- Joined
- Aug 17, 2005
- Messages
- 20,915
- Reaction score
- 546
- Gender
- Male
- Political Leaning
- Very Conservative
vergiss said:It's very simple: you cannot have the moral high ground if you behave immorally. Duh.
Is it immoral to kill/torture 1 to save 1,000,000 innocents?
FinnMacCool said:If you can prove that torturing can save 1,000,000 people then no.
FinnMacCool said:I don't believe boot camp would actually be torture but I think that a lot of the stuff that goes along with it could be. Have you ever seen the movie 'A Few Good Men'? I think **** like that is a problem.
FinnMacCool said:I don't believe boot camp would actually be torture but I think that a lot of the stuff that goes along with it could be. Have you ever seen the movie 'A Few Good Men'? I think **** like that is a problem.
Oh my freaking god that article I posted was a joke it was a cynical look at the McCain Bill and you actually took it seriously, the whole point is that the torture bill is freaking ridiculous, did that go over your hear or what???
FinnMacCool said:I didn't check the link, to be honest. I was responding to your question, and M14's post. I don't think the anti torture bill is ridiculous though.
The whole idea of the bill is to make the world realize that the United States of America doesn't condone torture and thats the most important thing. This won't stop torture but it will help our image.
No the most important thing is how the bill defines torture: 'cruel and degrading treatment.' That means that yelling at a terrorist suspect will no longer be allowed because it's degrading to the poor terrorist. Gimme a break.
FinnMacCool said:I haven't seen the actual bill so I can't really argue against that but let me just say that yelling or slapping a terrorist subject would be even harder to regulate then torturing. The whole idea is to improve our image and thats what matters. Refusing this bill says 'Okay world. We condone torture because we turned down a No-Torture bill.' We're hated enough already. We don't need people to say we're torturing now.
Trajan Octavian Titus said:They have just found that a slew of torture camps exist not overseas or in secret prisons but right here in the good old U.S. of A read on:
HOLD THE PRESSES. I've discovered that the use of torture by the U.S. government is far more pervasive than previously believed. There are major facilities all over the country where thousands of men and women who have not committed any crime are held for prolonged periods while subjected to physical and psychological coercion that violates every tenet of the Geneva Convention.
They are routinely made to stand for long periods in uncomfortable positions. They are made to walk for hours while wearing heavy loads on their backs. They are bullied by martinets who get in their faces and yell insults at them. They are hit and often knocked down with clubs known as pugil sticks. They are denied sleep for more than a day at a time. They are forced to inhale tear gas. They are prevented from seeing friends or family. Some are traumatized by this treatment. Others are injured. A few even die.
Should Amnesty International or the International Committee of the Red Cross want to investigate these human-rights abuses, they could visit Parris Island, S.C., Camp Pendleton, Calif., Ft. Benning, Ga., Ft. Jackson, S.C., and other bases where the Army and Marines train recruits. It's worth keeping in mind how roughly the U.S. government treats its own defenders before we get too worked up over the treatment of captured terrorists.
http://www.outsidethebeltway.com/archives/12982
Yep according to the Al-Qaeda Bill of Rights . . . . I mean the McCain torture Bill boot camp is now considered as torture let's hope the libs get around to stopping this right away just as soon as their done tying the hands of our military from winning the war on terror.
Ya the torture bill is going to sway world opinion.
I haven't seen the bill yet so I cannot argue against this.Here's the deal this torture bill the way it is worded now is bullshit, and people are spinning it to hide the real issue by saying that if you don't support the torture bill then you support torture, which is not the issue at all, the issue is that the bill defines torture in such a way as to not allow any interogation techniques to be used at all it defines torture as cruel and degrading treatment which can mean just about anything.
Going to jail, whether your tortured or not, isn't fun. And I still think that they will be tortured regardless.Passing this bill is like saying to the terrorists: "Don't worry if you get caught because the U.S. has tied its own hands."
