Okay, let's see where you guys live. Should the president of the united states have ordered the raid that killed bin laden, knowing that the intel. was gathered using gitmo, black site prisons, waterboarding and other harsh interrogation techniques? What is your answer?
Bin Laden is dead
- Thread starter Twin Fist
- Start date
- Status
I'll answer that with this:
In the 1940's the Nazi's did horrible things, evil thing.
We have their notes.
Should we use those notes in our current research?
Does the fact that a US soldier now can sprinkle magic dust on a wound and rapid-stop bleeding forgive the fact that the base research for that magic dust came out of WW2 German R&D that was tested on Jewish prisoners in the camps, many of whom were children?
I'm not arguing that using the intel was wrong.
I'm arguing that torture IS illegal, and that a nation that prides itself on being a leader can not at whim excuse itself from being held to those same laws.
So I repeat, it's ok to break the law if you deem it acceptable?
- Joined
- Mar 5, 2005
- Messages
- 9,931
- Reaction score
- 1,453
We don't know that the intel. was gathered using waterboarding and other harsh interrogation techniques. However, we have used data from Nazi experimentation on concentration camp prisoners. Our knowledge of how humans react to freezing is based almost entirely upon Nazi experimentation data where human beings were actually frozen-data that was obtained in an unethical, and brutal fashion.
There's still a great deal of controversy over its use. Intel obtained from torture should be no different.
So, in answer to that, yes, having obtained the data-however it was actually obtained-Obama, and those tasked with finding, capturing or killing OBL]-had an obligation to act upon it.
Actually, I would say we need to change the law. I believe in following the law, but I disagree with banning waterboarding so I say we need to change that law.
Apparently our friends in Europe are thinking that the attack on Bin Laden broke international law, quite a few times over. Hmmmmm, will you guys go up to the white house to make international citizen's arrests of the officials responsible for breaking international law. Since, all through this thread the international law on waterboarding was sacrosanct, it would seem to me you would be even more outraged over the invasion of a sovereign nation, the killing of unarmed civillians and the execution of a wanted criminal. Hmmmmm, what say you now young jedis....the article:
http://pajamasmedia.com/blog/the-european-media-reacts-to-death-of-osama-bin-laden/
from the article:
European media, almost without exception, have focused particular attention on the news that bin Laden was not armed when he was killed by American operatives. Many Europeans have criticized what they describe as America’s “wild-west” concept of justice. Dozens of European newspapers have published lengthy philosophical essays by sundry intellectuals that examine the morality of bin Laden’s killing. Many argue that bin Laden should have been tried in a court of law.
. Many German analysts say the American action was illegal under international law and some Germans have called for an international commission (similar to the Goldstone Commission in Israel) to investigate the U.S. foray into Pakistan. Unanswered remains the question of whether European activists will accuse U.S. President Barack Obama of war crimes and seek a warrant for his arrest as they did for George W. Bush, who recently was forced to cancel a trip to Switzerland.
http://pajamasmedia.com/blog/the-european-media-reacts-to-death-of-osama-bin-laden/
from the article:
European media, almost without exception, have focused particular attention on the news that bin Laden was not armed when he was killed by American operatives. Many Europeans have criticized what they describe as America’s “wild-west” concept of justice. Dozens of European newspapers have published lengthy philosophical essays by sundry intellectuals that examine the morality of bin Laden’s killing. Many argue that bin Laden should have been tried in a court of law.
. Many German analysts say the American action was illegal under international law and some Germans have called for an international commission (similar to the Goldstone Commission in Israel) to investigate the U.S. foray into Pakistan. Unanswered remains the question of whether European activists will accuse U.S. President Barack Obama of war crimes and seek a warrant for his arrest as they did for George W. Bush, who recently was forced to cancel a trip to Switzerland.
Waterboarding & torture violate BOTH US and International Law.
As to the sovereign nation argument, they are in fact probably correct, however there may be treaty or other clauses that would allow such.
