|
Note: You must be registered in order to post a reply.
To register, click here. Registration is FREE!
|
| T O P I C R E V I E W |
| Dark Woods |
Posted - November 17 2005 : 9:38:27 PM
The November 21, 2005 (yes I know that today is Nov 17) issue of Newsweek features Senator McCain's article on the subject of torture. I find his position compeling: Treaty and moral considerations prohibit cruel, inhumane, or abusive treatment of prisoners. In other words, it should be policy and law that Americans do not practice torture or "toture light"
I agree with Senator McCain. |
| 25 L A T E S T R E P L I E S (Newest First) |
| qasimoto |
Posted - January 05 2006 : 9:33:00 PM
AHA! So THAT'S how that works! Thanks very much, WW!
Q |
| Wilderness Woman |
Posted - January 04 2006 : 08:20:10 AM
Thank you, Qasimoto! Believe me, we all know how easy it can be to allow one's better judgement to be overruled by one's displeasure.
BTW, if I may, can I give you another navigational tip?
If you are missing some recently-posted messages, here is how you can find them all.
After you log on, take the link in the group at the upper right of your screen, titled "Active Topics." That will bring up a screen containing links to all of the threads that have had a new posting since the last time you logged on.
Hope that helps!
WW |
| qasimoto |
Posted - January 03 2006 : 4:30:27 PM
Yeah, you're right; I see now that I DID get carried away. Sorry to offend, I've just now revised my post to remove the two instances I think you were referring to. And "Thanks" for the heads-up.
Re Rich and a Lions' Den decision, I missed that and wasn't aware that he had decided to keep that thread running, though the vote in a poll was tending strongly in that direction anyway. It's Rich's site, there is much good about it, and I'm not about to complain about any of his decisions or to otherwise start jumping up and down. Besides, I'm in the minority on that (Lions' Den) matter, so I'm quite well satisfied with being just another opinion out here in the woods (and slush!).
Q |
| Wilderness Woman |
Posted - January 03 2006 : 12:28:58 PM
See now? Your post, Qasimoto, is just another good example of the whole problem here with this Lion's Den Forum. Your post comes across as being quite rude to the other posters. You can state your case without being nasty and calling people, who have a different opinion from yours, names.
Rich has decreed that the Den will stay and everyone can continue to post their opinions. However, I must insist that the name-calling stop! Opinions and debate... yes. Nastiness... no.
Thank you for your cooperation! |
| qasimoto |
Posted - January 02 2006 : 11:36:24 PM
Wow. This thread makes "Lions Den" sound pacifist and benign. What are you all trying to argue about, that torture is not nice? No, of course it's not. And I don't think anyone here, except perhaps me, has any Gestapo or Nazi tendencies. Nor SS. I had relatives in the Wehrmacht, but thank God none of them ever joined the Gestapo or SS. Nor even the Nazi party, few German professional soldiers ever did, frankly. Terribly grim, those first two; I've heard things that you don't want to. And it was no better in Russia, China, eastern Europe, or many other places worldwide.
Surely torture--infliction of physical or mental pain--is not ever a good or nice thing to do. And, wonderful as we are, we've almost never done that, to my knowledge, except for the early parts of our Revolution. Statistically, we were about 1/3 rebel (mostly street and ditch scum, including the Adams family), about 1/3 loyalist (mercantile and professional and dissenting clergy), and about 1/3 tradesmen, merchants, and others who were just trying to earn a living and didn't really care much about current politics. The rebels just tore up the loyalists, and some of the latter died from the burn wounds (the tar was boiling, you see; it wasn't as innocuous as you were taught in primary school) and feathering, and from being ridden down the rutted pike bouncing on a sharp, split rail which tended to split the crotch wide open up to the pelvic bone. So our forebears were not so innocent, please know.
