|
United States22883 Posts
(A) Torture.— The act of a person who commits, or conspires or attempts to commit, an act specifically intended to inflict severe physical or mental pain or suffering (other than pain or suffering incidental to lawful sanctions) upon another person within his custody or physical control for the purpose of obtaining information or a confession, punishment, intimidation, coercion, or any reason based on discrimination of any kind.
"Severe mental pain or suffering" meaning "the threat that another person will imminently be subjected to death, severe physical pain or suffering, or the administration or application of mind-altering substances or other procedures calculated to disrupt profoundly the senses or personality."
I'm not sure how you can personally regard water boarding as non-torture, but legally I would say it is.
|
On May 14 2009 08:53 Archerofaiur wrote:Show nested quote +On May 14 2009 08:51 Aegraen wrote:
It's so ineffective, yet we haven't been attacked since 9/11. I have an Anti-Polar Bear Rock to sell you.
I have a Brooklyn Bridge to sell you. (Lets see if you get this reference)
|
On May 14 2009 08:55 Vharox wrote:Show nested quote +On May 14 2009 08:42 Archerofaiur wrote:
Heres a philosophical question.
Can something be wrong AND nessisary? No. But things can be wrong but necessary though.
?
|
On May 14 2009 08:57 Jibba wrote:Show nested quote +(A) Torture.— The act of a person who commits, or conspires or attempts to commit, an act specifically intended to inflict severe physical or mental pain or suffering (other than pain or suffering incidental to lawful sanctions) upon another person within his custody or physical control for the purpose of obtaining information or a confession, punishment, intimidation, coercion, or any reason based on discrimination of any kind. "Severe mental pain or suffering" meaning "the threat that another person will imminently be subjected to death, severe physical pain or suffering, or the administration or application of mind-altering substances or other procedures calculated to disrupt profoundly the senses or personality." I'm not sure how you can personally regard water boarding as non-torture, but legally I would say it is.
Soon we'll be saying Spanking is torture. We (The west), as become so pussified to what is, and is not 'physical and mental pain'. Torture used to have the connotation of 'severe' that being; Dragged by a horse, Iron Maiden, broken bones, malnurishment, et al. Now, it has become so ridiculous now that things are included such as; loud music, phobias, perceptions, etc. We have become a parody of past generations.
I can't wait to see what we classify as torture in another 100 years.
|
On May 14 2009 08:58 Archerofaiur wrote:Show nested quote +On May 14 2009 08:55 Vharox wrote:On May 14 2009 08:42 Archerofaiur wrote:
Heres a philosophical question.
Can something be wrong AND nessisary? No. But things can be wrong but necessary though. ?
Sorry. I was playing spell checker b/c I'm immature and a troll =[
|
is awesome32274 Posts
On May 14 2009 08:51 Aegraen wrote:Show nested quote +On May 14 2009 08:45 Jibba wrote:On May 14 2009 06:12 Zato-1 wrote:On May 14 2009 06:04 seppolevne wrote:
"No physical or mental torture, nor any other form of coercion" - Third Geneva Convention, Part 3, Section 1, Article 17-20.
No rights? I think that's what the Geneva convention is. This man speaks the truth. There's also the Universal Declaration of Human Rights: "Article 5. * No one shall be subjected to torture or to cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment." And who's army enforces UDHR? The problem with that and the Geneva Convention is that no one gives a damn. There's not a single country that can hold another country accountable for violating those agreements, because every single country violates them, with possible exception of Germany because they're still guilt tripping over WW2. The only reason France stopped used torture was because they found it to be ineffective, and this only occurred decades after the Geneva Convention was signed. So talking about this in real terms and not just theories, you can't bring up official codes because none of the codes are followed and none of them even make sense. Official US War Crime code (Title 18 sec. 2441) states that inflicting "serious bodily injury to one or more persons, including lawful combatants" is in violation of the law of war. What exactly is the purpose of war if not to inflict serious bodily injury? The entire thing makes no sense. I'm not saying it's admissible - I just wrote a theory paper on how war damages the "body" - but I think you need to look at it in realistic terms. You don't torture because it's immoral, ineffective and endangers your own combatants. You don't choose not to torture because of a ridiculous idealistic piece of paper that was agreed upon to earn politicians' favor in their respective elections. Unfortunately, we don't really know the extent of Rice's duties as NSC advisor but I'm sure she's responsible for many of the poor decisions that were made. Then again, she was an expert on the fucking East Germany and the Soviet Union, so she shouldn't have been an advisor to begin with. Looking back, it seems she was very much a legacy product of the earlier Bush. It's so ineffective, yet we haven't been attacked since 9/11.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Affirming_the_consequent
|
United States22883 Posts
On May 14 2009 08:51 Aegraen wrote:Show nested quote +On May 14 2009 08:45 Jibba wrote:On May 14 2009 06:12 Zato-1 wrote:On May 14 2009 06:04 seppolevne wrote:
"No physical or mental torture, nor any other form of coercion" - Third Geneva Convention, Part 3, Section 1, Article 17-20.
