THE US, THE UN AND IRAQ, TENTH THREAD.

A British judge yesterday:

America's idea of what constitutes torture "is not the same as ours and doesn't appear to coincide with that of most civilised countries"

- Mr Justice Collins

we are the Iraqi government. we will ask us to leave when we decide it's time to bug out.

McTag wrote:

A British judge yesterday:

America's idea of what constitutes torture "is not the same as ours and doesn't appear to coincide with that of most civilised countries"

- Mr Justice Collins

Mr. Justice Collins is wrong.

This is not an argument over what the USA thinks torture consists of. This is an argument over what the USA thinks is permissible torture versus what the USA thinks is not permissible torture.

ican711nm wrote:

McTag wrote:

A British judge yesterday:

America's idea of what constitutes torture "is not the same as ours and doesn't appear to coincide with that of most civilised countries"

- Mr Justice Collins

Mr. Justice Collins is wrong.

This is not an argument over what the USA thinks torture consists of. This is an argument over what the USA thinks is permissible torture versus what the USA thinks is not permissible torture.

Is that so? (hint: no, it is not so.)

Under the U.S. Code, torture is said to be acts inflicting "severe pain or suffering, whether mental or physical."

However, the Justice Department memo seizes on the adjective "severe," and offers that "physical pain amounting to torture must be equivalent in intensity to the pain accompanying serious physical injury, such as organ failure, impairment of bodily function or even death.

"For purely mental pain or suffering to amount to torture ... it must result in significant psychological harm of significant duration, [for example] lasting for months or even years."

McTag wrote:

ican711nm wrote:

McTag wrote:

A British judge yesterday:

America's idea of what constitutes torture "is not the same as ours and doesn't appear to coincide with that of most civilised countries"

- Mr Justice Collins

Mr. Justice Collins is wrong.

This is not an argument over what the USA thinks torture consists of. This is an argument over what the USA thinks is permissible torture versus what the USA thinks is not permissible torture.

Is that so? (hint: no, it is not so.)

Yes, it is so! You may be confusing how the Bush administration chooses to characterize its thinking about torture with how a majority of Americans characterize their thinking about torture.

The Bush administration says in effect that humiliating, frightening or paining this new class of prisoners is not torture. A majority of us think that it damn well is torture. But we also think such torture is permissible because it is necessary to save civilian lives and is far less objectionable to us than killing, maiming, disabling, or wounding this new class of prisoners.

With anyone who thinks the captured prisoners ought to be shot just as soon as they are captured without trial or anything, its's not so surprising that they have in their vocabulary "permissible torture."

Cycloptichorn wrote:

...
Well, that's not going to end the War on Terror, is it? It's not going to destroy Al Qaeda, is it? So you admit this war is going to go on for a long long time, if the true goal is to get those who attacked us, and not to nation build?
...
Remaking Iraq and Afghanistan in the West's image isn't going to convince a bunch of fanatical terrorists to give up.

...
If our goal is getting these fanatics to completely abandon their repeatedly stated goals, then the only thing that will ultimately get these fanatics to completely abandon their repeatedly stated goals, is to exterminate them.
...

...
what information has been obtained by these methods?
Where the mass murderers of civilians have found sanctuary;
Where the would-be mass murderers of civilians have found sanctuary;
Where the mass murderers of civilians store their ordnance;
Where the would-be mass murderers of civilians store their ordnance;
Where the mass murderers of civilians intend to strike next;
Where the would-be mass murderers of civilians intend to strike first;
Where the would-be mass murderers of civilians are coming from.

just about any exterienced investigator/interrogator i've heard being interviewed , has said that you hardly ever get any valid and useful information that way . could they all be wrong ?
The alleged "hardly ever" has been often enough to save some civilians from being mass murdered. One person's "hardly ever" is another person's often enough to justify permissible torture of all such prisoner fanatics.

...
i might be a good idea to remember that in the process of these investigations the united states has created a lot of new enemies , namely those found innocent.
Or rather those not found to be innocent, but claiming to be innocent. We'd make even more enemies if we failed to do the best we can to protect civilians from being mass murdered by people or nature. By the way, in the past we made a lot of enemies while we were doing what is right inspite of our too frequent blunders; those who subsequently benefited became our friends (e.g., WWII -- Japanese, Germans).

saying : sorry , and sending the alleged perpetrators to jail isn't going to turn the victims into friends - something to chew on. hbg
But our goal is not to save friends--our goal is to save civilian lives. That's something else to chew on.

Hate and villify us all you want. We are going to do our best to do what we think is right. You keep score now! We will keep score later!

...
But, if the ultimate aim is to stop civilians getting killed, perhaps we should stop dropping bombs on them.

If our goal is getting these fanatics to completely abandon their repeatedly stated goals, then the only thing that will ultimately get these fanatics to completely abandon their repeatedly stated goals, is to exterminate them.

Abu Ghraib is Romper room compared to the real torture that is going on. Both sides use torture (It's a war). But we are the most advanced.

From "The school of the Americas" we have trained death squads and sent them into south America (El salvador and Nicaragua 1980's).

We will now train others to toture so it can't be traced to us. There are no cameras where real torture takes place. I have heard torture testimony more then once. I can't repeat it here. The photographs from Abu Ghraib prison are not pictures of torture they are just reckless and stupid Soldiers taking pictures.

The first in thing that takes place in training a torturer is to first de-humanize or de-sensitize the torturer. they must learn that You are not torturing a human that it is only a screaming piece of meat.

We or they must produce a psychotic in a controlled environment

McTag wrote:

...
But, if the ultimate aim is to stop civilians getting killed, perhaps we should stop dropping bombs on them.

More accurately, the ultimate aim at present is to minimize the number of civilians killed. More civilians would be killed if we did not try to stop the mass murderers of civilians.


According to data obtained from http://www.weeklystandard.com/Utilities/printer_preview.asp?idArticle=3889&R=C495A28 from 1979 to 2003, while Saddam was head of the Iraqi government, the average daily rate civilians were murdered was more than 65 civilians per day.

According to data obtained from http://www.iraqbodycount.org/database/ from 1/1/2003 to 12/31/2005, while the coalition had been preparing to invade and been in Iraq, the average daily rate of Saddamists & al-Qaeda et al murders and Coalition killings of Iraqi civilians was less than 29 per day. For this past January it was less than 20 per day. For the first ten days in February it has been less than 12 per day. Admittedly painfully slow progress, but it is nevertheless measurable progress.

As I have alleged previously:

Quote:

If our goal is getting these fanatics to completely abandon their repeatedly stated goals, then the only thing that will ultimately get these fanatics to completely abandon their repeatedly stated goals, is to exterminate them.

A major study by the UN and Iraqi officials found that life in Iraq has decayed significantly since foreign forces invaded, following a general trend seen in most sectors since the imposition of a global embargo in 1990.

May 18 - Responses to a detailed survey onducted by a United Nations agency and the Iraqi government indicate that everyday conditions for Iraqis in the aftermath of the 2003 US-led invasion have deteriorated at an alarming rate, with huge numbers of people lacking adequate access to basic services and resources such as clean water, food, health care, electricity, jobs and sanitation.

"This survey shows a rather tragic situation of the quality of life in Iraq," Barham Salih, Iraq's minister of planning, said in statement, adding:

"If you compare this to the situation in the 1980s, you will see a major deterioration."

The United Nations Development Program (UNDP) conducted the far ranging survey, titled "Iraq Living Conditions Survey 2004," in cooperation with Iraq's Ministry of Planning.

Researchers determined that some 24,000 Iraqis died as a result of the US-led invasion in 2003 and the first year of occupation. Children below the age of 18 comprised 12 percent of those deaths, according to survey data.

The study also indicates that the invasion and its immediate aftermath forced more than 140,000 Iraqis to flee their homes.

Amigo wrote:

Abu Ghraib is Romper room compared to the real torture that is going on. Both sides use torture (It's a war). But we are the most advanced.

From "The school of the Americas" we have trained death squads and sent them into south America (El salvador and Nicaragua 1980's).

We will now train others to toture so it can't be traced to us. There are no cameras where real torture takes place. I have heard torture testimony more then once. I can't repeat it here. The photographs from Abu Ghraib prison are not pictures of torture they are just reckless and stupid Soldiers taking pictures.

The first in thing that takes place in training a torturer is to first de-humanize or de-sensitize the torturer. they must learn that You are not torturing a human that it is only a screaming piece of meat.

We or they must produce a psychotic in a controlled environment

This reads like something you obtained from a LIEbral Hollywood movie fantasizer like Michael Moore, or from a LIEbral University Professor like Ward Churchill, or from a LIEbral financial sponsor like George Soros, or even something from a plain 'ol everyday paranoid schizophrenic.

But I'll ask anyway..... Source or sources please?

...
Meanwhile we ensure an increased supply of recruits to the insurgent cause by illegal occupation and widespread killing of innocents.