Ever hear of Japanese Army Unit 7013 in WWII, stationed in Manchuria? No one has an exact number, but it appears that they vivisected, without any anesthetic of any kind, local or general, around 4000 Westerners and Chinese, including, by the way, some captured Americans. The victims had to be tied down very, very securely. They were fed better, in isolation, starting two weeks beforehand, to build up their strength so that they would last longer under the knife. Pictures show that the doctors, recruited from Japan for "practice" and "experimentation", appeared to go mainly for, again, the crotch. In fact, they appeared to pretty much remove it. Ever hear about that? No? How about the Japanese-held island, I forget its name, where they killed, butchered, cooked, and served downed American airmen? Didn't hear about that either? Don't know much, do you? And yet you presume to pontificate about "torture"? You may thank me for deleting the last words that were to be in that sentence.
If you're engaged in an armed conflict and hold an intransigent prisoner who won't talk, and yet you need to download him to save lives of your guys, what, really, IS the right thing to do? Who are you going to relieve of suffering, their guys or yours? It does come down to that. It is their guys who are killing yours, sometimes through torture. Before we invaded Iraq, one of our Foreign Service diplomats was captured and killed by middle easterners through weeks of protracted torture and, when we finally found someone to negotiate with for his release, they said "Forget it, he's taken too much and he has spilled his guts and he will never live." But, at least WE were pure and hadn't tortured anyone.
So...hell YES, torture is an option available to us simply because it's a weapon being used against us. For every head that the Iraqis, and their foreign fighter friends, take off--typically with a small, dull knife or saw with much screaming--we should be taking off ten, or more, of theirs. No question about it, how else to stop them or at least slow them down? And make sure they know about the numerical inequity, and send them videos of the executions and body parts to be SURE they know about it. Do it on top of their minarets and use their mullahs' sound systems to broadcast every last little squeak and scream to their masses. And then feed their people the roasted remains, calling it "goat" until they've finished eating.
Qasimoto |
| Monadnock Guide |
Posted - December 11 2005 : 8:14:27 PM
Good post Rich, - and I share you sentiments completely. Political posts are by nature often very "emotional" and may well evoke strong relpies at times. So be it, - if that presents a problem, then perhaps one should avoid becoming involved. |
| richfed |
Posted - December 11 2005 : 11:29:18 AM
I don't see the point in discussion or debate if every time there is a difference everyone runs for cover. I really don't see personal attacks in this thread... just voicing of opinions.
Hey, I'm sorry if some of you don't like who I am ... I am a conservative & will continue to be one because it is the path I see as making sense. I think I can see the other side - I was once a RADICAL leftist [SDS, and the like] - but that's not me now. If some of you were "fooled" by my look, is that my fault? I am who I am ... you want everyone to agree? Not going to happen. The Sarge & WW are two of my closest political "allies," as far as I can tell, and both are fair & reasonable & polite. I don't see the "hitting & running" ...
You know, there is more to a person than their political agenda ... that is the mind ... there is something called the heart, too. I just hate to see folks pointing fingers and hurting ... I take the blame. |
| Kaylynn44 |
Posted - December 11 2005 : 06:34:14 AM
I haven't offered my opinion on this subject because I am the world's worst debater, but what the heck, I will do it anyway.
I personally think that torture is wrong. Yes, I know the reasoning behind torture, but it still doesn't make it right. I know that I get upset every time someone tortures one of our Americans, so why should I believe in torturing someone else. Now, my husband and son have differing opinions. They believe that torture is vital to get information and to save lives. They tell me that I am wrong and I tell them that they are wrong, but we all love each other anyway. 
Below I am listing pros and cons of torture. Not my words, I got this off of the internet, but I believe that the person that wrote it has a pretty good idea of the "good" and "bad" aspects of torture.
