• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

U.S. Condemns Video of Captured Soldier

It's kind of hard to condemn other countries for doing what we have done with captured combatants in the past 8 years.
Can you elaborate on this?
What exactly are you talking about?

Edit: Oh do you mean to Gitmo bay?
 
BBC NEWS | Americas | US military condemns hostage video

It's kind of hard to condemn other countries for doing what we have done with captured combatants in the past 8 years.

Colonel Greg Julian said "the public humiliation of prisoners is against international law", and stressed that the US mission in the country was to "support the Afghan government and improve security".


When has the US publicly humiliated prisoners? That is what they are condemning and I can't seem to think of a time we publicly flaunted any prisoners.
 
Abu Ghraib:

On April 28, 2004, CBS broadcast photos of graphic abuse at the Abu Ghraib prison in Iraq, showing bloodied prisoners, forced simulation of masturbation and oral sex, the stacking of naked prisoners with bags over their heads, mock electrocution by a wire connected to a man’s genitals, guard dogs on the verge of ripping into naked men, and grinning U.S. male and female soldiers celebrating the degradation. Three days later, the New Yorker, in an exposé by Seymour Hersh, published extracts from a March 2004 report by Maj. Gen. Antonio Taguba that catalogued U.S. abuses at Abu Ghraib prison, including

breaking chemical lights and pouring the phosphoric liquid on detainees; pouring cold water on naked detainees; beating detainees with a broom handle and a chair; threatening male detainees with rape ... sodomizing a detainee with a chemical light and perhaps a broom stick, and using military working dogs to frighten and intimidate detainees with threats of attack, and in one instance actually biting a detainee.

On the day after Hersh’s article was posted on the Internet, Gen. Richard Myers, chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, admitted in a television interview that he had not yet bothered to read the Taguba report.


Minimizing the damage

The Bush administration quickly portrayed the leaked photos as aberrations resulting from a handful of deviant National Guard members. However, a government consultant informed Hersh that the Abu Ghraib photos were specifically intended to be used to blackmail the prisoners abused, “to create an army of informants, people you could insert back in the population.” Hersh noted that “the notion that Arabs are particularly vulnerable to sexual humiliation became a talking point among pro-war Washington conservatives in the months before the March, 2003, invasion of Iraq.”

How Abu Ghraib Was Politically Defused, Part 1
 
Not to mention that appealing to international law is particularly disingenuous given our repeated violations of it (waterboarding, holding suspects indefinitely without a trial, etc.)
 
Not to mention that appealing to international law is particularly disingenuous given our repeated violations of it (waterboarding, holding suspects indefinitely without a trial, etc.)
The act that the terrorists took (video of captured soldier) is against international law, whether the US has broke international law in the past or not doesn't really change it.
 
Not to mention that appealing to international law is particularly disingenuous given our repeated violations of it (waterboarding, holding suspects indefinitely without a trial, etc.)

Sorry, but those things are against international law (whatever that is?).

Besides, these so called International Laws do not apply when some muslim pos is trying to kill Americans. Show me where they, these muslim pos, have that right under your so called International Law.
 
Last edited:
Besides, these so called International Laws do not apply when some muslim pos is trying to kill Americans. Show me where they, these muslim pos, have that right under your so called International Law.


Please tell me that you aren't a member of our armed forces. PLEASE.
 
Yeah. unfortunately, on this issue, Bush et. al. ceded the high ground.


Which I said numerous times on PF. I even knew when the tables were turned we'd whine like we always do.

Just be consistent. If you are going to ignore treaties and laws you agreed to, then fine. Just don't complain when the other guy does it. Stop pretending you care about human rights if you really don't.
 
The other part also holds true. If you want to have standing in pursuing violations of internation law against U.S. troops captured in battle, you best follow it.
 
The other part also holds true. If you want to have standing in pursuing violations of internation law against U.S. troops captured in battle, you best follow it.


Certainly. Because people tune you out when you talk the talk, but don't walk the walk. Makes sense. So would I.
 
Yes, I am.

I am a United States Marine Corps Officer (Retired). Why?

Because I find it distressing that you apparently don't follow the Military Code of Conduct in regards to the treatment of enemy prisoners, or find it necessary, based upon the race/ethnicity/religion of the particular prisoner.

That is not the standard that I'm used to with service members.
 
BBC NEWS | Americas | US military condemns hostage video

It's kind of hard to condemn other countries for doing what we have done with captured combatants in the past 8 years.

REALLY? So we took prisoners and video taped them begging for their lives and threatened the other countries if they did not comply with our demands we would saw the hostages heads off while they screamed for mercy?

You have to live on an alternate universe to make such farcical claims that we treated our UNLAWFUL combatants anything like these thugs. Shame on you; I expect much more from someone like you than your typical left leaning lunatic. :roll:
 
When has the US publicly humiliated prisoners? That is what they are condemning and I can't seem to think of a time we publicly flaunted any prisoners.

The few instances where these acts occurred, the individuals perpetrating those acts outside of policy guidelines, were prosecuted and dishonorably discharged.

There is a vast difference between our efforts to handle prisoners humanely and those tactics used by terrorist thugs; suggesting they are anything remotely the same is disingenuous at best.
 
Because I find it distressing that you apparently don't follow the Military Code of Conduct in regards to the treatment of enemy prisoners, or find it necessary, based upon the race/ethnicity/religion of the particular prisoner.

That is not the standard that I'm used to with service members.

I would like you to cite specifically what International laws applied to capture non-uniformed terrorist combatants and what part of the Military Code of Conduct the US violated in its handling of terrorists who do not represent any nation party to these laws and treaties.

Hint: you won’t find any but good luck.
 
That's American foreign policy 101! We only get mad when it's done to us.

...because you say so. Once more we have the "hate America" Libruls making their typical farcical claims in their tireless efforts to suggest that America is the evil in the world rather than these terrorist thugs whom the previous administration tried so desperately to protect you from.

You just cannot fabricate the level of ignorance it takes to hate and impugn the very people trying to prevent these thugs from murdering you. :roll:
 
Which I said numerous times on PF. I even knew when the tables were turned we'd whine like we always do.

Just be consistent. If you are going to ignore treaties and laws you agreed to, then fine. Just don't complain when the other guy does it. Stop pretending you care about human rights if you really don't.

I would like you to cite the "treaties and laws" that apply to non-uniformed terrorists who are captured in foreign nations trying to murder our troops.

Please, take some time to research and come up with them. Here's a hint for you; only legally represented NATIONS can enter into treaties and create laws others agree to abide by; these terrorist thugs do not represent any nation and their acts are outside of international laws.

The only thing people like you are consistent on is being dead wrong and lacking common sense and FACTS.

Carry on. :roll:
 
Because I find it distressing that you apparently don't follow the Military Code of Conduct in regards to the treatment of enemy prisoners, or find it necessary, based upon the race/ethnicity/religion of the particular prisoner.

That is not the standard that I'm used to with service members.

I know the code better than you do.

I also know the Geneva Convention better than you do, too. (I could be wrong.)

You must define your terms. What I said is in fact correct. Terrorists have no Geneva Convention rights as a uniformed member of an enemy force would have. That we give these terrorists any rights under the Convention or our own Code of Conduct is testament to our principles and honor we have hold dear for our Constitution. They, the terrorists, have no honor.
 
Back
Top Bottom