• 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

Bob0627

Banned
DP Veteran
Joined
Apr 2, 2014
Messages
4,523
Reaction score
1,345
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Independent
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.

It's not clear, however, how human rights officials think these prosecutions will take place, since the Justice Department has declined to prosecute and the U.S. is not a member of the International Criminal Court.

Zeid Raad al-Hussein, the U.N. high commissioner for human rights, said it's "crystal clear" under international law that the United States, which ratified the U.N. Convention Against Torture in 1994, now has an obligation to ensure accountability.

"In all countries, if someone commits murder, they are prosecuted and jailed. If they commit rape or armed robbery, they are prosecuted and jailed. If they order, enable or commit torture ? recognized as a serious international crime ? they cannot simply be granted impunity because of political expediency," he said.

U.N. Secretary-General Ban Ki-moon hopes the U.S. Senate Intelligence Committee report on the CIA's harsh interrogation techniques at secret overseas facilities is the "start of a process" toward prosecutions, because the "prohibition against torture is absolute," Ban's spokesman said.

Ben Emmerson, the U.N.'s special rapporteur on counterterrorism and human rights, said the report released Tuesday shows "there was a clear policy orchestrated at a high level within the Bush administration, which allowed (it) to commit systematic crimes and gross violations of international human rights law."

He said international law prohibits granting immunity to public officials who allow the use of torture, and this applies not just to the actual perpetrators but also to those who plan and authorize torture.

UN Officials Demand Prosecutions for US Torture - ABC News

The only CIA agent who has been jailed to date for anything to do with torture is John Kiriakou, for whistleblowing on the CIA torture program.
 
The UN, as it is, needs to be disbanded.
 
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?
 
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?
WTF?
The constitution does not outlaw enhanced interrogation techniques.

Enhanced interrogation is not done as punishment.
 
Last edited:
WTF?
The constitution does not outlaw enhanced interrogation techniques.

The idiocy of the semantic difference aside, explain how, in light of the report, the methods of the CIA are not cruel and unusual?
 
Explain how enhanced interrogation was used as punishment which the Eighth Amendment was addressing?

Because it didn't yield useful information. It wasn't coercive, only punitive.

But are you really suggesting that torture is acceptable when used that way? If it must be punitive, then isn't it permissible to torture you in order to get you to confess to a crime?
 
Because it didn't yield useful information. It wasn't coercive, only punitive.
That has already been disputed as false claim and it certainly wasn't what I addressed. So stop deflecting.
And your attempt to ignore intent is absurd.
It wasn't used as punishment which is what the Eighth Amendment addresses.


But are you really suggesting that torture is acceptable when used that way? If it must be punitive, then isn't it permissible to torture you in order to get you to confess to a crime?
:naughty
No.
I am pointing out your Constitutional argument was unsound because it was not being used as punishment.
 
That has already been disputed as false claim and it certainly wasn't what I addressed. So stop deflecting.
And your attempt to ignore intent is absurd.
It wasn't used as punishment which is what the Eighth Amendment addresses.

Okay, so you're just going to lie. This part of the discussion is done.

I am pointing out your Constitutional argument was unsound because it was not being used as punishment.

Try to keep up. If torture is only impermissible if it is used purely for punishment, then why isn't alright to torture you for coercive purposes?
 
Okay, so you're just going to lie. This part of the discussion is done.
There are no lies there.
You saying such is a lie. It has been disputed and that is not a lie. You may not believe it, but you do not get to say it is a lie that it was disputed.

Secondly, it wasn't done as punishment, but to extract information. Which shows your argument to be infirm.




Try to keep up. If torture is only impermissible if it is used purely for punishment, then why isn't alright to torture you for coercive purposes?
You try to keep up.
Your argument was unsound. The Constitution does not outlaw enhanced interrogation techniques.

What you are looking for is passed legislation which has become Law or in it's stead, a Treaty obligation. Which while authorized by the Constitution, is not itself a Constitutional argument.
 
Last edited:
The UN won't be able to really do anything to American officials, but the announcement is important nonetheless. It means there's a record somewhere that the wrong has been acknowledged and that someone should pay for it, even if only in spirit.

Our country has really lost its way, and it gets worse and worse all the time.
 
The UN, as it is, needs to be disbanded.
Funny how the we treat the UN- we used a UN resolution as a pretext to invade Iraq and now that they are criticizing us we demand its dismantlement.
 
We should just end the u.n. All together, but yes people need to be prosecuted for torture. It's obvious we broke international law, as well as the sanctity of the nation falls on our representatives and when they abuse their power it reflects on every singe one of us.

However we need to stop funding the u.n. But this prosecution of torture isn't the reason, it's because the u.n. And the IMF have effectivley destroyed the soverinty of almost every nation today
 
Nobody gives a damn what the UN says. They are an impotent bunch of posers on a ridiculously expensive never-ending boondoggle. As far as solving "world problems", they're worse than useless.
 
Definitely should happen. People foolishly think anyone at guantanamo was a terrorist, but roughly half were released within a year, and were simply at the wrong place at the wrong time, when they were accosted, kidnapped, denied due process and in many cases tortured before release.

If the "Justice" department won't do its job and uphold basic principles of human dignity, i'm all for returning the favor and the UN hiring foreign agents to come here, arrest and move these CIA agents to another country for prosecution. Something akin to the nuremburg trials could begin in earnest
 
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?

These people will never be sent to the Hague.

[Due to] the fact that the US has said, straight up, if any of it's people go the Hague, we will invade the Netherlands. U.S.: 'Hague Invasion Act' Becomes Law | Human Rights Watch Dutch still wincing at Bush-era 'Invasion of The Hague Act' - CSMonitor.com On 'The Hague Invasion Act'
 
UN Officials Demand Prosecutions for US Torture

If it can be shown that US officials authorized and carried out a program of torture then we need to prosecute them. Emphasis on the word "WE". As in US courts, US judicial system.

"UN officials" can shampoo my crotch. If it weren't for double standards these people would have no standards at all.
 
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?

I say the same thing about our immigration laws, why bother to have any. They don't mean a thing. When it comes to enforcing the laws, depending on one's political leanings it is all pick and choose.
 
If it can be shown that US officials authorized and carried out a program of torture then we need to prosecute them. Emphasis on the word "WE". As in US courts, US judicial system.

Except that will never happen because the POTUS and the DOD have already granted "immunity" by proxy to all the criminals prior to the POTUS' admission that "we tortured some folks". In legal terms this is known as "depraved indifference", which is tantamount to complicity. The Nuremburg Principles, for which the US had a major role and is a signatory, does not have any provision for granting immunity and makes it very clear that all involved, including those in positions of power who protect others who commit crimes against humanity are complicit.
 
The UN won't be able to really do anything to American officials, but the announcement is important nonetheless. It means there's a record somewhere that the wrong has been acknowledged and that someone should pay for it, even if only in spirit.

Our country has really lost its way, and it gets worse and worse all the time.
When the UN stops promoting human rights abusers to lead its condemnation bodies then they may have a shred of credibility.
 
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?
Even democrats who participated? :roll:
 
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?

So rich white people can get a little adrenaline/ego high when they break it and get away with it...kind of like when a little kid gets away with what would have been a beltable offense.
 
UN Officials Demand Prosecutions for US Torture

If it can be shown that US officials authorized and carried out a program of torture then we need to prosecute them. Emphasis on the word "WE". As in US courts, US judicial system.

"UN officials" can shampoo my crotch. If it weren't for double standards these people would have no standards at all.

:lamo I'm going to steal that. Best saying I've seen in a long time.
 
Back
Top Bottom