definition of torture depends on...

when sanctioned by our president, "harsh interrogation" is necessary and beneficial and keeps us safe, and it can be lied about/denied until someone comes up with silly proof like pictures or witnesses about floating prison ships. when anyone else does it we find them guilty of torture and imprison them forever.

http://www.miamiherald.com/1374/story/829810.html

Emmanuel, a U.S. citizen born in Boston, was head of the Antiterrorist Unit in Liberia from 1997 to 2003, when his father left power. Trial testimony described the ATU, also known as the "Demon Forces," as an elite battalion used to silence opponents of the president, train fighters for other African conflicts and conduct brutal interrogations of prisoners.

The administration of President George W. Bush has been criticized by some around the world and in Congress for using aggressive interrogation techniques. Justice Department memos were seen as providing legal underpinnings for some of the techniques.

However, administration officials have blamed abuses at places such as Iraq's Abu Ghraib prison on a small number of soldiers or agents and insisted there has been no systematic mistreatment of detainees in Iraq, Afghanistan or the prison camp at Guantanamo Bay, Cuba.

I've said it before and I'll say it again...Protecting our country is like making sausage...I don't want to know how it's done, just get it done...dammit!

Cincy Fan 44 wrote:I've said it before and I'll say it again...Protecting our country is like making sausage...I don't want to know how it's done, just get it done...dammit!

I don't want to buy sausage where you buy your sausage. I want to *select* what's going into my body. Why can't everyone just eat macaroni and cheese? Ya know... Yankee Doodle type stuff.

meta4 wrote:

Cincy Fan 44 wrote:I've said it before and I'll say it again...Protecting our country is like making sausage...I don't want to know how it's done, just get it done...dammit!

I don't want to buy sausage where you buy your sausage. I want to *select* what's going into my body. Why can't everyone just eat macaroni and cheese? Ya know... Yankee Doodle type stuff.

Can't disagree with you on the mac and cheese...it is a hearty meal!

What amazes me is that many of those who criticize the whole 'torture' definition may or may not have ever been a part of our awesome armed forces. With that said, I'm willing to bet that they have no idea of what a recruit is trained to do in order to complete basic training and further combat training received there afterwards.

Let's just say that I was not taught when confronting the enemy face to face to say Hi to them and ask them what kind of information do they have to offer today.

LTRT wrote:What amazes me is that many of those who criticize the whole 'torture' definition may or may not have ever been a part of our awesome armed forces. With that said, I'm willing to bet that they have no idea of what a recruit is trained to do in order to complete basic training and further combat training received there afterwards.

Let's just say that I was not taught when confronting the enemy face to face to say Hi to them and ask them what kind of information do they have to offer today.

I've never served in the military but I know several people who have ...and once I got paid to dress up like one and appear for a commercial political ad. Some say that I had the same training they had been given. But we were having beers at the time and I think he was joking.

And I have, at times, indulged in marathon play of several tactical video games.

I know if I were being shot at, I'd shoot back until they were not able to shoot any longer!

I don't think we are talking battlefield arm to arm combat there ... we are talking how we treat those that we have captured and or surrendered to us. Thank God Obama will end torture, I don't want other countries think it is ok to torture our guys when caught. I know ... I know ... Al Queda does not follow Geneva Convention rules but we are a civilized society and we should. We are better than AQ, at least beginning 1/20/09 we will be.

Bman wrote:I don't think we are talking battlefield arm to arm combat there ... we are talking how we treat those that we have captured and or surrendered to us.

Okay, let's just say when someone is captured and or surrenders we were not taught to say Hi and ask them what information they had to offer.

For those involved the two go hand in hand or arm to arm whatever you want to say.

exactly why i placed the cloak of shame on the current admin. the soldiers are doing what they were trained to do. that doesnt make it ok for me or a large share of the rest of the world.

so ltr are you saying the guy referenced in the article should be imprisoned for life...he was after all doing what his commanders taught him.

floridafun wrote:exactly why i placed the cloak of shame on the current admin. the soldiers are doing what they were trained to do. that doesnt make it ok for me or a large share of the rest of the world.

so ltr are you saying the guy referenced in the article should be imprisoned for life...he was after all doing what his commanders taught him.

You're not comparing Emmanuel's case to that of Abu Ghraib are you? The two don't even begin to match up, but I will graciously not try to convince you of that.

I could care less that this guy was born in Boston, this guy was following in his old man's footsteps. It's too bad somebody didn't nail him before his arrest in 2006.

so what i said in my original post is something you are in agreement that its reasonable and acceptable. i am not trying to change your mind either.

no comparison between this guys actions and those of a number of our military personnel? hmmmm.

"when sanctioned by our president, "harsh interrogation" is necessary and beneficial and keeps us safe, and it can be lied about/denied until someone comes up with silly proof like pictures or witnesses about floating prison ships. when anyone else does it we find them guilty of torture and imprison them forever."

floridafun wrote:so what i said in my original post is something you are in agreement that its reasonable and acceptable. i am not trying to change your mind either.

no comparison between this guys actions and those of a number of our military personnel? hmmmm.

"when sanctioned by our president, "harsh interrogation" is necessary and beneficial and keeps us safe, and it can be lied about/denied until someone comes up with silly proof like pictures or witnesses about floating prison ships. when anyone else does it we find them guilty of torture and imprison them forever."

Trying to insinuate that our president sanctioned methods used by this piece of trash, or harsh interrogation is equivelant to what this dirtbag did, now that's funny.

I believe Obama should have Chaney and Bush tortured. Their reign in the White House was a threat to our country as we have seen by the results of their administration.

LTRT wrote:

floridafun wrote:so what i said in my original post is something you are in agreement that its reasonable and acceptable. i am not trying to change your mind either.

no comparison between this guys actions and those of a number of our military personnel? hmmmm.

"when sanctioned by our president, "harsh interrogation" is necessary and beneficial and keeps us safe, and it can be lied about/denied until someone comes up with silly proof like pictures or witnesses about floating prison ships. when anyone else does it we find them guilty of torture and imprison them forever."

Trying to insinuate that our president sanctioned methods used by this piece of trash, or harsh interrogation is equivelant to what this dirtbag did, now that's funny.

I think the point FF is trying to make is when you have an administration that supports torture, without stern warnings NOT to violate geneva convention guidelines for tactics "sounds" to the public, and subordinates that the guidelines are fuzzy. Couple this with "extraordinary rendition" and it may have been perceived as a muted "carte blanc" to do whatever they wanted.

I understand your point LT, that you can't pin this on the President, and I agree. However, it's just another example of how the culture of the "W" Bush admin pushed policy past the high water marks. IMO, Bush believed that he was above the law, and left evidence to that fact.

meta4 wrote:I think the point FF is trying to make is when you have an administration that supports torture, without stern warnings NOT to violate geneva convention guidelines for tactics "sounds" to the public, and subordinates that the guidelines are fuzzy. Couple this with "extraordinary rendition" and it may have been perceived as a muted "carte blanc" to do whatever they wanted.

I understand your point LT, that you can't pin this on the President, and I agree. However, it's just another example of how the culture of the "W" Bush admin pushed policy past the high water marks. IMO, Bush believed that he was above the law, and left evidence to that fact.

Glad you put that "IMO" in there.

LTRT wrote:

meta4 wrote:I think the point FF is trying to make is when you have an administration that supports torture, without stern warnings NOT to violate geneva convention guidelines for tactics "sounds" to the public, and subordinates that the guidelines are fuzzy. Couple this with "extraordinary rendition" and it may have been perceived as a muted "carte blanc" to do whatever they wanted.

I understand your point LT, that you can't pin this on the President, and I agree. However, it's just another example of how the culture of the "W" Bush admin pushed policy past the high water marks. IMO, Bush believed that he was above the law, and left evidence to that fact.

Glad you put that "IMO" in there.

Glad you read my post so carefully. Was that the only thing you agreed with?

For the record, I do not support a ban on torture. However, the process/tactic guidelines must be followed for it to be "legal".

Enemy Combatants have no protections under the Geneva Convention. We can do whatever the hell we want to with these people and face only scorn at denialble accounts of discredited witnesses. We dont even have to disclose where these people are or why they are there.

Suppose for a minute that a former detainee would be able to forward a case to some sort of international tribunal that was able to state that there is no legal difference between a detained enemy combatant and a prisoner of war, then Bush, Cheney, Rummy are war criminals. Because the detainees are not POWs, Geneva Schmeneva...

Despite occasional evidence to the contrary, Bush and Cheney did not ascend to two of the most powerful positions in the world by being stupid.