English Deutsch Français Italiano Español Português 繁體中文 Bahasa Indonesia Tiếng Việt ภาษาไทย
All categories

countries? You know it is against the international law.

2007-08-15 01:34:37 · 13 answers · asked by Page 4 in Politics & Government Politics

http://takeaction.amnestyusa.org/site/c.goJTI0OvElH/b.1387629/k.F4A8/Extraordinary_Renditions__US_outsourcing_Torture.htm

2007-08-15 01:34:51 · update #1

Are you for outsourcing torture?

2007-08-15 01:35:29 · update #2

13 answers

I think it is a disgrace and completely un-American. And I will never cease to be shocked every time I read someone attempt to "defend" torture.

How many times must one post, over and over, links to where the Defense Department themselves have repeatedly explained that "torture does not work."?

Uh....then why are we doing it?

Oh. Right. Sadists.

2007-08-15 01:55:22 · answer #1 · answered by Anonymous · 4 2

Extraordinary rendition and torture are both failed policies of a failed administration. Perhaps someday the Esteemed Mr. Bush & Mr. Cheney will get an all expense paid trip to The Hague.

~

2007-08-15 04:26:07 · answer #2 · answered by fitzovich 7 · 1 1

Yes, but you don't seem to be aware that international law is for other people - not the US. The US is above the law, because they're the country with the biggest stick to beat people down who disagree with them.

Of course rendition is wrong. So's torture. But the people in the US will do it anyway, and you try stopping them.

2007-08-15 01:39:44 · answer #3 · answered by Mordent 7 · 5 2

a pair of motives. First, the terrific protection once you're backed right into a corner is to launch an stable offense. That way, mutually as the different area is busy protecting itself, it could forget approximately what it replaced into battling for interior the 1st place. 2nd, there's a word in psychology observed as "cognitive dissonance" and its premise is this: the human techniques, while confronted with 2 conflicting innovations, reviews dissonance. as a fashion to verify this condition, one in each of two issues ought to ensue. the two, the human techniques outrightly rejects the thought that conflicts with the only it has held for the longer quantity of time. Or, if the guy has a tendency to be open minded, he/she could attempt to reconcile the two innovations. at last, as they see the validity of the opposing attitude, and in the event that they arrive to realize that it makes greater experience than their previous concept, they could even reject the old stance in desire of the hot. it fairly is what "apostates" have accomplished. it is why the WT sternly warns its adherents to stay removed from "apostates", from Bible analyzing on my own, from "Christendom", etc. The WT is conscious that adherents will see it for the lies it promotes in the event that they're able to work out issues from yet another attitude and to verify that the WT has been mendacity to them, no longer basically approximately itself, yet relating to the character of God, Jesus Christ, the Holy Spirit, "Christendom", "apostates", the Bible, and the Gospel message.

2016-10-15 10:01:43 · answer #4 · answered by ? 4 · 0 0

It's not ordinary people they are dealing with. You critics of these types of situations rarely consider who you see as the victim as what they really are. They are terrorist who don't care about or follow any of the laws that you hold so dear. The fact that certain criminals are turned over to certain countries does not bother me in the least. If these people in question were as concerned as you are, they most likely would not put their self in a position that would cause this to happen.

2007-08-15 02:01:25 · answer #5 · answered by Anonymous · 0 2

Would having Jack Bauer at Gitmo be a better way of interrogating suspected terrorists?

I am against actual physical torture; there are so many ways of using psychological torture, and they are quite effective, such as using psychotropic/psychoactive drugs and isolation.

2007-08-15 01:54:55 · answer #6 · answered by MenifeeManiac 7 · 0 2

of course, Mordent, you seem to forget the case of Daniel Pearl.

Grow up. Bullying stops when the targets thump the bullies into next week or their next lifetime.

There are no police or nannies in the international world and thus everyone has the right to punish offenders against them in whatever ways will deter the next potential offenders.

Read John Locke [hmm ... I suppose your American schools didn't require you to do that, did they? Well, that's your loss, mate. You still get to either grow up or become a slave.]


:(

2007-08-15 01:49:46 · answer #7 · answered by Spock (rhp) 7 · 2 2

When you kidnap people and send them to a torture camp for interrogation you loose all moral high ground and become no better than the barbarians that we are fighting against.

2007-08-15 02:05:34 · answer #8 · answered by sprcpt 6 · 2 1

Lot's of things are against international law...that doesn't mean governments always play ball by the rules...The reason our intelligence info is so bad and we can't stop international criminals is because of hand-wringing lefties wanting us to "make nice" with international terrorists who don't give a nickel for the laws, and will use them to protect themselves from capture...I am all for "extraordinary rendition"...

2007-08-15 01:44:45 · answer #9 · answered by Anonymous · 3 4

Joe Biden said it best, when we torture it puts my (meaning Joe's son who is in the army) son at risk!

The United States should never torture, period, the end.

2007-08-15 02:06:43 · answer #10 · answered by Anonymous · 3 1

fedest.com, questions and answers