• 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!

Amnesty International Wants Bush Prosecuted for Admitted Waterboarding

Conservative said:
Sounds to me like a conviction without a trial on your part. I don't have a lot of respect for decisions made based upon ignorance.
Click to expand...

Then you should have plenty of respect for my decision based on detailed analysis of the facts. And, come to think of it, you should have no respect for your own position based on a breathtaking ignorance of the law.
 
Guy Incognito said:
I'm comparing Bush to other war criminals. Pay attention.
Click to expand...

Hitler had Hess, Goering and Himmler. Bush had Pelosi and Kerry. why are you giving Bush's coconspirators a pass?
 
Guy Incognito said:
I beg to differ. People who care about justice want to see Bush tried.
Click to expand...

There are ignorant people all over this country, single issue people who base their decisions based upon words vs. actual facts. GW Bush hasn't been proven guilty of torture since waterboarding wasn't defined as torture. Waterboarding hurt no one and saved lives. That is good enough for the majority in this country with only the kooks keeping this issue alive.
 
OscarB63 said:
Hitler had Hess, Goering and Himmler. Bush had Pelosi and Kerry. why are you giving Bush's coconspirators a pass?
Click to expand...

Nonsense, when did I say any of them got a pass? Anybody with a direct connection to the crime of torture ought to be tried. That will be hundreds of people, of which Bush is the most prominent and most directly responsible. But as for the other people involved, "just following orders" is not a defense against war crimes.
 
Last edited:
Guy Incognito said:
I beg to differ. People who care about justice want to see Bush tried.
Click to expand...

I beg to differ. People who care about justice want to see everyone involved tried. Partisan hacks with an axe to grind want to see Bush tried.
 
Guy Incognito said:
Then you should have plenty of respect for my decision based on detailed analysis of the facts. And, come to think of it, you should have no respect for your own position based on a breathtaking ignorance of the law.
Click to expand...

The facts that you believe you have are nothing more than opinions based on ignorance. I have no respect for your decision because it is biased and partisan based upon leftwing revisionist history.
 
Guy Incognito said:
Nonsense, when did I say any of them got a pass?
Click to expand...

all I hear is Bush, Bush, Bush, Bush, Bush, Bush, Bush, Bush, Bush, Bush, Bush, Bush, Bush, Bush. I wonder how that could've given me the idea that you were giving Pelosi and Kerry a pass.
 
Conservative said:
There are ignorant people all over this country, single issue people who base their decisions based upon words vs. actual facts. GW Bush hasn't been proven guilty of torture since waterboarding wasn't defined as torture. Waterboarding hurt no one and saved lives. That is good enough for the majority in this country with only the kooks keeping this issue alive.
Click to expand...

Incorrect. Waterboarding has been defined as torture under US law since at least WWII, when the US prosecuted the Japanese soldiers who water boarded American POWs.
 
OscarB63 said:
all I hear is Bush, Bush, Bush, Bush, Bush, Bush, Bush, Bush, Bush, Bush, Bush, Bush, Bush, Bush. I wonder how that could've given me the idea that you were giving Pelosi and Kerry a pass.
Click to expand...

Like I said, Bush is the most directly responsible. Would you prosecute a private in the killing fields before Pol Pot? Get Bush first and the rest will inevitably follow.

While we're at it, try Kissinger for Operation Condor as well.
 
Conservative said:
There are ignorant people all over this country, single issue people who base their decisions based upon words vs. actual facts.
Click to expand...
Indeed. :lamo
Conservative said:
GW Bush hasn't been proven guilty of torture since waterboarding wasn't defined as torture.
Click to expand...
Dispensed with that nonsense earlier.
Conservative said:
Waterboarding hurt no one and saved lives.
Click to expand...
Prove it.
Conservative said:
That is good enough for the majority in this country with only the kooks keeping this issue alive.
Click to expand...
Argumentum ad populum.

