Here’s the Latest Evidence Torture Doesn’t Keep Us Safe

[Dittohead not!]

At that time, the US was actually preparing to do something about a new world order and had started pushing for r2p, albeit missed by most in the public.

Had to look up t hat r2p. Found Responsibility to Protect.

Sounds like what used to be called the "white man's burden."

So, we have a responsibility to protect the world from evil doers?

 

[Socrates1]

One day, we'll look back on torturing prisoners the same way we now look back on slavery and the Japanese relocation camps.

Let's hope that day comes soon. My country is better than that.

Strange , no mention of all the beheading or how our brave soldiers were treated by the Japanese or North Vietnamese when captured . Lets hope the WORLD becomes a better place .eace Sounds like you NEVER entered a combat zone !!! :shock:

 

[Thoreau72]

Strange , no mention of all the beheading or how our brave soldiers were treated by the Japanese or North Vietnamese when captured . Lets hope the WORLD becomes a better place .eace Sounds like you NEVER entered a combat zone !!! :shock:

Sweet appeal to emotion! OMG, a head was cut off! Yikes. Not a word about innocents being killed anonymously by drones, but OMG somebody cut somebody's head off. :shock:

 

[Socrates1]

Sweet appeal to emotion! OMG, a head was cut off! Yikes. Not a word about innocents being killed anonymously by drones, but OMG somebody cut somebody's head off. :shock:

Now I'm sure you never entered a combat zone , say hi to Bernie ! :roll:

 

[Thoreau72]

Now I'm sure you never entered a combat zone , say hi to Bernie ! :roll:

Oh I have. In the Mekong Delta all those years ago, I was shot at and missed, **** at and hit. Yes, I've seen a few mortars being dropped around us, but I was quite lucky. A little PTSD, but by 15 years later I was pretty much over it. :mrgreen:

 

[joG]

Had to look up t hat r2p. Found Responsibility to Protect.

Sounds like what used to be called the "white man's burden."

So, we have a responsibility to protect the world from evil doers?

Actually it is quite another thing. White man's burden was a self-justification of colonial powers. R2P is a tool to establish legitimacy of a supranational system of producing global public goods in the eyes of populations. Security is the prime and mot elementary example of a public good and is therefore emotionally convincing. If the UN is seen as a reliable guarantor of protection and security, it can be used to do the lifting.

 

[Socrates1]

Oh I have. In the Mekong Delta all those years ago, I was shot at and missed, **** at and hit. Yes, I've seen a few mortars being dropped around us, but I was quite lucky. A little PTSD, but by 15 years later I was pretty much over it. :mrgreen:

And how were our troops treated when captured ?

 

[Thoreau72]

And how were our troops treated when captured ?

I did not personally know anybody who was captured.

The Hanoi Hilton, from a distance, appeared to be standard fare POW camp. However stark it may have been, it seems it did allow for the sons of ranking Naval Officers to move up the ladder, if you know what I mean.

We kept captured VC and maybe NVA too in a prison camp on An Thoi island in the Gulf of Thailand. I saw it once from a distance and it also appeared to be standard fare prison camp.

 

[Socrates1]

I did not personally know anybody who was captured.

The Hanoi Hilton, from a distance, appeared to be standard fare POW camp. However stark it may have been, it seems it did allow for the sons of ranking Naval Officers to move up the ladder, if you know what I mean.

We kept captured VC and maybe NVA too in a prison camp on An Thoi island in the Gulf of Thailand. I saw it once from a distance and it also appeared to be standard fare prison camp.

North Vietnam’s treatment of American airmen shot down and captured over North Vietnam was a subject of controversy and concern throughout the Vietnam War. From the very beginning of the war, North Vietnam’s stated position was that American prisoners captured in North Vietnam were “war criminals” who had committed crimes against the North Vietnamese people in the course of an illegal war of aggression and that therefore the American prisoners were not entitled to the privileges and rights granted to prisoners of war (POW) under the terms of the Geneva Convention. The North Vietnamese refused to provide the International Red Cross with the names of Americans who were being held prisoner in North Vietnam and did not allow regular inspection visits by the International Red Cross to ensure that the prisoners were being treated properly in accordance with the terms of the 1947 Geneva Convention on POWs.

 

[Thoreau72]

North Vietnam’s treatment of American airmen shot down and captured over North Vietnam was a subject of controversy and concern throughout the Vietnam War. From the very beginning of the war, North Vietnam’s stated position was that American prisoners captured in North Vietnam were “war criminals” who had committed crimes against the North Vietnamese people in the course of an illegal war of aggression and that therefore the American prisoners were not entitled to the privileges and rights granted to prisoners of war (POW) under the terms of the Geneva Convention. The North Vietnamese refused to provide the International Red Cross with the names of Americans who were being held prisoner in North Vietnam and did not allow regular inspection visits by the International Red Cross to ensure that the prisoners were being treated properly in accordance with the terms of the 1947 Geneva Convention on POWs.

