much has/is being made of the proposed McCain amendment and the restrictions it would place on methods of interrogating captured enemy combatants, and alledged instances of torture by American forces. Most admin critics cite Abu Ghraib and Guantanamo, as well as the "torture memos" of now AG Gonzalez. The former cases did not involve interrogation, and the memo did not specify any particular type of treatment. I think we can all agree there's such a thing as true torture -- fingernails pulled, electric shocks applied, sharp objects put where they don't belong -- and then there's other stuff. Complaints about U.S. forces usually involve "other stuff," and there's a lot of people playing fast and loose w/ definitions of torture. what, in the collective mind of the D&D, constitutes torture and should be banned? fake menstrual blood? koran desecration? wrapping islamic suspects in the israeli flag? water-boarding? except for the latter, i went through worse during fraternity hazing at Sigma Nu my freshman year. do these acts rise to the level of torture?
I have to admit, before I opened this thread I thought it was going to be some conservative opinion on how torture that was going on in these prisons wasn't all that bad. Its a good question. I personally don't know, but anything used to coerce information by mental or physical anguish maybe considered torture.
Watching the Texans on Sundays is pure torture. Perhaps if we put the Gitmo prisoners in Clockwork Orange-style "eye openers" and forced them to watch our pro football team, we would get all the information we would ever need.
according to the cia water boarding: The prisoner is bound to an inclined board, feet raised and head slightly below the feet. Cellophane is wrapped over the prisoner's face and water is poured over him. Unavoidably, the gag reflex kicks in and a terrifying fear of drowning leads to almost instant pleas to bring the treatment to a halt. blog source how this isn't cruel and inhumane is beyond me. leaving people out in freezing temperatures outside so they are near death or die? how is that not torture? and as far you going thru worse hazing...thats cute but theres a significant difference between the two situations. if you dont understand the difference i'd be more than happy to tell you but dont compare these situations.
And the more important thing to note is that torture isn't done as a punishment, its done as a way to collect intelligence. Many times this is done on an innocent person or at least a person who hasn't been found to be guilty of anything so you can't justify this as some sort of punishment or some sort of claim that "they deserve it." While you can make comparisons to your hazing at your frat, realize that you entered your frat with full knowledge that some sort of hazing would happen to you. For many of these people, they are arrested without charge on the streets and taken to detention facilities to be "interrogated." Many times these people are freed because the military figures out that they have no useful intelligence or were even near any suspected insurgents. However, with the "interrogation practices" we did, we sure did a great job of making the people feel like they were already guilty of supporting insurgents or terrorism. Its sad that we are even discussing the possibility of the government engaging in actions that might even be construed as torture. We've prided ourselves for YEARS on our human rights record and our ability to tell other countries not to torture. Yet, the mere fact that the subject is being brought up and even discussed in a manner that acknowledges the possibility of torture is just sick.
Yeah. Let's attach live electric wires to their nutsacks instead.... Actually, the way the Texans season is going, live-wiring the nutsack might be more humane!
Well the treaty we signed is as follows: Convention against Torture and Other Cruel, Inhuman or Degrading Treatment or Punishment http://www.unhchr.ch/html/menu3/b/h_cat39.htm Article 1 1. For the purposes of this Convention, the term "torture" means any act by which severe pain or suffering, whether physical or mental, is intentionally inflicted on a person for such purposes as obtaining from him or a third person information or a confession, punishing him for an act he or a third person has committed or is suspected of having committed, or intimidating or coercing him or a third person, or for any reason based on discrimination of any kind, when such pain or suffering is inflicted by or at the instigation of or with the consent or acquiescence of a public official or other person acting in an official capacity. It does not include pain or suffering arising only from, inherent in or incidental to lawful sanctions. 2. This article is without prejudice to any international instrument or national legislation which does or may contain provisions of wider application. ratifacation http://www.ohchr.org/english/countries/ratification/9.htm