Bush authorized abuse of detainees at Abu Ghraib prison

Discussion in 'Politics' started by mikeyh9in, Apr 28, 2009.

  1. mikeyh9in

    mikeyh9in Active Member

    Joined:
    May 31, 2004
    Messages:
    321
    Albums:
    1
    Likes Received:
    48
    Gender:
    Male
    Why wasn't Bush/Cheney/Rice defending Cindy England, et al. when the photos came out? Weren't we told that they were just a couple of "bad apples" by Rumsfeld?

    Now we learn the truth...

    FBI E-Mail Says Bush Authorized Abuse of Iraqis
     
  2. faceking

    faceking Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Nov 14, 2004
    Messages:
    7,454
    Albums:
    1
    Likes Received:
    49
    Gender:
    Male
    Location:
    Mavs, NOR * CAL
    and that's wrong?!
     
  3. bigbull29

    Gold Member

    Joined:
    Apr 24, 2006
    Messages:
    5,729
    Albums:
    1
    Likes Received:
    2,382
    Gender:
    Male
    When a terrorist blows up your family, you won't be so opposed to torture.

    Many people who are opposed to torture of suspected terrorists are not necessarily fundamentally opposed to torture in itself, but are so because right wingers and Republicans advocate it in dire situations. It's a matter of adhering to the opposite to disagree for disagreeing's sake.

    Any president who apologizes to other countries for how we handled suspected terrorists will never get my respect. 3,000 people died our soil, not theirs. We have no apology to make to anyone.

    Despite our problems, misjudgments and errors, we keep the world free, not Canada, France, Britain, etc. Facts are facts.

    Finally, the Clintons are best at handling international affairs.They befriend and treat other nations with much respect and clearly draw a line not to be crossed. This is in contrast to Obama who is a fencesitter (Mr. "I love everybody"), and George Bush who acted bit aggressively at times.
     
    #3 bigbull29, Apr 28, 2009
    Last edited: Apr 28, 2009
  4. B_VinylBoy

    B_VinylBoy New Member

    Joined:
    Nov 30, 2007
    Messages:
    10,516
    Likes Received:
    7
    Gender:
    Male
    Location:
    Boston, MA / New York, NY
    I think the difference in this case is that people were detained, never arrested or found guilty for any particular crime, and then tortured on some belief that didn't turn out to be true. I agree that it would be virtually impossible to have your mind focused on the right thing if your family was killed by a terrorist. However, we should be getting the guilty people and making THEM suffer. Not just pick any random person who fits the description on a hope to find out something valuable.

    Things like this happen in the poor neighborhoods a lot. A criminal robs an old lady, fitting the description of a thin male in his 20s wearing a baseball cap. Instead of gathering more info the legit way, they in turn round up every thin man in his 20s wearing a baseball cap within a 5 mile radius and threaten them all with prison time unless they "confess". Two different scenarios, but with some scary similarities.
     
  5. B_Hung Jon

    B_Hung Jon New Member

    Joined:
    Jul 4, 2007
    Messages:
    5,008
    Likes Received:
    16
    Gender:
    Male
    Location:
    Los Angeles, California
    Being selective about torture doesn't seem to me to be basically moral. It's like saying that I can murder another person because they hurt me somehow. It isn't justice. It's revenge.
     
  6. Calboner

    Gold Member

    Joined:
    Aug 16, 2007
    Messages:
    9,026
    Albums:
    5
    Likes Received:
    2,465
    Gender:
    Male
    Location:
    USA
    I don't know if such comments are due primarily to ignorance, stupidity, mendacity, delusion, or just confusion, but, setting aside the question whether there is torture is ever morally justified, and the question whether it is in the interest of the US to torture people, and the question whether torture is an effective means of obtaining information useful for protecting the country, the guys that we tortured at Abu Ghraib were not terrorists.
     
