Rumsfeld, Bush approved Iraq torture policy
POSTED BY: Ghoulman
UPDATED: Saturday, December 11, 2004 17:27
VIEWED: 18296
PAGE 5 of 10
^^^
??? Torture resulting in death is still torture. Even if the torture is beating.
You're so weird.
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
The goal of torture is to extract information, to subject your opponent to an escalated and remorseless form of punishment, and/or to satisfy an inner sense of twisted and sadistic desire. Killing someone by beating them is murder. A good torturer beats until unconscious, then dress them up, revives them; and depending on your goal (extract information or punishment), maintain disorientation or maintain clarity, then beat some more.
Quote:
Originally posted by Ghoulman:
^^^
??? Torture resulting in death is still torture. Even if the torture is beating.
You're so weird.
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Jason... I'd love to know where you got that insane definition.
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Quote:
Originally posted by rue:
Browncoat1
One comforting thought is that people outside of the US know better.
How do you hide a million-person demonstration? You bury the news.
*sigh*
Yeah, the US is the only place with idiots and the uniformed, the rest of the world are so much superior in every aspect! (Or at the very least better informed!)
Its AMAZING how dillusional some people are.
I don't care, I'm still free.
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Seriously? Insane? I don't read dictionaries, but you could 2x check if you'd like.
http://dictionary.reference.com/search?q=torture
It is *the* operating definition of torture... No where is torture defined as killing. There *might* be maiming involved should the incorrect (or correct) devices be employed. There *might* be excruciating, searing, blinding pain. It might involve skin slowly being flayed off. Or eyelids pulled back and stapled to the forehead. It might even involve slivers of bamboo shoved under the fingernails or hooks inserted into the nipples and hung from there. Alternately, it might just as well involve severe forms of mental anguish. Otherwise, killing involves ... well killing... murder involves killing. But torture by itself it not killing. If someone is dead, it could be murder or it could be natural causes - but that's for legal people to determine.
Quote:
Originally posted by Ghoulman:
Jason... I'd love to know where you got that insane definition.
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Quote:
Originally posted by JCobb:Quote:
Originally posted by rue:
Browncoat1
One comforting thought is that people outside of the US know better.
*sigh*
Yeah, the US is the only place with idiots and the uniformed, the rest of the world are so much superior in every aspect! (Or at the very least better informed!)
Its AMAZING how dillusional some people are.
Oh, we have our fair share of idiots here in Canada as well. Every country has them. There are just a lot fewer of them. Plus they tend to be more passive.
But, when it comes to news... well... If Fox "news" was here, it'd be comedy. Scary stuff goes on there, and a lot of US citizens watch it claiming it's actually good news *shiver*
----
"Canada being mad at you is like Mr. Rogers throwing a brick through your window." -Jon Stewart, The Daily Show
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Quote:Jason ... that's utter crap. Torture has to do with setting. Trying to tell people torture is defined as you put it is completely insane. There isn't an organization on the planet (except for evil regimes... such as the Bush/Cheney White House) that would accept your definition.
Originally posted by Jasonzzz:
Seriously? Insane? I don't read dictionaries, but you could 2x check if you'd like.
http://dictionary.reference.com/search?q=torture
It is *the* operating definition of torture... No where is torture defined as killing. There *might* be maiming involved should the incorrect (or correct) devices be employed. There *might* be excruciating, searing, blinding pain. It might involve skin slowly being flayed off. Or eyelids pulled back and stapled to the forehead. It might even involve slivers of bamboo shoved under the fingernails or hooks inserted into the nipples and hung from there. Alternately, it might just as well involve severe forms of mental anguish. Otherwise, killing involves ... well killing... murder involves killing. But torture by itself it not killing. If someone is dead, it could be murder or it could be natural causes - but that's for legal people to determine.Quote:
Originally posted by Ghoulman:
Jason... I'd love to know where you got that insane definition.
Prisoners are tortured. Torturers need not want information. The method isn't the point. It's because prisoners cannot defend themselves that makes it torture.
Solitary confinement is torture, for example.
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Quote:
Originally posted by Ghoulman:Quote:Jason (and I'm hoping you're just a weirdo and don't know better)... that's utter crap. Torture has to do with setting. Trying to tell people torture is defined as you put it is completely insane. There isn't an organization on the planet (except for evil regimes... such as the Bush/Cheney White House) that would accept your definition.
Originally posted by Jasonzzz:
Seriously? Insane? I don't read dictionaries, but you could 2x check if you'd like.
http://dictionary.reference.com/search?q=torture
It is *the* operating definition of torture... No where is torture defined as killing. There *might* be maiming involved should the incorrect (or correct) devices be employed. There *might* be excruciating, searing, blinding pain. It might involve skin slowly being flayed off. Or eyelids pulled back and stapled to the forehead. It might even involve slivers of bamboo shoved under the fingernails or hooks inserted into the nipples and hung from there. Alternately, it might just as well involve severe forms of mental anguish. Otherwise, killing involves ... well killing... murder involves killing. But torture by itself it not killing. If someone is dead, it could be murder or it could be natural causes - but that's for legal people to determine.Quote:
Originally posted by Ghoulman:
Jason... I'd love to know where you got that insane definition.
Prisoners are tortured. Torturers need not want information. The method isn't the point. It's because prisoners cannot defend themselves that makes it torture.
Solitary confinement is torture, for example.
heh? who sez torture *has* to involve extracting information? It's one of the many things that it could be. Real what I sez two postings ago. Torture is a process, it's not a thing. Torture isn't an end thing. It has goals that you work towards. It's a work "in-progress". I've got a good definition of what "torture" is. I don't have to "try to tell people" what it is. As I've said before, that's pretty much what the operating definition of "torture" is. I don't know where you got your factless, baseless claim from; but if you could explain it a bit better.
If you mean that *all* prisoners are tortured, then *you* are completely out of your mind. There are standing rules in place about being imprisoned - that and everyone knows what goes on in prison. The prisoners morally obligated themselves to the sort of treatment that they deserve by commiting the crimes. What's more, I say the punishment in this country is not severe enough. Caught stealing? you should forfeit your hand. Caught raping? you should be neutered. I say we've gone too soft. All of these half-baked resorts we call prison needs a bit toughening up. Instead of slowly driving them insane, we should do some real punishment and let them out a bit earlier. How much time would it really take to lop off a hand as compared to 5-7 years? (don't answer that, with the kind of bureaucracy we have, it *would* prolly take 5-7 years just to schedule the removal as an "elective" surgery) .
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Quote:
Originally posted by JasonZZZ:Quote:
Originally posted by Ghoulman:
Prisoners are tortured. Torturers need not want information. The method isn't the point. It's because prisoners cannot defend themselves that makes it torture.
Solitary confinement is torture, for example.
heh? who sez torture *has* to involve extracting information?
No one. That's exactly what I said: "Prisoners are tortured. Torturers need not want information. The method isn't the point. It's because prisoners cannot defend themselves that makes it torture.
Quote:Good god man.
It's one of the many things that it could be. Real what I sez two postings ago. Torture is a process, it's not a thing. Torture isn't an end thing. It has goals that you work towards. It's a work "in-progress". I've got a good definition of what "torture" is. I don't have to "try to tell people" what it is. As I've said before, that's pretty much what the operating definition of "torture" is. I don't know where you got your factless, baseless claim from; but if you could explain it a bit better.
If you mean that *all* prisoners are tortured, then *you* are completely out of your mind. There are standing rules in place about being imprisoned - that and everyone knows what goes on in prison. The prisoners morally obligated themselves to the sort of treatment that they deserve by commiting the crimes. What's more, I say the punishment in this country is not severe enough. Caught stealing? you should forfeit your hand. Caught raping? you should be neutered. I say we've gone too soft. All of these half-baked resorts we call prison needs a bit toughening up. Instead of slowly driving them insane, we should do some real punishment and let them out a bit earlier. How much time would it really take to lop off a hand as compared to 5-7 years? (don't answer that, with the kind of bureaucracy we have, it *would* prolly take 5-7 years just to schedule the removal as an "elective" surgery) .
I'll just back away slowly.
NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME