The only to beat , or even keep at bay, a terrorist is to be so infinitely more terrible that they are scared to death to even twitch before you. Abu grab was nothing but a few children having fun with terrible murderous animals that didn't deserve to be captured alive-- and in any previous war we would not have had to put up with a bunch of pansies crying about "this is not us" or whining about two wrongs.. When you are at war you don't hold back; you do all you need to to win; even if it means killing the enemy-- slowly and methodically.
2007-05-29 19:36:19
·
answer #1
·
answered by mr.phattphatt 5
·
0⤊
2⤋
Ask some guys who joined a frat in college if, during hazing, they didn't endure worse than Abu Ghraib.
I am appalled with the feigned disgust Middle Easterners show about Abu Ghraib, when their own military, police force, and governments do things that make Abu Ghraib look like a tea party.
It's interesting to note that some of the prisoners in Guantanemo have admitted that their conditions are better than back home. They always have clean clothes, good food, perfectly sanitized and relatively comfortable surroundings. Imagine the conditions a U.S. prisoner would endure. He'd probably have lesions all over his skin from the deplorable conditions, and get sick from the putrid food.
2007-05-29 10:44:38
·
answer #2
·
answered by pachl@sbcglobal.net 7
·
2⤊
1⤋
Your question asks about the techniques our enemies use. I would say that their techniques are probably a lot more effective, less time-consuming, and less labor-intensive than the ones we are forced to employ because we are the "good guys". Honestly, I would have no problems if the U.S. government handled the interrogations of war prisoners with the same attitude the Mafia would handle anyone in their organization who was a snitch or an informant. I believe that the U.S. should level the playing field and do whatever is necessary to ensure that foreign prisoners will not be treated as if they are on vacation.
2007-05-29 10:59:00
·
answer #3
·
answered by Anonymous
·
2⤊
0⤋
this could be a not uncomplicated question to respond to. The Bible names many enemies. some are actual, some non secular. So it somewhat is my take on the issue: a million. not all of us is in the physique of Christ. This factors to the top that not all of us is your brother in Christ. Even spiritually. In turn, in the event that they are actually not in the physique, they're an "enemy", yet basically to the element the place they flatly refuse the gospel of salvation. it somewhat is the place the Bible tells us to shake the airborne dirt and dust off our feet and flow on. 2. in case you element to a greater non secular nature, you are able to call the "seven deadly sins" or somebody or rigidity that seeks to divert our interest from serving God. those could count number between our enemies. 3. The Bible says to love people who hate you. for sure then we could desire to love our enemies. The Bible never says to hate all of us, which includes our enemies and this finally ends up in a distinction between enemy and hate. basically with the aid of fact I call you an enemy does not propose that I hate you. basically the choice. i'm going to love you greater with the aid of fact you're my enemy. Why? you desire it greater advantageous than my brother in Christ, who already has the perfect Love of all. In end-love those you call enemy, yet determine you comprehend who they're. in the event that they carry forth a diverse gospel, refuse the real gospel of salvation or blaspheme the Holy Ghost, then those could be worth of the call of enemy. returned, this does not propose i'm going to hate you or shun you away. The Bible supplies a strict command on enemies, and a greater strict command on hate.
2016-10-30 03:25:39
·
answer #4
·
answered by Anonymous
·
0⤊
0⤋
Heck! Everyone at the ACLU knows the answer to that!
Putting underwear on the head of a prisoner is the most inhumane thing one can do to another human being!!!!!!!
My big brother did that to me while I was asleep once.
Anyone have the # for the ACLU?
2007-05-29 11:39:56
·
answer #5
·
answered by Anonymous
·
2⤊
0⤋
Oh stop it already. We have no control over what techniques our enemies use, and so protesting those would be entirely useless. Whereas in theory, protesting our governments actions can bring about a result.
The lesser of two evils is still evil. Killing five people is worse than killing one, but both are still very very wrong!
2007-05-29 10:41:36
·
answer #6
·
answered by Jesus W. 6
·
1⤊
1⤋
I deplore what goes on elsewhere, but with Americans using torture, - well it is not us. What happened to national honor, are we not better then our enemies and some of our friends. As a disgruntled ex-republican, this issue was one of the few that drove me from the party. American culture is better than that. We are better than that. If we use torture than we are no better than are enemies, and God may no longer be on our side in the war. I will never support torture.
2007-05-29 10:42:44
·
answer #7
·
answered by Tom Sh*t 3
·
2⤊
1⤋
I don't think it's in the same ball park... but that doesn't mean that I like either one...
I think our methods aren't as harsh... but I think comparing the two is still asking someone to choose between two evils...
just because one is a lot worse, it doesn't make the other one ok... in my book
2007-05-29 10:50:16
·
answer #8
·
answered by Anonymous
·
0⤊
1⤋
We are not the enemy. We are better than that. And Abu Ghraib was a stain on our military, our principles and our nation. If you can't see that, you are blind.
2007-05-29 10:42:24
·
answer #9
·
answered by iwasnotanazipolka 7
·
2⤊
1⤋
Torture gets us nothing. They will tell us anything they think
we want to hear just to stop the pain for a little while. It is wrong
by any standards. It don't matter who is doing the dirt.
2007-05-29 11:06:58
·
answer #10
·
answered by wayne g 7
·
0⤊
1⤋