Why does Bush/Cheney promote Christian values so vehemently and then promotes torture too?

Question

Whether or not I agree with the man, his logic is so flawed it's ridiculous. How can someone that claims to be so thoroughly Christian intentionally call for the torture of suspects?

http://www.miami.com/mld/miamiherald/news/breaking_news/15849829.htm?source=rss&channel=miamiherald_breaking_news

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Water_boarding

Ruth - congratulations on giving an unintelligent answer. What does ethnocentrism have to do with anything?

Ruth - I'm not a liberal, first off. I'm simply not a Christian fundamentalist like Bush. Second, logic is logic. Logic, if it is valid, can be applied to a situation on the opposite side of one's beliefs. Logic cannot be applied to their Bush's actions.

Apologies, the above should say "to Bush's actions" not to "to their Bush's actions."

Answer 1

A Nuremberg chief prosecutor says there is a case for trying Bush for the 'supreme crime against humanity, an illegal war of aggression against a sovereign nation.'

Perhaps no person on the planet is better equipped to identify and describe our crimes in Iraq than Benjamin Ferenccz, a former chief prosecutor of the Nuremberg Trials who successfully convicted 22 Nazi officers for their work in orchestrating death squads that killed more than one million people in the famous Einsatzgruppen Case. Ferencz, now 87, has gone on to become a founding father of the basis behind international law regarding war crimes, and his essays and legal work drawing from the Nuremberg trials and later the commission that established the International Criminal Court remain a lasting influence in that realm.

Ferencz's biggest contribution to the war crimes field is his assertion that an unprovoked or "aggressive" war is the highest crime against mankind. It was the decision to invade Iraq in 2003 that made possible the horrors of Abu Ghraib, the destruction of Fallouja and Ramadi, the tens of thousands of Iraqi deaths, civilian massacres like Haditha, and on and on. Ferencz believes that a "prima facie case can be made that the United States is guilty of the supreme crime against humanity, that being an illegal war of aggression against a sovereign nation."

"The United Nations charter has a provision which was agreed to by the United States formulated by the United States in fact, after World War II. Its says that from now on, no nation can use armed force without the permission of the U.N. Security Council. They can use force in connection with self-defense, but a country can't use force in anticipation of self-defense. Regarding Iraq, the last Security Council resolution essentially said, 'Look, send the weapons inspectors out to Iraq, have them come back and tell us what they've found -- then we'll figure out what we're going to do. The U.S. was impatient, and decided to invade Iraq -- which was all pre-arranged of course. So, the United States went to war, in violation of the charter."

It's that simple. Ferencz called the invasion a "clear breach of law," and dismissed the Bush administration's legal defense that previous U.N. Security Council resolutions dating back to the first Gulf War justified an invasion in 2003. Ferencz notes that the first Bush president believed that the United States didn't have a U.N. mandate to go into Iraq and take out Saddam Hussein; that authorization was simply to eject Hussein from Kuwait. Ferencz asked, "So how do we get authorization more than a decade later to finish the job? The arguments made to defend this are not persuasive."

Answer 2

Bush and Cheney seem to think that Pontious Pilate and the Romans were the examples to follow from the Bible.

Answer 3

You are right! How did we all miss the logic here? (sarcasm)

Stop being so ethnocentric (look it up if you don't know what it means) with your definition of "logic"...

You are applying your philosophy to someone else to form a value judgment. Liberals should be familiar with the term, since they popularized it... They just can't handle the shoe on the other foot, huh?

Answer 4

They only use Christianity to get votes. Most politicians do. If they were really Christians they wouldn't be involved in politics at all. Jesus was politically neutral. His allegiance stood with God, not any Earthly governments. These men are trying to use us and God for their own benefits. Peace

Answer 5

bush is not a christian, he can not be considered a follower of Christ, it simply isn't so

Answer 6

It boggles the mind, doesn't it?