Pros
1. Timely information is needed to break up cells, capture wanted terrorists, and prevent thousands or millions of deaths. If we were able to stop the 9/11 attacks, thousands of lives would have been saved, along with billions of dollars in economic damage. Intelligence agents had information that Osama bin Laden was up to something, but they had nothing specific as to place and time. Today, the FBI and CIA are in the same situation. The next attack could involve a nuclear "dirty" bomb, an anthrax or smallpox bioweapons attack, or a poisonous chemical attack. The 9/11 attacks were bad, but the devastation of a mass destruction weapons attack would be tenfold. Intelligence information is only good for a short time. When Saddam was captured, Al Qaeda and Fedayeen cells scattered. Thus, any intelligence gained after a short initial period was outdated. Torture ensures we get the information on a timely basis. Of course torture is immoral, but we're talking about the lives of thousands, possibly even millions. Even if mass destruction weapons aren't involved, low-level attacks like a homicide bombing could cause the loss of many Americans lives. What is more important--protecting an evil, hateful terrorist from a little pain or saving scores of American lives?
2. These specific terrorists deserve a little extra punishment for the death and misery they've caused. Mounir al-Motassadek, who is accused of being a member of a terrorist organization and being an accessory to the deaths of more than 3,000 people on 9/11, was sentenced to 15 years in prison by a German court. He's lucky he wasn't convicted of killing 100,000 people; the court may have sentenced him to 20 years! The justice system has become somewhat of a joke in democratic societies. Even in America, where punishment is obviously tougher than mainland Europe, the punishments aren't all that bad. When you contribute to the death of thousands, a punishment of painless death or life in prison just doesn't cut it. We're talking about people that will kill Americans no matter where they are or who they are, and they show no remorse for their actions. Maybe a little torture is fitting for someone like Saddam Hussein.
3. Anything we do to our captives will still be nothing compared to what they do to our soldiers when captured. As we saw with the American POWs in Iraq, it doesn't matter how well we treat prisoners, our soldiers will always be faced with brutal torture or death. Consider the terrorists held in Guantanamo Bay. The prison there holds some of the most evil, hate-filled, venom-spewing men in the world. Yet, we feed them well, allow them books & prayer time, and refrain from beating them. Several prisoners released from there have said they were treated well and fed better than in their own country. Yet, the media distorts the treatment, showing us getting a little rough with some combative prisoners. Many in the media speculate we're torturing prisoners whenever we come up with useful information, despite the fact they have no proof. The point is, it doesn't matter if we torture prisoners or give t |
| Wilderness Woman |
Posted - December 10 2005 : 11:17:57 PM
quote:
Originally posted by Ilse
I never made comparisons (read the post).
I did. Several times. To me, and pardon me if I am wrong, the implication was definitely there.
quote:
Originally posted by Adele
I think that to say that one race/nationality/police force/military force are "plain and simply evil" is oversimplification in the extreme. It is the acts of the Nazis that make us label them as evil...
To "oversimplify" even further -- evil actions are performed by people; therefore, the people become evil. I stand by my original observation: the Gestapo/Nazis were evil.
quote:
Originally posted by Christina
The attitudes that sent me away were those posted over the Katrina disaster and the torture attitudes are even further proof to me that except for checking in to see how a few friends are doing, this is not the place for me anymore.
I am really sorry to hear that, Christina. I am puzzled, though. I do not remember anything other than sympathy and concern being posted over the Katrina disaster.
Why should any of you feel the need to "pick up your toys and go home" when some of us disagree with your opinions? Isn't disagreeing part of debate? And don't we have the right to offer ours, too? And please understand that those of us who have offered differing opinions from yours, Ilse's and Adele's have not said that you should leave because your opinions are different. I don't think that any of us want you to. I know I don't.
Emily? It wasn't you. |
| Emily |
Posted - December 09 2005 : 5:55:05 PM
I don't remembered where all I have posted so,if I was ever one of the offenders, I apologize and the result was not my intent.
God Bless.
|
| Christina |
Posted - December 09 2005 : 3:40:46 PM
I agree with everything Adele has said above and probably have my own perspectives to offer, but I don't think it's worth my time.