  7. bigbull29

    Gold Member

    Joined:
    Apr 24, 2006
    Messages:
    5,729
    Albums:
    1
    Likes Received:
    2,382
    Gender:
    Male
    I'm not ignorant, stupid or confused. I just love you!:biggrin1:

    I don't think there should be a war on terrorism. There are not really any terrorists. If there were any at all, they would be old Catholic women in their 80's. I'm pretty sure. How about you?
     
  8. B_starinvestor

    B_starinvestor New Member

    Joined:
    Mar 1, 2006
    Messages:
    4,409
    Likes Received:
    0
    Gender:
    Male
    Location:
    Midwest
    Very well said and unequivacably accurate.

    Again - you nailed it.

    You're Goddamn right.

    Correct again. 4 for 4.

    You aced this.

    Perceptive. Who'd a thunk it?
     
  9. invisibleman

    Gold Member

    Joined:
    Oct 10, 2005
    Messages:
    9,976
    Likes Received:
    39
    Gender:
    Male
    Location:
    North Carolina
  10. B_starinvestor

    B_starinvestor New Member

    Joined:
    Mar 1, 2006
    Messages:
    4,409
    Likes Received:
    0
    Gender:
    Male
    Location:
    Midwest

    You were on the right track. Gotta give you a C- on this response.

    Torture in and of itself is wrong. Within the context of a violent attack on your person, it exists in a different universe and for a different purpose.

    Hitting someone is wrong in and of itself. But hitting someone for the purpose of defending yourself is something different altogether.

    Examining an act without considering or acknowledging the context or necessity behind the act is an ignorant, delusional, mindless and foolish as anything this forum can produce.
     
  11. bigbull29

    Gold Member

    Joined:
    Apr 24, 2006
    Messages:
    5,729
    Albums:
    1
    Likes Received:
    2,382
    Gender:
    Male

    The guys whom we tortured
     
    #11 bigbull29, Apr 28, 2009
    Last edited: Apr 28, 2009
  12. bigbull29

    Gold Member

    Joined:
    Apr 24, 2006
    Messages:
    5,729
    Albums:
    1
    Likes Received:
    2,382
    Gender:
    Male
    I was using satire, my friend.:smile: Please don't give me a C-.
     
    #12 bigbull29, Apr 28, 2009
    Last edited: Apr 28, 2009
  13. B_starinvestor

    B_starinvestor New Member

    Joined:
    Mar 1, 2006
    Messages:
    4,409
    Likes Received:
    0
    Gender:
    Male
    Location:
    Midwest

    good deal:cool:
     
  14. bigbull29

    Gold Member

    Joined:
    Apr 24, 2006
    Messages:
    5,729
    Albums:
    1
    Likes Received:
    2,382
    Gender:
    Male
    Grammar polish-up and revision:

    Finally, the Clintons are best at handling international affairs.They befriend and treat other nations with much respect while clearly drawing a line not to be crossed. This is contrast to the more extremist approach of Obama, a fencesitter (Mr. "I love everybody"), and George Bush, an immoderate offender and enemy-maker (although sometimes justified in doing so:biggrin1:)
     
  15. Bbucko

    Gold Member

    Joined:
    Oct 28, 2006
    Messages:
    7,413
    Albums:
    1
    Likes Received:
    58
    Gender:
    Male
    Location:
    Sunny SoFla
    Torture is against the law. The latest iteration of that is a treaty Ronald Reagan enthusiastically supported and signed into law. And before anyone gets all relativistic, bear in mind that Reagan was no stranger to acts of terrorism perpetrated against Americans. The Iranian hostage crisis and the bombing of the barracks in Beirut are just two examples that spring instantly to mind.

    The symbol of justice, which predates our founding, is a woman who is blindfolded. There is no room in jurisprudence for context in terms of which law requires enforcement and which law can be flouted, and the concept of justice is completely divorced from vengeance.

    What you are advocating is hate-crime legislation, which I find abhorrent and contrary to the very system of justice our country's founded on. Adding extra penalties for the criminal's state of mind at the time that the act was committed is punishing thought, not action. I cannot believe that you're advocating hate-crime penalties. It just doesn't fit anything i know about you.
     
  16. mikeyh9in

    mikeyh9in Active Member

    Joined:
    May 31, 2004
    Messages:
    321
    Albums:
    1
    Likes Received:
    48
    Gender:
    Male
    bigbull29, you have no idea about me or my family. I did have a close friend that was killed on 9/11 in Tower 2, and another that was badly hurt in WTC 7.

    I know they would never want torture to be done in their name.

    So you are saying we should torture people for revenge? We should invade a sovereign country, capture their citizens, and exact torture for revenge? That is sick.

    Or maybe you believe torture actually works because you know it would work on *you* -- if you were tortured. Well guess what guy, these are people that will fly planes into buildings, I think their religious conviction and beliefs are a bit stronger than yours (remember if they die, they get 71 virgins). Study after study has shown that torturing increases the resolve of the victim and produces loads of misinformation.

    So, what is the real purpose of torture?

     
  17. bigbull29

    Gold Member

    Joined:
    Apr 24, 2006
    Messages:
    5,729
    Albums:
    1
    Likes Received:
    2,382
    Gender:
    Male
    Torturing is always wrong, unless the greater good of humanity is in question. For example, if terrorists or even "suspected" terrorists withhold information whose non-disclosure could jeopardize the lives of millions of Americans, then torture is justified. Even Buddhists, who promote peace and non-violence like no other religion around the world, believe that torture is acceptable in such a case.

    Yes, there probably was a bit of revenge being enacted at Guantanamo Bay at the beginning. That hard evidence, so badly wished for, wasn't showing up on some of the detainees, but reality is reality, and revenge rears its "natural" head. It's wasn't, though, full-fledged revenge, considering that they were all suspected terrorists (that's right, they were "suspected" terrorists). It's not as if they were attempting to torture anyone's 90-year-old grandmother with rosary beads in her hands.

    So, then I ask: When does any country turn the other cheek when they are attacked and many of its people die? Is the USA held to an angelic moral standard as compared to other nations like France, Britain, etc... (France's prisons are still horribly inhumane)?

    Finally, please stop parading on here like moral zealots. Many of you who are vehemently opposed to torture at Guantanamo Bay have no problem with a woman having a unborn baby violently ripped from her womb. Talk about unjustified torture!
     
    #17 bigbull29, Apr 29, 2009
    Last edited: Apr 29, 2009
  18. mikeyh9in

    mikeyh9in Active Member

    Joined:
    May 31, 2004
    Messages:
    321
    Albums:
    1
    Likes Received:
    48
    Gender:
    Male
    Why is it that idiots always try to change the subject when their arguments run dry?
     
  19. Calboner

    Gold Member

    Joined:
    Aug 16, 2007
    Messages:
    9,026
    Albums:
    5
    Likes Received:
    2,465
    Gender:
    Male
    Location:
    USA
    The word "guys" is a colloquialism; the word "whom" belongs strictly to formal prose; to combine the two words in one phrase is incompetent writing. What I wrote, "the guys that we tortured," was both correct colloquial English and good style. Your would-be correction is crap.
     
  20. SilverTrain

    Gold Member

    Joined:
    Aug 25, 2008
    Messages:
    4,582
    Albums:
    8
    Likes Received:
    404
    Gender:
    Male
    Location:
    USA
    The "ticking bomb" scenario is beloved by defenders of torture. But

    "...in the real world, the "ticking bomb" situation never arises. It is never the case that we know we can automatically avert mass slaughter by torturing someone. Reality is not that neat. Guilt and knowledge are not established in advance. Those whom we torture may or may not be planning nefarious deeds. As the British political scientist Henry Shue pointed out in his classic 1978 essay "Torture,............."

    See full article Torture works sometimes -- but it's always wrong | Salon
     
Draft saved Draft deleted