61% of Americans think torture is okay?

[ArmedBear]

According to whom?Yes, you may shoot someone to stop them from committing murder. That is not the same as the government torturing suspects, and if the government is absolutely sure that you are a terrorist, but you have yet to have a trial, the word for that is suspect.

Why is someone caught in a terrorist act any different from someone caught while robbing a bank, with information about hostages inside?

 

[nfl1990]

Ok, Gunnyskox, I suspect that you are a terrorist. Off you go to Egypt for a series of near drowning sessions under interrogation. When not being near drowned, you will spend your time in a small upright coffin which is just a little too short to fully stand up in, and just a little too narrow to fully sit down in. Even if you give us a list of names of other terrorists, the torture won't stop, because you are suspected of terrorism, and terrorists are low down scum, and you might just be holding out on us. Forget about a chance to disprove our evidence against you. Terrorists don't deserve a chance at that. And forget about a lawyer, or the presumption of innocence, or the right to face your accuser. Terrorists don't deserve that. Oh, you protest that you are not a terrorist? Well tell it to your interrogators. No judge will ever hear your protests. Is that the America that you were taught to love?

I highly doubt that the guy shooting his Ak, or RPG at you, or attempting to detonate a vest filled with C4 that is strapped to his chest is innocent, but I guess ya never know huh.

 

[nfl1990]

Why is someone caught in a terrorist act any different from someone caught while robbing a bank, with information about hostages inside?

Well woundn't both technically be terrorists, just that that wasn't the primary goal of the bank robber, just a side-effect.

 

[ArmedBear]

I highly doubt that the guy shooting his Ak, or RPG at you, or attempting to detonate a vest filled with C4 that is strapped to his chest is innocent, but I guess ya never know huh.

Exactly. Due Process does not apply to people who are actively trying to kill you in war or in civilian law enforcement.

There is a HUGE difference between torture as a procedure used on criminal suspects and "torture" used as a heat-of-battle tactic.

Iain is correct, otherwise. I oppose using the word "terrorist" to describe just anyone. And I'm not sure whether Britney or Christina is worse, as I try to avoid both.

 

[Camp David]

Imagine yourself the innocent guy having his fingernails being pulled out...

No... you imagine yourself sitting in an aircraft slamming into the World Trade Center! My example is real; yours is ficticious! Remember that!

 

[The Real Hawkeye]

Why is someone caught in a terrorist act any different from someone caught while robbing a bank, with information about hostages inside?

It's who's saying they caught you red handed that's the issue. If you, Joe citizen, catch someone red handed and torture them into telling you the combo a the safe they've locked the bank clerk in with the time bomb, then you will have to prove to our criminal justice system that you acted reasonably under the circumstances. The situation of the government catching someone red handed is different. They are not subject to the criminal justice system. They are the system. The system must presume innocence until a jury determines guilt. This is a necessary safeguard against tyranny, even if it means some innocent people might die. Better that than live in the Soviet Union of the United States of America. Those are the options we face.

 

[The Real Hawkeye]

I highly doubt that the guy shooting his Ak, or RPG at you, or attempting to detonate a vest filled with C4 that is strapped to his chest is innocent, but I guess ya never know huh.

What you describe, first of all, are NOT terrorist acts. They are acts of war or acts of attempted murder, depending on the circumstance. You have every right to shoot to kill. Governments should not be allowed to torture anyone, no matter how much I'd personally like to torture some people. I fear what our government would become, released from the chains of the Constitution, more than ANY terrorist. You should too.

 

[ArmedBear]

It's who's saying they caught you red handed that's the issue. If you, Joe citizen, catch someone red handed and torture them into telling you the combo a the safe they've locked the bank clerk in with the time bomb, then you will have to prove to our criminal justice system that you acted reasonably under the circumstances. The situation of the government catching someone red handed is different. They are not subject to the criminal justice system. They are the system. The system must presume innocence until a jury determines guilt. This is a necessary safeguard against tyranny, even if it means some innocent people might die. Better that than live in the Soviet Union of the United States of America. Those are the options we face.

Actually, the government oversteps its legal boundaries all the time, and judges and juries decide that after the fact. I wish it were not so, but again, that's reality, not a dream world.

Due process is not guaranteed to anyone "caught in the act." People are shot by the police when they pose a threat every day. And the police are subject to punishment if they misuse their power.

I would like a better system. But I still fail to understand why a terrorist, during an attack, deserves to be treated differently from a bank robber, during a robbery.

 

[The Real Hawkeye]

Actually, the government oversteps its legal boundaries all the time, and judges and juries decide that after the fact. I wish it were not so, but again, that's reality, not a dream world.

Due process is not guaranteed to anyone "caught in the act." People are shot by the police when they pose a threat every day. And the police are subject to punishment if they misuse their power.

I would like a better system. But I still fail to understand why a terrorist, during an attack, deserves to be treated differently from a bank robber, during a robbery.

