Hard Light Productions Forums
Off-Topic Discussion => General Discussion => Topic started by: Bobboau on June 21, 2006, 05:38:10 am
-
http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=5498870
it was going to come up eventualy, note the whole 'bodies so baddly mutalated they need DNA testing to be sure it's them' thing. and that's just fine, it's a war and this **** happens, but next time someone wants to cry about sleep deprivation, barking dogs and standing naked, I get to wip this out.
-
Y'know, given that the US was the agressor in the conflict [nothing wrong with that, just plain fact], you could argue that the entire body-count for the war is on their hands, and that beats two tortured soldiers by... what, several thousand? But then, who's keeping score, eh?
Plus, it's worth noting that these were soldiers, they knew the risk and were trained to avoid it where possible. Obviously it didn't help here, but the risk comes with the territory. Torture against civilians that may well be completely innocent is somewhat more sinister than torture of enemy combatants killing your countrymen.
-
http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=5498870
it was going to come up eventualy, note the whole 'bodies so baddly mutalated they need DNA testing to be sure it's them' thing. and that's just fine, it's a war and this **** happens, but next time someone wants to cry about sleep deprivation, barking dogs and standing naked, I get to wip this out.
Look, torture is always wrong. This (the torturing of effective POWs) is horrible, vicious, inexcusably inhumane and totally unjustified (and is unjustifiable); i.e. it's simply evil.
But you can't say, 'oh lets just torture them, but only a little' and think that makes it alright. The existence of homicide doesn't stop GBH being a serious crime, after all, and 2 wrongs don't make a right.
-
and i suppose torturing iraq people is "okhay"
America is ****ed up PERIOD you had no buisness in iraq and still dont, its all your fault, also the entire population is under the control of the media
OMFGBBQ they killed on of our soldiers OMG REVENGE oh and it dosent count that you have allready killed thousands of theyrs.
Thats all i had to say.
-
Its a war, this stuff happens, we should just count ourselves lucky we werent all drafted up for WW2, Not that i wouldnt fight, It just seemed to one of the more
viscous vishcous bloody and violent, It was pre-Geneva ?
-
too many rules in war to be honest, if noone gave a **** on how to destroy the enemie or extract information it woulda be so much more horrid and people would try to avoid wars alltogether
-
Pre Geneva. It wasn't so much your treatment as a prisoner in many cases that was the danger, it's was conditions on the front line meant that disease and infection were far far greater enemies than Hans with a gun. I can't remember the exact amount, but in WW1, for example, a lot more lives were lost to dysentry, cholera and other diseases than people were shot.
-
too many rules in war to be honest, if noone gave a **** on how to destroy the enemie or extract information it woulda be so much more horrid and people would try to avoid wars alltogether
No they wouldn't. The people who start wars, are the people who send others to fight for them.
-
No they wouldn't. The people who start wars, are the people who send others to fight for them.
We need a system where politicians may go to war, but they put something on the line when they do so. When you've got a system like the one now where politicians can not only go to war on a whim, but they lose nothing, and even profit from it. Am I the only one who sees a small problem with that system?!
-
A net game of Quake 4 with electordes/guillotines over their manhood.
Or stick all politicians in a Big Brother house..............
That way we can bomb it while their inside and establish a new HLPBB based world order.
-
Its a war, this stuff happens, we should just count ourselves lucky we werent all drafted up for WW2, Not that i wouldnt fight, It just seemed to one of the more viscous vishcous bloody and violent, It was pre-Geneva ?
at leastWWII was a good war, with good guys and bad guys. everything since then has been shades of gray, and america is representing a darker and darker shade
-
Bob, your standpoint is bull**** and you're smart enough to know it. Just because your enemy is capable of such brutality, does not justify your own forces acting in such a manner. Remember that "we" (being the west) are supposed to be above such behaviour.
-
Sounds like Goading to me to be honest. 'Anything you can do, we can do better'. The point is, it doesn't justify the torture of prisoners, it simply exemplifies it at it's more extreme stage. It's all torture, otherwise you'd be saying 'It's ok to hit people as long as it doesn't bruise.'
-
at leastWWII was a good war, with good guys and bad guys.
Wrong! I hate that moronic misconception. Read into the war a little, the moral sides were about as clear as one of my stools.
Just because your enemy is capable of such brutality, does not justify your own forces acting in such a manner.
I honestly don't believe any side, faction or group has held themselves to that standard, and I believe no single human does either. It's a myth, one propagated by optimists and philosophical well-wishers, and it holds no value whatsoever in the face of the overwhelming natural cruelty that is human behaviour.