We were not treated properly by NVA, so therefore 30 years later we should be doing the same thing to others? Sorry dude, I just don't see the reasoning.

The Socratic method is being tried...

There is right, and there is wrong. We must each individually decide what's right and wrong, and assaulting another human is wrong.

It doesn't matter what traitors in the White House say, turning loose the dogs of war and encouraging a trip to the Dark Side by Cheney, assaulting another human is wrong.

 

[Dittohead not!]

Strange , no mention of all the beheading or how our brave soldiers were treated by the Japanese or North Vietnamese when captured . Lets hope the WORLD becomes a better place .eace Sounds like you NEVER entered a combat zone !!! :shock:

Would you have this country descend to the level of its enemies? If the Vietnamese and the Japanese tortured our soldiers, then should we torture our own captives? Who has the moral high ground in such a scenario?

 

[Dittohead not!]

Actually it is quite another thing. White man's burden was a self-justification of colonial powers. R2P is a tool to establish legitimacy of a supranational system of producing global public goods in the eyes of populations. Security is the prime and mot elementary example of a public good and is therefore emotionally convincing. If the UN is seen as a reliable guarantor of protection and security, it can be used to do the lifting.

and if it isn't, then it's up to whom? The US is not a supranational entity.

 

[Gaztopian]

One day, we'll look back on torturing prisoners the same way we now look back on slavery and the Japanese relocation camps.

Let's hope that day comes soon. My country is better than that.

You and I are both dreamers. Some recent polls, 10 years after Abu Ghraib and less than 2 years after the Senate Report, show that 2 out of 3 americans support torture. My very informal guess is that about 2 out of 3 posters here feel the same.

Dick Cheney and Dubya took us to the Dark Side, and many found out they rather like it.

I don't mean to be a downer, but that kind of magnanimity perplexes me. Both of you seem to mean well, but how exactly do you hold the U.S to a higher moral standard after Korea, Vietnam, Cambodia, Chile, Nicaragua, Iraq, Afghanistan, and Palestine? The U.S's history is mired in iniquity and belligerence, yet Americans have this perverse entitlement to the moral high-ground.

 

[iacardsfan]

I mean, we could all take the Trump route and simply torture their families. Then we don't have to worry about putting stress on the terrorists!

 

[RetiredNSmilin]

He said something to the effect that he would employ methods that make waterboarding look tame.

I saw that memo.

He recommended a circle of 96 inch screen TVs all playing Pee Wee Herman's Big Adventure, but the sound would be a loop of "Afternoon Delight" by the Starland Vocal Band.

the horror!...the inhumanity!

 

[joG]

and if it isn't, then it's up to whom? The US is not a supranational entity.

That is the challenge. We have to persuade and help organize the international community. R2P ie the 2005 Resolution of the UN was a step in that direction.

 

[Socrates1]

Would you have this country descend to the level of its enemies? If the Vietnamese and the Japanese tortured our soldiers, then should we torture our own captives? Who has the moral high ground in such a scenario?

What moral high ground ? We are in combat , something most liberals never see , we are there to kill our enemy and not there to play house . :roll:

 

[Thoreau72]

I don't mean to be a downer, but that kind of magnanimity perplexes me. Both of you seem to mean well, but how exactly do you hold the U.S to a higher moral standard after Korea, Vietnam, Cambodia, Chile, Nicaragua, Iraq, Afghanistan, and Palestine? The U.S's history is mired in iniquity and belligerence, yet Americans have this perverse entitlement to the moral high-ground.

Americans have been conditioned to believe that they hold the moral high ground, but then Americans live in a quasi-permanent state of a willing suspension of disbelief. They willingly believe everything they are told by authority and the media as though it were absolutely true. And if the authorities tell them it is OK to torture, they accept that. Though somewhat behind the scenes, the Lucifer Effect is always able to influence human behavior and thought processes.

 

[Dittohead not!]

I don't mean to be a downer, but that kind of magnanimity perplexes me. Both of you seem to mean well, but how exactly do you hold the U.S to a higher moral standard after Korea, Vietnam, Cambodia, Chile, Nicaragua, Iraq, Afghanistan, and Palestine? The U.S's history is mired in iniquity and belligerence, yet Americans have this perverse entitlement to the moral high-ground.

This is the country that led the world to defeat Nazism and Imperial Japan, then helped to rebuild both our allies and former enemies to make the former theaters of war into peaceful and prosperous parts of the world.

Then, we got mired in Vietnam and everything changed.

We need to recapture the nation that we were in the '40s, '50s, and early '60s. Starting wars and supporting torture is not the way to go about it.

 

[Visbek]

Americans have been conditioned to believe that they hold the moral high ground....

Not all of us think that way. Just sayin'.

That said, I think it's rare for citizens to think of their nation as being deeply unethical, unless that nation has really gone overboard, or was mired in a civil war.

I could be wrong, but: I'm not so sure that the French hold themselves accountable for what their government did in Algeria, and apparently they are still messing with CAR and other ex-colonies. I really doubt many Russians feel guilty over Afghanistan or Chechnya; Chinese over Tibet; Japan over Manchuria. Turkey's government, and many citizens, actively refute the history of the Armenian genocide.

