Welcome Guest [Log In] [Register]
Welcome to The New Coffee Room. We hope you enjoy your visit.


You're currently viewing our forum as a guest. This means you are limited to certain areas of the board and there are some features you can't use. If you join our community, you'll be able to access member-only sections, and use many member-only features such as customizing your profile, sending personal messages, and voting in polls. Registration is simple, fast, and completely free.


Join our community!


If you're already a member please log in to your account to access all of our features:

Username:   Password:
Add Reply
  • Pages:
  • 1
  • 6
Torture is Bad; The Pentagon Finally Acknowledges
Topic Started: Sep 6 2006, 09:13 AM (1,275 Views)
QuirtEvans
Member Avatar
I Owe It All To John D'Oh
From the new directive on detainee treatment:

Quote:
 
All detainees shall be treated humanely and in accordance with U.S. law, the law of war, and applicable U.S. policy. . . . All persons subject to his directive shall observe . . . at a minimum the standards articulated in Common Article 3 to the Geneva Conventions of 1949


And more, according to CNN:

Quote:
 
Though defense officials said earlier this year that they were debating writing a classified section of the manual to keep some interrogation procedures a secret from potential enemies, officials said Wednesday that there is no secret section to the new manual.

The Pentagon also on Wednesday released a new policy directive on detention operations that says the handling of prisoners must -- at a minimum -- abide by the standards of the Geneva Conventions and lays out the responsibilities of senior civilian and military officials who oversee detention operations.

The new Army manual specifically forbids intimidating prisoners with military dogs, putting hoods over their heads and simulating the sensation of drowning with a procedure called "water boarding," one defense official said on condition of anonymity because the manual had not yet been released.
It would be unwise to underestimate what large groups of ill-informed people acting together can achieve. -- John D'Oh, January 14, 2010.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
The 89th Key
Member Avatar

Torture is bad, no doubt.

Letting 50,000 people die so a terrorist isn't scared by a dog, is worse.

Seriously though...it's good America is once again standing up for what's right. I'm just hoping it doesn't backfire.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
The 89th Key
Member Avatar

http://today.reuters.com/news/articlenews....&src=rss&rpc=22
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
QuirtEvans
Member Avatar
I Owe It All To John D'Oh
Quote:
 
the Pentagon retained the Bush administration's distinction between traditional prisoners of war and "unlawful enemy combatants," who are guaranteed fewer rights, such as protections against prosecution for warlike acts such as killing an enemy on a battlefield.


If this is the sole purpose of the distinction, I have no problem with it.

BECAUSE IT ISN'T REALLY A WAR (in the classic definition of a war). And the desire to prosecute someone for acts on the battlefield shows that the Bush Administration knows that it isn't really a war.

You can't claim it's a war when it suits your purposes, but decide that you won't treat prisoners as if it's a war when you don't like the result. Or rather you can ... but only if you have no integrity.
It would be unwise to underestimate what large groups of ill-informed people acting together can achieve. -- John D'Oh, January 14, 2010.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Aqua Letifer
Member Avatar
ZOOOOOM!
Quote:
 
You can't claim it's a war when it suits your purposes, but decide that you won't treat prisoners as if it's a war when you don't like the result. Or rather you can ... but only if you have no integrity.


No doubt. Torture should never be condoned, and it isn't, under the Geneva conventions. They apply to wartime scenarios. If you call it a war, you need to treat it as such.
I cite irreconcilable differences.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
OperaTenor
Member Avatar
Pisa-Carp
Torture is not a component of maintaining moral high ground, regardless of its legality.



Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
The 89th Key
Member Avatar

I'm not too familiar with the Geneva Conventions requirements. Don't both "parties" fighting in a war have to follow them? What if only one side does... Or what if one side doesn't because the other side doesn't?

If we apply it to Al-Qaeda prisoners...what are the reprocussions for Al-Qaeda since they obviously don't follow the conventions?

AKA...what are the penalties for not following the rules?
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Phlebas
Member Avatar
Bull-Carp
The 89th Key
Sep 6 2006, 10:01 AM
I'm not too familiar with the Geneva Conventions requirements. Don't both "parties" fighting in a war have to follow them? What if only one side does... Or what if one side doesn't because the other side doesn't?

If we apply it to Al-Qaeda prisoners...what are the reprocussions for Al-Qaeda since they obviously don't follow the conventions?

AKA...what are the penalties for not following the rules?

Al Quaeda's objective is killing innocents, and our objective is to kill them when we see them, so I don't think the subtleties of the Geneva Convention are much of a concern to them. However, if they are caught, they could be brought on war-crimes charges, which would be the definition of absurdity.