Few of you probably give a rip, but the attitudes Adele is referring to are precisely why I don't post here anymore. The attitudes that sent me away were those posted over the Katrina disaster and the torture attitudes are even further proof to me that except for checking in to see how a few friends are doing, this is not the place for me anymore.
Some of you all need to take a good long look in the mirror.
Have a nice holiday.
Christina |
| Adele |
Posted - December 09 2005 : 2:16:23 PM
quote:
Originally posted by Monadnock Guide
No one in particular, since I post on a couple of boards, and have encounter the same attitide from other Europeans. As always though, if the shoe fits, ...
Let me clarify a few things for you....
1) I would no more describe myself as European than you would describe yourself as North American...I am British, or to be specific, English.
2) I made no reference to Americans in my post whatsoever. I did frequently refer to 'us', meaning the generic Westerner. I have not become personal, or made any derogatory comments about any race or nationality.
3) Perhaps I need to remind you that the British also invaded Iraq, and also had photographs published in the press of their troops torturing Iraqi prisoners. I did not differentiate between those taken of American troops and those taken of British troops. There is no difference.
4) I have not 'pontificated' about how anyone should be treated, I have merely expressed my opinion about the ethics of torture, some of the possible reasons behind the behaviour of the troops, and the potential consequences.
5) I have, I think, similar opintions to Dark Woods (who has expressed himself very eloquently), and yet I do not see you making reference to his nationality or suggesting that he has a 'sniffling American attitude'.
I haven't posted on this board for a while, but have always enjoyed a good debate and reading other peoples views and opinions, which is why I thought I would join in this current debate. I have also enjoyed the fact that this is listed as a forum for 'international debate' - but it would appear that this is no longer the case.
I'm rather sorry that you have been unable to really read my post simply as an unemotional, opposing side of a debate, because I am sure we could all have enjoyed a very interesting and informative discussion. But, I get the feeling that I am not going to find what I am looking for in this forum anymore.
Adele
PS If I could be permitted to disagree with you on one more thing.....that shoe you are handing out.....it doesn't fit!
|
| Monadnock Guide |
Posted - December 09 2005 : 1:30:52 PM
No one in particular, since I post on a couple of boards, and have encounter the same attitide from other Europeans. As always though, if the shoe fits, ... |
| Adele |
Posted - December 09 2005 : 12:59:34 PM
quote:
Originally posted by Monadnock Guide
One does what one has to in war, - the idea is to win. With the history that the Europeans have, - it doeesn't leave them much room to pontificate to anyone about how people should be treated. For "decades" after WWII all one had to do was look at Eastern Europe and Western Europe to see how we treated both our defeated allies, and enemies. We installed the Marshall Plan and helped rebuild the entire continent, regardless of who was on our side, or fought against us. We also rebuilt Japan after WWII, - all this costing us a fortune. And we are compared to Nazi's? Easy I suppose when one country isn't involved in anything, - but should that change, that lofty attitude would be hard pressed to find any virtue in the actions it would need to survive. It goes completely unreported, but we've built more new hospitals, schools, electric power stations, water distribution plants, highways, etc., etc. in Iraq than the average individual knows of, or will ever hear of. I wonder how much of that the Nazi's would have done had they won? I tire of the sniffiling European attitude, ....
Just to clarify..... is it my comments that you are referring to as lofty and sniffling, Monadnock Guide? |
| Emily |
Posted - December 09 2005 : 12:27:26 PM
No in no way do I condone the disgusting behavior of the military personel at Abu Ghraib prison. I see whole mess as a bunch of nut cases who needed a little dose of power and the only way they could get it was to humiliate someone weaker than they. They abused their power and I hope they get a punishment that discourages that from ever happening again. But that torture served no purpose and didn't help the U.S. gain anything that would lead to any captures or findings to help us win this war. But, I'm not saying we should be torturing people, beating them, but can't just wait for them to make up and play nice. No matter how much I wish it would work that way it won't and never will. To get our point across and show we're serious we have to get a little rough. They won't talk peacfully and try to settle things like civilized people, so somtimes we have to get their attention by other means. If we don't, I have no doubt we'll be looking at another 9/11 pretty quick. We can't be pushed around and take it.