__________________
jallman said:I have never read a more inane, irrelevant, and pointless load of partisan BS in the entire time I have been a member of this forum. Let me point out one serious flaw in your little parody...MEN AND WOMEN OF THE ARMED SERVICES VOLUNTEER...you know, they have an idea of what they are getting into and they willingly sign waivers and forms that permit the kind of treatment they receive as training.
Prisoners of war are prisoners...they have no say in how they are treated and so, we should be held to a standard of humane treatment, especially when it comes to those under suspicion but not yet proven to be criminals/terrorists.
If you dont like McCain or you are just in love with Bush, say so...but dont attack a war hero who faced torture for 5 years with this partisan hackmanship. Weak.
FinnMacCool said:Maybe not but rejecting the bill definatly won't help us nor will it help Bush's approval ratings
Trajan Octavian Titus said:good freaking plan, conduct the war on terror based on popularity polls.
I haven't seen the bill yet so I cannot argue against this.
Trajan Octavian Titus said:well I've already explained to you what the bills definition of torture is.
Going to jail, whether your tortured or not, isn't fun. And I still think that they will be tortured regardless.
Well you can blame Bush on that. But if I were in his shoes, I would've done the same thing.good freaking plan, conduct the war on terror based on popularity polls.
So should I take your word for it? I would have to see the actual thing first.well I've already explained to you what the bills definition of torture is.
How does it tie their hands together?It's not about torture it's about tying the hands of the military from being able to interogate terrorist suspects you people just aren't getting it.
FinnMacCool said:Well you can blame Bush on that. But if I were in his shoes, I would've done the same thing.
Trajan Octavian Titus said:Actually Bush has stated many times that he doesn't conduct policy based on polls not like another president by the name of Clinton.
So should I take your word for it? I would have to see the actual thing first.
Trajan Octavian Titus said:Well if you don't believe me here's a snippet from the Washington Post:
The amendment by McCain, one of Bush's most significant backers at the outset of the Iraq war, would establish uniform standards for the interrogation of people detained by U.S. military personnel, prohibiting "cruel, inhuman or degrading" treatment while they are in U.S. custody.
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2005/10/05/AR2005100502062.html
How does it tie their hands together?
Oh yeah, he says that :roll: This poll should be evidence enough that Bush isn't some noble leader but just a petty politician influenced by things such as polls. If he were a true noble leader, he would've vetoed it.Actually Bush has stated many times that he doesn't conduct policy based on polls not like another president by the name of Clinton.
I know about that. But I would have to see what they define as 'cruel and degrading'Well if you don't believe me here's a snippet from the Washington Post:
The amendment by McCain, one of Bush's most significant backers at the outset of the Iraq war, would establish uniform standards for the interrogation of people detained by U.S. military personnel, prohibiting "cruel, inhuman or degrading" treatment while they are in U.S. custody.
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn...100502062.html
I'd have to read the bill.It's going to outlaw any form of coercive interogation.
Deegan said:No sir, stuff like that is the solution, and God help the enemy of the men who finish that test of strength, courage, and determination.:shock:
I couldn't do it, I wouldn't even try, but I thank God everyday for men like that, I wish it was not necessary, but unfortunately it is.
To buy lots of cheeseI brought my own visegrips, where they at? Stupid friggin Arab, what's your plan? (crack)
Ben Affleck (crack).. Who's your boss?
[NOTE: I changed it to reflect what they COULD tell him]What's that? Buy lots of cheese? Oh, tough guy huh? (crack). Thank you. The doctor will see you in a minute.
Three broken fingers just saved 3000 lives.
FinnMacCool said:Oh yeah, he says that :roll: This poll should be evidence enough that Bush isn't some noble leader but just a petty politician influenced by things such as polls. If he were a true noble leader, he would've vetoed it.
I know about that. But I would have to see what they define as 'cruel and degrading'
I'd have to read the bill.
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?