But, the US doesn't worry much about treaties.
But, let me ask this:
Should an Israeli commando team be allowed to stage a rapid insertion, seek and capture, extract mission on oh, say Tulsa OK to capture a former SS commander or PLO general?
Without advance notice to our government, permission, etc?
As to the sovereign nation argument, they are in fact probably correct, however there may be treaty or other clauses that would allow such.
But, the US doesn't worry much about treaties.
But, let me ask this:
Should an Israeli commando team be allowed to stage a rapid insertion, seek and capture, extract mission on oh, say Tulsa OK to capture a former SS commander or PLO general?
Without advance notice to our government, permission, etc?
If they can get out of the country before we catch them sure. If we catch them they are subject to our laws and would have to suffer the consequences, I would wish them good hunting though.
Well, I am pretty sure that shooting unarmed civillians and executing an unarmed wanted criminal suspect is also against U.S. law and international law, and a lot more serious than waterboarding a terrorist. Hmmmmm?
Not asking if you approve.
I'm asking if the US should accept foreign military operating -without permission- on it's soil against targets that include US citizens.
Better yet, should the US accept foreign military operating -with permission- on it's soil against targets that include US citizens.
Hell, should I have to worry about some French Commando knocking my door in because he got the address to the Surrender Plaze wrong?
You're ok with waterboarding.
How about rape? Thumb screws? Honey and fire ants? Muzak Metallica?
Where's the line?
I get it though. You're fine with the US breaking the law at whim if they feel it's necessary.
I wonder if my local PD will buy that as an excuse. "Sorry officer, I know the speed limit was 55, but I didn't feel I should be bound by it because I had a triple bean burrito and it's barking bad!"
- Joined
- Mar 5, 2005
- Messages
- 9,931
- Reaction score
- 1,453
Now, Bob- a variant of that has actually worked for me, when I was going close to 95......Why were you going so fast?...I gotta pee! :lfao:
In summary:
US/International law outlaws torture.
Evidence collected by it is inadmissible in court.
No nation can at whim ignore international law and treaty when dealing with other nations.
Violators are subject to prosecution.
The rest, is simple people trying to justify a 'the results justify the means' argument...one I can not agree with.
US/International law outlaws torture.
Evidence collected by it is inadmissible in court.
No nation can at whim ignore international law and treaty when dealing with other nations.
Violators are subject to prosecution.
The rest, is simple people trying to justify a 'the results justify the means' argument...one I can not agree with.
I need to sleep...but, no rape and thumb screws are not right. Waterboarding is not harmful in either the short or long term, requires no violation of the body, other than a little water up the nose, which is non lethal, does not break the skin or bones, and does not create intense pain or psychological damage. Also, it has the added benefit of ending as soon as the murdering dirt bag decides to cooperate.
On a side note, Richard Miniter, in his book "Master mind," says that Khalid's favorite food, which he received after he was waterboarded and started cooperating, was the McDonald's Filet of fish sandwich. During his time with al queda, his nickname was kfc because he loved to eat kentucky fried chicken.
On a side note, Richard Miniter, in his book "Master mind," says that Khalid's favorite food, which he received after he was waterboarded and started cooperating, was the McDonald's Filet of fish sandwich. During his time with al queda, his nickname was kfc because he loved to eat kentucky fried chicken.
Yeah, I am pretty sure that U.S. and internatinal law does not condone putting bullets into unarmed civillians and unarmed criminal suspects either. Would you give the "go" order on this op. knowing the info. was from gitmo, black sites and waterboarding as well as other harsh interrogation techniques, as well as knowing that killing unarmed civillians in another soveriegn nation was against both U.S. and international law. Please, let's try not to spin that moral compass around too much.
A simple question: "go" or "no go" break U.S. law and international law or not, it is your decision now president (fill in the blank). I am closely watching your moral compass on this decision.
- Status