And no, I don't condone what the Gestapo did either. |
| Monadnock Guide |
Posted - December 09 2005 : 10:56:04 AM
One does what one has to in war, - the idea is to win. With the history that the Europeans have, - it doeesn't leave them much room to pontificate to anyone about how people should be treated. For "decades" after WWII all one had to do was look at Eastern Europe and Western Europe to see how we treated both our defeated allies, and enemies. We installed the Marshall Plan and helped rebuild the entire continent, regardless of who was on our side, or fought against us. We also rebuilt Japan after WWII, - all this costing us a fortune. And we are compared to Nazi's? Easy I suppose when one country isn't involved in anything, - but should that change, that lofty attitude would be hard pressed to find any virtue in the actions it would need to survive. It goes completely unreported, but we've built more new hospitals, schools, electric power stations, water distribution plants, highways, etc., etc. in Iraq than the average individual knows of, or will ever hear of. I wonder how much of that the Nazi's would have done had they won? I tire of the sniffiling European attitude, .... |
| Adele |
Posted - December 09 2005 : 02:47:10 AM
I think that to say that one race/nationality/police force/military force are "plain and simply evil" is oversimplification in the extreme. It is the acts of the Nazis that make us label them as evil - the acts of invading other countries, imprisoning without trial, murder, genocide and torture. Any of those acts sound familiar?
Ultimately, if you belong to a country that believes there is justification for torture, imprisonment without trial etc, then as a country, you need to be open about it, stand behind that belief and acknowledge that there will be consequences.
To say that one is justified because 'they started it' is playground politics. If you believe yourself better than others, you need to practice what you preach - these double standards only lead people to say "what makes you better than us?"
Speaking personally, I am a realist, and I believe that torture is a part of conflict and can be a successful strategic tool. I also believe that part of creating an effective military force is to have soldiers trained to do their job - and part of that training involves dehumanising the enemy, in order to carry out their responsibilities. However, since I also believe torture is ethically wrong, I would rather put my efforts into supporting international agreements such as the Geneva Convention to try and move us forward as a civilisation, than devote any effort to justifying it. If the soldiers our countries train are not subsequently properly monitored, or boundaries are not made crystal clear and enforced, the result is the pictures that we have all witnessed from Abu Ghraib jail. And ultimately, regardless of whether you think those prisoners got what they deserved or not, those photographs just gave some countries yet another reason to hate us.
Justifiable torture? Speaking for myself, I am not sure that those two words go together. But even if I did, I would be very concerned about the scope of the word 'justifiable'. |
| Ilse |
Posted - December 08 2005 : 5:58:03 PM
I never made comparisons (read the post).
To me ends never justify means. |
| Dark Woods |
Posted - December 04 2005 : 01:48:11 AM
I agree that the United States and allied nations have long-held traditions of treating prisoners well. We best honor those traditions by maintaining them intact. We honor those traditions by not moving one inch (one centimeter for metric-philes) in the direction of objectionable practices, such as torture. |
| Monadnock Guide |
Posted - December 03 2005 : 05:51:53 AM
Not too difficult to see the difference in who's - who. When the German defeat was nearly complete in WWII, nearly all Germans that could move, including their military, may a bee-line for the Allied Lines. Preferring to surrender to the Allies than the Russians. They did not see/equate both sides as a flip of the coin, - and went for the safer approach at the first opputunity. There is and never has been a comparison in our treatment of prisoners with the Soviets, Germans Japanese etc. In WWII, I belive something like around 3% of Japanese prisoners died in our care, - while over 30% of captured Americans died in Japanese camps. |
| Wilderness Woman |
Posted - December 03 2005 : 12:59:14 AM
quote:
Originally posted by Ilse
Germany was having fun torturing and didn't give a bloody hell about winning the war... Wait, what?