:failpail:
 
Guy Incognito
lol Tough to prove his innocence when he's going on a book tour with his confession. But you can still dream, i guess.
Click to expand...

In the democracies people are generally innocent until proven guilty. That you don't subscribe to this proposition doesn't mean that others don't. This is also US law.

As was explained more than once, his legal advisors, as well as many on this board if they at all are representative of public opinion, feel that what was done was not criminal. At worst it's still unproven.
That's not at all how it works. The jurisdiction is over the reasonable allegation of the war crime, there is no presumption of guilt.
Click to expand...

But you certainly have that presumption and I believe the body you support, the ICC, does as well.
That's what the trial is for. Hell, if Bush was tried and acquitted by a fair court, I'd be thrilled. That would be justice. But I cannot imagine a realistic defense, his is clearly guilty based on well known facts that he himself has admitted to. But he has a right to his day in court.
Click to expand...

Right. Try him then hang him.
It's not just my opinion, it's the opinion of the US government. When the USA recognizes a sovereign nation's legitimacy, we must act accordingly. We're not talking about some failed state here, we're talking about democracies that the US and the global community at large all recognize as legitimate, uncorrupt, and freely elected, just as they treat our government as such. This is very basic stuff here.
Click to expand...

I don't think many Americans would fall for this "very basic stuff" of their president being tried in Belgium. Personally I'd love to see them try.

When people like yourself believe that George Bush is the greatest international war criminal, and is compared to the Nazi leaders, then we know that you, and those like you, have become seriously unhinged. This is a clear example of why nations must maintain their sovereignty and if the United States ever relinquished theirs to some snotheads in Europe, then it really will be the end of the world as we know it.
 
Guy Incognito said:
Nonsense, when did I say any of them got a pass? Anybody with a direct connection to the crime of torture ought to be tried. That will be hundreds of people, of which Bush is the most prominent and most directly responsible. But as for the other people involved, "just following orders" is not a defense against war crimes.
Click to expand...

Excuse me?

Where did Bush say he was "just following orders"? Or anyone in the US Federal Government for that matter. This Nazi analogy has long run its course.
 
Grant said:
When people like yourself believe that George Bush is the greatest international war criminal, and is compared to the Nazi leaders, then we know that you, and those like you, have become seriously unhinged. This is a clear example of why nations must maintain their sovereignty and if the United States ever relinquished theirs to some snotheads in Europe, then it really will be the end of the world as we know it.
Click to expand...

You're entirely wrong. I don't thin George Bush is the "greatest war criminal." All war criminals are dogs in my eyes. George Bush just happens to be the greatest American war criminal, and he is a stain on my country, that's why I care so much about seeing him brought to justice. If we can't prosecute our own war criminals because they wield such corrupt influence, how can we expect other countries to keep to a standard of human rights when we can't even mind our own yard?

The difference between you and me is that I believe in American Exceptionalism, whereas you are a cynic. Have a nice day!
 
Last edited:
Guy Incognito said:
Incorrect. Waterboarding has been defined as torture under US law since at least WWII, when the US prosecuted the Japanese soldiers who water boarded American POWs.
Click to expand...

Didn't know that terrorists were covered under international law. Please cite that proof?
 
Grant said:
Excuse me?

Where did Bush say he was "just following orders"? Or anyone in the US Federal Government for that matter. This Nazi analogy has long run its course.
Click to expand...

I'm talking about the guys that actually did the interrogating, they can't use the Nuremberg defense. Bush was the one writing the orders.
 
Guy Incognito said:
You're entirely wrong. I don't thin George Bush is the "greatest war criminal." All war criminals are dogs in my eyes. George Bush just happens to be the greatest American war criminal, and he is a stain on my country, that's why I care so much about seeing him brought to justice. If we can prosecute our own war criminals because they wield such corrupt influence, how can we expect other countries to keep to a standard of human rights when we can't even mind our own yard?

