The Torture Question

POSTED BY: canttakesky
UPDATED: Sunday, October 30, 2005 21:30
VIEWED: 10585
PAGE 2 of 16

FIRST PAGE PREV PAGE 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 NEXT PAGE LAST PAGE

GEEZER

Saturday, October 22, 2005 8:06 PM

Quote:
Originally posted by canttakesky:
What does it say about us as a nation that we have folks who not only support state-authorized torture, but also want to keep it secret.

It says we're a nation of individuals with differing opinions. The folks who produced "the Torture Question" expressed their opinion and Mr. Moran expressed his. Or would you rather that only "acceptable" opinions be expressed?

Although I have problems with the changed guidelines for treatment of Afgan and Iraqi prisoners, I can see how the search for intelligence to prevent acts of international terrorism or Iraqi insurgent attacks could have been a strong motivation for people with responsibility for stopping these acts to step over the line.

I'd think that if we were truly evil, as a nation, we'd have had better provision for coercive interrogation in place from the get-go. The slap-dash manner in which it developed, and the relatively low-grade techniques used really do seem like a scramble for some useful info, rather than a pre-orchestrated and systematic torture machine.

"Keep the Shiny side up"

SEVENPERCENT

Saturday, October 22, 2005 8:15 PM

Ok Finn, help me out here- and I swear I'm not being trollish or snarky, I'm asking legitimately- but I really don't understand your position vis a vis torture. You say this:

Quote:
Originally posted by Finn mac Cumhal:
I don’t consider defacing or destruction of religious items, to include the Koran, in front of prisoners, torture.

Then you turn around and say this:

Quote:
We are fighting an enemy that is very fanatical and driven to fits of inhuman psychopathic and/or suicidal fanaticism that will be inflamed by even the notion that the US defaces a Koran.

Most Muslim fanatics (as well as many non-fanatics) would rather be killed or beaten than be religiously or sexually humiliated. We of the western world would probably rather escape with our lives than worry about a book (I know I would) or being photographed naked. But is a definition of what constitutes torture only applicable to the people giving, or is it somewhat based on the people receiving it? I would propose that defacement of a Koran in front of a Moslem cleric is tantamount to torture on a level that we as westerners are unfamiliar with. If another culture considers an act to be torturous, shouldn't we as a civilized nation respect that? My personal position on torture is no way no how, because I see us as being better than that (as well as its actual effectiveness has always been in question). But people who actually debate things like, 'where is the line' always confuse me on points like this. Sure it isn't torture to you, but a maybe a better question to ask is, 'is it torture in regards to their culture.'

Interested in anyone's thoughts on this.

------------------------------------------
He looked bigger when I couldn't see him.

HKCAVALIER

Saturday, October 22, 2005 8:19 PM

Hey Finn, you act as if the Arab world has no news agencies. They were all over the scandal at Abu Ghraib, long before us. All the info we're getting from the Frontline program is years old. "The enemy" sure doesn't need to get their info from PBS.

Our news agencies covering these stories isn't inflaming anyone outside this country. Our news agencies covering these stories actually presents a level of sanity and accountability that the rest of the world finds hopeful. As Bush has so often pointed out, one of the things that makes the U.S. a much better place than Iraq under Saddam is the fact that when members of our military commit atrocious acts, there are consequences. Stories in our country's free press are part of those consequences. The commitment of Americans to take the inquiry to the highest level of government is another thing that makes this country great.

And Finn, you really oughta watch the program before you comment, unless you just want to muddy the waters with issues that may or may not be germane.

HKCavalier

Hey, hey, hey, don't be mean. We don't have to be mean, because, remember, no matter where you go, there you are.

SEVENPERCENT

Saturday, October 22, 2005 8:24 PM

Quote:
Originally posted by Geezer:
we'd have had better provision for coercive interrogation in place from the get-go. The slap-dash manner in which it developed, and the relatively low-grade techniques used really do seem like a scramble for some useful info, rather than a pre-orchestrated and systematic torture machine.

I'm in agreement with you on this, Geezer. I don't think there is a torture 'machine' in place, I think that as a result of certain policy statements and general post-9/11 fear, coupled with a wartime threat, we're engaging in practices we shouldn't be. Some wrong signals were sent from the top down (re: Geneva Convention) into a high-pressure situation that simply boiled over.

What bothers me the most is the failure of upper level accountability. I find it very difficult to believe that the grunts in the field should be taking the most punishment for what went on. Their commanding officers (and probably their commanding officers as well) should be being court-martialled as well. Though I cannot remember the Latin, I believe the phrase is "who watches the watchmen?"

------------------------------------------
He looked bigger when I couldn't see him.

CHRISISALL

Saturday, October 22, 2005 8:48 PM

Quote:
Originally posted by Finn mac Cumhal:
I don’t consider sleep deprivation and aggressive, loud and/or threatening speech torture. I don’t consider defacing or destruction of religious items, to include the Koran, in front of prisoners, torture. Nor do I think that such things are newsworthy.