Nations like Germany, which spent decades trying to deal with the ethical and political repercussions of a genocide, seem to be the exception rather than the rule.

 

[Thoreau72]

Not all of us think that way. Just sayin'.

That said, I think it's rare for citizens to think of their nation as being deeply unethical, unless that nation has really gone overboard, or was mired in a civil war.

I could be wrong, but: I'm not so sure that the French hold themselves accountable for what their government did in Algeria, and apparently they are still messing with CAR and other ex-colonies. I really doubt many Russians feel guilty over Afghanistan or Chechnya; Chinese over Tibet; Japan over Manchuria. Turkey's government, and many citizens, actively refute the history of the Armenian genocide.

Nations like Germany, which spent decades trying to deal with the ethical and political repercussions of a genocide, seem to be the exception rather than the rule.

Great post, and you're right that we don't all think that way. Yes it is true that indoctrination efforts work well on part of the population, and don't work at all on other parts.

But every single administration in the last several decades brag about how "exceptional" the US, and a common retort to any criticism of the US government is "well, if you don't like it here, move away".

I really do want to believe that my government is an agent for good in this world. Sadly there is not much to suggest my idealism is valid or in touch with reality.

You are also right that the average person DOES NOT WANT TO BELIEVE(accept) that his child or his government is anything less than perfect. It's part of the human condition, and cognitive dissonance is a part of it.

 

[Gaztopian]

Americans have been conditioned to believe that they hold the moral high ground, but then Americans live in a quasi-permanent state of a willing suspension of disbelief. They willingly believe everything they are told by authority and the media as though it were absolutely true. And if the authorities tell them it is OK to torture, they accept that. Though somewhat behind the scenes, the Lucifer Effect is always able to influence human behavior and thought processes.

What perplexes people about the U.S is its unprecedented and perhaps uncontested economic, military, and scientific superiority. But it's the country's ideological idiosyncrasies and its intransigent make-believe when it comes to morality that perplex me.

A case in point. We recently had a discussion in the Middle East forum regarding statistics that reveal a popular animus towards the U.S in Iraq. Considering what the U.S did to Iraqis and the ramifications of it, no sane person would argue against that animus. But we had several American members objecting to the sentiment, and when confronted by the reason behind it, a few argued that the U.S invaded Germany and Japan and yet they don't hate us. I wasn't born yesterday and I'm acquainted with obstinacy, but I have to say, I was stunned.

 

[Gaztopian]

This is the country that led the world to defeat Nazism and Imperial Japan, then helped to rebuild both our allies and former enemies to make the former theaters of war into peaceful and prosperous parts of the world.

Then, we got mired in Vietnam and everything changed.

We need to recapture the nation that we were in the '40s, '50s, and early '60s. Starting wars and supporting torture is not the way to go about it.

This mode of thinking is another manifestation of that perverse entitlement to the moral high-ground, for it assumes the inherent benevolence of the U.S.

The U.S did lead the world to defeat Nazism and Japanese imperialism, but for what? to replace it with American hegemony? You might say "wait a second, you can't possibly equate American hegemony to murderous Nazism and Japanese imperialism". To you and to the Marshall Plan beneficiaries that might sound absurd, but I assure you, it wouldn't have sounded absurd to the Vietnamese that American napalm incinerated. Nor does it sound absurd to anyone who had his family wiped off the face of the earth by a drone strike only to be called collateral damage, to Iraqis who saw their country reduced to rubble over the whimsy of a cretin, or to Palestinians who know that the root of their undying misery is American unconditional support of Zionism.

 

[RetiredUSN]

This mode of thinking is another manifestation of that perverse entitlement to the moral high-ground, for it assumes the inherent benevolence of the U.S.

The U.S did lead the world to defeat Nazism and Japanese imperialism, but for what? to replace it with American hegemony? You might say "wait a second, you can't possibly equate American hegemony to murderous Nazism and Japanese imperialism". To you and to the Marshall Plan beneficiaries that might sound absurd, but I assure you, it wouldn't have sounded absurd to the Vietnamese that American napalm incinerated. Nor does it sound absurd to anyone who had his family wiped off the face of the earth by a drone strike only to be called collateral damage, to Iraqis who saw their country reduced to rubble over the whimsy of a cretin, or to Palestinians who know that the root of their undying misery is American unconditional support of Zionism.

Perhaps, you could use all your flowery educated wording to convince the rest of the world to police their own regions. I would just as soon see the American military camped out within it's own borders.

 

[Gaztopian]

Perhaps, you could use all your flowery educated wording to convince the rest of the world to police their own regions. I would just as soon see the American military camped out within it's own borders.

Too late for you. Now it's the fate of the U.S to keep policing the world till it goes bankrupt. And no, that's not my "flowery educated wording" at play; it's the rhetoric of the current presidential frontrunners despite the blunders of the past two decades and the throng of ailments from which the U.S suffers.