The difference between you and me is that I believe in American Exceptionalism, whereas you are a cynic. Have a nice day!
Click to expand...

I think people like you are nuts and don't understand the world we live in. Please show me where terrorists are covered under the Geneva Convention or international law?
 
Guy Incognito said:
Like I said, Bush is the most directly responsible. Would you prosecute a private in the killing fields before Pol Pot? Get Bush first and the rest will inevitably follow.
Click to expand...

oh please that is total bull**** and you know it. as soon as the libtards got Bush the whole thing would be forgotten and everyone else involved would "get a pass". The only way I think this would be in any way fair would be to get Bush and all the members of congress who were complicit AT THE SAME TIME.
 
Guy Incognito
You're entirely wrong. I don't thin George Bush is the "greatest war criminal." All war criminals are dogs in my eyes. George Bush just happens to be the greatest American war criminal, and he is a stain on my country, that's why I care so much about seeing him brought to justice. If we can prosecute our own war criminals because they wield such corrupt influence, how can we expect other countries to keep to a standard of human rights when we can't even mind our own yard?
Click to expand...


Oh, really? Well which international war criminals do you feel should be tried in Belgium ahead of George Bush?

The difference between you and me is that I believe in American Exceptionalism, whereas you are a cynic. Have a nice day!
Click to expand...

If you believe in American Exceptionalism, why would you want George Bush tried in Brussels?
 
Guy Incognito said:
I'm talking about the guys that actually did the interrogating, they can't use the Nuremberg defense. Bush was the one writing the orders.
Click to expand...

But the guys doing the interogationg were following orders. I guess they'll be tried too, huh? Along with the entire US military.

This will be a lifetime job for the ICC guys. A 40 year orgasm for them and their eventual replacements.
 
Moderator's Warning:
Folks, let's keep it civil. Discuss the issue, not other posters' sanity or intellect. Thank you.
 
Boo Radley said:
1, what you call it is meaningless. The US government has called it torture and so has the rest of the world. it is called the water torture.
Click to expand...

President Obama called it torture when he outlawed it in 2009. If it was illegal before, he wouldn't have issued an Executive Order.

2. It is protected as it is torture.
Click to expand...

See my statement above. Further, enemy combatants are protected; not terrorists.

3. Some techinques simply work better. I posted some testimony on the other thread.
Click to expand...

Also, legal protection is not equal to being morally right. Nor does it mean they did not break the law when they did it. it just means we're not going to prosecute them. And it would be unfair to do so without prosecuting those who allowed it, encouraged it, including the president of the US at the time.
Click to expand...

Please list what's morally right about killing civilians. (Our drones) Oh, wait, must be because we "try real hard not to." There's very little morality in a war. And when there is, I personally would much rather we apply that compass to civilians rather than to terrorists who would chop off our heads.
 
Guy Incognito said:
How ridiculous that people are still arguing about whether water-boarding is torture or not. Amazing how effective a little agitprop can be. There is no serious disagreement as to whether or not waterboarding is torture. It is, that is a given.

For everybody denying that waterboarding is torture, wise up folks. Of course it is!

As for everybody who admits it is torture but thinks it should be policy anyway to "save lives," I shake my head in shame.
Click to expand...

During SERE school I was boarded along with being bound, put in a 48 in tall bamboo cage in 42 inches of water. Every time I was asked a question and I gave my name rank and SN a boot would push me under and hold me there for as long as 30 seconds only to have it done again in another 10 seconds. Was it torture? Hell no. It sucked but at no time did I feel like my life was in danger. But while in Iraq we were warned that if you felt you were about to be captured, it was better to eat a bullet than fall into the hands of AQ. And these are the people whom you guys want to protect over your fellow countrymen. Talk about hanging your head in shame.
 
Yossarian said:
What about the obvious possibility of permanent psychological damage?
Click to expand...

As in the permanent pyschological damage suffered by those left behind when their loved ones were incinerated on 9/11?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom