You are either not logged in or not registered with our community. Click here to register.
 
December 05, 2016, 09:10:43 PM

Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
Did you miss your activation email?

Login with username, password and session length

Click here if you are having problems.
Default Wide Screen Beige Lilac Rainbow Black & Blue October Send us your theme!

Hark!  The Herald!
Holiday Issue 2016

Wiki Blogs Dicebot

Author Topic: Obama opposes detainee abuse photo release  (Read 2790 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline Bayushi

Re: Obama opposes detainee abuse photo release
« Reply #25 on: May 25, 2009, 07:09:19 AM »
Anybody who believes that the only way to survive is to kill is perpetuating that reality.

And here you display naivete.

Humans are flawed. Our very nature includes violence.

Most of the advances the human race has made were made with the goal of violence, or the goal to defend oneself. Gunpowder was once an innocuous substance, used by the chinese for fireworks.

When the Europeans returned from China with some gunpowder, it's potential was realized, and things like swords and shields and body armour(at least as we know it) became obsolete.

The advent of the use of Gunpowder for purposes of warfare lead to the invention of new technologies to either defend oneself against the bullet(musket ball) or newer methods that could outpower gunpowder weapons.

The invention and use of plumbing(Rome or Grecians, don't recall) was a necessity to help maintain cleanliness and keep clean water available when a city was under siege.

And the human race continues to invent new things. Most of which would never have been dreamt of if it were not for the basic principle of combustion... which only became a big deal upon the discovery of the use of gunpowder in warfare.

Not to mention the basic premise of balance.

Without war, there can be no peace. Peace without war would be hardly peaceful, as the peace would be breached often by strife and bloodshed.

Altruism is nice, Lavaske... but we're human. Human's are rarely, if ever, truly altruistic. Even Mother Theresa... she gave of herself and her time, as she knew it was leading her to a 'better place' in the afterlife, or so she believed.

But back on topic...

I agree, Torture is not good. But if I had to, as a leader, choose between torturing an enemy who sought my death, and the deaths of my people... the choice is obvious.

Your own people SHOULD come first. In a world society delineated by independent nations, anyways. Sadly, Congress can't figure this out. We have homeless and destitute people the world over, sure. We should work out taking care of our own before worrying about another country's.

I don't seek to dictate the policy of other nations, and neither should anyone else. Of course, some exceptions should be made... such as nuclear non-proliferation. Last thing we need is for the wrong people to get ahold of nuclear weapons, and/or the ability and materials to make them. That, unfortunately, includes a number of 'rogue' nations who consistently make threats against other nations that do little or nothing to harm them, such as the Democratic People's Republic of Korea and the Islamic Republic of Iran.

Offline OldSchoolGamer

Re: Obama opposes detainee abuse photo release
« Reply #26 on: May 25, 2009, 10:36:59 PM »
What bothers me more than the waterboarding itself is that all-but-total autonomy with which the executive branch has been permitted to have people detained, without trial or legal recourse, indefinitely.

The Constitution makes no provision for the U.S. government, or any representative thereof, to detain people abroad indefinitely without trial.  And with good reason: such acts smack of the unlimited monarchies and other forms of repression America was founded to oppose.

Offline ZeitgeistTopic starter

Re: Obama opposes detainee abuse photo release
« Reply #27 on: May 25, 2009, 10:51:10 PM »
What bothers me more than the waterboarding itself is that all-but-total autonomy with which the executive branch has been permitted to have people detained, without trial or legal recourse, indefinitely.

The Constitution makes no provision for the U.S. government, or any representative thereof, to detain people abroad indefinitely without trial.  And with good reason: such acts smack of the unlimited monarchies and other forms of repression America was founded to oppose.

Well I would only argue its not the function of our Constitution to afford rights to people who are not US citizens. Does that give us the right? No perhaps not, but it was never the function of our Constitution to do such a thing.

Our dilemma is such that we've never, or rarely before faced these particular set of issues. That being stateless enemy combatants who are neither afforded rights of US citizens or rights under the Geneva Convention. They are stateless, without any sense of legitimate military order. Stateless criminals, i.e. terrorists.

Its good to have the discussions and debates, though the solution is neither clear nor obvious I would argue.

Offline Zakharra

Re: Obama opposes detainee abuse photo release
« Reply #28 on: May 25, 2009, 10:56:28 PM »
 
Quote
That being stateless enemy combatants who are neither afforded rights of US citizens or rights under the Geneva Convention. They are stateless, without any sense of legitimate military order. Stateless criminals, i.e. terrorists.


 Unfortunately some, too many in my opinion, do see them as having protection under the Geneva Conventions.  I do think they should have been proceecced much faster than they were. It was wrong to let them linger for so long without any charges against them.

Offline GS3XXAristo

Re: Obama opposes detainee abuse photo release
« Reply #29 on: May 26, 2009, 08:21:38 AM »
The first thing I noticed about the Commander In Chief's reluctance to have the photo release was his, in my opinion, perfect reasoning. He stated that he didn't want to increase hostility towards American troops deployed into warzones (I suppose I paraphrased). And I believe he's right. We already saw what happened to those Blackwater USA guys (I've met one before, a decent, jolly man with a wife and son) after they got ambushed.

Yeah, eventually the pictures should be released, but really, if I know what the contents of the picture are and I comprehend them, do I need to see them immediately? What about the picture of that girl who got into the accident driving her porsche? The magazine article described how gruesome it was, so do I need to really Google images to see with my own eyes? Honestly?

Now, I said IMO because if the whole detainee pictures get released and violence against us ground troops increases, that puts ME in a bad situation. Being a Soldier, I might, in the future, be part of the surge of forces deployed to Afghanistan (Air Defense Artillery deploys with Infantry sometimes, depending on the unit. Buddy of mine is the same MOS as me and hes with 4th Cavalry). I don't want to run that risk, especially if I have loved ones at home that would grieve for my loss.

Waterboarding, on the other hand...

I suppose not many people are in on the fact that waterboarding is used to train Navy recruits (at higher degrees, obviously) and all Department of Defense operators (Civilian, Army, Marine, etc) participating in SERE (Survival Evasion check wikipedia for the acronym), which is something anyone can volunteer for. They waterboard you until you fall unconscious, to show you that you "cannot resist torture". Why? I'm not sure. Why do they make us take off our gas masks in the Gas Chamber in Basic Training when the whole point is to NOT get attacked with CS Gas?

So, should waterboarding be illegal? I don't think so. People imagine that all Interrogators do is waterboard terrorists till we get the answer we want. Sometimes that may work, but one thing we learned (probably from the Israelis) is that the best way to learn what we want to know is, yes I'm about to say it--

Befriend the enemy.

Think about it. You capture a terrorist, and take away 4-6 years of their life, keeping them alive, whole, fed, and in captivity. You try and reason, learn, and convert them. Sometimes it works, sometimes it doesn't. But one thing that let's you know it works is when you go to Iraq, visit that former insurgent, and ask them "Do you still want to kill Americans?"

And you know what they reply, jokingly?

"Yes, I do!"

Yeah. Jokingly too. If you've spent 6 years of your life in prison, you're gonna want to get out and make up those lost years. Interrogators know this, and this is a more common form (but not as well known about) way of dealing with captured terrorists.

Well, thats my 2 cents about it. Sorry if I offended anyone.