It's a little hard to see the moral high-ground when we're all standing in the mud.
-
Wrong! I hate that moronic misconception. Read into the war a little, the moral sides were about as clear as one of my stools.
I hate that moronic misconception too.
It was a war that needed to be fought; and those, by definition, involve some evil that can be removed no other way.
-
i guess i watch too much history channel then.. seriously, that was the impression i got from my history classes too.
i'll re-teach myself later, i have too much math crap to worry about now
-
I honestly don't believe any side, faction or group has held themselves to that standard, and I believe no single human does either. It's a myth, one propagated by optimists and philosophical well-wishers, and it holds no value whatsoever in the face of the overwhelming natural cruelty that is human behaviour.
It's a little hard to see the moral high-ground when we're all standing in the mud.
Oh stop being so melodramatic. It is no longer human nature to seek an eye for an eye. If it were true, there would be no such thing as forgiveness. We'd all be running around, forever seeking revenge for every infraction against us until there was nothing left but hatred. You don't have to look far to see that this is not the case. I won't deny that the basic need for restitution remains, but that's what the justice system serves.
And do you really believe that most human behaviour is 'natural cruelty'? Were you raised by wolves or something?
-
And do you really believe that most human behaviour is 'natural cruelty'? Were you raised by wolves or something?
You've never commuted through london in rush hour have you? :mad: :nod:
-
LOL I have, frequently, Land of Flying Elbows :/
-
I'm quite tall, about 6.2 > 6.3ish and i put my big old rugby shouulders to use.
:bump: Just like that :D
-
And do you really believe that most human behaviour is 'natural cruelty'? Were you raised by wolves or something?
My upbringing by a mother-wolf is none of your business! If it was good enough for Romulus & Remus, it's good enough for me...
...Okay, not really, just in a melodramatic mood. :p
Still, I think you give humanity waaaay too much credit. An individual may be calm, collected and not seek such harsh reparations, but then societally we strive for anonymity within a larger group, where such traits no longer apply. Deep down, we all strive for sweet revenge when we a wronged, and we only restrain ourselves out of fear of reprisal. Isn't the mere presence of that feeling evidence enough that we really don't give a s*** about anyone other than ourselves at heart?
-
No we don't.
-
A dashing rebuttle, sir.
-
Quite right, Priorities are priorities.......... You gotta look after yourself before you can help other people.
Aint nature a b1t*h :nod:
-
Has anyone pointed out that this was apparently carried out by an Egyption? So the whole "you invaded their country!!!11222" argument is void. In fact, it seems the major terror elements in Iraq are not from iraq, and consistently kill iraqis.
-
Has anyone pointed out that this was apparently carried out by an Egyption? So the whole "you invaded their country!!!11222" argument is void. In fact, it seems the major terror elements in Iraq are not from iraq, and consistently kill iraqis.
The vast majority of insurgents are Iraqi, not to mention the ethnic terrorism i.e. sunni vs shia. Even the Pentagon admits this. Furthermore, the arguement is still valid as it involves the creation of a state (of affairs) in which foreign elements are welcomed in, or at the very least tolerated, to kill Americans. There's simply no way any form of terrorist insurgency of this nature could operate without local support - why do you think the US was sending troops into Ramadi?
-
ok, to all you "oh noes the killed an american now you want revenge" morons. look at my post, I don't particularly care that two american solders were killed, I don't care that they were tortued, all I care about is the fact that we are being forced to fight this war with both hands and a leg tied behind are back, all I hear is *****bich ***** America is tortureing people, and the thing that realy pisses me off is the stuff that is being put up as examples of torture, lack of privacy, sleep depravation, foul language, to this date the worst thing that we have been found to have done (comperably, with prisoners) was Abu Ghraib, what did we do there? we made a few people play naked pirimid, were a leash, and have dogs bark at them (ok, granted there was worse stuff like that, some sort of thing with a pospherous light (but still in comparison that aint that bad) I'm not saying we should let these people off, but you, need to look at the situation more holisticly). all I'm asking for is a truely level playing feild. that means, I want you to have the reaction you had when you read this, if the sides were switched, that's all, I want you to treat me and my people no more harshly than an insurgant/Iraqi/whatever you want to call them. in other words, if you hear a story about an american beating some detainie to death, I want to hear you say "oh, well the Iraqis are doing the same to the americans, no biggie".