IMO, the pentagon should never mention the work "torture" in a for-or-against, we do it or we don't context. Awful things happen in wars, and the US has been in a few of them. Let's leave it at that.
Random FML: Today, I was fired by my boss in front of my coworkers. It would have been nice if I could have left the building before they started celebrating. FML

The founding of the bulk of the world's nation states post 1914 is based on self-defined nationalisms. The bulk of those national movements involve territory that was ethnically mixed. The foundation of many of those nation states involved population movements in the aftermath. When the only one that is repeatedly held up as unjust and unjustifiable is the Zionist project, the term anti-semitism may very well be appropriate. - P*D


Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
QuirtEvans
Member Avatar
I Owe It All To John D'Oh
Here's the Prez today on the subject of torture:

Quote:
 
I want to be absolutely clear with our people and the world: the United States does not torture. It's against our laws and our values. I have not authorized it, and I will not authorize it.


Of course, in the past, his Administration has defined torture as treatment giving rise to something akin to organ failure. Who knows how he's defining it now.

And notice that he doesn't say it has never happened, only that he's never authorized it. I wonder who has? The concept of "plausible deniability" raises its ugly head.
It would be unwise to underestimate what large groups of ill-informed people acting together can achieve. -- John D'Oh, January 14, 2010.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
QuirtEvans
Member Avatar
I Owe It All To John D'Oh
Quoting the Pentagon spokesperson who announced the new rules:

Quote:
 
No good intelligence is going to come from abusive tactics.
It would be unwise to underestimate what large groups of ill-informed people acting together can achieve. -- John D'Oh, January 14, 2010.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
George K
Member Avatar
Finally
QuirtEvans
Sep 6 2006, 05:07 PM
Quoting the Pentagon spokesperson who announced the new rules:

Quote:
 
No good intelligence is going to come from abusive tactics.

Here's what the President said (without reference to specific techniques).


Questioning these detainees has given us information that has helped save lives...I'm going to share some of this information:

Posted Image
Sr. terrorist leader and trusted associate of Osama bin Laden. He disclosed KSM.

Posted Image
Vital piece of the puzzle...He stopped talking. Clear he had received training on how to resist interrogation. New, lawful techniques used. Tough, safe, lawful, and necessary. Provided key info on operatives. Identified KSM accomplice in 9/11 attacks: Ramzi bin al Shibh.

Posted Image
KSM captured. Provided info on Majid Khan. Led to info on Hambali, "Asia's bin Laden."

Posted Image

Led to Zhuber (sp?). Led to capture of Hambali.

KSM provided info on efforts to produce anthrax, biological weapons. Unraveled plot to hijack plans into Heathrow, attack on Pakistan.

This intel has helped us connect the dots and stop attacks before they occur. Invaluable to America and our allies.

...I want to be clear: The US does not torture. I have not authorized and I will not authorize it.
A guide to GKSR: Click

"Now look here, you Baltic gas passer... "
- Mik, 6/14/08


Nothing is as effective as homeopathy.

I'd rather listen to an hour of Abba than an hour of The Beatles.
- Klaus, 4/29/18
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Rick Zimmer
Member Avatar
Fulla-Carp
QuirtEvans
Sep 6 2006, 11:46 AM
Here's the Prez today on the subject of torture:

Quote:
 
I want to be absolutely clear with our people and the world: the United States does not torture. It's against our laws and our values. I have not authorized it, and I will not authorize it.


Of course, in the past, his Administration has defined torture as treatment giving rise to something akin to organ failure. Who knows how he's defining it now.

And notice that he doesn't say it has never happened, only that he's never authorized it. I wonder who has? The concept of "plausible deniability" raises its ugly head.

Exactly, Quirt.

At least the Military laid out techniques and tactics in written form.

God only know what Bush is talking about -- since it was his own White House counsel, now the Attorney General, who decided to slice and dice the definition of torture.
[size=4]Violence is incompatible with the nature of God and the nature of the soul -- Benedict XVI[/size]
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
QuirtEvans
Member Avatar
I Owe It All To John D'Oh
does not. Present tense.

Have not authorized. Past tense.

Plausible deniability.

If only he could ask what "is" means.
It would be unwise to underestimate what large groups of ill-informed people acting together can achieve. -- John D'Oh, January 14, 2010.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Rick Zimmer
Member Avatar
Fulla-Carp
George K
Sep 6 2006, 03:17 PM
QuirtEvans
Sep 6 2006, 05:07 PM
Quoting the Pentagon spokesperson who announced the new rules:

Quote:
 
No good intelligence is going to come from abusive tactics.

Here's what the President said (without reference to specific techniques).


Questioning these detainees has given us information that has helped save lives...I'm going to share some of this information:

Posted Image
Sr. terrorist leader and trusted associate of Osama bin Laden. He disclosed KSM.

Posted Image
Vital piece of the puzzle...He stopped talking. Clear he had received training on how to resist interrogation. New, lawful techniques used. Tough, safe, lawful, and necessary. Provided key info on operatives. Identified KSM accomplice in 9/11 attacks: Ramzi bin al Shibh.

