Bush's International House of Pain

[The Big Al]

http://www.freep.com/news/nw/torture6e_20051006.htm

90-9. Do you know the last time 90 Senators voted together on anything?

Yesterday, after stories of secret torture facilities in other countries, Bush claimed they did exist. However, if Bush claims there is no torture, why would he threaten to veto a bill with language that would ban the use of torture by the U.S. military on any prisoner?

 

[Mozz]

What exactly do they define as "torture"? I have yet to see anything from Abu Ghraib that I would define as torture.

 

[The Big Al]

O-kay?

I know, it's called hazing because it's what I'd expect from a college frat house than the U.S. military.

 

[Mozz]

Former Secretary of State Colin Powell, a retired Army general, joined 28 other retired senior military officers in endorsing the amendment, which would ban "cruel, inhuman or degrading" treatment of any prisoner in U.S. hands.

"Degrading" is the one that doesn't belong. Is wiping a McDonald's hamburger on a Muslim suspect torture? Is having a woman dance for them while they're forced to watch torture? Is stacking them up naked while women watch torture? No.

I understand that having a bill like this pass is important for how we are viewed in the world, and I hope that the government would simply ignore the law or find a workaround. But these people we're bringing in are captured on the battlefield and are still treated better than pretty much any POW in history. We should be able to fuck with them without actual "torture", but that language just screws it all up.

 

[The Big Al]

Former Secretary of State Colin Powell, a retired Army general, joined 28 other retired senior military officers in endorsing the amendment, which would ban "cruel, inhuman or degrading" treatment of any prisoner in U.S. hands.

Which is a step in the right direction.

"Degrading" is the one that doesn't belong. Is wiping a McDonald's hamburger on a Muslim suspect torture? Is having a woman dance for them while they're forced to watch torture? Is stacking them up naked while women watch torture? No.

Uh...yes...it is. It's called insulting their religious beliefs. Though considering what little respect you have for religion in general I guess you don't understand this. It's mental torture which is the worst kind. It doesn't leave any physical scars but has a negative impact on the psyche.

I understand that having a bill like this pass is important for how we are viewed in the world, and I hope that the government would simply ignore the law or find a workaround. But these people we're bringing in are captured on the battlefield and are still treated better than pretty much any POW in history. We should be able to fuck with them without actual "torture", but that language just screws it all up.

Any POW captured by America? Last time I checked, it was dictatorships that spat on the Geniva Convention and treated their POW's poorly. Should we sink to their level?

Why should we even be "fuck"ing with them? Do you seriously believe these people have any information we could use? Let alone enough to justify this inhumane treatment. No. They'll just tell us what we want to hear. It doesn't take a genious to tell you that.

 

[Mozz]

A man is captured setting up an IED on the side of a busy street ouside of a police station at 2am. He's eventually brought to Gitmo.

What kind of treatment or punishment should he receive?

 

[Zeta]

What kind of treatment or punishment should he receive?

Whatever a court sentances him to. It shouldn't be decided by bored and resentful prison guards.

 

[The Big Al]

Why don't we just throw him in a cell like other criminals? I'm not saying they should be set free or treated with kid gloves. But we shouldn't be dehumanizing these people. Besides, what do you think you're going to get out of a shmuck setting up a roadside bomb?

 

[GrnMarvl14]

Besides, what do you think you're going to get out of a shmuck setting up a roadside bomb?

Actually, you'd be surprised. Unless he's acting COMPLETELY on his own, then someone might have sent him. If you find who sent him, you might find someone higher up. If you find someone higher up...well...I think you get where I'm going with this.

I don't think torture is right, and I don't like the humiliation they're receiving (seriously, I have SO MANY better ideas than these guys do), but it HAS led to a few intelligence breakthroughs.

But these people we're bringing in are captured on the battlefield and are still treated better than pretty much any POW in history.

True, but shouldn't we maintain a moral superiority? So that when these people say "oh, they did this and this", we can turn around and say "no...we didn't, actually here's what we did". Terrorists don't join up because they're jealous, they join up because of propaganda, and when they have actual video to use in their recruiting...it doesn't help.

EDIT:

Found this little tidbit on Harper's:

It was reported that the CIA had set up a secret system of prisons, called “black sites,” around the world. Originally intended solely for Al Qaeda leaders, the prisons now detain a number of people whose link to terrorism is less certain. “It's just a horrible burden,” said an intelligence official.[The Washington Post] Vice President Dick Cheney was pressuring Republican senators to grant the CIA an exemption from a proposed ban on torturing terrorism suspects.

 

[A Concerned Solomon]

I really hope that's all word games, because why the hell should the CIA get that kind of power? It destroys the entire purpose if a government agency can do this kind of thing.