1
   

Ture torture

 
 
DrewDad
 
  1  
Reply Tue 6 Dec, 2005 09:20 am
Just pathetic, McG.
0 Replies
 
sozobe
 
  1  
Reply Tue 6 Dec, 2005 09:21 am
It's awful. Full stop.

In the context of this discussion, though, it's also "Jimmy's brother hits him with bricks!"

(Is anyone disputing that Saddam tortured people? If not, what does that article bring to the discussion?)
0 Replies
 
joefromchicago
 
  1  
Reply Tue 6 Dec, 2005 09:31 am
McGentrix wrote:
I am not comparing Saddams actions to US actions.

Of course you are.
0 Replies
 
McGentrix
 
  1  
Reply Tue 6 Dec, 2005 09:37 am
No, I am not. I am suggesting that the liberal use of the word "torture" has become meaningless as they appear to have no real understanding of the definition anymore.
0 Replies
 
joefromchicago
 
  1  
Reply Tue 6 Dec, 2005 09:47 am
McGentrix wrote:
No, I am not. I am suggesting that the liberal use of the word "torture" has become meaningless as they appear to have no real understanding of the definition anymore.

Had that been your intention, you need not have mentioned the "stress position" torture techniques at Abu Ghraib -- a reference to Saddam's grisly methods would have been sufficient. By bringing up American torture techniques, however, you wanted to demonstrate that there's "torture" and then there's "TORTURE" (or "ture torture"). That's not a question of definitions (both, after all, can be torture), that's just a rather feeble tu quoque argument.
0 Replies
 
DrewDad
 
  2  
Reply Tue 6 Dec, 2005 09:48 am
And I'm not certain you do, either.

Your definition of torture appears to be: whatever Saddam did.

Your definition of not torture: whatever the US did.
0 Replies
 
DrewDad
 
  1  
Reply Tue 6 Dec, 2005 09:49 am
You need to review the "difference in kind versus difference in degree" thread, McG.
0 Replies
 
McGentrix
 
  1  
Reply Tue 6 Dec, 2005 10:16 am
joefromchicago wrote:
McGentrix wrote:
No, I am not. I am suggesting that the liberal use of the word "torture" has become meaningless as they appear to have no real understanding of the definition anymore.

Had that been your intention, you need not have mentioned the "stress position" torture techniques at Abu Ghraib -- a reference to Saddam's grisly methods would have been sufficient. By bringing up American torture techniques, however, you wanted to demonstrate that there's "torture" and then there's "TORTURE" (or "ture torture"). That's not a question of definitions (both, after all, can be torture), that's just a rather feeble tu quoque argument.


Yes, I did need to mention it to demonstrate the difference between what liberals consider torture (anything that causes discomfort, humiliation or pain apparently) and what "true torture" is. There is no doubt that there has been some degree of torture done by American and coalition troops and I in no way condone or excuse it. I have not tried to. However, not every abuse in the prisons in Iraq qualifies as torture either. Beatings are abuse. Extreme abuse even. Not torture though.

I have created this thread to chronicle the accusations of torture by Saddam during his reign of terror though, not to discuss American abuse of prisoners. We have plenty of those threads already.
0 Replies
 
Ticomaya
 
  1  
Reply Tue 6 Dec, 2005 10:17 am
Saddam's a monstrous thug, and the world is a better place now that he's sitting in jail. The trial will highlight this, and the meat grinder story is just one of many stories of real torture we will be hearing about during the trial.

And it's sure interesting to watch the reaction of the leftists. They have convinced themselves of the evil of America, and refuse to acknowledge the reality check offered by McG. The left uses the word "torture" when referring to events that aren't that far removed from a hazing incident at a college fraternaty. The few isolated (and non-sanctioned) cases where there have been deaths at the hands of the US interrogators are nothing compared to the brutality Saddam inflicted upon his people by fiat. And instead of saying, "Yeah, Saddam sure was a piece of ****," like Kicky did, most of you want to pick a fight with McG and apparently claim the US is just as bad.

Somebody tell me you'd rather sit in Saddam's prison than a US Military prison. Somebody tell me you would rather have been a prisoner of Iraq's at Mukhabarat than a prisoner of the US at Gitmo or Abu Ghraib.
0 Replies
 
DrewDad
 
  1  
Reply Tue 6 Dec, 2005 10:52 am
I don't think anyone is of that opinion that Saddam is/was not a thug. In fact, I feel that it is so obvious as to go without saying.

I don't think anyone here doubts that Saddam tortured people and/or ordered people to be tortured.

I don't think anyone here doubts that Saddam's torturers were not masters at their craft.





I do think that some here think that Saddam's actions excuse torture by US personnel and allies.

Are you one such, Tico? I already know that McGentrix is.
0 Replies
 
joefromchicago
 
  1  
Reply Tue 6 Dec, 2005 10:54 am
McGentrix wrote:
Yes, I did need to mention it to demonstrate the difference between what liberals consider torture (anything that causes discomfort, humiliation or pain apparently) and what "true torture" is.

That's just silly. "Torture" can be adequately described without detailing all the things that aren't torture.

McGentrix wrote:
There is no doubt that there has been some degree of torture done by American and coalition troops and I in no way condone or excuse it. I have not tried to.

Nor would anyone expect you to do that, so there's no need to mention it. Of course, you will extend the same courtesy to those who don't feel the reflexive need to state that they also disapprove of torture as practiced by Saddam's regime.

McGentrix wrote:
However, not every abuse in the prisons in Iraq qualifies as torture either. Beatings are abuse. Extreme abuse even. Not torture though.

Well, then, it all depends on how you define "torture."

McGentrix wrote:
I have created this thread to chronicle the accusations of torture by Saddam during his reign of terror though, not to discuss American abuse of prisoners. We have plenty of those threads already.

Make up your mind. First you said you created this thread because liberals didn't understand the term "torture." Now you want to chronicle torture under Saddam's regime. Neither of those threads, of course, requires you to elaborate upon American torture techniques, so it is still unclear why you felt compelled to mention them.
0 Replies
 
joefromchicago
 
  1  
Reply Tue 6 Dec, 2005 10:59 am
Ticomaya wrote:
The left uses the word "torture" when referring to events that aren't that far removed from a hazing incident at a college fraternaty.

Where did you fit in your frat's naked human pyramid, Tico? I'd like to think you were at the apex, just like the cherry on top of a sundae.
0 Replies
 
nimh
 
  1  
Reply Tue 6 Dec, 2005 11:25 am
McGentrix wrote:
Yes, I did need to mention it to demonstrate the difference between what liberals consider torture (anything that causes discomfort, humiliation or pain apparently) and what "true torture" is. There is no doubt that there has been some degree of torture done by American and coalition troops and I in no way condone or excuse it. I have not tried to. However, not every abuse in the prisons in Iraq qualifies as torture either. Beatings are abuse. Extreme abuse even. Not torture though.

OK, what about this one DD mentioned:

Quote:
1. Beating someone's legs until they would require surgery to be able to walk again. Then allowing them to hang handcuffed from the ceiling until they die. Torture or not torture?

True torture, or just the kind of liberal use of the word "torture" that has made the word become meaningless?
0 Replies
 
nimh
 
  1  
Reply Tue 6 Dec, 2005 11:43 am
The sad thing about torture is that it doesnt even work - it makes some people confess everything, regardless of whether they did it or not, and (rare) others confess nothing, when they make complete resistance their survival strategy. Neither way you get anything resembling reliable evidence.

Furthermore, the use of torture endangers the chance of subsequent success of any kind of judicial prosecution against the suspects. The end result may well be that the suspect gets to walk off scot free even if he did do it, because the fact of his confession having been acquired by torture gets him off.

Two examples of that, lately:

- Four facing deportation on security claims given bail

Summary:

Quote:
Four Algerians who are facing deportation from the UK on the grounds that they are a threat to national security were granted bail yesterday by the Special Immigration Appeals Commission. Home Office lawyers had claimed that they were involved in "creating the climate, the motivation and the opportunity that led to the" London bombing. They were bailed as it emerged that the British security and intelligence agencies accept evidence about suspected terrorists, even though it might have been obtained through torture abroad.


- Torture claims 'forced US to cut terror charges'

Summary:

Quote:
The Bush administration decided not to charge Jose Padilla with planning to detonate a radioactive "dirty bomb" in a US city because the evidence against him was extracted using torture on members of al-Qaida. Padilla was indicted on the lesser charges of supporting terrorism abroad instead. Government officials said he could not be charged with the bomb plots because neither of the captured al-Qaida leaders from whom the information came could be used as witnesses, as they could open up charges from defence lawyers that their statements resulted from torture. An internal review by the CIA inspector general found that Mohammed had suffered excessive use of "waterboarding", a technique involving near drowning which entails the detainee being strapped to a board and then submerged.


Hmm ... that raises a new question for DD's list, in answer to McG's question here:

Strapping a detainee to a board and nearly drowning him, over and over and over again ... "true torture" - or would that just be the kind of liberal use of the word that makes it meaningless?
0 Replies
 
Cycloptichorn
 
  1  
Reply Tue 6 Dec, 2005 11:50 am
This thread is ridiculous.

Saddam tortured, it was wrong.

We torture, it is wrong.

Those who deny we torture folks are hiding their heads in the sand.

Is the US a monstrous, torturing country like Iraq under Saddam? No!

Do we torture people? Yes, to death.

That's 'ture torture.'

Sheesh

Cycloptichorn

(it's getting 1984 in here)
0 Replies
 
Ticomaya
 
  1  
Reply Tue 6 Dec, 2005 12:10 pm
DrewDad wrote:
I do think that some here think that Saddam's actions excuse torture by US personnel and allies.

Are you one such, Tico?


Of course not. But the point is when the leftists refer to the "stress position" techniques used by the US as "torture," they trivialize the word and essentially equate what the US does with what Saddam did.

Consequently, if you ask me whether I condone the "torture" being done by "US personnel and allies," we must define the word, as joe has pointed out. The leftists have used the term to include fairly innocuous interrogation techniques.

DD wrote:
I already know that McGentrix is.


You must have missed it when McG said:

McGentrix wrote:
There is no doubt that there has been some degree of torture done by American and coalition troops and I in no way condone or excuse it.



As Cyclops would say: Sheesh.
0 Replies
 
Ticomaya
 
  1  
Reply Tue 6 Dec, 2005 12:10 pm
joefromchicago wrote:
Ticomaya wrote:
The left uses the word "torture" when referring to events that aren't that far removed from a hazing incident at a college fraternaty.

Where did you fit in your frat's naked human pyramid, Tico? I'd like to think you were at the apex, just like the cherry on top of a sundae.


Not my frat. I'm referring to stories I've heard about some of the frats in Ann Arbor, Joe.
0 Replies
 
joefromchicago
 
  1  
Reply Tue 6 Dec, 2005 12:19 pm
Ticomaya wrote:
Not my frat. I'm referring to stories I've heard about some of the frats in Ann Arbor, Joe.

I wouldn't know anything about that. I didn't attend the Univ. of Michigan as an undergraduate and I certainly didn't belong to a frat when I was in law school. But while I can't speak from experience on this issue, perhaps you'd like to share some of your own hazing stories, Tico.
0 Replies
 
Cycloptichorn
 
  1  
Reply Tue 6 Dec, 2005 12:21 pm
Quote:
Of course not. But the point is when the leftists refer to the "stress position" techniques used by the US as "torture," they trivialize the word and essentially equate what the US does with what Saddam did.


Noone's talking about stress positions.

We're talking about beating people to death, burning them, choking them to death. Electric shocks. Breaking legs and arms. All of which have been reported.

I'd say that kind of stuff pretty much equates with what Saddam did.

I'd say that punishing a few low-ranking soldiers is preposterous, given the wide nature of abuse.

Therefore I'd say we tacitly condone torture, even promote it; anyone who says different is lying.

Cycloptichorn
0 Replies
 
Ticomaya
 
  1  
Reply Tue 6 Dec, 2005 12:26 pm
joefromchicago wrote:
Ticomaya wrote:
Not my frat. I'm referring to stories I've heard about some of the frats in Ann Arbor, Joe.

I wouldn't know anything about that. I didn't attend the Univ. of Michigan as an undergraduate and I certainly didn't belong to a frat when I was in law school. But while I can't speak from experience on this issue, perhaps you'd like to share some of your own hazing stories, Tico.


I would, but then I'd have to kill you. I'm sure you understand.
0 Replies
 
 

Related Topics

Obama '08? - Discussion by sozobe
Let's get rid of the Electoral College - Discussion by Robert Gentel
McCain's VP: - Discussion by Cycloptichorn
Food Stamp Turkeys - Discussion by H2O MAN
The 2008 Democrat Convention - Discussion by Lash
McCain is blowing his election chances. - Discussion by McGentrix
Snowdon is a dummy - Discussion by cicerone imposter
TEA PARTY TO AMERICA: NOW WHAT?! - Discussion by farmerman
 
  1. Forums
  2. » Ture torture
  3. » Page 2
Copyright © 2024 MadLab, LLC :: Terms of Service :: Privacy Policy :: Page generated in 0.03 seconds on 05/06/2024 at 02:55:50