This thread should be re-titled "it's not okay to torture anyone".
So, let me get this straight
Half the time, us Americans are backwards, lazy, illiterate, misanthropic, neanderthal, gun-obsessed, imperialistic savages bent on dominating and killing the noble, peaceful, morally upstanding citizens of the world. Then plundering their resources for our amusement and greed.
The other half of the time, we are told we aren't living up to the lofty ideals and noble intent of our constitution, our laws, or our American Ideals. That we should remember to live up to those same lofty, noble ideals regardless of what depths of depravity our enemies are excused for employing.
So. Which is it? Are we nasty brutal savages worthy of nothing better than beheading at the hands of our betters - or - are we a nation looked up to for our founding principles of equality, fairness, democracy, and willingness to bleed with/for our allies?
Just a little confused as to how the 'Bad Guys' get a pass for horribly vicious acts - but America is damned to hell and oblivion for anything less than the full "5 star hotel and spa treatment" for our enemies.
(Y'know.. beheading journalists, hiding behind civilian populations, chemical warfare genocide of Kurds, execution of dissident writers, invading and annexing Kuwait, lobbing unguided rockets into civilian population areas on purpose, threatening to nuke and/or invade South Korea, threatening to "push Israel into the sea" or "wipe Israel off the map", and little things like ramming civilian airliners into civilian business buildings)
Are you all hypocrites, or is there a reason there's two sets of rules for acceptable conduct?
And, Is America your friend or your enemy? Is the world a better place with our "noble experiment in Liberty & Democracy", or would you rather see us wiped off the face of the Earth, and forgotten as a bad dream?
Half the time, us Americans are backwards, lazy, illiterate, misanthropic, neanderthal, gun-obsessed, imperialistic savages bent on dominating and killing the noble, peaceful, morally upstanding citizens of the world. Then plundering their resources for our amusement and greed.
The other half of the time, we are told we aren't living up to the lofty ideals and noble intent of our constitution, our laws, or our American Ideals. That we should remember to live up to those same lofty, noble ideals regardless of what depths of depravity our enemies are excused for employing.
So. Which is it? Are we nasty brutal savages worthy of nothing better than beheading at the hands of our betters - or - are we a nation looked up to for our founding principles of equality, fairness, democracy, and willingness to bleed with/for our allies?
Just a little confused as to how the 'Bad Guys' get a pass for horribly vicious acts - but America is damned to hell and oblivion for anything less than the full "5 star hotel and spa treatment" for our enemies.
(Y'know.. beheading journalists, hiding behind civilian populations, chemical warfare genocide of Kurds, execution of dissident writers, invading and annexing Kuwait, lobbing unguided rockets into civilian population areas on purpose, threatening to nuke and/or invade South Korea, threatening to "push Israel into the sea" or "wipe Israel off the map", and little things like ramming civilian airliners into civilian business buildings)
Are you all hypocrites, or is there a reason there's two sets of rules for acceptable conduct?
And, Is America your friend or your enemy? Is the world a better place with our "noble experiment in Liberty & Democracy", or would you rather see us wiped off the face of the Earth, and forgotten as a bad dream?
ya thats it.m3thod wrote:
I believe marine belief is if you're a darkie, wearing Nike trainers kitted out with one of those headscarf's the pals wear and anywhere near the vicinity of Iraq then you're should be detained and promptly sent to be waterboarded in the nearest secret CIA prison.mikkel wrote:
Why the hell does it matter what he was detained for?usmarine wrote:
he wasnt detained for helping puppies cross the street
so...what were you saying about debate again?
ok. sorry sir.Scorpion0x17 wrote:
@'marine: It's "Innocent until proven guilty", not "Innocent until forced to say 'I did it'".
Born in Saudi Arabia, al-Nashiri travelled to Afghanistan to participate in attacks against the Russians in the region. In 1996 he travelled to Tajikistan and then Jalalabad, where he first met Osama bin Laden.[9] Bin Laden attempted to convince al-Nashiri to join al-Qaeda at this point, but he refused because he found the idea of swearing a loyalty oath to bin Laden to be distasteful. Still, after al-Nashiri travelled to Yemen, he began to consider committing terrorist actions against United States interests.[9]
When he returned to Afghanistan in 1997, he again met bin Laden, but again declined to join in the terrorist group. Instead, he fought with the Taliban against the Afghan Northern Alliance. Still, he assisted in the smuggling of four anti-tank missiles into Saudi Arabia, and helped arrange for a terrorist to get a Yemeni passport. His cousin, Jihad Mohammad Ali al-Makki, was one of the suicide bombers in the 1998 U.S. embassy bombings in Kenya.[9]
-----------
by god this man should be put up for saint status. wtf is wrong with us.
Well if it's proven that he did those things then by all means, send him to prison forever.usmarine wrote:
ok. sorry sir.Scorpion0x17 wrote:
@'marine: It's "Innocent until proven guilty", not "Innocent until forced to say 'I did it'".
Born in Saudi Arabia, al-Nashiri travelled to Afghanistan to participate in attacks against the Russians in the region. In 1996 he travelled to Tajikistan and then Jalalabad, where he first met Osama bin Laden.[9] Bin Laden attempted to convince al-Nashiri to join al-Qaeda at this point, but he refused because he found the idea of swearing a loyalty oath to bin Laden to be distasteful. Still, after al-Nashiri travelled to Yemen, he began to consider committing terrorist actions against United States interests.[9]
When he returned to Afghanistan in 1997, he again met bin Laden, but again declined to join in the terrorist group. Instead, he fought with the Taliban against the Afghan Northern Alliance. Still, he assisted in the smuggling of four anti-tank missiles into Saudi Arabia, and helped arrange for a terrorist to get a Yemeni passport. His cousin, Jihad Mohammad Ali al-Makki, was one of the suicide bombers in the 1998 U.S. embassy bombings in Kenya.[9]
-----------
by god this man should be put up for saint status. wtf is wrong with us.
But, in the fairytale world of G. Bay, appearently american rules dont apply because you arent entitled to a speedy trial, clearly, and your allowed to be tortured by means that would not be allowed in the US.
So either G. Bay is US soil and follows ALL US law, or its fucking not. Period!!!!
In this mystery, fairytale land of G.bay, do other laws not exist also? Can you smoke crack and kill hookers there too? Please tell me how you decide what laws stay and what laws go.
If your the United States army capturing terrorists and punishing them under U.S decided law, then they should be put through a U.S style trial.
Do i think G.Bay should be shut down? No. I think its a good idea to keep terrorists off the Contig US.
Should military judges follow the same regulations as regular judges? Abso-fucking-lutely
15 more years! 15 more years!
you dont apply laws afforded to US citizens to enemy combatants. i dont see how that is even considered.
this isnt court tv.....its the battlefield.
this isnt court tv.....its the battlefield.
He isn't in the battlefield, he is in prison.usmarine wrote:
you dont apply laws afforded to US citizens to enemy combatants. i dont see how that is even considered.
this isnt court tv.....its the battlefield.
Wake up.
he was picked up for attacking the Cole........ and a list of other things he has done is readily available.TheAussieReaper wrote:
He isn't in the battlefield, he is in prison.usmarine wrote:
you dont apply laws afforded to US citizens to enemy combatants. i dont see how that is even considered.
this isnt court tv.....its the battlefield.
Wake up.
wake up
you fucking people make every excuse for this guy, yet dont afford the same judgement when it comes to the US or israel. get off your pulpits. nobody with a brain is buying your shit.
So, torture is the best way to get evidence?usmarine wrote:
he was picked up for attacking the Cole........ and a list of other things he has done is readily available.TheAussieReaper wrote:
He isn't in the battlefield, he is in prison.usmarine wrote:
you dont apply laws afforded to US citizens to enemy combatants. i dont see how that is even considered.
this isnt court tv.....its the battlefield.
Wake up.
wake up
you havent read the whole thing have you?TheAussieReaper wrote:
So, torture is the best way to get evidence?
You seem to have missed the best part.usmarine wrote:
you havent read the whole thing have you?TheAussieReaper wrote:
So, torture is the best way to get evidence?
"However, new charges can be brought again later, and al-Nashiri will remain in prison for the time being."
He hasn't been given a pass, you somehow think this guy is going to be handed a cash settlement and sent on his merry way.
Sorry man that just doesnt cut it.usmarine wrote:
you fucking people make every excuse for this guy, yet dont afford the same judgement when it comes to the US or israel. get off your pulpits. nobody with a brain is buying your shit.
Look, im a freedom loving, kill the son-of-a-bitch terrorist too, and i have a very good friend in the marines, mad respect to the Military, but my previous thoughts still stand.
Tbh, why even bring him in, why not just kill him out on the battlefield?
But if he's in military custody then he's in U.S. custody, and according to the constitution i do believe the fifth amd. is the right to a speedy trial?
If that only applies to citizens, then why does the spic dirty mexican crossing our border get a fair and speedy trial?
