2
   

Bush Advisor : President Has Legal Power to Torture Children

Forums: Politics, Torture, Human Rights, Bush Administration
Email this Topic • Print this Page
 
 
Brandon9000
 
  1  
Reply Tue 10 Jan, 2006 01:25 pm
detano inipo wrote:
However, terrorists and illegal combatants do not get the priviliges afforded by the Geneva conventions.
..............
Once a war is declared, all prisoners are covered by the G.C.
To pick and choose the ones that need to be tortured is illegal and immoral. The Gestapo and the NKVD did that.

This is incorrect. Article 4 of the Geneva Convention specifies exactly who falls under its protection and who does not.
0 Replies
 
detano inipo
 
  1  
Reply Tue 10 Jan, 2006 02:51 pm
Can't find anything that allows the torture of prisoners.

http://encarta.msn.com/encyclopedia_762529232_3/Geneva_Conventions.html
0 Replies
 
detano inipo
 
  1  
Reply Tue 10 Jan, 2006 02:55 pm
McGentrix:
I can't seem to see where I said anything about killing innocent people.
...................
You didn't.
That did not stop the US from killing 16-20 000 civilians in Iraq. Were they all guilty?
Just curious.
0 Replies
 
McGentrix
 
  1  
Reply Tue 10 Jan, 2006 03:05 pm
The US is responsible for approx 37% of the civilian deaths that have occured in Iraq. Mostly from bombings. It is unfortunate that so many had to die to usurp one evil bastard.

Obviously if they were innocent civilians, it would be erroneous to call them guilty, wouldn't it? Are you asking me for any particular reason?
0 Replies
 
Setanta
 
  1  
Reply Tue 10 Jan, 2006 03:57 pm
Got some support for that contention, McWhitey? For that 37% BS . . . or is this just another case of a conservative getting frustrated and making sh!t up . . . Fox "News" doesn't count as a source, btw . . .
0 Replies
 
McGentrix
 
  1  
Reply Tue 10 Jan, 2006 03:59 pm
If you look really close, you will notice the 37% is linked somewhere. Maybe you should click on it and if your lucky, it will take you some where that supports my contention there Satana
0 Replies
 
Setanta
 
  1  
Reply Tue 10 Jan, 2006 04:05 pm
I do have vision problems, so i didn't see that right away--that's why i bold-face links when i post them, out of consideration for others, something i wouldn't expect from you.

Their figures are more than a little odd, don't you think?

Quote:
# US-led forces killed 37% of civilian victims.
# Anti-occupation forces/insurgents killed 9% of civilian victims.
# Post-invasion criminal violence accounted for 36% of all deaths.


That's 82%, if my math has not failed me--who killed the other 18%?
0 Replies
 
DrewDad
 
  1  
Reply Tue 10 Jan, 2006 04:16 pm
McGentrix wrote:
Cycloptichorn wrote:
And, besides that, what is immoral to do to one, is immoral to do to all, whether they wear a uniform or not.

Cycloptichorn


Morality... I find it immoral to attach a bomb to oneself, wrap it with bb's, nails, misc fragments and then walk into a crowd and explode. Do you find that immoral as well?

I do not find it immoral to do everything within ones power to stop that immoral behavior. Especially on a grander scale of using an airplane or other weapon that can inflict massive casualties.

Our morals do not seem to align.

Certainly not. I do not believe that "kill 'em all; god will recognize his own" to be a morally supportable stance.

But as long as McGentrix is scared, McGentrix doesn't really care.
0 Replies
 
Cycloptichorn
 
  1  
Reply Tue 10 Jan, 2006 04:37 pm
McGentrix wrote:
I can't seem to see where I said anything about killing innocent people. Do your morals allow you to see unwritten words as well?


You wrote,

Quote:
I do not find it immoral to do everything within ones power to stop that immoral behavior.


If it is within our power to commit immoral acts in order to stop someone else's immoral acts, is it immoral to do so? You seem to claim that it is not.

For we are doing many things to combat the immoral behavior of AQ, some moral, some immoral. Do you believe they are all justified? Is it morally justifiable that we kill innocent Iraqis to get to terrorists?

Cycloptichorn
0 Replies
 
JustWonders
 
  1  
Reply Tue 10 Jan, 2006 05:12 pm
That reminds me of some movie (Patriot Games?) with Harrison Ford where he's got one of the bad guys cowering in his basement and demands to know "the plan" (his family is in danger) and when the bad guy refuses, Ford's character (he's CIA, I think) doesn't blink, but shoots him in the knee and when he still doesn't answer, cocks his gun and aims at the other knee.

He got his answers pronto.

I can't really fathom many men acting much differently.
0 Replies
 
FreeDuck
 
  1  
Reply Tue 10 Jan, 2006 05:18 pm
And in another movie, Harrison Ford crushes the bad guys' son's testicles. The guy talks. Magic. Hollywood morality makes a comeback.
0 Replies
 
Setanta
 
  1  
Reply Tue 10 Jan, 2006 05:23 pm
Oh geeze, Lash, get a grip . . .
0 Replies
 
JustWonders
 
  1  
Reply Tue 10 Jan, 2006 05:39 pm
FreeDuck wrote:
And in another movie, Harrison Ford crushes the bad guys' son's testicles. The guy talks. Magic. Hollywood morality makes a comeback.


Only in your world, Freeduck Smile

<And maybe current-day Hollywood's>
0 Replies
 
blueflame1
 
  1  
Reply Tue 10 Jan, 2006 05:47 pm
That last batch of Abu Ghraib photos and videos the Pentagon refuses to release are not made in Hollywood. But they do allegedly show young boy prisoners being raped by American military personnel. The blood curdling screams are not Hollywood either. I guess Rummy and Bushie took Yoo's advice to heart.
0 Replies
 
detano inipo
 
  1  
Reply Tue 10 Jan, 2006 07:30 pm
Like I said before: in a war both sides become monsters.

The monster that denies it is worse than the other one.
0 Replies
 
McGentrix
 
  1  
Reply Tue 10 Jan, 2006 07:53 pm
has the whole nut-crushing event happened anywhere other than in a hypothetical question? I mean other than in Saddam's dungeons of course.
0 Replies
 
FreeDuck
 
  1  
Reply Tue 10 Jan, 2006 07:54 pm
Not that I know of. But I'm pretty sure that Harrison Ford never actually shot a guy in the knee either.
0 Replies
 
McGentrix
 
  1  
Reply Tue 10 Jan, 2006 07:55 pm
That's most likely true.
0 Replies
 
detano inipo
 
  1  
Reply Tue 10 Jan, 2006 08:12 pm
SOA has trained torturers for several decades.

http://www.geocities.com/~virtualtruth/soaback.htm
0 Replies
 
Brandon9000
 
  1  
Reply Tue 10 Jan, 2006 11:01 pm
detano inipo wrote:
Can't find anything that allows the torture of prisoners.

http://encarta.msn.com/encyclopedia_762529232_3/Geneva_Conventions.html

It doesn't cover certain prisoners at all. Get it?
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
AMERICAN CONSERVATISM IN 2008 AND BEYOND - Discussion by Foxfyre
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
Fellow Bostonians: How many of us wished we had an assault weapon last night? - Question by maxdancona
What should be first on the agenda of the winner in November? - Discussion by Frank Apisa
TEA PARTY TO AMERICA: NOW WHAT?! - Discussion by farmerman
 
  1. Forums
  2. » Bush Advisor : President Has Legal Power to Torture Children
  3. » Page 5
Copyright © 2025 MadLab, LLC :: Terms of Service :: Privacy Policy :: Page generated in 0.03 seconds on 01/15/2025 at 08:41:10
▲ ▼