Posted Image
KSM captured. Provided info on Majid Khan. Led to info on Hambali, "Asia's bin Laden."

Posted Image

Led to Zhuber (sp?). Led to capture of Hambali.

KSM provided info on efforts to produce anthrax, biological weapons. Unraveled plot to hijack plans into Heathrow, attack on Pakistan.

This intel has helped us connect the dots and stop attacks before they occur. Invaluable to America and our allies.

...I want to be clear: The US does not torture. I have not authorized and I will not authorize it.

Given that the Pentagon says no good information can come from torture, one has to assume these men were not tortured during the interrogation.

Or are you implying, George, that the Pentagon spokesmen is lying or that the President is hinting we used torture, even as he said we don;t use it?

BTW, I assume these guys were all picked up in Iraq -- which as we all know is the central front in the war on terrorism, to which most of our resources are going because Iraq is where the terrorists are.
[size=4]Violence is incompatible with the nature of God and the nature of the soul -- Benedict XVI[/size]
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
George K
Member Avatar
Finally
Rick Zimmer
Sep 6 2006, 05:32 PM
Given that the Pentagon says no good information can come from torture, one has to assume these men were not tortured during the interrogation.

Was that in this thread? If so, I missed it. If not, I don't recall a Pentagon policy statement reflecting that.

Quote:
 
Or are you implying, George, that the Pentagon spokesmen is lying or that the President is hinting we used torture, even as he said we don;t use it?


Quote:

"Zubaydah told us that Al Qaeda operatives were planning to launch an attack in the United States and provided physical descriptions of the operatives and information on their general location. Based on the information he provided, the operatives were detained; one, while traveling to the United States.
We knew that Zubaydah had more information that could save innocent lives. But he stopped talking.
As his questioning proceeded, it became clear that he had received training on how to resist interrogation. And so, the CIA used an alternative set of procedures.

These procedures were designed to be safe, to comply with our laws, our Constitution and our treaty obligations. The Department of Justice reviewed the authorized methods extensively, and determined them to be lawful.

I cannot describe the specific methods used. I think you understand why. If I did, it would help the terrorists learn how to resist questioning and to keep information from us that we need to prevent new attacks on our country. But I can say the procedures were tough and they were safe and lawful and necessary."
A guide to GKSR: Click

"Now look here, you Baltic gas passer... "
- Mik, 6/14/08


Nothing is as effective as homeopathy.

I'd rather listen to an hour of Abba than an hour of The Beatles.
- Klaus, 4/29/18
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
John Jacob Jingoism Smith
Member Avatar
Middle Aged Carp
Torture is so far outside my moral sphere that I have a hard time believing anyone who grew up in the U.S., or has any Christian belief at all can feel otherwise.

But there we have it. Who would Jesus torture?

Second thing wrong with it, is that it's a government enterprise and the government inevitably F***s up EVERYTHING it touches. They WILL torture innocents, I guarantee it. The government does not have and will never have the wisdom it would take to guarantee no innocents will be harmed. I cannot live with that.

Thirdly, torture, much too often, just doesn't work in terms of extracting valuable information.

People who advocate torture are way, way too dark for me. It is the epitome of evil.
Jingoism

You can safely assume that you've created God in your own image when it turns out that God hates all the same people you do.
Anne Lamott
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
George K
Member Avatar
Finally
I am not, repeat not, advocating torture. What I am doing is pointing out suppositions that others (like Rick) made here - the Pentagon (not an unnamed spokesman) that torture is 1) performed by the US, 2) ineffective.

Perhaps it is. I don't know.

You claim that torture is a goverment enterprise. Please show me where that's the policy of the US, after you define what you conceive of torture being. I certainly have my ideas. Perhaps yours and perhaps the US governments are the same.

Perhaps not.

Is playing rock music and ABBA at Manuel Noriega torture? I don't know.
Is making someone fear for their lives - without actually hurting them - torture? I don't know.
Is breaking limbs torture? - you tell me.
Is having a dog bark at a prisoner torture? - you tell me.

A guide to GKSR: Click

"Now look here, you Baltic gas passer... "
- Mik, 6/14/08


Nothing is as effective as homeopathy.

I'd rather listen to an hour of Abba than an hour of The Beatles.
- Klaus, 4/29/18
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
The 89th Key
Member Avatar

JJJS, I doubt Jesus would torture anyone. He would just use a Jedi mind trick! :doh:

It really all depends on the definition of torture.

Some could say listening to Barbra Streisand is torture....
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
AlbertaCrude
Bull-Carp
Or Celine Dion.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
The 89th Key
Member Avatar

You know, I almost put her!

But I actually like her singing, so I didn't. :leaving:
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
pianojerome
Member Avatar
HOLY CARP!!!
AlbertaCrude
Sep 6 2006, 11:51 PM
Or Celine Dion.

A friend of mine gave me the sheet music for the Titanic song this summer. My little brother now hates me more than ever. :D
Sam
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Klotz
Middle Aged Carp
pianojerome
Sep 7 2006, 07:06 AM
AlbertaCrude
Sep 6 2006, 11:51 PM
Or Celine Dion.

A friend of mine gave me the sheet music for the Titanic song this summer. My little brother now hates me more than ever. :D

Now... we all do...
Posted Image
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Rick Zimmer
Member Avatar
Fulla-Carp
The 89th Key
Sep 6 2006, 08:50 PM
It really all depends on the definition of torture.

So it doesn't depend upon religious principles?

Or moral principles?

Or cultural principles?

Or ethics?

Or respect for the human being as a child of God?

Or respect for life?

Or Jesus' teaching to love our enemies and to do good to those who hurt us?

As long as a person is apprehended and is assumed to have information, it only depends on somebody's interpretation of a definition in the Oxford Unabridged Dictionary of the English Language?
[size=4]Violence is incompatible with the nature of God and the nature of the soul -- Benedict XVI[/size]
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
pianojerome
Member Avatar
HOLY CARP!!!
Rick Zimmer
Sep 7 2006, 12:36 AM
The 89th Key
Sep 6 2006, 08:50 PM
It really all depends on the definition of torture.

So it doesn't depend upon religious principles?

Or moral principles?

Or cultural principles?

Or ethics?

Or respect for the human being as a child of God?

Or respect for life?

Or Jesus' teaching to love our enemies and to do good to those who hurt us?

As long as a person is apprehended and is assumed to have information, it only depends on somebody's interpretation of a definition in the Oxford Unabridged Dictionary of the English Language?

Of course it does depend on moral principles.

But torture could be anything, couldn't it? Or is it specific?

What is torture and what is not?

Only when you decide what actions are considered torture can you decide if they are morally acceptable.


Or is it rather the intent to torture, for any imaginable reason, that is so morally unacceptable, regardless of the action? If something is intended as torture, regardless of what actions it entails, is it morally unacceptable? If something is not intended as torture but it conceived by the subject as torture, regardless of the actions, is it morally unacceptable?



Is torture just any action that is intended to inflict pain upon someone until a desired goal is attained? Is a teacher hitting a naughty student with a ruler considered torture? Is war considered torture? Is a police officer pinning a suspect to a car considered torture?

Is torture just any action that is intended to frighten someone until a desired goal is attained? Is all imprisonment to be considered torture? Is a law prohibiting murder by pain of death considered torture?

What is torture? It's easy to say "torture is bad", but unless you can differentiate between what is torture and what is not torture, there's really no way to tell if a particular action is moral or not as regards 'torture'.
Sam
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Rick Zimmer
Member Avatar
Fulla-Carp
pianojerome
Sep 6 2006, 10:15 PM
But torture could be anything, couldn't it?  Or is it specific?

What is torture and what is not?

Only when you decide what actions are considered torture can you decide if they are morally acceptable.

See, this is how these types of questions become trivialized -- with statements like "anything can be torture" or playing Barbra Streisand can be torture.

(And no, Sam, I am not arguing just with you -- just using your post as the starting off point).

There are standards by which civilized nations act. They are embodied in their laws, in their social mores, in their treaties, in international law.

To argue that anything can be torture f the person does not want it or like it is to equate extreme physical, emotional and psychological abuse with frivolous activites and to make discussions such as this completely meaningless.

No doubt, any of us could do research and find out what civilized nations and the internatonal community defines as torture and as unacceptable interrogation practices. This information is out there. People far more intelligent than any of us have discussed that and have defined it.

Obviously, the US Military in revising its interrogation manual to specifically exclude certain activities knows and understands what torture is in military interrogation.

We all know what torture is, even if we cannot list all of the activites. We know it because such actions would revolt us if we were to watch them. For us laymen, I would simply suggest a couple of simple rule to define it for ourselves -- if you would recoil and turn from watching it being done to a human being, even one you dislike, it's torture. If you, personally, would have intense moral scruples about inflicting a certain type of pain -- physical, psychological, emotions -- on a human being, it is torture.

All of these silly examples demean the discussion and reduce it to meaninglessness. If we really cannot distinguish between playing loud music outside of Manuel Noriega's palace and ripping off people's finger nails or applying electricity to the genitals, then we need to rethink our moral standards.
[size=4]Violence is incompatible with the nature of God and the nature of the soul -- Benedict XVI[/size]
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
ZetaBoards - Free Forum Hosting
ZetaBoards gives you all the tools to create a successful discussion community.
Go to Next Page
« Previous Topic · The New Coffee Room · Next Topic »
Add Reply
  • Pages:
  • 1
  • 6