Everything Is Illegal In America??

[Q9]

When you have a group of prisoners that you are getting info. from you can use the other prisoners to find out what is true and what is not. A skilled interrogator can tell from body language. For instance under water boarding the guy tells you they plan to blowup a blue building and when he tell another that we know they plan to blow up a blue building that person will show some sign that will say if we are on the right track.

We hold our self to a higher standard to our determent.

I could have some serious fun with the logical extreme of your last sentence.

Perhaps we should do like the Russians did? Some Islamic extremists at one point had captured some Russians (not sure who; I believe they were government officials). The Russians' response was to find the extremists' families, chop a finger off of each one, and send it to the extremists. It worked. Should we do that, too, since it "works?" Perhaps we should also capture relatives of known and suspected terrorists and threaten to torture them to death?

Trust me, the ends do not justify the means. What, precisely, is the purpose of going to war if we're going be just as evil as the enemy? The fact is, some things are wrong, plain and simple. Indiscriminate killing of civilians is wrong; torture is wrong; using innocents, directly or indirectly, as human shields is wrong; killing soldiers who have surrendered is wrong; and so on and so forth. We're supposed to be better than that. Aren't those types of things what terrorists do? Then again, government today, almost without fail, is just one big terrorist organization, so...

 

[dainerra]

In the liqueur store analogy there is a major flaw. You are driving to an area where it is LEGAL to do that activity. You purchase your items at a licensed establishment that is following the legal code of that county(state, whatever).
Here, we have several counties that are dry - no alcohol sales allowed. However, it is not illegal for private citizens to possess alcohol that they purchased elsewhere. So, drive a few miles to the county line and take your liqueur home with you.
The problem with the torture scenario, is that it isn't "torture is illegal in the US" but that it is illegal for US representatives (military, intelligence, whatever) to torture suspects. It isn't a matter of where you do it, but the activity itself.

 

[thaiturkey]

In the liqueur store analogy there is a major flaw. You are driving to an area where it is LEGAL to do that activity. You purchase your items at a licensed establishment that is following the legal code of that county(state, whatever).
Here, we have several counties that are dry - no alcohol sales allowed. However, it is not illegal for private citizens to possess alcohol that they purchased elsewhere. So, drive a few miles to the county line and take your liqueur home with you.
The problem with the torture scenario, is that it isn't "torture is illegal in the US" but that it is illegal for US representatives (military, intelligence, whatever) to torture suspects. It isn't a matter of where you do it, but the activity itself.

He follows a winding path of pseudo logic in an attempt to take his flawed case to a point where he thinks people will be fooled into accepting what he writes. He knows that the liqueur store analogy is irrelevant to the point being discussed.

Your last sentence is, of course, absolutely correct and it applies to all Western countries.

 

[hemet dennis]

In the liqueur store analogy there is a major flaw. You are driving to an area where it is LEGAL to do that activity. You purchase your items at a licensed establishment that is following the legal code of that county(state, whatever).
Here, we have several counties that are dry - no alcohol sales allowed. However, it is not illegal for private citizens to possess alcohol that they purchased elsewhere. So, drive a few miles to the county line and take your liqueur home with you.
The problem with the torture scenario, is that it isn't "torture is illegal in the US" but that it is illegal for US representatives (military, intelligence, whatever) to torture suspects. It isn't a matter of where you do it, but the activity itself.

Can you show what law you refer to when you say it's illegal for U.S. representatives to torture suspects ? I think they got a legal opinion that what they did was legal.

 

[dainerra]

The U.S. Military Code specifies that it is a crime to violate the Geneva convention:
"Whoever, ... commits a war crime, ... shall be fined under this title or imprisoned for life or any term of years, ... and if death results to the victim, shall also be subject to the penalty of death. ... Definition: As used in this section the term 'war crime' means ... a grave breach in any of the international conventions signed at Geneva 12 August 1949 [or acts] prohibited by Article 23, 25, 27, or 28 of the Annex to the Hague Convention IV, Respecting the Laws and Customs of War on Land, signed 18 October 1907 ... " (Section 2441: U.S. Military Code on War Crimes)

1945 Nuremberg Principles:

After WWII, the U.S. led the formation of the ‘Nuremberg Principles,’ which form the United Nations Charter. Every country in the world is bound by that Charter.
Defines as a crime: "Planning, preparation, initiation or waging of a war of aggression or a war in violation of international treaties, agreements or assurances;"

 

[hemet dennis]

He follows a winding path of pseudo logic in an attempt to take his flawed case to a point where he thinks people will be fooled into accepting what he writes. He knows that the liqueur store analogy is irrelevant to the point being discussed.

Your last sentence is, of course, absolutely correct and it applies to all Western countries.

Well you haven't showed how my case is flawed.
The analogy was to show you that somethings are legal some places and the same thing can be illegal some place else.
Now do I think we should torture people to an extent of doing permanent damage ? No
Should we cut off body parts ? No
Should we hang people by there arms as was done to John McCain in N. Vietnam so that to this day he cannot raise his arms over his head ? No
But water boarding I have no problem with.

 

[chickened]

Fortunately for us Americans we have 2 examples of products that one is legal and the other is not. As for one, alcohol it is legal and kills more people than drugs. For drugs they are illegal and kill less people but cost more money to enforce the ban. Which is better for all?

As for torture by the military it is a mute point. The military does things that we cannot do already. Their job is to KILL the enemy period and it is when we use them for world police that these other issues come in to play. As far as I am concerned they can pretty much do what is needed to win for my side when the choice to go to war has been reached. That is what an army is for.

 

[chickened]

Well you haven't showed how my case is flawed.
The analogy was to show you that somethings are legal some places and the same thing can be illegal some place else.
Now do I think we should torture people to an extent of doing permanent damage ? No
Should we cut off body parts ? No
Should we hang people by there arms as was done to John McCain in N. Vietnam so that to this day he cannot raise his arms over his head ? No
But water boarding I have no problem with.

That is the fine line as to what constitutes torture. It is relative, (not done to a relative

) as to one mans' opinion or many mens' opinion as to what torture is. That is basically what the legal opinion said about water boarding.

The problem is really the idea that we somehow think a terrorist who is too cowardly to go to war has rights to begin with when they should be shot like rats for what they do.

They are prepared to die when they commit acts of terrorism I see no reason to disappoint them.

 

[DuckLady]

Thank you for your participation