February 8, 200818 yr I have a very hard time accepting or supporting this country using means of torture. I am willing to accept McCain's view on the matter. Agreed lbbc!
February 8, 200818 yr Look, I am not looking for "moral highground" here. I figure you of all people would know this by now TB&G. Good guy and bad guy is a matter of perspective. For what it's worth I don't care if it IS torture or not. If we have to torture to get information then so be it. If we have more effective and more economical means of obtaining information then I would suggest using that. Also terrorists and sub-nationals fighters are not soldiers nor do they represent governments or nations. So it isn't really an applicable term to these individuals. I was just seeking clarification and bringing up a point for some to consider. I would guess that someone could consider it torture, but still be okay with it. Of course, there are about 1000 scenarios that I could ask about...if it is torture, but still okay.
February 8, 200818 yr That pesky Geneval Convention! :irked: :lol: Seriously...we are America. Torture is wrong.
February 8, 200818 yr That pesky Geneval Convention! :irked: :lol: Seriously...we are America. Torture is wrong. The Geneva Conventions apply among the nations who signed the accords. Al Qaeda, Hammas, and other stateless terrorist organizations are not signatories and have not exactly practiced the Golden Rule toward their prisoners. The Geneva Conventions do not apply to terrorists and they do not afford our citizens any protection against torture at the hands of terrorists.
February 8, 200818 yr Considering waterboarding doesn't cause any lasting physical damage, and is by no means life threatening I have no problem with it. Sorry if I seem cold hearted but if it takes torture to get information that can be essential in defending our country then the ends justify the means. Do you have a problem with this procedure being applied to, say, downed U.S. pilots in the hands of a hostile government?
February 8, 200818 yr Do you have a problem with this procedure being applied to, say, downed U.S. pilots in the hands of a hostile government? I am none to fond of the idea of an American soldier being tortured however I don't care if we torture terrorists to get information. Again provided that the method used is indeed the most effecient means of getting accurate information. I have no qualms with admitting a double standard there. Similar to how I don't mind the U.S. having nukes, but am none too fond of the idea of certain countries having them. A double standard to be sure, but I do not mind because it serves to protect the United States.
February 8, 200818 yr Forgive me if I'm wrong, and I am likely to be in this case...but didn't someone rule that the Geneva Convention Rules DID apply when the Abu Grade (sp?) debacle arose? IF I am right, what would make this any different?
February 8, 200818 yr Sometimes you have to fight fire with fire. Don't both sides get burnt though? I remember Ghandi's statement that an eye for an eye leaves the whole world blind. Somebody has to be the moral compass of the world and say this ain't right.
February 8, 200818 yr Are we agreeing on something, LBBC? :lol: :eek: Shirley not.:lol::jump: I am really a libconberservaltive. Liberal on some issues. Conservative on others.:thumb:
February 8, 200818 yr Shirley not.:lol::jump: I am really a libconberservaltive. Liberal on some issues. Conservative on others.:thumb: I think it's your flu! :lol:
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.