• 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!

UN Officials Demand Prosecutions for US Torture

Would you kill a person to prorect your family?

You're trying to get around what I said, but no, I wouldn't randomly pick a person and kill that person any more than I'd rape a child. And self defense isn't anything like torturing someone.
 
You're trying to get around what I said, but no, I wouldn't randomly pick a person and kill that person any more than I'd rape a child. And self defense isn't anything like torturing someone.

Let me re-post the question and read it very carefully: would you kill another person, to protect your family?
 
Crimes against humanity, like torture, can be tried anywhere in the world, regardless of whether or not the US has signed onto the ICC.
:doh:lamo:doh
1. No they can't.
2. Nor where there any crimes agaisnt humanity to be prosecuted.
You're completely wrong on both counts. But you'll have to research it yourself, as I have no desire to educate you.
You are the one who needs to educate their self on this matter, as you are wrong.
 
All senior U.S. officials and CIA agents who authorized or carried out torture like waterboarding as part of former President George W. Bush's national security policy must be prosecuted, top U.N. officials said Wednesday.. . . .

I say shoot the top U.N. officials and take down the U.N., building. Its nothing but a nest of liars, spies, and criminals who do the bidding of criminal regimes.

And Waterboarding is not torture. We waterboard Navy Seals as part of their training. That idiot b*tch who Obama appointed for AG said in front of Congress that waterboarding is torture, thus demonstrating that her nomination should be rejected because she puts lies and ideology above actual facts.
 
FYI, there's a typo in the thread title. "Persecutions" is misspelled. ;)
 
Let me re-post the question and read it very carefully: would you kill another person, to protect your family?

That is the question I answered. And it is a clear answer, covering both an innocent person and in defense. If you don't like or understand the answer, either be more specific, or address what you don't understand.
 
Let me re-post the question and read it very carefully: would you kill another person, to protect your family?

The ends do not justify the means. Your line of reasoning is horrific, monstrous.
 
You are the one who needs to educate their self on this matter, as you are wrong.

You can keep saying so, but it doesn't make it true. You are simply ignorant. Read up on it if you like. Living in ignorance is not a good thing.
 
You can keep saying so, but it doesn't make it true. You are simply ignorant. Read up on it if you like. Living in ignorance is not a good thing.
Yes living in ignorance is not a good thing, you should stop doing it.

And again it is you who needs to read up on this. You clearly have no idea what you are talking about.
 
I say shoot the top U.N. officials and take down the U.N., building. Its nothing but a nest of liars, spies, and criminals who do the bidding of criminal regimes.

And Waterboarding is not torture. We waterboard Navy Seals as part of their training. That idiot b*tch who Obama appointed for AG said in front of Congress that waterboarding is torture, thus demonstrating that her nomination should be rejected because she puts lies and ideology above actual facts.

Waterboarding IS torture. So is sleep deprivation. So are many other practices.

If you are credulous enough to believe that as long as it's called 'interrogation', then you are quite credulous, quite gullible.
 
Yes your post displays such.

Explain how enhanced interrogation was used as punishment which the Eighth Amendment was addressing?

"If you don't give me the information I need I am going to waterboard you." Sounds like punishment to me.
 
"If you don't give me the information I need I am going to waterboard you." Sounds like punishment to me.

This would be you not understanding the totality of what has been said.
Punishment as addressed applies only to punishment for a crime.
Enhanced interrogation is not punishment for a crime. It isn't even punishment, but a method to extract information.


As previously provided.

INGRAHAM v. WRIGHT
430 U.S. 651

(1977)
1. [...]


[...]

(a) The history of the Eighth Amendment and the decisions of this Court
make it clear that the prohibition against cruel and unusual punishment
was designed to protect those convicted of crime. Pp. 664-668.

[...]

FindLaw | Cases and Codes

And if you do not understand what the U.S. stands for in the above site reference. It is a U.S. Supreme Court decision.
 
The ends do not justify the means. Your line of reasoning is horrific, monstrous.

You would let your family die, before you killed the person(s) that was endangering their lives?
 
You would let your family die, before you killed the person(s) that was endangering their lives?