I reitterate, my anger is not directed at the people who killed the American solders, basturds they may be this is war, and this sort of thing is expected, my anger is directed at the onesidedness of the critisism. the FIRST thought that poped into my head when I heard this was 'imagine what would have happened if we had done that to them'. I want you to think about that and the differences in your reaction. don't hold us to a higher standard, either lowwer your standard for us or raise theres, you obviusly think us the devil aleady so I don't care anymore. just give us the same curtacy you give them.
-
ok, to all you "oh noes the killed an american now you want revenge" morons. look at my post, I don't particularly care that two american solders were killed, I don't care that they were tortued, all I care about is the fact that we are being forced to fight this war with both hands and a leg tied behind are back, all I hear is *****bich ***** America is tortureing people, and the thing that realy pisses me off is the stuff that is being put up as examples of torture, lack of privacy, sleep depravation, foul language, to this date the worst thing that we have been found to have done (comperably, with prisoners) was Abu Ghraib, what did we do there? we made a few people play naked pirimid, were a leash, and have dogs bark at them (ok, granted there was worse stuff like that, some sort of thing with a pospherous light (but still in comparison that aint that bad) I'm not saying we should let these people off, but you, need to look at the situation more holisticly). all I'm asking for is a truely level playing feild. that means, I want you to have the reaction you had when you read this, if the sides were switched, that's all, I want you to treat me and my people no more harshly than an insurgant/Iraqi/whatever you want to call them. in other words, if you hear a story about an american beating some detainie to death, I want to hear you say "oh, well the Iraqis are doing the same to the americans, no biggie".
I reitterate, my anger is not directed at the people who killed the American solders, basturds they may be this is war, and this sort of thing is expected, my anger is directed at the onesidedness of the critisism. the FIRST thought that poped into my head when I heard this was 'imagine what would have happened if we had done that to them'. I want you to think about that and the differences in your reaction. don't hold us to a higher standard, either lowwer your standard for us or raise theres, you obviusly think us the devil aleady so I don't care anymore. just give us the same curtacy you give them.
I'm sorry you consider the basic rules of war and the conventions upon human rights (already being bent and broken anyways) as tying your hands behind your back. The US started this war under the banner of bringing freedom and democracy - do you honestly expect people to just stand by whilst crimes are committed under that banner? I'm pretty sure you've never been forced to undergo water torture, stand upright until you piss and **** yourself, suffered extreme sleep deprivation, etc, otherwise you wouldn't even be trying to defend the indefensible. Torture in all forms is wrong, full stop.
-
Hmm Ashrak got banned over this ? :confused:
-
And do you really believe that most human behaviour is 'natural cruelty'? Were you raised by wolves or something?
Wouldn't that make him better behaved than many of the humans, not hte other way around? :D
-
I'm sorry you consider the basic rules of war and the conventions upon human rights (already being bent and broken anyways) as tying your hands behind your back.
no, no, you misunderstand, it's that fact that we follow the rules and the people we fight don't even pretend to that I am refering to. if captured Americans were given the same level of treatment we show our captives, like red cross visits, or culturaly sensitive meals, then I wouldn't find the rules you are talking about the least bit of a burden. but that isn't the way things are, is it?
The US started this war under the banner of bringing freedom and democracy - do you honestly expect people to just stand by whilst crimes are committed under that banner? I'm pretty sure you've never been forced to undergo water torture, stand upright until you piss and **** yourselfdamn near, suffered extreme sleep deprivationdoes 10 hours of sleep in a (7 day) week count?, etc, otherwise you wouldn't even be trying to defend the indefensible. Torture in all forms is wrong, full stop.
do you honestly think, beeing forced to stand for a day or two, not being allowed to sleep for a week compares to haveing your eyes gouged out, your skin being flailed off and haveing your head sawed off? neither one of us has experienced any of these things, but I think you can clearly see that they are on totaly diferent planes of discomfort.
I know people who have endured the things you have described, I have talked with them, and they agree with me.
-
Bob, I fully agree with you on this whole issue. Until we can start seeing the same treatment of civilians and American soldiers in Iraq as detainees in Gitmo, then the rest of the world really needs to keep its mouth quiet about human rights violations. The USA can't even do anything at Gitmo worthy of giving the insurgents something to be afraid of without getting lectures from the EU.
What we put the detainees through at Gitmo is really nothing more than any special ops personnel or airmen go through during their training. They're trained to answer name, rank and serial number; nothing more. What they're not trained to resist is having their skin peeled off, burned away, and their body mutilated as the insurgency in Iraq does. America is relatively standing by the Geneva Convention, while the insurgency doesn't even acknowledge it. The military has to fight with reasonable civility while the insurgency fights with dirty terror tactics.