But I didn't say Nazi Germany didn't care about winning the war. Of course they did. After all, they wanted to take over the world and didn't care how they went about doing it or who they got rid of along the way. And yes, any group or country who is fighting a war wants to win. That goes without saying.
And no, I do not "think that Germans are inherently bad" anymore than I think that the Japanese or the Russians are inherently bad. The Nazi reign was a terrible time in Germany's history, but it is done. And I do not believe that America is in danger of falling into the type of trap that Germany fell into under Hitler.
My point was simply to say: Please don't make unfair and outlandish comparisons. |
| Dark Woods |
Posted - December 02 2005 : 10:07:25 PM
Torture for fun or information?
I am of the belief that the primary reason that the Nazis tortured people was to get information useful to their cause. The Nazis wanted to win (I suspect that all groups/nations conducting war want to win.)The acceptance of torture as a "normal business practice" naturally attracted folks who enjoyed torturing people. The "normal business practice" of torture provided opportunities and cover for recreational torturers to have their fun.
I do not think that Germans are inherently bad. The undeniable presence of "recreational torturers" among those Germans who became Nazis is (in my opinion) more illustrative of the damaging effects on a society when torture is officially sanctioned. |
| Ilse |
Posted - December 02 2005 : 5:53:18 PM
Germany was having fun torturing and didn't give a bloody hell about winning the war... Wait, what? 
I think you are all missing my point. These conflicts are all ideologically driven. In any ideology, no matter how despicable or how honourable (or whether it's your's or you enemy's), you can find reasons for yourself to be exempt from commonly held ethical norms and values for whatever reason you have. The thing is not to fall into this kind of trap and not stoop to lower levels. If you do you probably will instll fear but respect is an altogether different matter. |
| SgtMunro |
Posted - November 30 2005 : 2:14:12 PM
I think you missed the whole point, Ilse; and you are way out of line to compare measures needed to protect innocent lives to those used by past/present fascist regimes in order to exterminate whole peoples. As far as destroying human rights/dignity, the answer is very "black & white"; to wit: if you do not want to be placed under duress, then you do not plot, or participate in, an attack on innocent people.
YMH&OS,
The Sarge
P.S.- Monadnock Guide is correct; that being you do not win a war by being nice, sensitive or understanding, you win by destroying the enemy's ability to fight. As President Theodore Roosevelt once noted, "...The world may grow to respect us, even to fear us, but they will never love us..."
...And as far as the Sarge is concerned, fear and respect will suffice, where love is wanting...
|
| Wilderness Woman |
Posted - November 27 2005 : 11:56:35 PM
quote:
Originally posted by Ilse
Well, by that definition the Gestapo, with their need for intelligence and information, had every right to use whatever means to get to the goal.
I believe that the difference here, Ilse, is that the Gestapo were not using torture to gather information for the purpose of protecting their countrymen from terrorists. The Gestapo were plain and simply evil and were using torture as a "fun" tool to humiliate and annihilate an entire race of people. That is, of course, an unthinkable horror.
I think it's more than a little unfair to compare America to the Gestapo, or any Communist-ruled country who employs torture as punishment. |
|
Around The Site:
~ What's New? ~
Pathfinding
|
Mohican Gatherings
|
Mohican Musings
|
LOTM Script
|
History
|
Musical Musings
|
Storefronts on the Frontier
Off the Beaten Trail
|
Links
Of Special Interest:
The Eric Schweig Gallery
|
From the Ramparts
|
The Listening Room
|
Against All Odds
|
The Video Clips Index
DISCLAIMER
Tune, 40, used by permission - composed by Ron Clarke
|
| The Mohican Board! [Bumppo's Redux!] |
© 1997-2024 - Mohican Press |
 |
|
| Current Mohicanland page raised in 0.22 seconds |
 |
|
![The Mohican Board! [Bumppo's Redux!]](images/wwwboard.gif "The Mohican Board! [Bumppo's Redux!]")
