BF2S Forums Evil Americans

USA has changed. It amazes me how TODAY American politicians are discussing what level of torture is acceptable to carry out on a detainee (who may even potentially have been wrongfully detained). It's a very worrying sign for the future.

Why do Americans seek to justify Club Gitmo? You should hush it up and brush it under a carpet - you're only drawing undue attention to a festering sore on the US international reputation. Comparisons are pointless. You don't need to compare something that's wrong with something else that's wrong - they're both STILL WRONG.

CameronPoe wrote:

USA has changed. It amazes me how TODAY American politicians are discussing what level of torture is acceptable to carry out on a detainee (who may even potentially have been wrongfully detained). It's a very worrying sign for the future.

Why do Americans seek to justify Club Gitmo? You should hush it up and brush it under a carpet - you're only drawing undue attention to a festering sore on the US international reputation. Comparisons are pointless. You don't need to compare something that's wrong with something else that's wrong - they're both STILL WRONG.

QFT.

/liberal interrogation technique

Intel guy: "Excuse me Mr. Terrorist, would you pretty please tell me who all of your associate terrorists are and what capabilities they have?"


Terrorist: "No."

Intel guy: "Ok, thanks anyway. You run along now. Have a nice day!"

/end liberal interrogation

Comfy chair anyone?

Last edited by Deader (2006-09-28 11:12:12)

yuckfou09 wrote:

=OBS= EstebanRey wrote:

yuckfou09 wrote:

gitmo=club med 

well compared to what the north vietnamese did to downed pilots in the nam.

Um, Gitmo = 2006
'Nam= 1960s

See the difference?  If I remember correctly, the US still segregated whites and blacks in that era so how can you compare the two?

a human being is a human being it doesnt matter if it was over forty years ago. Thats no excuse for the vietnamese to torture prisoners for years and years. Calling them traitors and marching them through streets letting citizens kick and punch them. NO EXCUSE. Who said anything about segregation? Maybe you should start your own topic on that cheif. We're talking about prisoners of war. Have a nice day!

Um do you have a comprehension problem?  You compared the torture in Vietnam with the (according to you anyway) lack of torture at Gitmo.

I was making the point that during 'Nam you father or grandfather would have regarded a black man as a 2nd class citizen which is clearly immoral and wrong.  Today our morals have evolved, just like the vietnamese's moral have probably evolved, still with me?

so, using your phrase "a human being is a human being it doesnt matter if it was over forty years ago" the US were just as, if nor more, wrong than the Vietnamese at the time; but let's just forget about that eh?

CameronPoe wrote:

Deader wrote:

/liberal interrogation technique

Intel guy: "Excuse me Mr. Terrorist, would you pretty please tell me who all of your associate terrorists are and what capabilities they have?"


Terrorist: "No."

Intel guy: "Ok, thanks anyway. You run along now. Have a nice day!"

/end liberal interrogation

Comfy chair anyone?

Roughly translated: USA should carry out and endorse TORTURE. Whatever happened to American values??

Not so roughly translated:

America should use coersion techniques that don't involve pounding peoples teeth through their skull or ripping their fingernails out with pliers. However, if I sit you in a cold room playing lound music and deprive you of sleep for a few days you might just have to deal with it.

Sorry, i didn't see the required "/sarcasm" entry in your post.  And your answer is not what I was asking.  I was asking, sincerely, where you got the idea that "liberals" would interrogate thus.  I'll assume that you have no support for that.

Jenkinsbball wrote:

R3v0LuT!oN wrote:

CameronPoe wrote:

USA has changed. It amazes me how TODAY American politicians are discussing what level of torture is acceptable to carry out on a detainee (who may even potentially have been wrongfully detained). It's a very worrying sign for the future.

Why do Americans seek to justify Club Gitmo? You should hush it up and brush it under a carpet - you're only drawing undue attention to a festering sore on the US international reputation. Comparisons are pointless. You don't need to compare something that's wrong with something else that's wrong - they're both STILL WRONG.

QFT.

Again, what the fuck does QFT stand for? This is starting to piss me off, as when I ask, I forget which thread I'm asking it in. Sorry for being off topic.

Queen for Truth.

JahManRed wrote:

usmarine2005 wrote:

Gitmo is a violation of human rights.

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20060927/ap_ … mo_ramadan

"Meals are offered before dawn and after sunset to accommodate their fasting during daylight hours."

Wow....I wonder what US troops in Japan POW camps think of this.  Oh wait, never mind, they were being experimented on with chemical weapons.

Lots of mistakes were made on both sides through the various wars. Yes the Jap POW camps were shocking. Yes dropping two atomic bombs on civilian targets was wrong.  Yes airmen were tortured in the nam......yes US troops wiped out whole villages of women and children in the nam. Most countries don't practice these atrocities anymore, we have moved on. Hence accommodating a prisoners religious practices. Bush and his Christian buddies are always hankering on about god etc, so its good to see they are respecting ppl's religion as religion seams to drive Bush's decisions.