-
The thing is the US claims to be civilized. Being civilized and treating people in accordance with human rights (especially when they've not yet been found guilty of any crimes, as is the case for approximately 100% of gitmo detainees) goes hand in hand. You can't be one without doing the other.
So it basically comes down to this: Is the US a civilized country that is prepared to stand up for freedom and human rights, or is the US in reality a totalitarian state that's prapared to thrown those things down drain whenever it's convenient? I'd like to believe the former, and so far still do, but I'm starting to have doubts.
-
just because they don't have moral standards doesnt mean we should give up ours.
-
I just hope it won't take another Battle of Solferino for the governments of the world, and the US inparticular, to remember why it is important to have the protections that are currently in place.
-
It's still not the same. The insurgents fighting this war are essentially making Guantanamo what it is; refusing to abide by any international law in terms of treatment of POWs is leading civilians and guilty insurgents alike being thrown into Gitmo. If there were a clearly defined enemy in Iraq, it would certainly be easier to determine who goes to Gitmo and who doesn't. Still another reason that the Iraqi people should hate the insurgency.
Again, I say that what goes on at Gitmo is nothing more than what Air Force personnel who have only had about six weeks of military training go through during SERE training in terms of torture, and, while it is unpleasant, it hardly marks a human rights violation. This is war: **** happens; if this were peacetime and the US was abducting civilians and holding them without question, then I would be infuriated. It's happened frequently during wars; the Filipinos went through it, as did the Japanese, and even this is on a much smaller scale than those incidents.
-
When the Nazis came for the communists,
I remained silent;
I was not a communist.
When they locked up the social democrats,
I remained silent;
I was not a social democrat.
When they came for the trade unionists,
I did not speak out;
I was not a trade unionist.
When they came for the Jews,
I did not speak out;
I was not a Jew.
When they came for me,
there was no one left to speak out.
You have to stick by your own standards even if that makes winning harder. Suck it up or **** off.
-
You seem to be missing something. Iraq and Gitmo are entirely unrelated. The people captured in Iraq are held mostly at Abu Ghraib, though I'm pretty sure they would trade that for Gitmo any day considering what has gone on there...
Many Guantanamo detainees were part of a real war. Against a clearly defined enemy - the Taleban, specifically. And don't make the mistake of equating Taleban with Al Qaeda, because they are not the same. Many more detainees there were simply civlilians (cab drivers, etc.) picked up off the street due to being in the wrong place at the wrong time or some US allied warlord holding a grudge against them.
And finally, there's a world of difference between going through a 6 week course you know will end and where you know you're not going to be harmed, and being held indefinitely, for no reason you know of, with no apparent chance of ever being let loose, not knowing whether you will actually live to see another day. It is a massive human rights violation, and a disgrace for the US to even be remotely associated with that sort of practise.
-
It's still not the same. The insurgents fighting this war are essentially making Guantanamo what it is; refusing to abide by any international law in terms of treatment of POWs is leading civilians and guilty insurgents alike being thrown into Gitmo. If there were a clearly defined enemy in Iraq, it would certainly be easier to determine who goes to Gitmo and who doesn't. Still another reason that the Iraqi people should hate the insurgency.
So it's entirely on the hands of the insurgents that the US are holding potentially innocent civilians and subjecting them to torture?
Oh, it's because they're not a 'clearly defined enemy', well, that makes sense. Wait, no it doesn't, as it's not being 'clearly defined' that's kept the insurgent forces from being destroyed. Being underfined and fighting a guerella war is how you fight the US, they did it to great effect in Vietnam, and they're doing it to respectable effect here. It is not the fault of the insurgency that the US is picking up random POWs and ignoring their rights under Geneva, and to do so would be like saying the US shouldn't have bombed the s*** out of Bagdad before they went in because it wasn't 'sporting'.
Anyway, you're missing the point, while innocent civilians being sent to Gitmo is a problem, it's what goes on there that is the issue here, and I don't see how the fighting methods of a group of individuals half a world away have any impact on what goes on within those walls on the Isle of Cuba.
-
You have to stick by your own standards even if that makes winning harder. Suck it up or **** off.
ok, we are sticking by OUR standards, few Americans consiter what happens in gitmo to be torture, when it is described to them.
and can you posably try to make a point without resorting to cliced nazi references, I beleive there is a rule of some sort stateing that the first person to bring up Nazis forfits the argument, I won't hold you to it of course. I don't think I've used any, but I think I've seen it come up a few times, I want you out of 'regergitate retoric' mode for a moment please.
