Do you think that terrorists such as Osama bin Laden should be tortured rather than simply being put to death?
2007-01-02 08:32:27 · 19 answers · asked by aero 5 in Politics & Government ➔ Military
After being put through a FAIR trial in a CIVILIAN court with a CIVILIAN lawyer and CIVILIAN jury and being convicted of a crime against humanity than go ahead and torture him for all the intelligence you want as long as it does not bring permanent bodily harm against the person or inflict dangerous mental pain. I'm all for mental pain if the subject is executed a year or two after the first torturing. The big controversy behind the military commissions act is that the detainees aren't given their constitutional rights. They are given a trial in front of a MILITARY TRIBUNAL, their lawyer is from the MILITARY, now don't you think the military might be a little biased and controlled by capital hill?
2007-01-02 08:45:46 · answer #1 · answered by kass9191 3 · 0⤊ 2⤋
Say a criminal had kidnapped a bus load of kids. The criminal had been apprehended but the kids were still missing.
The person obviously knows where the kids are and admits it. The kids will die if not found soon.
And abductor will not tell. Do you use whatever method is nescessary to save the kids? even if its torture.. or do you take the high ground and not do it knowing that the kids will die?
If a terrorist has information that will save lives... you see the paralel.
I think that there are just reasons sometimes.
2007-01-02 10:16:37 · answer #2 · answered by sociald 7 · 2⤊ 0⤋
I see torture for expediency, acceptable! I see no reason to torture an individual for punitive reasons, that's not to say I don't believe in capitol punishment because I do. The speed in which Saddam Hussein was hung, is much more preferable and effective than the way it is in the states. A mass murderer can be on death row for twenty years before he's exhausted all his legal maneuvering. This is not a deterrant to crime, when they know they have twenty years more to live before the grim reaper gets his!
2007-01-02 09:00:43 · answer #3 · answered by briang731/ bvincent 6 · 1⤊ 0⤋
Bugger me... it somewhat is unusual. i'm no longer commonly the lone voice of sanity... there is commonly a minimum of another. No. The skill does not continuously justify the ends, and those of you who think of it somewhat is ought to ask yourselves one tiny little insignificant question. Are you all satisfied being no better than the individuals who could kill you? Oh, wait, no; forget approximately that. i will inform you're. luckily the western international has ordinarily moved on while you lot have been living on the hours of darkness a protracted time; different than u . s . of america, I notice, the place the dying penalty continues to be an selection, making the U. S. unique among western cultures, and waterboarding isn't considered torture. convey on the thumbs; final retort of the ignorant.
2016-11-25 23:12:52 · answer #4 · answered by blunkall 4 · 0⤊ 0⤋
We cant allow torture, it goes against everything the United States stands for..however, what we *can* do, if suspects refuse to tell us anything, is turn them over to somebody like the Israelis and let *them* question them. Just the threat of doing that should be enough to make them talk. And as far as terrorists having "constitutional rights". war is covered by the Geneva Conventions, and non-uniformed fighters are called "illegal combatants" and it is perfectly legal to shoot them, they have *no* rights...
2007-01-02 08:55:06 · answer #5 · answered by Rich F 3 · 0⤊ 1⤋
Civilized people do not torture. When you torture people like that, you become what you are fighting.
Never consider subjecting another to treatment that you wouldn't find acceptable being used against you. We can imprison people, and we can execute people, but we don't torture them.
2007-01-02 16:52:30 · answer #6 · answered by iraqisax 6 · 0⤊ 1⤋
I believe that if it is to protect a mass amount of people than it would be fine just there would be strict guidelines to what tourture would be implimented and it will not kill the person or harm them to an extreme
2007-01-02 08:41:20 · answer #7 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 0⤋
No as that is us terrorising and that is what we want to stop .In a way he is being terrorised now as he is being hunted down and putting someone to death is not the answer as that makes them excuse the spelling marters and then thats another story keep them securely locked up
2007-01-02 09:08:04 · answer #8 · answered by sammie 6 · 0⤊ 1⤋
No, I see no reason to torture him. I'd prefer they killed him upon finding him. No reason to have a show trial for such a worthless sack of manure.
2007-01-02 08:46:31 · answer #9 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 1⤋
Theres no point to that, I DO beleive that there should be torture to gain information/intelligence from the enemy; but not just to be evil. America is better than them, dont stoop to their level.
2007-01-02 08:35:35 · answer #10 · answered by I Hate Liberals 4 · 2⤊ 1⤋