Art Vandelay wrote:This is a false dichotomy. We don't have to decide between one or the other, both are wrong. Nobody in this thread is saying that it's okay for others to torture and kill Americans. The difference is, I don't have a voice in al Qaeda and those acts aren't being committed in my name. I do, theoretically, have a voice in how the US treats it's captives. It's not that I'm "more upset" about the US waterboarding captives than I am about US prisoners being tortured and killed, it's that I can't personaly do anything to stop the latter.
That's a good retort Art. Shows much more thought and insight than this for instance:
acsguitar wrote:Right well we get back at them for the beheadings by dropping daisy cutter bombs on their schools
My point is in the contrast. Let's put to rest this silly talk of us being just like them. We're nothing like them. If suddenly we could know that our captured soldiers would be treated exactly like the detainees at Gitmo, that would be a huge human rights victory. We could never dream that the worst that would ever happen to them is waterboarding.
I'll agree but disagree with your other point. To a point, how enemy combatants are treated reflects on us all. As Americans it is right for us to be concerned about what our military does. But what about your role as a human being? In any conflict not just one involving my own country I think I'd be far more outraged about the country committing the worst atrocities.
Art Vandelay wrote:This is a false dichotomy. We don't have to decide between one or the other, both are wrong. Nobody in this thread is saying that it's okay for others to torture and kill Americans. The difference is, I don't have a voice in al Qaeda and those acts aren't being committed in my name. I do, theoretically, have a voice in how the US treats it's captives. It's not that I'm "more upset" about the US waterboarding captives than I am about US prisoners being tortured and killed, it's that I can't personaly do anything to stop the latter.
That's a good retort Art. Shows much more thought and insight than this for instance:
acsguitar wrote:Right well we get back at them for the beheadings by dropping daisy cutter bombs on their schools
My point is in the contrast. Let's put to rest this silly talk of us being just like them. We're nothing like them. If suddenly we could know that our captured soldiers would be treated exactly like the detainees at Gitmo, that would be a huge human rights victory. We could never dream that the worst that would ever happen to them is waterboarding.
I'll agree but disagree with your other point. To a point, how enemy combatants are treated reflects on us all. As Americans it is right for us to be concerned about what our military does. But what about your role as a human being? In any conflict not just one involving my own country I think I'd be far more outraged about the country committing the worst atrocities.
See this is the problem. You ignore the civilan deaths we cause. Lots and lots of civilian deaths. If Al Qaeda was killing Civilans then you might have a different opinion.
* The military agency which actually provided advice on harsh interrogation techniques for use against terrorism suspects warned the Pentagon in 2002 that those techniques would produce "unreliable information."
* Army Field Manual 34-52 Chapter 1 says:
"Experience indicates that the use of force is not necessary to gain the cooperation of sources for interrogation. Therefore, the use of force is a poor technique, as it yields unreliable results, may damage subsequent collection efforts, and can induce the source to say whatever he thinks the interrogator wants to hear."
* A declassified FBI e-mail dated May 10, 2004, regarding interrogation at Guantanamo states "[we] explained to [the Department of Defense], FBI has been successful for many years obtaining confessions via non-confrontational interviewing techniques." (see also this)
* Brigadier General David R. Irvine, retired Army Reserve strategic intelligence officer who taught prisoner interrogation and military law for 18 years with the Sixth Army Intelligence School, says torture doesn't work
* The CIA's own Inspector General wrote that waterboarding was not "efficacious" in producing information
* A former FBI interrogator -- who interrogated Al Qaeda suspects -- says categorically that torture does not help collect intelligence. On the other hand he says that torture actually turns people into terrorists
Neato Torpedo wrote:If 9/11 never happened and Saddam had given us all the oil and political support we could have ever wanted, we'd still be bombing villages all over the Middle East.
If our response to 9/11 had been a real show of force instead of us hiding behind our skirts shooting a pop gun at Afghanistan, Saddam never would have stood up to the UN and we never would have gone into Iraq. And North Korea wouldn't be building its nuclear program wide out in the open like they are.
But we proved to the world that we no longer have the stones to do what it takes to ensure our country remains free and safe, so it is of no surprise at all that the other countries out there know they can mess with us all they like. Not because of our military of course, it's due to politics and the limp-wristed people out there.
Yes doctor, I am sick. Sick of those who are spineless. Sick of those who feel self-entitled. Sick of those who are hypocrites. Yes doctor, an army is forming. Yes doctor, there will be a war. Yes doctor, there will be blood.....
TheRock wrote:My point is in the contrast. Let's put to rest this silly talk of us being just like them. We're nothing like them. If suddenly we could know that our captured soldiers would be treated exactly like the detainees at Gitmo, that would be a huge human rights victory. We could never dream that the worst that would ever happen to them is waterboarding.
I'll agree but disagree with your other point. To a point, how enemy combatants are treated reflects on us all. As Americans it is right for us to be concerned about what our military does. But what about your role as a human being? In any conflict not just one involving my own country I think I'd be far more outraged about the country committing the worst atrocities.
I agree with your first paragraph completely, and only somewhat disagree with the second paragraph. Putting aside the technicality of whether or not we're talking about "countries" committing these acts, like you, as a human being I'm more outraged by the treatment that "they" give "our" captives than vice versa. As an American, though, I'm more upset at "our" treatment of "them." Which gets back to the same point I made previously. I may be more outraged by "their" actions, but I have no outlet for that outrage, or, rather, that outrage will always fall on deaf ears (or most likely, no ears at all). On the other hand, my outrage over "our" actions will be heard, and possibly even acted upon, or at least considered.
acsguitar wrote:See this is the problem. You ignore the civilan deaths we cause. Lots and lots of civilian deaths. If Al Qaeda was killing Civilans then you might have a different opinion.
Nobody likes civilian casualties but they're inherent in war. Any country with a standing military either has been guilty of civilian casualties or will be if they ever use their military, for attack or defense.
The US, however, has gone to extreme lengths to minimize civilian casualties, unlike your poorly chosen comparator, Al Qaeda, whose prime goal in their one major "offensive" against America was SOLELY civilians.
America wants there to be zero civilians in their crosshairs. Al Qaeda wants mostly civilian casualties. Big difference there.
Cafe Home
Fantasy Football
Fantasy Basketball
Fantasy Hockey
by TheRock » Wed May 27, 2009 4:41 pm 