-
ok, we are sticking by OUR standards, few Americans consiter what happens in gitmo to be torture, when it is described to them.
Then why are you complaining about torture of your own countrymen? You're sticking to your standards in not-really-but-sort-of torturing people, and Iraqi insurgents are sticking to their standards in blatantly torturing people. Everybody wins with an attitude like that! :)
-
Well, by current american standards, any US civilians in the Iraqi war zone could of course rightfully be considered illegal combatants by the enemy, and as such are devoid of any human rights or protections under the geneva conventions. So yes, if you stick by the current US standards and not the accepted international standards, the insurgents are playing entirely by the book...
Now, I don't hold to that. Of course what happens there is wrong. But so is what happens at Abu Ghraib and Gitmo - Not wrong on the same level (well, some Abu Ghraib instances have been), not at all, but wrong still.
-
Then why are you complaining about torture of your own countrymen? You're sticking to your standards in not-really-but-sort-of torturing people, and Iraqi insurgents are sticking to their standards in blatantly torturing people. Everybody wins with an attitude like that! :)
ummm... what? were have I ONCE complained about the incedent here, have I not explained enough times that, I don't care about this persay, I find this situation to be well within the expectations of a war, how many more times are you going to just ignore what I say and assume I'm parroting Bush because the sounds I make don't exactly match up with yours?
I'm not pissed about the guys getting tortured, I'm pissed that people such as your self consiter sleep depravation, and loud noises to be on par with it because it's politicaly/ideologicaly convenient.
-
Well, by current american standards, any US civilians in the Iraqi war zone could of course rightfully be considered illegal combatants by the enemy if they were found in a combat zone preferably with a weapon, or if someone that the insergents trusted told them said US civilian was actively involved with military opperations against them, but granted, that could easly make any US citizen a valid target, so... I'll accept that premis , and as such are devoid of any human rights or protections under the geneva conventions. So yes, if you stick by the current US standards and not the accepted international standards, the insurgents are playing entirely by the book...well ok then, nice to see we see these things eye to eye, so long as we get to play by the same book, I'm fine
Now, I don't hold to that. ah, damn! Of course what happens there is wrong. But so is what happens at Abu Ghraib and Gitmo - Not wrong on the same level (well, some Abu Ghraib instances have been), not at all, but wrong still.
now, here is the important part, who has gotten more international flak? the US or the insurgency? you have just said that what we do, while wrong, is not on the same level of wrong as the things the insurgency does (some insedents have aproched it, but the mean atrosity average is lower) so why do we get grilled for three years for one incedent, and when they do it, it's rarely even back of the paper news?
-
ummm... what? were have I ONCE complained about the incedent here, have I not explained enough times that, I don't care about this persay, I find this situation to be well within the expectations of a war, how many more times are you going to just ignore what I say and assume I'm parroting Bush because the sounds I make don't exactly match up with yours?
I'm not pissed about the guys getting tortured, I'm pissed that people such as your self consiter sleep depravation, and loud noises to be on par with it because it's politicaly/ideologicaly convenient.
My apologies, I miscontrued the motive behind your creation of the thread. Anyway, I still think you underestimate the effect good psychological torture can have on an individual. The body will heal with time, but the mind is a far more delicate instrument.
now, here is the important part, who has gotten more international flak? the US or the insurgency? you have just said that what we do, while wrong, is not on the same level of wrong as the things the insurgency does (some insedents have aproched it, but the mean atrosity average is lower) so why do we get grilled for three years for one incedent, and when they do it, it's rarely even back of the paper news?
You may not preach to be better than the average dictatorship, but your leaders certainly do. So, you'll have to forgive some of us when we get a little ticked at your leaders proclaiming the US as a beacon of hope, liberty and freedom, and proceed to smack a POW before they've even finished talking. The insurgency may be worse in some areas, but they don't seriously expect people to believe otherwise. :rolleyes:
-
BECAUSE WE EXPECT THEM TO! Jesus Christ is it so hard for you to understand? We know they're ****ing nutters! We expect better from people who are supposed to be on our (justice, freedom, democracy, et al) side!
-
not that it affects this thread, but i saw this on the news at dinner
apparently a detatchment went to an area to search for a terrorist, they couldnt find him. so, instead of leaving and saying they didnt find him, they murdered some random 53 year old man and planted an ak47 and a shovel on his corpse.
the defenders of freedom and democracy.
-
Erm, link or credible proof?
-
yeah, I heard that too, aparently they are being put on trial for murder (http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/5103558.stm?ls), and yes, the death penalty is on the table for them, if they did it sounds like they deserve it... yes... interesting...
I was actualy going to post a thread about that to, there was another murder case involveing a US solder and a(n) Iraqi(s).
so anyway back to the tread, what was that you were saying about expecting better from us?
-
yeah, i expect better from us.
go idealism and morals!
-
I like the fact that people are decrying the USMC despite the fact they are actually charging the guys.
Damned if you do, damned if you don't.
-
I like the fact that people are decrying the USMC despite the fact they are actually charging the guys.
Damned if you do, damned if you don't.
So... you're saying they shouldn't cop any flak for letting it happen in the first place?!
-
Expectation is exactly the point. We don't expect a movement like the Iraq insurgency to uphold human rights, and so the fact that they don't isn't something that's being brought up every 2 days in the papers. Guess what though - We don't deal with them either. We don't trade with them, we don't talk to them, we don't cooperate with them, and we throw them in prison whenever they're identified or, if they're armed, kill them.
If we were to expect the US to behave like they do, we would have to also start throwing every US citizen in jail, stop all relations, impose a complete trade embargo, bomb every US base in and around Europe and so forth. That's what we would morally have to do if it comes to the point where we expect the US to behave like the insurgents do. So I think the fact that we expect much higher standards from the US is a good thing... don't you? If you eventually end up no better than the insurgents, you basically forfeit everything.
-
I like the fact that people are decrying the USMC despite the fact they are actually charging the guys.
Damned if you do, damned if you don't.
So... you're saying they shouldn't cop any flak for letting it happen in the first place?!
Oh, come on now. You're not actually going to blame an entire military branch for not countering something that just happens like this, are you? I'm not saying the Marines shouldn't be put on trial and investigated, but why decry an entire division just because of what a few people do?
You can't just simply say that the USMC expected something like this to happen and just let them go off and do it. Thousands of raids have been carried out with Marines investigating, doing their job, and coming home, and in the event that something doesn't turn out right, none of them until now have been reported to do something like this.
-
I simply understood DB's post to mean 'they charged the soldiers, so drop it', which is dumb. I didn't say the entire 'Core should be chastised, nor did I say they should have the entire division investigated undersuspicion of genocide. Stop twisting my words. :rolleyes:
Anyway, why shouldn't they have expected it? They're conducting an occupation in a decidedly hostile place where guerellas could be anywhere and anyone, and death could come at any moment. Hell, i'd be damned worried if they had thought something like this wouldn't happen. It's happened before, in other countries, other wars, and other times, why should this country, war and time be any different?
IMO, they did see something like this coming, as evidenced by that 'empathy' or 'sensitivity' training or whatever it was that was announced for US Armed Forces abroad a few months ago. The fact alone that they're going to waste money on crap like that is evidence that they expected it.
-
I'm sorry you consider the basic rules of war and the conventions upon human rights (already being bent and broken anyways) as tying your hands behind your back.
no, no, you misunderstand, it's that fact that we follow the rules and the people we fight don't even pretend to that I am refering to. if captured Americans were given the same level of treatment we show our captives, like red cross visits, or culturaly sensitive meals, then I wouldn't find the rules you are talking about the least bit of a burden. but that isn't the way things are, is it?
The US started this war under the banner of bringing freedom and democracy - do you honestly expect people to just stand by whilst crimes are committed under that banner? I'm pretty sure you've never been forced to undergo water torture, stand upright until you piss and **** yourselfdamn near, suffered extreme sleep deprivationdoes 10 hours of sleep in a (7 day) week count?, etc, otherwise you wouldn't even be trying to defend the indefensible. Torture in all forms is wrong, full stop.
do you honestly think, beeing forced to stand for a day or two, not being allowed to sleep for a week compares to haveing your eyes gouged out, your skin being flailed off and haveing your head sawed off? neither one of us has experienced any of these things, but I think you can clearly see that they are on totaly diferent planes of discomfort.
I know people who have endured the things you have described, I have talked with them, and they agree with me.
And that stops it being torture, does it? Tell me, what did these people you've talked to actually go through then? Elaborate.
Tell you what, breaking your leg isn't really as bad as killing you with a chainsaw, mind if I do that? Or, maybe - to be fair - if you kill one person, I'll chop the legs off of ten, and then we'll be equal?
Did you even read the first post I made on this thread? I doubt it.