No rights? I think that's what the Geneva convention is. This man speaks the truth. There's also the Universal Declaration of Human Rights: "Article 5. * No one shall be subjected to torture or to cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment." And who's army enforces UDHR? The problem with that and the Geneva Convention is that no one gives a damn. There's not a single country that can hold another country accountable for violating those agreements, because every single country violates them, with possible exception of Germany because they're still guilt tripping over WW2. The only reason France stopped used torture was because they found it to be ineffective, and this only occurred decades after the Geneva Convention was signed. So talking about this in real terms and not just theories, you can't bring up official codes because none of the codes are followed and none of them even make sense. Official US War Crime code (Title 18 sec. 2441) states that inflicting "serious bodily injury to one or more persons, including lawful combatants" is in violation of the law of war. What exactly is the purpose of war if not to inflict serious bodily injury? The entire thing makes no sense. I'm not saying it's admissible - I just wrote a theory paper on how war damages the "body" - but I think you need to look at it in realistic terms. You don't torture because it's immoral, ineffective and endangers your own combatants. You don't choose not to torture because of a ridiculous idealistic piece of paper that was agreed upon to earn politicians' favor in their respective elections. Unfortunately, we don't really know the extent of Rice's duties as NSC advisor but I'm sure she's responsible for many of the poor decisions that were made. Then again, she was an expert on the fucking East Germany and the Soviet Union, so she shouldn't have been an advisor to begin with. Looking back, it seems she was very much a legacy product of the earlier Bush. It's so ineffective, yet we haven't been attacked since 9/11.
I'm sure it's been somewhat helpful, but it has also caused damage and there's no reason to believe it's produced information that wasn't attainable by other means. The reason it was still in practice is because the US was behind the curve in examining its effectiveness. The Israelis (who are tops in the world at information gathering) found it was disruptive and stopped using it and the French (also one of the best counter-terrorist services) came to the same conclusion. The first major US study was just completed and found basically the same thing.
"The potential mechanisms and effects of using coercive techniques or torture for gaining accurate, useful information from an uncooperative source are much more complex than is commonly assumed. There is little or no research to indicate whether such techniques succeed in the matter and contexts in which they are applied. Anecdotal accounts and opinions based on personal experiences are mixed, but the preponderance of reports seems to weigh against their effectiveness."
|
United States22883 Posts
On May 14 2009 09:01 Aegraen wrote:Show nested quote +On May 14 2009 08:57 Jibba wrote:(A) Torture.— The act of a person who commits, or conspires or attempts to commit, an act specifically intended to inflict severe physical or mental pain or suffering (other than pain or suffering incidental to lawful sanctions) upon another person within his custody or physical control for the purpose of obtaining information or a confession, punishment, intimidation, coercion, or any reason based on discrimination of any kind. "Severe mental pain or suffering" meaning "the threat that another person will imminently be subjected to death, severe physical pain or suffering, or the administration or application of mind-altering substances or other procedures calculated to disrupt profoundly the senses or personality." I'm not sure how you can personally regard water boarding as non-torture, but legally I would say it is. Soon we'll be saying Spanking is torture. We (The west), as become so pussified to what is, and is not 'physical and mental pain'. Torture used to have the connotation of 'severe' that being; Dragged by a horse, Iron Maiden, broken bones, malnurishment, et al. Now, it has become so ridiculous now that things are included such as; loud music, phobias, perceptions, etc. We have become a parody of past generations. I can't wait to see what we classify as torture in another 100 years.
You sound a lot like Roland Weary.
|
On May 14 2009 08:57 Aegraen wrote:
I have a Brooklyn Bridge to sell you. (Lets see if you get this reference)
Lol ill bite. Whats the reference?
|
On May 14 2009 09:07 Jibba wrote:Show nested quote +On May 14 2009 09:01 Aegraen wrote:On May 14 2009 08:57 Jibba wrote:(A) Torture.— The act of a person who commits, or conspires or attempts to commit, an act specifically intended to inflict severe physical or mental pain or suffering (other than pain or suffering incidental to lawful sanctions) upon another person within his custody or physical control for the purpose of obtaining information or a confession, punishment, intimidation, coercion, or any reason based on discrimination of any kind. "Severe mental pain or suffering" meaning "the threat that another person will imminently be subjected to death, severe physical pain or suffering, or the administration or application of mind-altering substances or other procedures calculated to disrupt profoundly the senses or personality." I'm not sure how you can personally regard water boarding as non-torture, but legally I would say it is. Soon we'll be saying Spanking is torture. We (The west), as become so pussified to what is, and is not 'physical and mental pain'. Torture used to have the connotation of 'severe' that being; Dragged by a horse, Iron Maiden, broken bones, malnurishment, et al. Now, it has become so ridiculous now that things are included such as; loud music, phobias, perceptions, etc. We have become a parody of past generations. I can't wait to see what we classify as torture in another 100 years. You sound a lot like Roland Weary.
Abstract names that have no meaning to me, or most paints a very accurate picture. When I was a kid, I got spanked, disciplined, etc. Nothing 'abusive', but it got the message across. Most from my generation didn't, but those previous to me did. You can see the huge difference between generations. For the record I'm 22. Now, you are chastised for disciplining your kids, by the moral police, or the PC police. We have become so enamored in people's feelings, we fail to realize we're setting up whole generations to fail because they are adult babies for all intents and purposes.
Now, we can't fail. No, no. Failure is a good thing. It teaches you, motivates you, and guides you to success. Without failure you will have no success.
Anyways, the babied generation will grow up and do the same, etc. Until we wake up one day and we'll look back and see how weak we have become. You cannot change human nature.
PS: I'm a non-interventionist. We should get the hell out of most countries business and let them do what they want as long as it doesn't harm US citizens. No more aid money, no more NAFTA, no more NATO, no more policing the world. We will trade with everyone, but we're not going to be your babysitter.
|
On May 14 2009 09:11 Archerofaiur wrote:Show nested quote +On May 14 2009 08:57 Aegraen wrote:
I have a Brooklyn Bridge to sell you. (Lets see if you get this reference) Lol ill bite. Whats the reference?
We used waterboarding to obtain information that uncovered a plot that was in the process (soon to be executed) to blow up the Brooklyn Bridge.
While I am in agreement that nothing is 100%, there are techniques that are essential and should never be ruled out in times of war. Even if the information we get is 'inaccurate' or false, its called 'trust, but verify' in the words of Ronald Reagan.
While the first pieces of information you get may be 'inaccurate' there are breaking points, and eventually he will start to give you accurate information if you promise 'rewards'. Human nature.
Of course this won't work on strong nationalistic persons, but then again they are the minority.
|
theres no right answer here
|
On May 14 2009 09:01 Aegraen wrote:Show nested quote +On May 14 2009 08:57 Jibba wrote:(A) Torture.— The act of a person who commits, or conspires or attempts to commit, an act specifically intended to inflict severe physical or mental pain or suffering (other than pain or suffering incidental to lawful sanctions) upon another person within his custody or physical control for the purpose of obtaining information or a confession, punishment, intimidation, coercion, or any reason based on discrimination of any kind. "Severe mental pain or suffering" meaning "the threat that another person will imminently be subjected to death, severe physical pain or suffering, or the administration or application of mind-altering substances or other procedures calculated to disrupt profoundly the senses or personality." I'm not sure how you can personally regard water boarding as non-torture, but legally I would say it is. Soon we'll be saying Spanking is torture. We (The west), as become so pussified to what is, and is not 'physical and mental pain'. Torture used to have the connotation of 'severe' that being; Dragged by a horse, Iron Maiden, broken bones, malnurishment, et al. Now, it has become so ridiculous now that things are included such as; loud music, phobias, perceptions, etc. We have become a parody of past generations. I can't wait to see what we classify as torture in another 100 years.
So torture these days should not be classified as torture because it's relatively mild compared to the old days?
Maybe it's just me but what you're describing seems like a desirable course of history and a great advance in human rights when people keep having to come up with new and more creative ways of torture to stay one step ahead of human rights. Maybe if we keep this up in a 100 years we will be rid of torturing people? Oh lord do I dread the day when we have become such pussies!
Seriously, a parody? What a disgusting choice of words.
|
On May 14 2009 09:21 Aegraen wrote:
We used waterboarding to obtain information that uncovered a plot that was in the process (soon to be executed) to blow up the Brooklyn Bridge.
See there you go again addressing the "was it nessisary?" question.
I dont care if it was nessisary. I care if it was wrong.
|
On May 14 2009 09:21 Aegraen wrote:Show nested quote +On May 14 2009 09:11 Archerofaiur wrote:On May 14 2009 08:57 Aegraen wrote:
I have a Brooklyn Bridge to sell you. (Lets see if you get this reference) Lol ill bite. Whats the reference? We used waterboarding to obtain information that uncovered a plot that was in the process (soon to be executed) to blow up the Brooklyn Bridge. While I am in agreement that nothing is 100%, there are techniques that are essential and should never be ruled out in times of war. Even if the information we get is 'inaccurate' or false, its called 'trust, but verify' in the words of Ronald Reagan. While the first pieces of information you get may be 'inaccurate' there are breaking points, and eventually he will start to give you accurate information if you promise 'rewards'. Human nature. Of course this won't work on strong nationalistic persons, but then again they are the minority.
And how do you know what's accurate information? Do you go on torturing until you get lots of different, controversial bits of information and then test them all out? I don't understand how anyone can be as cruel as you are.
|
On May 14 2009 09:28 Xenixx wrote:
theres no right answer here
Yes, there is. Torture is ALWAYS wrong. No matter what.
|
On May 14 2009 09:21 Aegraen wrote:Show nested quote +On May 14 2009 09:11 Archerofaiur wrote:On May 14 2009 08:57 Aegraen wrote:
I have a Brooklyn Bridge to sell you. (Lets see if you get this reference) Lol ill bite. Whats the reference? We used waterboarding to obtain information that uncovered a plot that was in the process (soon to be executed) to blow up the Brooklyn Bridge. While I am in agreement that nothing is 100%, there are techniques that are essential and should never be ruled out in times of war. Even if the information we get is 'inaccurate' or false, its called 'trust, but verify' in the words of Ronald Reagan. While the first pieces of information you get may be 'inaccurate' there are breaking points, and eventually he will start to give you accurate information if you promise 'rewards'. Human nature. Of course this won't work on strong nationalistic persons, but then again they are the minority.
Ronald Reagan surely did some nice babysitting when put down his cowboy boot and defended the American people from the imminent threat of the Nicaraguan army.
|
On May 14 2009 09:31 TS-Rupbar wrote:Yes, there is. Torture is ALWAYS wrong. No matter what.
yeah its wrong
but thats not the right answer kiddo
if you take the moral high ground and thats all you have then youre a damn blind fool and if you dont pay for it someone else will
outlawing torture isnt solving the problem with human nature
|
All the socialists and free-spirits are out in force in this thread.
Rupbar, it's pretty easy to verify information you receive. US Intelligence (The apparatus) is not small, and information can be passed from collector to consumer very quickly and acted upon. The turn around time to verification is very short. After a couple of times of giving inaccurate information, they'll break eventually.
I don't consider torture what you do, doesn't mean I'm 'cruel'. I'm not breaking any bones, making people go deaf, throwing them in Iron Maidens, cutting them, etc. If you don't see how pussied you guys have gotten, compared to the east well, you will wake up one day when Russia is once again knocking at your door and you'll want to play buddy and buddy and appease like Europe always does.
You guys have to get past this faerie non-sense.
|
On May 14 2009 09:28 Xenixx wrote:
theres no right answer here
This is an objective, not a subjective discussion. There is no middle ground or anything of the likes when it comes to torture. You're either for or against it.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
