[Bobboau]

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.

[Mefustae]

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.

[aldo_14]

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.

[Ashrak]

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.

[Colonol Dekker]

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 ?

[Ashrak]

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

[Flipside]

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.

[aldo_14]

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.

[Mefustae]

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?!

[Colonol Dekker]

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.

[Turambar]

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

[vyper]

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.

[Flipside]

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.'

[Mefustae]

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.

[NGTM-1R]

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.

[Turambar]

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

[SadisticSid]

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?

[Colonol Dekker]

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?

[Flipside]

LOL I have, frequently, Land of Flying Elbows :/

[Colonol Dekker]

I'm quite tall, about 6.2 > 6.3ish and i put my big old rugby shouulders to use.

  Just like that