• 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!

WikiLeaks cables: India accused of systematic use of torture in Kashmir

Demon of Light

Demon of Light

Bohemian Revolutionary
DP Veteran
Joined
May 7, 2010
Messages
5,095
Reaction score
1,544
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Independent
US officials had evidence of widespread torture by Indian police and security forces and were secretly briefed by Red Cross staff about the systematic abuse of detainees in Kashmir, according to leaked diplomatic cables released tonight.

The dispatches, obtained by website WikiLeaks, reveal that US diplomats in Delhi were briefed in 2005 by the International Committee of the Red Cross (ICRC) about the use of electrocution, beatings, sexual humiliation against hundreds of detainees.

Other cables show that as recently as 2007 American diplomats were concerned about widespread human rights abuses by Indian security forces, who they said relied on torture for confessions.
Click to expand...

Source: The Guardian

We are much too generous in calling India the world's biggest democracy.
 
"Other cables show that as recently as 2007 American diplomats were concerned about widespread human rights abuses by Indian security forces, who they said relied on torture for confessions."

Ok so its good that they were concerned but why are they not concerned about all the people that we torture?
 
Resist the gov. said:
"Other cables show that as recently as 2007 American diplomats were concerned about widespread human rights abuses by Indian security forces, who they said relied on torture for confessions."

Ok so its good that they were concerned but why are they not concerned about all the people that we torture?
Click to expand...

I think it's because they're 'diplomats' they don't usually deal with domestic issues just the interests of their own countries.
 
This isn't America's business. If you're looking for victims look to Detroit, and a host of locations in America. Americans should mind their own business.
 
Resist the gov. said:
"Other cables show that as recently as 2007 American diplomats were concerned about widespread human rights abuses by Indian security forces, who they said relied on torture for confessions."

Ok so its good that they were concerned but why are they not concerned about all the people that we torture?
Click to expand...
Note the "widespread". I haven't heard claims of widespread torture done by Americans, but I have heard claims of some torture - however, I have not heard anything about torture in India, until now.

And what Hatuey said, obviously.
 
The Mark said:
Note the "widespread". I haven't heard claims of widespread torture done by Americans, but I have heard claims of some torture - however, I have not heard anything about torture in India, until now.
Click to expand...

Yeah, it isn't quite the cause célèbre that torture in China is for Western media.
 
I'm honestly more concerned with the US using torture than other countries. We have a provision against it in our constitution. And how do we expect other countries to stop the practice if we do not act as a role model? We need to put our money where our mouth is, and take the first step to ridding the world of torture.
 
Paschendale said:
I'm honestly more concerned with the US using torture than other countries. We have a provision against it in our constitution. And how do we expect other countries to stop the practice if we do not act as a role model? We need to put our money where our mouth is, and take the first step to ridding the world of torture.
Click to expand...

What do you think of Obama's reactivation of the policy of extraordinary rendition?
 
EnigmaO01 said:
It means he's nowhere near as liberal as his detractors make him out to be.
Click to expand...

That's a possibility I think is pretty remote. He's not a believer in ruthlessness as a legitimate means of persuasion. I think he's trapped.

Obama has no place to put these folks any more. Not Gitmo. Bagram's prison is bursting at the seams because the miscreants can't be transferred to Afghan custody. They would let them go.

He's reactivated extraordinary rendition for torture overseas, but the really interesting thing is his escalation in the use of drone strikes. I have the impression Obama prefers to simply kill jihadis rather than capture and interrogate them.
 
Harshaw said:
What does the one have to do with the other?
Click to expand...

Do I really have to explain what a liberal's position on extraordinary rendition would be? You can't be serious. :roll:
 
EnigmaO01 said:
Do I really have to explain what a liberals position on this would be? You can't be serious. :roll:
Click to expand...

1) You make it sound like it's exclusively a "liberal" position.

2) You also make sound like liberal administrations didn't make use of it just as often as "conservative" ones.

This is one of those things which was never a problem until Bush did it.

Snatches, or more properly "extraordinary renditions," were operations to apprehend terrorists abroad, usually without the knowledge of and almost always without public acknowledgement of the host government.... The first time I proposed a snatch, in 1993, the White House Counsel, Lloyd Cutler, demanded a meeting with the President to explain how it violated international law. Clinton had seemed to be siding with Cutler until Al Gore belatedly joined the meeting, having just flown overnight from South Africa. Clinton recapped the arguments on both sides for Gore: Lloyd says this. Dick says that. Gore laughed and said, "That's a no-brainer. Of course it's a violation of international law, that's why it's a covert action. The guy is a terrorist. Go grab his ass."
Click to expand...

Richard Clarke, Against All Enemies, pp. 143-144


I guess Al Gore is not a liberal. Who are we kidding? He's one of the most liberal people in the country. :lamo
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom