• 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!

Should the Report on Torture Be Released Publicly?

Should The Torture Report be Released Publicly?

  • Total voters
    90
twixie1 said:
Out of court settlements it is then!!
Click to expand...
Click to expand...



The USA won't be making any settlements, in or out of court to any terrorists.

Don't take my word for this, just wait and see.

There is no power on this planet that can force the USA to do anything that it doesn't want to do.
 
shrubnose said:
The USA won't be making any settlements, in or out of court to any terrorists.

Don't take my word for this, just wait and see.
Click to expand...

You seem very sure..what will happen if the victims take it to the court of Human Rights..I would if I was them..unless any charges had been made..and there was proof that I actually was a terrorist..

The video's on this subject are damning..plus your admission that ''mistakes were made''..

Trouble is with Americans..

When the US play that game, .. ''We've got the biggest guns / bombs / swinging dicks''..and you still think you can make the rules ...
 
twixie1 said:
You seem very sure..what will happen if the victims take it to the court of Human Rights..I would if I was them..unless any charges had been made..and there was proof that I actually was a terrorist..

The video's on this subject are damning..plus your admission that ''mistakes were made''..

Trouble is with Americans..

When the US play that game, .. ''We've got the biggest guns / bombs / swinging dicks''..and you still think you can make the rules ..
Click to expand...
.
Click to expand...



Orders from any court are meaningless without the force required to enforce them.

One more time: Tell us who is going to force the USA to do anything. :roll:
 
shrubnose said:
Orders from any court are meaningless without the force required to enforce them.

One more time: Tell us who is going to force the USA to do anything. :roll:
Click to expand...

The main thing people around the world should be thinking about is how they want to maintain international security,if they make it too expensive for the Americans.
 
shrubnose said:
Orders from any court are meaningless without the force required to enforce them.

One more time: Tell us who is going to force the USA to do anything. :roll:
Click to expand...

Well for a start..Russia told you not to interfere in the horrors that were going on in Syria..

Russia warned it could potentially retaliate if U.S. or Arab airstrikes go beyond targeting Islamic State of Iraq and Syria, or ISIS, and instead bomb any Syrian regime targets.

That seemed like poopy pants time for the USA..
 
twixie1 said:
Well for a start..Russia told you not to interfere in the horrors that were going on in Syria..

Russia warned it could potentially retaliate if U.S. or Arab airstrikes go beyond targeting Islamic State of Iraq and Syria, or ISIS, and instead bomb any Syrian regime targets.

That seemed like poopy pants time for the USA.
Click to expand...
.
Click to expand...



Wake up and join the reality-based world.

The USA is bombing ISIS targets in Syria right now.

Who is going to take care of that problem if the USA decides that it has better things to do? Fill us in. Is the UN going to handle it? :roll:
 
shrubnose said:
Orders from any court are meaningless without the force required to enforce them.

One more time: Tell us who is going to force the USA to do anything. :roll:
Click to expand...

yea, that will play well in the world court of public opinion [/sarcasm for those who needed the prompt]
 
eohrnberger said:
If you really believe that this is a battle that we cannot win, I suggest that you save time and start adopting Sharia law now, rather than later. Get used to being beheaded for not being Muslim or believing in Islam.
Click to expand...

Stopped reading after this.

Have a nice day.
 
Fenton said:
If it was so " immoral " why didn't the Democrats in the House intelligence committee do something about it when they were thoroughly briefed by the CIA ?

Pelosi and Company were well aware that these enhanced interrogation techniques were being used .

What did they do to put a stop to them ?
Click to expand...

If they already knew then they didn't need to do the investigation for a report. Besides, the relatively small number of intelligence committee members doesn't adequately represent the nation as a whole, or even Democrats as a whole.
We also don't know to what degree information was not revealed, or how many lies were told to the committee by the intelligence agencies. We know that they were lied to about the scope of NSA surveillance.
 
cpwill said:
:lol: information is the most easily traded resource; the idea that foreigners know things about our governments' activities that we are kept in the dark about is unsupportable at best.
Click to expand...

The people who see the bodies and destruction from drone attacks know what happened. The families and friends of the people who are disappeared by the USA have a pretty good idea of what is happening to them. Word gets around.
 
great time for the repubs to blow something up and then blame it on the Obama administration for letting out the report and you don't even have to hurt anyone!!! just and old abandoned building owned by the government I would not be surprised these days with all the hate against him
 
eohrnberger said:
If you really believe that this is a battle that we cannot win, I suggest that you save time and start adopting Sharia law now, rather than later. Get used to being beheaded for not being Muslim or believing in Islam.

We can see the throes of this in the heavily Muslim immigrated EU countries, such as France, Germany and the UK. They've got a hell of a problem in that this Islamic radicalism is not only present in the first generation immigrants, it's also starting to show up in the second generation of immigrants, which have not really assimilated into the local culture as expected and depended on.

