Warning

 

Close

Confirm Action

Are you sure you wish to do this?

Confirm Cancel
Member Login
Site Notices
11/24/2017 4:44:23 PM
11/22/2017 10:05:29 PM
Posted: 10/13/2004 6:29:02 PM EST
[Last Edit: 10/13/2004 6:29:17 PM EST by The_Neutral_Observer]
Proposition:
Torture is a legitimate and moral act in some situations.

First, the legalities:

When the terrorist is held by US law enforcement agencies, obviously it is not legitimate due to certain parts of the Constitution.

However, when the terrorist is held by certain other government organizations, there are no laws governing the treatment of the terrorist.

In the case of some portions of the DOD, there are no rules governing the treatment of the terrorist.

In the case of the military, the terrorist was not taken in a declared war while wearing a uniform, and is not subject to the various conventions offering protection to combatants. To The Neutral Observer's knowledge, there have been no binding court decisions on the treatment of these "enemy combatants" as of yet, therefore, the law is at worst undefined. When the law in the US is undefined, it is generally interpreted based on morality by a judge.

This brings up the morality of torture:

In every case in which a terrorist has been captured, there has been evidence that would convict the terrorist in any court of law in the world. Either this evidence has been developed through intelligence (which is how the terrorist was captured in the first place) or the terrorist has been captured while engaging in hostile activities.

Terrorists commit murder, if not directly then by assisting those who do. Nevertheless, terrorist groups do commit murder, and since that is their publically avowed goal, anyone who knowingly join a group intends to commit murder.

Terrorists generally intend and plan to commit murder at some point in the future, and possess information about plans to commit murder.

In most US states, law allows for the provision for citizens to commit justifiable homicide to save the life of a third party. Not many people here would argue with putting a Hellfire up some terrorist's ass in light of the above.

In general, it is accepted that the worst thing one can do to someone is to kill them (Yes, The Neutral Observer knows you could argue this, but in general...). If killing a terrorist is legal and moral in light of the above, why is torture (a lesser thing) not legal and moral if done by an agency that is not restrained by law, since the information that results will save lives of third parties?

Discuss.
Link Posted: 10/13/2004 6:32:47 PM EST
Fuck moral, moral is great when it comes to women and money, otherwise my motivation is necessity.
Link Posted: 10/13/2004 6:34:34 PM EST
I'd like to know if either of you two has served in the military?
Link Posted: 10/13/2004 6:40:02 PM EST
This is a purely academic, intellectual discussion.

The Neutral Observer is interested in any viewpoint anyone might have, and the supporting argument.
Link Posted: 10/13/2004 6:42:33 PM EST

Originally Posted By Tortfeasor:
I'd like to know if either of you two has served in the military?



Nope. Why does it matter?

I agree with TNO on the necessity of torture, but I don';t think we need to justify it like that.
Link Posted: 10/13/2004 6:44:33 PM EST

Originally Posted By Combat_Jack:

Originally Posted By Tortfeasor:
I'd like to know if either of you two has served in the military?



Nope. Why does it matter?

I agree with TNO on the necessity of torture, but I don';t think we need to justify it like that.



Morals and moral justification is what separates the civilized world from the terrorists.
Link Posted: 10/13/2004 6:45:19 PM EST
[Last Edit: 10/13/2004 6:53:48 PM EST by 1776]

Originally Posted By Tortfeasor:
I'd like to know if either of you two has served in the military?




What does that have to do with it?

We are the ONLY ones that play by OUR rules of warfare. Ultimately it will lead to out destruction if we cant fight on the opponents terms.

If they are US citizens then they should be afforded ALL rights granted by the constitution. If they are not......................Oh well.
Link Posted: 10/13/2004 6:48:03 PM EST

Originally Posted By The_Neutral_Observer:

Originally Posted By Combat_Jack:

Originally Posted By Tortfeasor:
I'd like to know if either of you two has served in the military?



Nope. Why does it matter?

I agree with TNO on the necessity of torture, but I don';t think we need to justify it like that.



Morals and moral justification is what separates the civilized world from the terrorists.



True. Still, even to protect a moral way of life, somebody has to be the bad motherfucker with low standards.
Link Posted: 10/13/2004 6:49:05 PM EST
Torture as punishment is illegal under the 8th and 14th amendments. Torture to elicit a confession is illegal under the 5th and 14th amendments. Torture of combatants violates the laws of land warfare, to which the United States is a party. Even those who are not entitled to POW status are classified as "protected persons".
Link Posted: 10/13/2004 6:52:41 PM EST

Originally Posted By Steve_T_M:
Torture as punishment is illegal under the 8th and 14th amendments. Torture to elicit a confession is illegal under the 5th and 14th amendments. Torture of combatants violates the laws of land warfare, to which the United States is a party. Even those who are not entitled to POW status are classified as "protected persons".



The Neutral Observer was under the impression, possibly mistaken, that the amendments applied to law enforcement, the legal system, and those protected under the Constitution.

Can you give The Neutral Observer a reference on the combatants and protected persons decisons? That's a hot area, legally, at the moment.
Link Posted: 10/13/2004 6:56:12 PM EST

Originally Posted By Combat_Jack:
Fuck moral, moral is great when it comes to women and money, otherwise my motivation is necessity.



Two weeks ago I would have agreed. However, America is the greatest nation in the world. We are honorable, courageous, principled, loyal. I think it is a travesty if we sacrifice the moral standards that we have to derive information from an individual. Secondly, information derived from many torture methods is false. A man will say many things when he is being held under duress and he knows the kind of information which you seek.

"What is the final destination of hatred? When you look into the eyes of your enemy and see yourself..." - To End All Wars

I will work towards the demise and death of my adversary for as long as I live, but I hope that I never succumb to my enemy.
Link Posted: 10/13/2004 7:12:19 PM EST
It's only moral if it works.

GunLvr
Link Posted: 10/13/2004 7:13:06 PM EST
I say that when the bastards are found, they should be given a choice of two options. Option number one is full cooperation. Option number two is a bullet in the brain. Ten seconds should be enough time to make the decision. If they choose the bullet, the should be left for their associates with a note stating: This man was a sworn enemy of The United States of America. We will destroy all threats to our national security. We are coming for you.
Link Posted: 10/13/2004 7:14:49 PM EST

Originally Posted By triburst1:
I say that when the bastards are found, they should be given a choice of two options. Option number one is full cooperation. Option number two is a bullet in the brain. Ten seconds should be enough time to make the decision. If they choose the bullet, the should be left for their associates with a note stating: This man was a sworn enemy of The United States of America. We will destroy all threats to our national security. We are coming for you.



Yup...KTA...
Link Posted: 10/13/2004 7:24:07 PM EST
In this situation I don't care about morality. Please don't cite the Constitution and Geneva Convetion - I know it's illegal.

The terrorists are using our morals against us. The liberals are already calling Bush a Nazi, Hitler, and a terrorist so what are they going to do? Make up new words? The liberals, the UN, and the rest of the world is more concerned with the US bringing it's behavior from 9 to 10 instead of degenerate countries bringing their behavior from 2 to 5.

To the argument "torture doesn't work because people will say anything under pain and duress" I say this: it can always get worse. Keep the subject alive while you verify his/her information; if it turns out to be a lie ratchet up the torture. If we torture them too close to death let them recuperate with the best medical care available and start again when they've healed a bit.
Link Posted: 10/13/2004 7:27:04 PM EST
Actaully, we can torture "insurgents", "terrorists", etc. Any individual captured and being found to have fought against our forces without wearing standardized nation gear and dress is considered an enemy Combatant and is not protected by the Hague or Geneva convention because this instance was not accounted for. We can do whatever we want with them, I just think Americans should subscribe to a higher level of morals. We become our enemy when we replicate our enemy.
Link Posted: 10/13/2004 7:30:18 PM EST

Originally Posted By GrH_Revelation:
We become our enemy when we replicate our enemy.


There's that dangerous holier-than-thou talk. We need to do what they understand. Three nutritious square meals per day, showers and other hygiene-related 'luxuries', and a prayer mat in their cells is not enough of a deterrent to make them cooperate.
Link Posted: 10/13/2004 7:39:31 PM EST
[Last Edit: 10/13/2004 7:40:59 PM EST by Cans4you]
Torture works... Mental, psyical ... I'm not sure where sleep deprivation would be catagorized maybe "passive" but it also seems to work.

It is how many get information that saves countless lives from further aggression.

Link Posted: 10/13/2004 7:45:26 PM EST
To say that only U.S. citizens should be exempt from torture is ludicrous.
Do you not think that any constitutional attachment would be based more on the fact that the majority of Americans felt that torturing any human being was cruel and inhumane, and was beneath your moral values to see it practiced. To say that no others should be afforded the same protection would be like saying the only reason you don't torture your own is because of the piece of paper, not based on common decency.
Link Posted: 10/13/2004 8:03:30 PM EST
[Last Edit: 10/13/2004 8:04:36 PM EST by 76R]

Originally Posted By 76R:
To say that only U.S. citizens should be exempt from torture is ludicrous.
Do you not think that any constitutional attachment would be based more on the fact that the majority of Americans felt that torturing any human being was cruel and inhumane, and was beneath your moral values to see it practiced. To say that no others should be afforded the same protection would be like saying the only reason you don't torture your own is because of the piece of paper, not based on common decency.



I must add however, that I do feel that certain individuals in a sandy overseas country should be dragged around until their skin is peeled from their bones for the things they have done, but I would not try to justify it as anything else but SWEET,SWEET REVENGE.
Don't forget you wouldn't want your own to be tortured by your enemies.
Link Posted: 10/13/2004 8:07:39 PM EST

Originally Posted By 76R:
Don't forget you wouldn't want your own to be tortured by your enemies.


Yeah, let's hope they don't do that.
Link Posted: 10/13/2004 8:26:33 PM EST

Originally Posted By triburst1:
I say that when the bastards are found, they should be given a choice of two options. Option number one is full cooperation. Option number two is a bullet in the brain. Ten seconds should be enough time to make the decision. If they choose the bullet, the should be left for their associates with a note stating: This man was a sworn enemy of The United States of America. We will destroy all threats to our national security. We are coming for you.



+1

9mm is cheap, and torture is one thing, having 10 seconds to live is another...
Link Posted: 10/13/2004 8:44:55 PM EST
i dont think that enemy combatants qualify as warriors fighting for a land or protection under the US Constitution.

there is nothing in the Constitution that guarantees anything to anyone but a US CITIZEN..

a US CITIZEN is afforded liberties. not a foreigner..of any type.

even if caught on US SOIL. they should not be afforded "rights"..as such.

all civilized nations of the world, use the uniform code of war. you must be in uniform or you will/should be held as a spy and the legal tender of that is usually death by means other than hanging..LoL.

thank you N.O. for the question...
Link Posted: 10/13/2004 8:45:18 PM EST

Originally Posted By GrH_Revelation:
Secondly, information derived from many torture methods is false. A man will say many things when he is being held under duress and he knows the kind of information which you seek.




Not if your man knows his shit and doesn't lead him on. if you don't tell the guy what you want to hear, its a good way to do it.
Link Posted: 10/13/2004 8:47:38 PM EST
The problem with torture is that it rarely yields reliable, useful information. The person being subjected to torture will, more often than not, lie, babble, and say anything just to get the pain to stop.

Now some will argue the information can be checked out, and if it's no good the person can be punished. Though I ask, what's the point in that? It just wastes time.

Torturing for the express purpose of punishing a terrorist I don't really have a problem with, and in fact see that as a legitimate thing to do because they are in fact inhumane savages and not deserving of human compassion.


I'll add that things like slapping a person around, firing a gun near them, depriving them of sleep and food, and similar things is NOT torture, IMO. The media can whine and complain, but torture, in my eyes, is things like what saddam did, and what was done during the inquisition, dark ages, etc.
Link Posted: 10/13/2004 8:48:35 PM EST
Is this like Jonathan Swift's "A modest proposal?"
Top Top