15 more years! 15 more years!
i am not talking about the crappington post.
i never said he was given a pass. where did i say that?
i never said he was given a pass. where did i say that?
TheAussieReaper wrote:
You seem to have missed the best part.usmarine wrote:
you havent read the whole thing have you?TheAussieReaper wrote:
So, torture is the best way to get evidence?
"However, new charges can be brought again later, and al-Nashiri will remain in prison for the time being."
He hasn't been given a pass, you somehow think this guy is going to be handed a cash settlement and sent on his merry way.
I said that in the 7th fucking post of the thread and you all continue to go at each other because of semantics.
orly?usmarine wrote:
i am not talking about the crappington post.
i never said he was given a pass. where did i say that?
Well where did any of us say or even consider such a stupid remark as:
usmarine wrote:
by god this man should be put up for saint status. wtf is wrong with us.
lol why is this still open? this guy is not gettting released back home. still in prison, just not gitmo. get over it. no one should ever be tortured, but hey, he mustve dne SOMETHING to get the CIA's attention. gg, game over
Hey Marine I has the greatest idea. Close all trials to Gitmo, put 2 in the head so the hippies will stop yelling zomgs torture. Hey, at least it's painless. No more capturing terrorists, since we all know it's wrong and illegal, but just get rid of them on the spot.
go grasp at some more strawsTheAussieReaper wrote:
orly?usmarine wrote:
i am not talking about the crappington post.
i never said he was given a pass. where did i say that?
Well where did any of us say or even consider such a stupid remark as:usmarine wrote:
by god this man should be put up for saint status. wtf is wrong with us.
well...... i differ on what torture is. i dont think something that was used in training of select US troops is torture since it wont kill you or harm you. but, water boarding became a hot button sheep topic. so everyone flocks to it.Cybargs wrote:
Hey Marine I has the greatest idea. Close all trials to Gitmo, put 2 in the head so the hippies will stop yelling zomgs torture. Hey, at least it's painless. No more capturing terrorists, since we all know it's wrong and illegal, but just get rid of them on the spot.
I'm sure some select US troops are also subjected to sleep deprivation, should criminals (suspected or otherwise) be submitted to that also? lolusmarine wrote:
well...... i differ on what torture is. i dont think something that was used in training of select US troops is torture since it wont kill you or harm you. but, water boarding became a hot button sheep topic. so everyone flocks to it.
once again you cannot wrap your head around a robber or coke head in jail compared to a terrorist.TheAussieReaper wrote:
I'm sure some select US troops are also subjected to sleep deprivation, should criminals (suspected or otherwise) be submitted to that also? lolusmarine wrote:
well...... i differ on what torture is. i dont think something that was used in training of select US troops is torture since it wont kill you or harm you. but, water boarding became a hot button sheep topic. so everyone flocks to it.
i dont know any father that would not do anything to get their kid back for example. would you allow water boarding if it meant saving your kids life? or your mom's?
you can answer honestly or answer how we know you will answer.
Last edited by usmarine (2009-02-06 21:34:37)
To prevent something like that, I would certainly consider it. May even carry it out.usmarine wrote:
once again you cannot wrap your head around a robber or coke head in jail compared to a terrorist.TheAussieReaper wrote:
I'm sure some select US troops are also subjected to sleep deprivation, should criminals (suspected or otherwise) be submitted to that also? lolusmarine wrote:
well...... i differ on what torture is. i dont think something that was used in training of select US troops is torture since it wont kill you or harm you. but, water boarding became a hot button sheep topic. so everyone flocks to it.
i dont know any father that would not do anything to get their kid back for example. would you allow water boarding if it meant saving your kids life? or your mom's?
you can answer honestly or answer how we know you will answer.
But you don't have to torture someone who is already incarcerated and incapable of carrying out those murders.
Before and after the fact is very different. Surely you can see that?
once again, i dont consider water boarding torture. so you can see my point if you consider that yes?
You don't consider water boarding torture, because select elite troops have under gone similar for training purposes? I can understand that, I don't agree with it, because those are specially trained and conditioned soldiers who volunteered, who also have the luxury of saying no, I'm not going to do that. I quit.usmarine wrote:
once again, i dont consider water boarding torture. so you can see my point if you consider that yes?
I do consider it torture. I also think that obtaining evidence, testimony or anything else while under torture is useless.
I want to see these terrorists held and charged but under the same basic rights you would expect for another US citizen. Condoning practices because the enemy is bad, does nothing but lower the standards and ideals your founding fathers fought for.