The Islamic extremists's stated goal is to spread Islam to all countries, and make it the majority religion in all countries.

What's the most pragmatic response to the threat of being killed by Islamic extremists?
What's the most pragmatic response to the threat of displacing the culture of all non-Islamic countries?
Click to expand...

Sorry, The possibility of Islamists coming to the USA and imposing their religion and laws on us is so unlikely that basing policy decisions on that notion is nothing but irrational paranoia. It is much more likely that we will become a Christian fascist theocracy in response to that insane paranoia. We're already dealing with people, many of them in power, who want to ban certain religions, legalize torture, allow long term incarceration of people without due process, support unlimited government surveillance, and want to remain engaged in an endless undeclared war with a method of fighting (terrorism) rather than a well defined enemy. The people who support eliminating our nations guiding principals as embodied in the Bill of rights are the real threat to the USA.
 
Northern Light said:
Stopped reading after this.

Have a nice day.
Click to expand...

You are free to ignore that which you don't agree with or can't accept. But that doesn't make it go away.
Worldwide Caliphate - From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
A "Worldwide Caliphate" is the concept of a single theocratic one-world government as proposed by some Islamic extremists in their efforts to overthrow the world's current political systems.[1] The Daily Times reported that at a rally held in Islamabad[when?] the militant organization Pakistan.[2]
Hizb ut-Tahrir believes that all Muslims should unite in a worldwide caliphate[3][4] that will "challenge, and ultimately conquer, the West."[5] While extremists commit atrocities in pursuit of this unlikely goal, it lacks appeal among a wider Islamic audience.[6] Brigitte Gabriel argues that the goal of a worldwide caliphate is central to the enterprise of radical Islam.[7] History

Efraim Karsh explains[clarification needed] the concept's origin:[8] "As a universal religion, Islam envisages a global political order in which all humankind will live under Muslim rule as either believers or subject communities. In order to achieve this goal it is incumbent on all free, male, adult Muslims to carry out an uncompromising struggle 'in the path of Allah,' or jihad. This in turn makes those parts of the world that have not yet been conquered by the House of Islam an abode of permanent conflict (Dar al-Harb, the house of War) which will only end with Islam's eventual triumph."
Click to expand...
Worldwide Caliphate - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Interpretations of the Qur'an and Hadith
See also: Islam and violence § Hadiths about Jihad
The role played by the Qur'an, Islam's sacred text, in opposing or in encouraging attacks on civilians is disputed.[citation needed]
The Princeton University Middle Eastern scholar Bernard Lewis, states that Islamic jurisprudence does not allow terrorism.[26] In 2001, Professor Lewis noted:[27] At no time did the (Muslim) jurist approve of terrorism. Nor indeed is there any evidence of the use of terrorism (in Islamic tradition).[28] Muslims are commanded not to kill women, children,[29] or the aged, not to torture or otherwise ill-treat prisoners,[30] The rules and regulations concerning prisoners of war in Islam to give fair warning of the opening of hostilities, and to honor agreements.[31] Similarly, the laws of Jihad categorically preclude wanton and indiscriminate slaughter.[32] The warriors in the holy war are urged not to harm non-combatants, women and children, "unless they attack you first." A point on which they insist is the need for a clear declaration of war before beginning hostilities, and for proper warning before resuming hostilities after a truce. What the classical jurists of Islam never remotely considered is the kind of unprovoked, unannounced mass slaughter of uninvolved civil populations that we saw in New York two weeks ago. For this there is no precedent and no authority in Islam.

But Bernard Lewis says Jihad is an unlimited offensive to bring the whole world under Islamic law; Christian crusades a defensive, limited response to, and imitation of, jihad.[33]
Click to expand...
Islamic terrorism - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

So it is said that if you know your enemies and know yourself, you can win a hundred battles without a single loss.
If you only know yourself, but not your opponent, you may win or may lose.
If you know neither yourself nor your enemy, you will always endanger yourself.
Click to expand...
The Art of War - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
 
Northern Light said:
Nothing you've posted is evidence that we're going to be invaded by the Islamic world and forced to accept Sharia Law.

:spin:
Click to expand...

Other than it's a stated goal of their religion, and that it's perfectly acceptable in their religion to kill off all the males of the society they invade / conquer.

Think again as to the civil unrest incidences in the EU countries that caused by larger scale Muslim rioting. Think again as to how the radicalism is being spread from Mosque to Mosque even in this country.

Imminent threat? Quite possibly. Immediate threat? Not so much, unless you consider 9/11 as only the opening salvo of a much longer time context in which they are viewing this conflict.

Are you really so sure that it's something the western nations can afford to ignore?
 
eohrnberger said:
Other than it's a stated goal of their religion, and that it's perfectly acceptable in their religion to kill off all the males of the society they invade / conquer.
Click to expand...