I agree.

Quote:
However, the unnecessary discussion, even innocently, on the news can inflame threats against our people. We are fighting an enemy that is very fanatical and driven to fits of inhuman psychopathic and/or suicidal fanaticism that will be inflamed by even the notion that the US defaces a Koran. Innocent people, including Americans, may die as a result of simply discussing so called torture in the news.

Free speech isn't free. Maybe it would be better to take our people out of harm's way than hope human(ie fallable, weak and/or viciously opportunistic) media has a conscience, and the ability to follow it.

Quote:

if inappropriate or unworthy news is used as propaganda to further or even escalate war against the US.

Um...you mean.....
What do you mean?
Did someone start a war with us? (I haven't seen the news yet today...)

Sorry, okay- the 'shouting fire in a crowded theatre' thing; I get it. But they're cuttin' off heads over there. We should not have gone there the way we did, we should not be there now, it should not matter what our media says about anything, true OR inflamatory.

And if the American people don't know the bad things that go on (as they obviously don't), it WILL continue full force. Change of some kind is necessary, and it's always painful.

What am I talking about- why should we have zero tollerance for torture, when we have 50% tollerence for unfit leaders like Bush?

Yes, unfit, he's dumb, he's a dry-drunk, he's a 'I'll show Daddy!!!' boy, he's a bad manager, blagh, blagh, and it's all true....Chrisisall

P.S. Finn, I don't see you on the General Discussion boards much, what did you think of the BDM? I loved it!

FINN MAC CUMHAL

Saturday, October 22, 2005 9:02 PM

Quote:
Originally posted by SevenPercent:
Most Muslim fanatics (as well as many non-fanatics) would rather be killed or beaten than be religiously or sexually humiliated. We of the western world would probably rather escape with our lives than worry about a book (I know I would) or being photographed naked. But is a definition of what constitutes torture only applicable to the people giving, or is it somewhat based on the people receiving it? I would propose that defacement of a Koran in front of a Moslem cleric is tantamount to torture on a level that we as westerners are unfamiliar with. If another culture considers an act to be torturous, shouldn't we as a civilized nation respect that? My personal position on torture is no way no how, because I see us as being better than that (as well as its actual effectiveness has always been in question). But people who actually debate things like, 'where is the line' always confuse me on points like this. Sure it isn't torture to you, but a maybe a better question to ask is, 'is it torture in regards to their culture.'

Multiculturalism in all its ridiculousness.

I seem to remember an “art” piece a few years ago that involved defacing the image of the Mother May with feces. Many Christians found this to be in rather poor taste. Was the artist “torturing” Christian clerics? Should that artist be arrested for practicing torture? Or does a reverence of ones religion only apply to fanatical Muslim clerics? If we are going to elevate the defacing of a religious book to the level of torture, then we have essentially eliminated the freedom of speech, if we are to apply this new found reverence for religious articles fairly.

Quote:
Originally posted by HKCavalier:
Our news agencies covering these stories isn't inflaming anyone outside this country. Our news agencies covering these stories actually presents a level of sanity and accountability that the rest of the world finds hopeful. As Bush has so often pointed out, one of the things that makes the U.S. a much better place than Iraq under Saddam is the fact that when members of our military commit atrocious acts, there are consequences. Stories in our country's free press are part of those consequences. The commitment of Americans to take the inquiry to the highest level of government is another thing that makes this country great.

I agree, but it doesn’t change the fact that there are those, even in this country, who wish to use the issue of torture as a political weapons against the president.

Quote:
Originally posted by HKCavalier:
And Finn, you really oughta watch the program before you comment, unless you just want to muddy the waters with issues that may or may not be germane.

I don’t think so. I was honest in reporting that I had not seen the show and admitted that I wasn’t criticizing this show.

-------------
Qui desiderat pacem praeparet bellum.

SEVENPERCENT

Saturday, October 22, 2005 9:14 PM

Quote:
Originally posted by Finn mac Cumhal:
Multiculturalism in all its ridiculousness.

I seem to remember an “art” piece a few years ago that involved defacing the image of the Mother May with feces. Many Christians found this to be in rather poor taste. Was the artist “torturing” Christian clerics? Should that artist be arrested for practicing torture? Or does a reverence of ones religion only apply to fanatical Muslim clerics? If we are going to elevate the defacing of a religious book to the level of torture, then we have essentially eliminated the freedom of speech, if we are to apply this new found reverence for religious articles fairly.

You brushed off my post without answering it at all, and gave an example that had no relevance to my point. As I made perfectly clear, we in the west don't take our iconography as seriously as the Islamic world does. Is that act torturous as we define it in America? No, nor would I equate it with a freedom of speech issue here in America. A Moslem American defacing the Koran gets the same rights/punishments/priveliges as a Christian defacing a Bible. That's because it's our society's rules, not theirs. That wasn't the point- we live by a different societal code here.

