It’s true. We’ve lost the moral high ground

[Gunthr]

Ever heard about the nazis? - DeSelys

Of course, but you need to go a bit further if you want me to understand your point.

[Edbert]

I'm in favor of playing by the rules, as long as our opponents do too. Peel them like grapes I say.

[Neubob]

Originally posted by AKH
Hopefully you are in the minority of a minority...

Well, if I am, then in time, they will reach their desired end. Their willingness to stay the course they have chosen will erode whatever manpower we have left. Our continued half measures will embolden them further, and when they do achieve nuclear capability, we will bear the brunt of their resolve in short order. When they act, they do not ask questions of morality, civilian casualties, or public image. We do. Our quest to be the good guy, even while executing a full-on invasion, has left us declawed and downright laughable when compared to a man who sees nothing wrong with using his full capabilities in a time and place where they will do the most harm.

We CANNOT inject civility into war. The two concepts are mutually exclusive. War is not civilized, was never designed to be, and even with space-age technology, never will be. Our choice should be simple, either engage in war or do not. We have been, and apparently, will continue to try to execute politically-correct 'intervention'. The enemy knows this. The enemy knows that those nation-killing missiles of ours are nothing but fossils. So what's to stop this enemy from continuing to wittle away? Not talks and negotiation--those do nothing but create momentary peace while that same enemy stocks up and prepares. He has a goal, he has a method, and he uses them with minimum forethought. As of now, all we have is forethought, tempered with a good dose of regret.

This situation has progressed well past the point of live and let live. If we must choose who will survive, and on some days it seems that we must, we should choose in favor of ourselves. As of now, I think the average westerner is so saturated with sympathy for the poor downtrodden muslim that he'd rather be overrun than bare a sword in anger to preserve himself.

[Yeager]

We held fast to what we believed and what America stood for no matter what the japanese did.
====
We interned more than 120,000 Americans of Japanese decent.  We denied them their freedoms under order of a Great President who did what he thought was necessary in time or war.  We dropped two atomic bombs against cities full of japanese civilians forcing the Japanese to finally surrender before more cities were destroyed.    That is what we did.  That is what we stood for.

[Edbert]

Originally posted by Yeager
We held fast to what we believed and what America stood for no matter what the japanese did.
====
We interned more than 120,000 Americans of Japanese decent.  We denied them their freedoms under order of a Great President who did what he thought was necessary in time or war.  We dropped two atomic bombs against cities full of japanese civilians forcing the Japanese to finally surrender before more cities were destroyed.    That is what we did.  That is what we stood for.

Are you referring to the US citizens that were interrred due to their race? If so I would not support interring every US citizen of the Muslim religion. I'd be okay with requiring loyalty oaths with their hand on the Koran though.

If you are talking about treating Jap POWs according to the Geneva convention than I don't have a problem with that. Those captured were serving in uniform, and were rightly accorded the protection as such. Partisans and spies (combatants in civilian clothing) were not afforded such protections in most cases by most countries.

Back in those days we held nothing back in our attempts to destroy the enemy. If we approached this current war with the same will-to-win then it would already be winding down by now, although much of the landscape over there would be charred and smoking.

[Eagler]

if they want to truly "torture" them, make them watch network television on weeknights btwn 7 to 11 pm

maybe they'd have pity on us after that and leave us alone LOL

ppv jerry springer would probably throw them over the edge as well. an eposide or two of jackarse may convince them that we are crazier than them and send them running  

[Neubob]

Originally posted by Edbert
Back in those days we held nothing back in our attempts to destroy the enemy. If we approached this current war with the same will-to-win then it would already be winding down by now, although much of the landscape over there would be charred and smoking.

Perfectly stated. We should be as concerned about their landscape as they are about ours.

[deSelys]

For the nazis, the extermination of the Jews (and the weak) was 'culturally embraced as a desireable or moral thing to do'.

IMO, fundamentalist moslems are as bad as nazis but not worse (is it be possible to be worse than nazis, that is another debate...). Finally, the national-socialist ideology can honestly be viewed as a religion.

AFAIK, your country wasn't feeling the need to use torture during WWII. Why now?

[rpm]

Originally posted by eagl
Honestly, it sounds like torture to me.  Yea taken one incident all by itself, it's no big deal, but over time there is no term that describes it other than torture.

Everything on that list was given to me as a examples of what the "other guys" (ie. enemy) did to Vietnam POWs, and that I could expect at least that level of treatment if captured.

Hearing that we do it makes me f**king sick, and I just know that it'll come back to us in the form of increased torture used against US servicemen/women when they're captured.  We were taught in basic training that the ends do not justify those means, yet now our government is going directly against training given to all US military members, doing things that we've been told all along are illegal and horrible.

So who's fault is it when military members figure that all the other crap they heard was "illegal" doesn't matter either?  Maybe rape and murder is ok, since torture is ok now, right?

Makes me want to puke.

Great post eagl. This kinda stuff is what happens when you put people with little or no military experience in charge of the military.

[john9001]

i'm against taking prisoners, no prisoners-no one to torture, see everybody happy.

[Elfie]

In a war, there is no moral high ground. Kill or be killed it's that simple.

I'm in agreement with Neubob on this one. If you are going to go to war, then by golly go to war and no beating around the bush.

I have always considered things like: ripping out fingernails, inserting large splinters beneath the fingernails, physical beatings, breaking of bones, the rack, thumbscrews etc etc to be torture.

From Wikipedia:

   1. 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.

That definition definately paints a fairly wide swath in regards to what could be construed as torture.

I forget the actual name of it, the drug commonly known as Truth Serum, why dont we use that instead? Is it not reliable?

We definately need a way to get these people to talk. Just asking nicely isnt very likely to get a response.

*edit* Also from Wikipedia:

Section 1: torture is defined as severe pain or suffering, which means there exist levels of pain and suffering which are not severe enough to be called torture. Discussions on this area of international law are influenced by a ruling of the European Court of Human Rights(ECHR). See the section Other conventions for more details on the ECHR ruling.

Interesting.....

[Gunthr]

For the nazis, the extermination of the Jews (and the weak) was 'culturally embraced as a desireable or moral thing to do'.

IMO, fundamentalist moslems are as bad as nazis but not worse (is it be possible to be worse than nazis, that is another debate...). Finally, the national-socialist ideology can honestly be viewed as a religion.

AFAIK, your country wasn't feeling the need to use torture during WWII. Why now?  - deSelys

I was under the impression that the plan to exterminate Jews was a secret withheld from the German people.  I doubt the German culture would have embraced genocide.  It can be argued that the Nazi's were not part of the larger German culture, and only a relatively few individuals knew of what was really going on.  The average guy in the Heer, the Kriegsmarine or the Luftwaffe did not know about the nazi genocide, as far as I know.

I'm not so sure that the USA embraces torture.  I was giving my own personal views on the topic of denying comfort during cycles of interrogation for Muslim extremists.  

As far as I know, Americans generally didn't use torture in WWII because our enemies generally did not either, certainly not the Geneva Convention signatories ( I emphasize "generally" -  because of course it did occur, but I don't think it was broadly embraced or endorsed by the dominant culture of any country I am aware of)

I agree Muslim extremists and Nazis are roughly equivelent on a moral scale.

[Gunslinger]

Personally I don't think any of the above mentioned items (what I posted) is considered "torture"  I don't think any of that is going to get our GIs any worse treatment at the hands of the enemy.  There's no such thing as a POW to the hajis.

There is great benefit to being able to break down our prisoners and extract information from them.  If this is all the CIA is asking for it's no longer a moral or ethical issue with me.  We view the Geneva conventions as some holey document written in stone when the fact is we havn't faced too many enemys in the past 50 or so years that have actually followed it.  So why do we tie our hands behind our backs when dealing with prisoners.

A pink belly is torture?  Sleep deprevation is torture?  If that's as extreme as it gets and it's effective at extracting intel then by all means let leash the dogs of war.  It won't change the minds of our enemys except for the fact that they will balk at this....scream deth to emerika on Al Jazera....and threaten to behead every american servicmen they capture (wich they've allways done) as if this is something new.  The religion of perpetual outrage will be predictable and be....well.....outraged by all of this when in actuality it is nothing new.

EDIT:  this is all done in vein however,  by the time the debate is over our enemy will know exactly what we can and cannot do because they read and watch our news and will prepare for it.  Its the fear of the unkown that a public debate over this eliminates.

[Gunslinger]

I guess the orriginal article missed a few "methods"


But check it out, the Bush regime doesn't want to tell you about the other torture techniques he's devised...

The Faux Shirt Stain: Interrogator points at suspect's chest: "Look, you've got something on your shirt." When suspect looks down, interrogator brings up index finger, tweaking suspect's nose. Interrogator laughs. This grievous affront, a loss of honor in the eyes of Allah, administers massive psychic trauma to suspect. Repeat as needed.

The Urkel: Suspect is locked in room lined with 72-inch plasma screens showing non-stop Family Matters episodes featuring '90s "urban nerd" Steve Urkel. Longest recorded breaking time: 2.3 hours.


The Echo: Interrogator repeats all of suspect's statements in snotty voice...

-Suspect: All unbelievers will fall before the sword of Allah!
-Interrogator: [Flouncing about room in effeminate fashion] All unbelievers will fall! Before the sword! Of Allah! Who is my boyfriend! Pppbbbbbbhhht!!
Interrogator's failure to be struck down instantly places suspect under extreme psychological stress. In case of emergency, interrogator may deploy Nyah-Nyah-Nyah Protocol.


The Complete and Utter Mindf**k: Suspect is addressed directly by unchaperoned female exposing more than 3% of her epidermis.


The Chomsky: Suspect is strapped to chair in room with award-craving theoretical linguist Noam Chomsky. Earplugs are placed on table just out of suspect's reach. (This protocol is considered a Last Resort.)

All you want to do is blow up some infidels for Allah, but these pigs won't let you sit down or take a nap or put on a sweater. If the blasphemers are feeling particularly American, they might even wrinkle your outfit. Or give you a pinkbelly! AAAAIIIEEEEEEEE!!!

[Edbert]

Among the methods listed on TV just now...labeled as torture:

1.) leaving the lights on
2.) standing for prolonged periods
3.) sharing a toilet with other prisoners
4.) grabbing their shirt suddenly in a way that startles them

sigh...