2006-09-19 16:34:22 · 21 answers · asked by Anonymous in Politics & Government ➔ Government
One of the reason we stopped using torture is that is has been proved not to work. It is amazing the depth these people will go to in order to ignore solid science. No only is it Uncivilized, but it does not work. That is probably why Bush is all for it, nothing that man in in favor of works. Guess he want to FU this too.
2006-09-19 16:50:43 · answer #1 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 1⤋
I for one could care less what America does because I live in the United States of America. Did you mean Why does the United States think it can use torture but others should not?
Well it is like this.. As long as others can crash planes in to our buildings and cut the heads off our people and shoot 72 year old nuns in the back I think that is enough for to turture anyone we want to.
Are you trying to say that none of the people that Islam kidnapped was tortured? Did you forget their heads was found on top of a stick stuck in the ground and their bodies found in another part of the town? I would call that murder and I'm sure there was torture before they lost their heads.
So you are saying it is ok to kill us and our babies but it is not ok for us to fight back?
2006-09-19 23:43:44 · answer #2 · answered by Don K 5 · 2⤊ 1⤋
Are you speaking of the proposal to, as Bush claims it amounts to but with which fellow GOP like McCain disagree, 'clarify' the Geneva Convention for our interrogators?
I don't think that is about torture....I don't know exactly how I feel about it, really, but as I understand it, it is not as though Bush were saying hey, we need permission to use torture.
We did employ torture, but we recognize that this was very 'bad', sad to say, at for instance Abu Ghraib prison in Iraq. That isn't what the Bush proposal is aiming to codify...we should be clear about that.
What we are aiming to address I think are certain practices that might be considered 'humiliating' to Muslim terror suspects, like playing music and so on. There can be no question that the horrific things done at Abu Ghraib were violations, and that is not what is at issue.
As I understand the counterargument, to reinterpret the international rules sets a bad precedent. If we can decide to decide what it means to *us*, so can anyone else. I think we are trying to make distinctions about what *we* think *should* be interpretable as assaults to human dignity, but by so doing we open up a great big wriggling can o' worms and make ourselves look, as you point out, like we live by a different set of rules than everyone else.
2006-09-20 00:07:26 · answer #3 · answered by Michelle H 2 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Why does America think its ok to police the world? America's claim to fame is independence so why are they constantly invading everyone elses soil?
oh and BTW to quote Bush "waterboarding is not torture, i would never accept torture"
2006-09-19 23:44:02 · answer #4 · answered by Aussieblonde -bundy'd 5 · 0⤊ 0⤋
the scary thought is that a large percentage of americans would be jumping up and down for joy if we initiated genocide on the mexican/hispanic population, turned the country into an all out police state with military checkpoints at every intersection, and bombed and wiped out every arab and jew, and repress and outlaw christianity, and torture prisoners ... all in the name of "protecting ourselves" lol .. it kinda sounds ridiculous but alot of people seem to want that with a passion in the US because they listen to too much tv telling them that all these people are the cause of their problems ... it may just be me, but to me, it takes a real ignoramous to buy into any of that bullcrap.
2006-09-19 23:47:24 · answer #5 · answered by Anonymous · 2⤊ 0⤋
Idiot liberals care more about the terrorist security than national security. When did the terrorist become signatories of the Geneva Convention? Read the Koran, it says infidels should be beheaded...
2006-09-20 08:21:38 · answer #6 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
America doesn't, Bush does. there is a difference, oh yes, there is a difference. We Americans believe in honoring our treaties (usually) and includes the Genena Conventions, after all, what will they do to our prisonors?
2006-09-19 23:44:48 · answer #7 · answered by Iamstitch2U 6 · 1⤊ 1⤋
I think it's just horrible when we catch those guys who plan to bomb stores and schools and little children and America actually wants to put them in cold rooms and turn up the Red Hot Chilie Peppers.....are they gonna pass em' a joint too?!? Horrible!...Just Horrible!!!
2006-09-19 23:50:42 · answer #8 · answered by jazzzame 4 · 0⤊ 1⤋
Ask the Bush Administration that ... I believe in the Geneva Convention and always have. I knew damn well Bush would get bit in the butt by refusing to impliment the rules. Perhaps he should try being Water Boarded.
2006-09-19 23:37:30 · answer #9 · answered by pickle head 6 · 1⤊ 3⤋
If it means saving a U.S. City from being bombed or preventing another 9/11 type of attack, and the prisoner has vital info that will help stop it, I say start chopping off fingers!!! I am sick and tired of these politically correct ******* who think that going soft on these Islamic terrorists scumbags is the answer. It isn't. Screw Islam. Their Allah is actually the devil. Screw them all.
2006-09-19 23:39:00 · answer #10 · answered by Billy K 2 · 3⤊ 3⤋