The point was, had someone in Iran made a Koran art piece like the Xtian one you point out, he wouldn't have lived to see it on display. That's a fact. So, since something like that would be illegal at best, murderous heresy requiring stoning more than likely in a Moslem country, it doesn't matter whether it's freedom of speech in ours. I'm asking if we should treat the issue in that respect. Just because we define torture one way doesn't mean someone else's definition is a perfect match.

Now answer, Finn, should the culture of the tortured be taken into account?

------------------------------------------
He looked bigger when I couldn't see him.

FINN MAC CUMHAL

Saturday, October 22, 2005 9:16 PM

Quote:
Originally posted by chrisisall:
Free speech isn't free. Maybe it would be better to take our people out of harm's way than hope human(ie fallable, weak and/or viciously opportunistic) media has a conscience, and the ability to follow it.

I agree. I think it would be best to take our people out of harms way. I think, however, we have different opinions of what constitutes “harms way,” and how to get our people out of it.

Quote:
Originally posted by chrisisall:
Did someone start a war with us?

Yep.

Quote:
Originally posted by chrisisall:
Sorry, okay- the 'shouting fire in a crowded theatre' thing; I get it. But they're cuttin' off heads over there. We should not have gone there the way we did, we should not be there now, it should not matter what our media says about anything, true OR inflamatory.

Are you suggesting that it doesn’t matter whether our media puts forth rational and honest news? I would say that that kind of thinking with regard to the media is exactly what I was talking about.

Quote:
Originally posted by chrisisall:
And if the American people don't know the bad things that go on (as they obviously don't), it WILL continue full force. Change of some kind is necessary, and it's always painful.

I think the American people get an ear full of the bad things that go on over there. So much so that I think the good things, which are just as important, often get ignored.

Quote:
Originally posted by chrisisall:
P.S. Finn, I don't see you on the General Discussion boards much, what did you think of the BDM? I loved it!

I posted a few times. I never really got around to posting my review of the movie. I thought it was good. I saw it twice for entertainment sake, and I’m waiting a few weeks to see it again when I will try to be more critical. In the meantime, the expansion to Rome Total War came out a few weeks ago and all my free computer time has been spent throwing virtual hordes of Vandals, Franks and Saxons at the frontier provinces of the Roman Empire.

-------------
Qui desiderat pacem praeparet bellum.

HKCAVALIER

Saturday, October 22, 2005 9:18 PM

Quote:
Originally posted by Finn mac Cumhal:
I agree, but it doesn’t change the fact that there are those, even in this country, who wish to use the issue of torture as a political weapons against the president.

There comes a point though, where the nature of the political weapon trumps the partisan motives, don'it? I mean, using the fact that a Senator is a drug dealer to make sure he doesn't get re-elected is a good thing, even from his opponant who stands to gain substantially from the scandal? Illegally promoting sadism and torture in the ranks of the U.S. Army is something any President should get in trouble for. That a bunch of folk have been waiting for the opportunity is a political commonplace. At least Bush would be taken down for something a bit more substantive than a bj.

I could have been more direct with my remarks about watching the video than I was. Sorry. The real point is that the familiar argument about making prisoners wear underwear not being torture, would, hopefully, not have come up if you'd seen the documentary because the documentary deals with acts that any sane person would surely agree upon. If your time is limited, I recommend you watch part 6 at least, that's where the toughest stuff is dealt with.

HKCavalier

Hey, hey, hey, don't be mean. We don't have to be mean, because, remember, no matter where you go, there you are.

FINN MAC CUMHAL

Saturday, October 22, 2005 9:32 PM

Quote:
Originally posted by SevenPercent:
As I made perfectly clear, we in the west don't take our iconography as seriously as the Islamic world does. Is that act torturous as we define it in America? No, nor would I equate it with a freedom of speech issue here in America.

I would agree that in general that is true, but it is not true of everyone in the West, I’m sure. I’m certain that some very devout Catholics in the West were as infuriated and insulted by this particular piece of art as some Moslem clerics from the Middle East might be about the defacing of the Koran.

Quote:
Originally posted by SevenPercent:
The point was, had someone in Iran made a Koran art piece like the Xtian one you point out, he wouldn't have lived to see it on display. That's a fact. So, since something like that would be illegal at best, murderous heresy requiring stoning more than likely in a Moslem country, it doesn't matter whether it's freedom of speech in ours. I'm asking if we should treat the issue in that respect. Just because we define torture one way doesn't mean someone else's definition is a perfect match.

The answer is no. That’s an excellent example of why there is no moral equivalence between a theocratic totalitarian culture and the US, and why I have so much distain for multiculturalistic ideals. What if in some hypothetical country it is required, under pain of death, to kill Jews? Is it then torture, if the US chooses not to kill Jews? I don’t believe that one can’t use a countries’ culture, particularly a country with a history or fanaticism and totalitarianism, as the defining aspect of what constitutes torture.

-------------
Qui desiderat pacem praeparet bellum.

FIRST PAGE PREV PAGE 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 NEXT PAGE LAST PAGE