You are confusing policemen acting as citizens with government policy. Very different things. Cops, when they act outside of policy, are judged by the criminal justice system based on the reasonableness of their actions, just like you and I. If, on the other hand, the policy of the Police Department was to torture suspects in certain situations, then they'd be acting as an agency of government, i.e., as the system itself. These things must be kept very distinct.

 

[Gunpacker]

Uh, we can expect them to torture American troops or civilians regardless. Also kill them on camera. They are not from a warring nation that they can be identified with. They aspire to kill millions of our citizens. Torture them, extract all the info we can get and then do what should be done with murderers that do not wear a uniform- Kill them-unless they give us useful info. Don't have any? Soorryyyyy. The muslim world can't hate us any more than they do, and we are not breaking any international agreement that we are signatory to. We need to use every means to protect ourselves. Let the country that they represent step forward and demand that we treat their soldiers properly. Then we can treat prisoners properly and bomb the hell out of their country.

 

[The Real Hawkeye]

Uh, we can expect them to torture American troops or civilians regardless. Also kill them on camera. They are not from a warring nation that they can be identified with. They aspire to kill millions of our citizens. Torture them, extract all the info we can get and then do what should be done with murderers that do not wear a uniform- Kill them. The muslim world can't hate us any more than they do, and we are not breaking any international agreement that we are signatory to.

Yes, but the problem is, who are they?

 

[444]

Just a couple comments, sort of related to the topic:
It seems to me that in the years since the Korean conflict, we have had great difficulty in fighting wars or what have been called wars. Whether it be the so called war on drugs, the war on terrorism, or police actions like the one in Vietnam. In all these cases, we were not fighting a conventional military with uniformed soldiers who were playing by the same rules as we are. We have a set of rules and they don't. Because we have not been willing to do what it takes to win in these situations, we have not been able to accomplish our mission completely.
To me, we may have played by a set of rules, and if this is honorable to you, great. That in itself would be a victory to you, I suppose. However, the mission wasn't accomplished completely and to me, this isn't victory.

Along the same line, we look at these issues through our own eyes and presume that the eyes of our enemies see the same thing as we do. This is a problem. An example of this that is totally unrelated to this discussion: I have a good friend who escaped across the iron curtin. He served in the US Army back in the 1950s. He mentioned that during his time in the US Army, he got the lecture about shooting to wound rather than to kill so that it would tie up a number of enemy soldiers who would be helping their wounded comrade. He said that he got a good laugh out of this. He couldn't make the Americans understand that the Russians wouldn't tie up anyone by helping the wounded. They don't value life like we do. If you were wounded, that was tough crap and they just left you there. BUT, the Americans were unable to look at the situation through the eyes of their enemy. They blindly insisted on basing their decisions on American values and American SOPs. They don't care about your honor, or your values. They run the game by their rules, they look at our actions through their eyes and base their opinions on their values.

 

[NineseveN]

One more thing...

Freedom and justice don't mean a hill of horsecrap if we're a smoldering heap of radioactive rubble. Survival DOES matter, in the real world. This ain't some mythological novel, and dead people are really dead.

+1

 

[Iain]

No... you imagine yourself sitting in an aircraft slamming into the World Trade Center! My example is real; yours is ficticious! Remember that!

You genuinely think that mine is fictitious? I don't think so.

 

[Baba Louie]

Is it torture of a terrorist who wants to die for his cause/religion whatever, if you only take him there halfway, albeit somewhat painfully, in your attempt to gather useful information from him to help your side of the conflict, knowing full well that he'd have zero qualms about taking over a high school full of kids and blowing them and their ilk to smithereens, ala Russian scenario of a while back?

What have we become? Perhaps it's time to go back to the good old, yet horrible, days of promising the native americans peace on one hand while we lie, cheat them out of their lands (show me your property deed please), and commit genocide on our way to become the superpower we are today... or maybe like we interred 120,000 Japanese/American citizens, taking their homes and business' for the duration of the war...

I mean, it worked then...

Or maybe we can just sit around and wait until Iran does develop their own nuclear powered device or two and see what our next Democratic (and probably female) President decides to do about it...

Could be interesting

 

[Lupinus]

Is it torture of a terrorist who wants to die for his cause/religion whatever, if you only take him there halfway, albeit somewhat painfully, in your attempt to gather useful information from him to help your side of the conflict, knowing full well that he'd have zero qualms about taking over a high school full of kids and blowing them and their ilk to smithereens, ala Russian scenario of a while back?

He may not be afriad to die, but tie him up on a table and let me go to the hardware store with 20 bucks and I assure you when I'm done with him he will be petrafied of me.

 

[doger5]

No one remembers history

I forgot I quit caring. I'm just one of the powerless lemming.

 

[Baba Louie]

I believe in the ideals of the Constitution and the Bill of Rights but no one is carrying them on.