You're not arguing coherently at all. What you're describing now is a person actively endangering others. Get your act together.
 
This is a false debate. We knew the answer to this in the past. Bush just pretended we didn't know and the willing pretended with him.

Yes. And we prosecuted Americans for doing this before.
Yes, the innocent cab driver died IN PART due to a stress position. It's torture.
Odd phrasing, but extreme heat and cold is torture, yes.
Yes, of course.
Yes.
being silly now, but yes.
Yes.
You're just being silly here and you know it.
These have no real purpose and just looking to incite resistance. More just stupid than torture.
Back to silly agian.


You operate from a false premise. It is not tying our hands to do what is effective over what isn't. And you can't excuse immorality by throwing out the faulty claim of tying our hands. Torture is first and foremost, immoral. Secondly, it is ineffective. There is virtually no reason to do other than you want to do evil and harm to another human being.

Aw Bull****....Some of those things I was being purposely silly to highlight how silly YOUR position is. Look, in your post you went as far as to actually say that "yelling" was torture to you....that "lights" were torture....According to you, anything short of asking them pretty please is torture....I don't know how you expect to ever gain intelligence.
 
Aw Bull****....Some of those things I was being purposely silly to highlight how silly YOUR position is. Look, in your post you went as far as to actually say that "yelling" was torture to you....that "lights" were torture....According to you, anything short of asking them pretty please is torture....I don't know how you expect to ever gain intelligence.

Then you failed. The entire torture is OK argument from your side is silly to begin with. Yelling and lights are in that they are used to deprive someone of sleep, and that is where the torture comes in. Not that doing them at all, but how it is actually used.

And no, I repeat, there are very accepted and reliable measures to take that don't involve the unreliable method of torture.
 
Then you failed. The entire torture is OK argument from your side is silly to begin with. Yelling and lights are in that they are used to deprive someone of sleep, and that is where the torture comes in. Not that doing them at all, but how it is actually used.

And no, I repeat, there are very accepted and reliable measures to take that don't involve the unreliable method of torture.

I'll just say, you tell me today, under your touchy/feely, kinder/gentler approach under the sypathizer n chief, how's our intel today? Better? or worse?
 
The idiocy of the semantic difference aside, explain how, in light of the report, the methods of the CIA are not cruel and unusual?

Did you see the Jordanian pilot get lit on fire. Call me when the US does that, till then, go pound sand.
 
Did you see the Jordanian pilot get lit on fire. Call me when the US does that, till then, go pound sand.

Yes, certainly, the US is the very paragon of High Moral Character. :roll:
 
Yes, certainly, the US is the very paragon of High Moral Character. :roll:

Name a country with clean hands and history. YOU CANNOT ****ING DO IT. Is the USA perfect? Nope but people like you sit on a high horse deriding the country like there is a better option out there...
 
Did you see the Jordanian pilot get lit on fire. Call me when the US does that, till then, go pound sand.

We hurled napalm on children in Vietnam. We drop drone bombs on children right now. I'm sure some of them die from burns.

But either way, using others' transgressions to excuse your own is the height of moral cowardice. We need to take the moral high ground and be as unlike our foes as we can, not rush to embrace their ways.
 
We hurled napalm on children in Vietnam. We drop drone bombs on children right now. I'm sure some of them die from burns.

But either way, using others' transgressions to excuse your own is the height of moral cowardice. We need to take the moral high ground and be as unlike our foes as we can, not rush to embrace their ways.

Yeah. its called war. notice the nicer we are the more we lose?
 
I'll just say, you tell me today, under your touchy/feely, kinder/gentler approach under the sypathizer n chief, how's our intel today? Better? or worse?

No one is touchy feely. But yeah, better. In the Book The Gamble our own general (I'd have to look up his name) stated clearly that we got better intel once we stopped with those techniques. I want this to be clear to you, the most effective techniques are neither torture nor touchy feely. Those are not the only two options.
 
Of course there should be prosecutions for this. The US constitution prohibits torture. Government officials who authorized it and carried it out should pay for their crime. And it's a war crime. If there are not punishments for breaking the law, why bother having it?

This is of course why the US is conveniently not a party to the ICC.
 
Back
Top Bottom