The atom bomb.  Lets remember why that was dropped.  Because it was the best of the bad options.  How do you stop a country whose citizens believe thier leader is GOD?  You can't invade the island with 3 million Marines and disuade them from believeing in thier religion.  You have to make "GOD" understand that he can not and will not come out of the war with even a political or moral victory.  The Allied affensive had to be strong enough to over come and entire nations religious belief and dedication to Martyedom.

IRONCHEF wrote:

Sorry, i didn't see the required "/sarcasm" entry in your post.  And your answer is not what I was asking.  I was asking, sincerely, where you got the idea that "liberals" would interrogate thus.  I'll assume that you have no support for that.

My apologies for forgetting the /sarcasm tags, and here is your definition of sarcasm for the record.

"Sarcasm is sneering, jesting, or mocking a person, situation or thing."

So basically I exaggerated the described situation to prove a point. The groups/oranizations etc. that complain about methodologies that while they may be uncomfortable and trying but do not cause physical harm are typically (not necessarily universally) liberal institutions or institutions that espouse liberal ideals. Hence the incorporation of these types of ideas into general liberal ideology.

In closing, no I don't think anyone with any serious intention of extracting information from a prisoner would use the described technique. I used sarcasm as a literary device to get across the point that there is a fine line between torture which I define as causing a person serious physical harm in an effort to extract information and interrogating which may involve physical and mental discomfort/distress but causes no permanent harm.

CommandoRog wrote:

The Geneva Conventions on prisoners of war should not apply to Al Qaeda ,Taliban or any Terrorist.

Capture-Interrorgation-Extermination.

Guess im one of those Evil Americans.

No just a dumbass who does not understand the concept of 'Freedom'.

An Enlarged Liver wrote:

CommandoRog wrote:

The Geneva Conventions on prisoners of war should not apply to Al Qaeda ,Taliban or any Terrorist.

Capture-Interrorgation-Extermination.

Guess im one of those Evil Americans.

No just a dumbass who does not understand the concept of 'Freedom'.

Actually the Geneva Conventions DO NOT apply to those mentioned above.  It applies to uniformed combatants, which they are NOT.  I don't know what rules/laws that the Gitmo detainees have, but the Geneva Convention Law of Land Warfare is something that they DO NOT.

=OBS= EstebanRey wrote:

yuckfou09 wrote:

=OBS= EstebanRey wrote:

Um, Gitmo = 2006
'Nam= 1960s

See the difference?  If I remember correctly, the US still segregated whites and blacks in that era so how can you compare the two?

a human being is a human being it doesnt matter if it was over forty years ago. Thats no excuse for the vietnamese to torture prisoners for years and years. Calling them traitors and marching them through streets letting citizens kick and punch them. NO EXCUSE. Who said anything about segregation? Maybe you should start your own topic on that cheif. We're talking about prisoners of war. Have a nice day!

Um do you have a comprehension problem?  You compared the torture in Vietnam with the (according to you anyway) lack of torture at Gitmo.

I was making the point that during 'Nam you father or grandfather would have regarded a black man as a 2nd class citizen which is clearly immoral and wrong.  Today our morals have evolved, just like the vietnamese's moral have probably evolved, still with me?

so, using your phrase "a human being is a human being it doesnt matter if it was over forty years ago" the US were just as, if nor more, wrong than the Vietnamese at the time; but let's just forget about that eh?

ok, so your saying the us government is wrong for treating african american citizens as 2nd class. Agreed
IM SAYING THAT TORURE IS WRONG. I wouldnt feel any differnt about the torture in nam if it was another soldier of another country.
TORTURE IS WRONG.
Following? In no way am i saying it was right for the us government to segregate. And yes i know that societies change and "evolve". Thnx for the class session i can now tell my history teacher that i dont need him this guy on the forum boards knows EVERYTHING. Im just stating that gitmo is a hell of alot....lets see whats the word? humane! I would rather be held prisoner for 5 years then be tortued and held for 7 years. And what are we forgetting? How was the US wrong? Segregation? I think we know that.

CameronPoe wrote:

USA has changed. It amazes me how TODAY American politicians are discussing what level of torture is acceptable to carry out on a detainee (who may even potentially have been wrongfully detained). It's a very worrying sign for the future.

Why do Americans seek to justify Club Gitmo? You should hush it up and brush it under a carpet - you're only drawing undue attention to a festering sore on the US international reputation. Comparisons are pointless. You don't need to compare something that's wrong with something else that's wrong - they're both STILL WRONG.

We would love to send some of those poor innocents back, however, if we do most of those people will never be seen alive again since their home countries WILL toture them or their home countries will not accept them back and we sure dont want them in our country (legally or otherwise) so some of them are in residential limbo until someone takes them in.   

Not only that, they are POW's which means we have the right to hold enemy (legal or otherwise) combatants until the end of operations, occupation, etc for the remainder of the conflict. 

I dont like torture, dont want it to happen to me or to do it to another, but thats beyond my control just as it is yours.  However, some of what is going on is helping keep americans, coalition and iraqi lives, not to mention stopping execution style murders in iraq.