It's not in our .gov's best interest as they give too much power to the people and we can't have that, now can we? You've got to practice those ideals on an individual basis and always stand ready to protect you and yours from Terrorists AND Tyrants, be they of a religious nature, home made or foreign or elected to office.
Regarding the overall thread topic, if I and my gang of buddies, were to terrorize your family (or any other family) and you caught me in the act of doing some unspeakable deed to your daughter, mother or wife and you knew that my buddies who were not caught are planning to continue that practice...
What WOULD you do to me? Bill of Rights be damned at that moment. WHAT WOULD YOU DO?
Do the means justify the ends?
Should our .gov have that power?
When will they use it against me... or you?

Sticky Wicket, eh what?

 

[chas_martel]

For the second time in 24 hours I have clicked into a thread
where some seem to be lacking COMMON SENSE.

I think some people are confused because they don't realize we are
at war, this is not a police action. And the next step is that it
will be fought on our street corners.

Comparing the torture of vermin that are hell bent on destroying our collective
way of life to a Dirty Harry movie is STUPID!

Use common sense. Police beating street thugs is wrong, storm troopers
beating Muslim vermin is OK.

Flame me! But most people, even if afraid to admit it, will agree with me.

 

[Berek]

My $0.02 worth... for what it's worth...

Ok, for many years now, I've wondered why we (UN nations) are bound by the rules of war (Geneva Convention, Hague Accord, etc.) when these terrorists and their sponsers run free through the wild weapons patch without hesitation.

Lets look at some of this:
Convention for the Suppression of Unlawful Acts Against the Safety of Civil Aviation (1971) means that no one can put the safety of civilian aircraft in danger. What does that sound like?

Universal Declaration of Human Rights - Written at the U.N. in 1948 which states in Article 5: "No one shall be subjected to torture or to cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment."

Now, Iran & Iraq became members of the UN in 1945, Afghanistan in 1946 and Kuwait in 1963. As such, we were all bound to follow these rules. Iraq decided they were above these rules and began to torture POWs regardless of their nationality. Somalia joined the UN in 1960. Should I even mention the Black Hawk incident?

I don't understand why these nations can do what they do and we are the ones persecuted if one of our troopers take a situation a little too personal and spits on a prisoner.

If everyone wants to preach equal rights and equal treatment, all aspects should go both ways. If we follow these accords regarding the treatment of prisoners and what weapons to use, they should do the same. If they fail to follow the accord, we should be able to use the same tactics.

Eye for an eye or I'm taking my ball and going home!

 

[nfl1990]

For the second time in 24 hours I have clicked into a thread
where some seem to be lacking COMMON SENSE.

I think some people are confused because they don't realize we are
at war, this is not a police action. And the next step is that it
will be fought on our street corners.

Comparing the torture of vermin that are hell bent on destroying our collective
way of life to a Dirty Harry movie is STUPID!

Use common sense. Police beating street thugs is wrong, storm troopers
beating Muslim vermin is OK.

Flame me! But most people, even if afraid to admit it, will agree with me.

You bring out an interesting point that this is a milatary rather than a police action.

 

[GunnySkox]

Ok, Gunnyskox, I suspect that you are a terrorist...

*Strong Bad* Oh-ho-ho, look who thinks he's Clever Dan. */Strong Bad*

I think you missed the boat when I pushed it out to sea in my post, Hawkeye. Let me point you in the direction of its last line:

"Which is satisfying in a visceral, Old Testament sort of way, but still wrong."

BUT STILL WRONG. By which I imply that TORTURING PEOPLE IS WRONG even though the thought of putting ones barbaric enemies through horrendous torture is satisfying in a low, base, animalistic sort of way.

Try living up to your name next time you decide to chew someone out for no reason, eh?

~GnSx

 

[The Real Hawkeye]

Because we have not been willing to do what it takes to win in these situations, we have not been able to accomplish our mission completely.

Well, the problem with many of our uses of our military since WWII is that they have been fought to secure the ends of the UN, and not actually to win. In Korea, we fought to secure a certain line between north and south. Had we actually been at war with North Korea, we'd have annihilated them in a few days. Same for Vietnam. Again, there, we were not fighting for victory. Any soldier who actually pursued victory there would have been court martialed. We were pursuing internationalist goals, rather than the goal of victory against our enemy. Remember, victory in war means the utter destruction of the enemy, at least to the point where they surrender, but more traditionally to the point of utter destruction, and then you either take the territory, or you leave them to deal with the smoldering mess as best they can. That's real war. Korea and Vietnam were not real wars, even if there was lots of heroism and excellent soldiering in them by American troops.

 

[RomanKnight]

Today, it's the Muslim vermin overseas. Tomorrow, we'll torture the Muslim Arabs in our country. Then, we'll torture all terrorists. Especially the fanatical, right-wing gun-toting extremists. Guns equal terror! You have guns? Off you go!

 

[TheLastBoyScout]

Count me with the 61%. Hell count me with the 11% who say its often acceptable.

Reciprocity is a bitch. If the hajji's captured me, I know I'd be wishing I was only subject to what the CIA considers "torture"; so I've got no sympathy at all for them.

Cold water is not torture. Sleep deprivation is not torture. Crappy music is not torture. Humiliation is not torture. Decapitation with a dull knife on the other hand...