicially, as they should have been - as will any other that are uncovered. I don't see the Senate grandstanding as being particularly helpful to our cause.

    I understand the argument that we don't want to invite retribution. I also know we're dealing with fanatics who behead prisoners for... well, apparently for the pure enjoyment of it. What worse could they do? Make them wear a leash and then behead them? Our AQ enemy are irregular ununiformed soldiers that we would be within our rights under the Geneva convention to summarily execute. That we don't is a credit to our society as a whole, and our military in particular.
    Current: iPhone 3G
    Retired from active duty: Treo 800w, Sprint Touch, Mogul, Apache, Cingular Treo 650, HP iPaq 4350, T|T, M505 - Nokia 3650 - SE R520m, T610, T637, Moto P280, etc, etc...
  3. #43  
    First off: I'm mobile.

    "phurth I imagine we have different conceptions of torture. If we're pulling fingernails out and shocking prisoners to get info - that's wrong and should be punished if discovered. I don't think sleep-deprivation and similar tactics are torture, but under the UN convention they would appear to be."

    Im no expert on that but you would be ok with our boys facing similar methods?

    "phurth -The abuses at Abu Ghraib were dealt with judicially, as they should have been - as will any other that are uncovered. I don't see the Senate grandstanding as being particularly helpful to our cause."

    I guess that is one way to look at it. I think the larger picture from all of this is that we live in a global world. Communication occurs instantly. Let's make sure we are in accord with what the rest of the world expects (at least the superpowers). In addition to punishing those who break the law, let's make sure we show the rest of the world that we stand behind what we say. I don't think its a stretch to say that based on some of Pres. Bush's recent decisions regarding POW's and now 'enemy combatants' that others might be confused (and he may have very good policy reasons for doing what he has done). My point is that I don't think its just grandstanding on the side of the Senate to want to be clear on how we will treat the issue of torture (plus as an aside, why would the Pres. own party support the grandstanding if indeed that is what it is.)

    "phurth-I understand the argument that we don't want to invite retribution. I also know we're dealing with fanatics who behead prisoners for... well, apparently for the pure enjoyment of it. "

    I think the fanatics are going to do what they want regardless. The more moderate ones might be persuaded. I think the argument is really one of principle. We will not torture because it's wrong...not that we won't torture in hopes that others won't torture. (although that would be a great result.)
    Palm III-->Palm IIIxe-->Palm 505-->Samsung i300-->Treo 600-->PPC 6600-->Treo 650-->Treo 700wx-->BB Pearl--> BB Curve

  4. #44  
    Quote Originally Posted by t2gungho
    Im no expert on that but you would be ok with our boys facing similar methods?
    I'm no expert, either, but I'd be stunned if our boys don't already face (and receive training on how to deal with) those interrogation methods.
    I guess that is one way to look at it. I think the larger picture from all of this is that we live in a global world. Communication occurs instantly.
    That's precisely why the Senate attempting to micromanage (the reality may be different, but it's secondary to the appearance) this is potentially so damaging.
    Let's make sure we are in accord with what the rest of the world expects (at least the superpowers).
    I don't think any other country in the world would be as concerned with these prisoners' welfare as we are. This is also to our credit. I highly doubt France (to name just one example) would behave any better towards such prisoners if they felt Paris were endangered.
    ..........My point is that I don't think its just grandstanding on the side of the Senate to want to be clear on how we will treat the issue of torture (plus as an aside, why would the Pres. own party support the grandstanding if indeed that is what it is.)
    Uh, 'cause it's the Senate - that's what they do.
    I think the fanatics are going to do what they want regardless. The more moderate ones might be persuaded. I think the argument is really one of principle. We will not torture because it's wrong...not that we won't torture in hopes that others won't torture. (although that would be a great result.)
    You may be right... however I've seen absolutely no evidence of the existence of any Al Qaeda moderates.
    Current: iPhone 3G
    Retired from active duty: Treo 800w, Sprint Touch, Mogul, Apache, Cingular Treo 650, HP iPaq 4350, T|T, M505 - Nokia 3650 - SE R520m, T610, T637, Moto P280, etc, etc...
  5. #45  
    Quote Originally Posted by phurth
    I'm no expert, either, but I'd be stunned if our boys don't already face (and receive training on how to deal with) those interrogation methods.
    No I am sure they do to some extent, probably more training for those going into Iraq.

    Quote Originally Posted by phurth
    That's precisely why the Senate attempting to micromanage (the reality may be different, but it's secondary to the appearance) this is potentially so damaging.
    I guess I see it as a check and balance. You seem to agree with Pres. Bush's stance. I don't. For you its a micromanaging issue, for me a check and balance.

    Quote Originally Posted by phurth
    I don't think any other country in the world would be as concerned with these prisoners' welfare as we are. This is also to our credit. I highly doubt France (to name just one example) would behave any better towards such prisoners if they felt Paris were endangered.
    This may or not be true...but like I said before...it's not what everyone else does, but what we do (principle). If as an added bonus, we can get other countries on board, that's a good thing.

    Quote Originally Posted by phurth
    Uh, 'cause it's the Senate - that's what they do.
    I know that's what they do, but not usually to the President when you have majority control of both the House and Senate.

    Quote Originally Posted by phurth
    You may be right... however I've seen absolutely no evidence of the existence of any Al Qaeda moderates.
    This statement seems to indicate that the only terrorists are AQ. Terrorists are all over the world...some are obviously more moderate than AQ.
    Palm III-->Palm IIIxe-->Palm 505-->Samsung i300-->Treo 600-->PPC 6600-->Treo 650-->Treo 700wx-->BB Pearl--> BB Curve

Page 3 of 3 FirstFirst 123

Posting Permissions