Oh lord... beyond the radicals, if you actually believe that load of crap then you really need to stop watching Fox News.

Christianity has similar passages, but again only a handful of radicals commit heinous acts each year.

Thank god people like you don't form foreign policy in this country, at least not for now.

Unsubscribing now. Tootles.
 
Northern Light said:
Oh lord... beyond the radicals, if you actually believe that load of crap then you really need to stop watching Fox News.
Click to expand...

It's in the reference that I cited, and that reference is heavily cited itself to the original materials. So, no, not Fox News.

Northern Light said:
Christianity has similar passages, but again only a handful of radicals commit heinous acts each year.
Click to expand...

Good point. How many extremist Christians? Not many. How many extremist Muslims? Quite a lot. Big difference.

Northern Light said:
Thank god people like you don't form foreign policy in this country, at least not for now.

Unsubscribing now. Tootles.
Click to expand...

As you see fit.
 
Hard Truth said:
The people who see the bodies and destruction from drone attacks know what happened. The families and friends of the people who are disappeared by the USA have a pretty good idea of what is happening to them. Word gets around.
Click to expand...

:lol: I've dealt with and studies these populaces for several years now. Allow me to assure you that U.S. citizens are far more informed, and by more than RUMINT at that :lol:


You are mistaking paranoid, conspiratorial mutterings for logic or data.
 
Hard Truth said:
If they already knew then they didn't need to do the investigation for a report. Besides, the relatively small number of intelligence committee members doesn't adequately represent the nation as a whole, or even Democrats as a whole.
We also don't know to what degree information was not revealed, or how many lies were told to the committee by the intelligence agencies. We know that they were lied to about the scope of NSA surveillance.
Click to expand...


Oh please, first Nancy Pelosi didn't remember being briefed and now they were briefed but were lied to.

Sounds like more Democrat dishonesty
 
Sabanist said:
My enemies are not having their heads chopped off on video, or having their corpses dragged through the streets.

If one civilian or allied life can be saved by denying my enemies some sleep, then thats success
Click to expand...

Bollocks. "If one teenager is saved... If one murder is prevented... If one fatality is avoided...", it's a cheap cop-out. We're talking about torture and you don't get to move the goal-posts with crapola like, "...denying my enemies some sleep". Those scum who behead innocents, drag corpses through the streets and torture prisoners deserve the worst fate karma can arrange for them and you want to crawl into their gutter and share their karma.
 
Grand Mal said:
Bollocks. "If one teenager is saved... If one murder is prevented... If one fatality is avoided...", it's a cheap cop-out. We're talking about torture and you don't get to move the goal-posts with crapola like, "...denying my enemies some sleep". Those scum who behead innocents, drag corpses through the streets and torture prisoners deserve the worst fate karma can arrange for them and you want to crawl into their gutter and share their karma.
Click to expand...

Thata what the report read. You saw torture in a headline and went off screaming "TORTURERS!!! Get em!!" Mission accomplished by the media i guess.

But the reality is one guy was waterboarded and he deserved it.

And why cant you say if one life is saved? Thats exactly what happened.
 
disneydude said:
Continuing doing the same actions and sweeping it under the rug endangers more lives. It was the immoral activity instigated under Cheney/Bush that has put American lives at risk.....not releasing the report that details their actions.
Click to expand...

The enhanced interrogations were under special circumstances, mostly occurring right after roughly 3000 Americans were brutally murdered and the terrorists were threatening to brutally murder thousands more.
The waterboarding, etc of terrorists was entirely legal. And democrats like Senator Dianne Feinstein were briefed and quite okay with it. At the time their attitude was: "Whatever it takes". The democrats also pushed the WMDs in Iraq narrative long before Bush and Cheney assumed office. The democrats were all in and did not want to miss out on any of the political credit for the fall of Saddam Hussein. It was only after it became clear that the insurgency that followed the take down of the Saddam regime was not going to go away quickly and the war was going to drag on longer that they suddenly pushed the scenario that they were against the war and the wmd narrative all along.
 
Amadeus said:
Any Democrats or Republicans complicit in torture policies should be thrown out like the anti-American bums they are.
Click to expand...

So they should just blow them to bits with predator drones, huh?
 
shrubnose said:
I agree.

If some of the people in the G.W. Bush mis-administration hadn't descended into barbarity as part of their response to 9/11 we wouldn't be having this conversation. :roll:

When any country (Including the USA.) violates international agreements that it has signed and tortures people it has crossed a red line.

And it shouldn't be surprised when other nations condemn its actions.
Click to expand...

International agreements? The only international agreement that applies to torture is the Geneva Conventions. The protections against torture in the Geneva Conventions do not apply to terrorists. They do not apply to any combatants who are not fighting under the flag of any nation.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom