Is it acceptable for the US government to torture people?

[BigSky]

The price of a barrel of oil is a historic fact - going to be hard to pin this on anyone other than the current administration (see graph ... remember oil below $20 a barrel? sigh)

Seems you pay VERY little attention to events as they unfolded.

Prices start rising in roughly 1999, Septemeber 7. 2000 was when oil prices on the spot market climbed to $35.39 per barrel, their highest since November 1990.  Terms of trade with OPEC were said to have dramatically shifted to OPEC's  favor with higher prices yet to come. (Looks like we know what those higher prices are now huh)  From this point on OPEC has the power to control prices by their output to determine whether they want higher prices or lower prices. This is the first time this has occurred in over 20+ years and since that point OPEC has NEVER lost terms of trade.

By your own chart you can see that prices were taking off since 1999 and the only hiccup occurred where prices dropped was because of 9/11's effect on the US and world economy, but as soon as that hiccup passed prices continued on in the pattern they were before Bush was even in office.

Not sure I understand your point about the US's treatment of Indians - is this to say that people fingered by a corrupt Iraqi secret service should be treated as sub-humans in the same way non-anglos were treated as sub-humans back in the day? Are you saying Andrew Johnson's injun policy worked so well we should use it as a guide to the Middle East?

I'm sure you dont know.  Pretty clear on that.

You claim 200 years of tradition and honor going down the drain by our actions today, yet you fail to even comprehend our history and therefor your claim of tradition and honor being lost is false because it doesnt even compare to what past generations did, which was far worse in this country.

The most serious difference between today and the numerous examples of torture in US history is that today torture is being condoned by political leaders and systematically used as a tactic of first resort. The constitutional issue is that this is being done without regard to existing US law and treaty obligations.  If the law is to mean anything then it must apply to everyone.

Hmm so was the trail of tears, infecting tribes with smallpox by giving them infected blankets etc. etc.

The current president had carte blanc for 5 years after 9/11. He could have chosen to conduct his war within our constitutional framework, instead he chose to act as an unitary executive daring the legislative and judicial branch to stop him. Administration officials have resorted to complete memory failure and contempt of Congress in an all encompassing effort to run out the clock on their term in office. Maybe if his policies were successful their legality would have been overlooked but that is not what happened. His policies have been amateurish and not well thought out. The blow back from our post 9/11 policies will haunt us for generations. Our blind blundering bluster has been a disaster. An example of defeating ones self. I don't see everyone forgetting the sequence of events anytime soon. At least I am hoping that the 40% of Americans who believe in a Saddam-9/11 tie are also mostly people who will stay home on election day, dissatisfied that Rudy lost in the primary.

Actually the war was conducted as within the framework.  Congress did authorize war to be conducted. 

Authorization for Use of Military Force Against Iraq Resolution of 2002.  Passed by the United States Congress in October 2002 as Public Law No: 107-243.  Hence authorization for Bush from Congress to conduct war as is required by the US Constitution.


Senate approves Iraq war resolution

WASHINGTON (CNN) -- In a major victory for the White House, the Senate early Friday voted 77-23 to authorize President Bush to attack Iraq if Saddam Hussein refuses to give up weapons of mass destruction as required by U.N. resolutions.

Hours earlier, the House approved an identical resolution, 296-133

[Bill Peckham]

Not sure I understand your point about the US's treatment of Indians - is this to say that people fingered by a corrupt Iraqi secret service should be treated as sub-humans in the same way non-anglos were treated as sub-humans back in the day? Are you saying Andrew Johnson's injun policy worked so well we should use it as a guide to the Middle East?

I'm sure you dont know.  Pretty clear on that.

You claim 200 years of tradition and honor going down the drain by our actions today, yet you fail to even comprehend our history and therefor your claim of tradition and honor being lost is false because it doesnt even compare to what past generations did, which was far worse in this country.

The most serious difference between today and the numerous examples of torture in US history is that today torture is being condoned by political leaders and systematically used as a tactic of first resort. The constitutional issue is that this is being done without regard to existing US law and treaty obligations.  If the law is to mean anything then it must apply to everyone.

Hmm so was the trail of tears, infecting tribes with smallpox by giving them infected blankets etc. etc.

Let me make sure I understand you. You are saying we can't loose our honor because we never had any honor to begin with? You are saying that we can justify torture today because we've done far worse to better people in our history?

[BigSky]

Let me make sure I understand you. You are saying we can't loose our honor because we never had any honor to begin with? You are saying that we can justify torture today because we've done far worse to better people in our history?

Actually not even close.

You said:  "Instead of holding to our 200 years of tradition and honor, we've gone down the path of torture and dishonor. We threw away our birthright for thuggish tactics which have been systematically discredited."


You are the one claiming we have lost tradition and honor by our recent actions.   However these recent actions pale in comparison to actions previously taken.  Hence it is illogical to say we have lost tradition and honor when prior actions were far worse than they are now.  So in essence your claims to having lost tradition and honor of 200 yeares are based on false assumptions when measured by your own standards to tradition and honor of this country over those past 200 years.


 

[Bill Peckham]

The illegality of torture does not depend on America having a saintly past. We signed international treaties constraining our actions freely, of our own free will. And it is true that even after agreeing to abide by the Geneva Conventions we used torture. What is unprecedented is not the torture, but the openness. In the past our government kept secrets; the crimes were sanctioned but they were committed in the shadows, officially denied and condemned. The Bush administration has demanded the right to torture without shame, they've worked to make torture legal through new definitions and new laws like the cynically named Patriot Act.

Maybe you're right and it was always only a myth that "we're better than them" but it is what we use to tell ourselves.

[BigSky]

The illegality of torture does not depend on America having a saintly past. We signed international treaties constraining our actions freely, of our own free will. And it is true that even after agreeing to abide by the Geneva Conventions we used torture. What is unprecedented is not the torture, but the openness. In the past our government kept secrets; the crimes were sanctioned but they were committed in the shadows, officially denied and condemned. The Bush administration has demanded the right to torture without shame, they've worked to make torture legal through new definitions and new laws like the cynically named Patriot Act.

Maybe you're right and it was always only a myth that "we're better than them" but it is what we use to tell ourselves.

Yes we have international treaties.  However as those treaties are written they only apply and give benefit to those that are members of them.  Since terrorists have not signed onto them they do not get to claim benefit to them.  Such treaties are only binding between those that sign onto them, they do not extend to those that refuse to sign on.

You say illegal.  Has any US court ruled what we are doing in Gitmo as torture and illegal?   

[Bill Peckham]

I thought this was a very thoughtful discussion of the US's new torture and secrete rendition policies from the point of view of the other side of the aisle. Nice to know that not everyone in the Republican party has lost their perspective and conservative grounding. From the website "Right thinking from the left coast": http://right-thinking.com/index.php/weblog/comments/14620/

Fear Of A Terrorist Planet
by West Virginia Rebel

What it’s really about.

Here is all that torture is good for: inspiring fear in a population. If you want it widely known that your ruling regime is utterly ruthless and doesn’t care about individuals, all you have to do is scoop up random people suspected of anti-government activities, hold them for a few weeks, and return them as shattered wrecks with mangled limbs, while treating the monsters who would do such a thing as respected members of the ruling clique, who are immune from legal prosecution. The message gets out fast that one does not cross the government.

    So, yeah, if you’re a tyrant in Uzbekistan who is holding control through force of arms, fear is a useful part of the apparatus of control, and torture is a great idea, as are barbaric executions, heads on pikes, and bullets to the back of the head.

    When the US government announces it’s support for torture, they aren’t talking about intelligence gathering: they are simply saying “Fear us.” They are taking the first step on the road to tyranny.

    The real problem is that fear isn’t a good tool to use in a democratic society. We are supposed to be shareholders in our government; when a process of oppression is endorsed by our legislators and president, we should recognize that they are trying to set themselves apart from the ordinary citizenry, and it’s time to rebel…before the goon squads come to your neighborhood. Anyone who supports torture is a traitor to the democratic form of government, and should be voted out of office, if not impeached.

In spite of all that Bush has done, I still don’t see us as headed down the road towards dictatorship-but we have become a secretive and paranoid country, using the fear factor to allow all sorts of anal and nefarious behavior to happen in the name of fighting terrorism. Instead of reacting we’ve been overreacting in a lot of ways. If this is to truly be a “Change” election, the Keystone Cops/Kafka-esque way we’ve been fighting on the domestic front is one of the first things that has to be dealt with by the next President.

Update by Lee: I’m going to have to respectfully disagree with WVR here.  I think we have taken the first steps towards tyranny with the introduction of torture.  Torture is easy, anyone can do it.  It’s been used, as the quoted article correctly suggests, as a tool of fear since the beginning of time.  And people who use fear to control populations are dictators.

This is not an irreversible course, however.  What we have taken might be called the first “baby steps” towards tyranny.  Every crack addict at one time started out drinking alcohol, but this does not necessarily lead to every alcohol drinker becomes a crack addict.  But, to make the point once again, if you justify our current use of “enhanced interrogation techniques,” then what is to stop us from using real, honest-to-Glaven torture?  Think about it.  The line between real “torture” an “enhanced interrogation techniques” is purely arbitrary.  We once had an arbitrary line between civilized and uncivilized behavior, between what was acceptable and what was not.  This line was codified in the many international treaties and agreements on human rights which we not only signed, but were instrumental in writing.  That was the arbitrary line, and for six decades we all abided by it.  Now we’ve unilaterally decided to shift the line a little, all while pulling the standard totalitarian tactic of moving the line while claiming that we are not actually moving it.  So now we have a new arbitrary line for what is acceptable.  Why couldn’t we simply expand “enhanced interrogation techniques” to include pins under the fingernails?

If the line can be moved once, it can be moved again.  And again.  And again.

For the sake of argument, let’s assume that torture indeed works.  Let’s assume that the the “terrorists” to whom we have applied these “enhanced interrogation techniques” have supplied us with a pirate’s booty of information on terrorist activities, information which could never have been obtained through standard interrogation.  Why, in any logical sense, should we stop at “enhanced interrogation techniques?” If keeping a man in a cold room to where he almost freezes to death will yield information, why not drive nails through his testicles?  That would yield more information, wouldn’t it?  Since a little bit of torture works, and since we all know terrorists are of such keen intellect and steely resolve that regular interrogation won’t work on them, then surely a lot of torture would work better, right?  And if the more torture the better, why not bring their children in and smash their feet to pulp with hammers?  After all, the name of the game is to gather intelligence, right?  If more torture equals more information, why pussyfoot around with sleep deprivation and weak-ass shit like that?  Hell, let’s just pull out his p*cking fingernails and be done with it.  Let’s hook electric shocks up to his testicles.  Let’s rape his wife in front of him.  That’s GOT to give us more intelligence, right?  After all, we have to protect America, and if we have to pull out a few fingernails or rape a few children to learn about the next 9/11, isn’t that worth it?  Which would you rather see, a child raped or a mushroom cloud over Manhattan?

This is the problem with “moving the line” in the manner we have.  George Orwell was a huge believer in words.  Words mean things. It is the hallmark of totalitarian dictatorships throughout history that, when the meaning of a word becomes politically inconvenient for the goals of the regime, they simply redefine the word.  In the literal sense, this is where the term “politically correct” comes from—Stalinist Russia.  “Yes, it might be correct to say that we are torturing these people, but it would not be politically correct to do so, so we will refer to it as an enhanced interrogation technique.” Hitler did this too.  The Jews were “resettled” into the east, but we all know what “resettling” meant and it sure as hell didn’t mean “resettled.”

Think, for a second, about what “democracy” means.  Now think about the definition of the word “republic.” The official name for North Korea is “The Democratic People’s Republic of North Korea.” Would any of you, in any sense, describe North Korea as being either democratic or a republic?  Well, they do in North Korea.  Words mean things, unless it’s politically advantageous for the government to redefine them to suit their needs.  Words like “torture” becoming “enhanced interrogation techniques.”

In the Navy a cook is known as a “Mess Management Specialist.” But he’s still a cook.  You could call him “Senior Thoracic Cardiologist,” but if he prepares food and serves it to people he’s still a cook.

There has been a definition of “torture” in place for 60 years.  We’re now violating that definition.  You can tart it up however you like, you can use whatever euphemism allows you to convince yourself that we’re not actually torturing people, but according to any accepted definition of torture, including the ones we wrote ourselves, that’s exactly what we’re doing.  All I ask is that, if you support this type of behavior, at least be intellectually honest enough with yourself to call it torture and stop bullshitting yourself with “enhanced interrogation techniques.”

I wouldn’t say that we’re well on our way to becoming a totalitarian state.  But we’ve come to a fork in the road, and we’ve taken the first baby steps in that direction.  It’s not too late to change our minds and turn back, and I think—I hope—that whoever our next president happens to be they have the courage and integrity to end this barbaric practice.  Because if they don’t, then we might as well just abandon all pretense that we’re opposed to just torture and really start p*cking torturing people.  After all, we have to protect America.

Of course, the definition of “America” can be changed too, can’t it?  And if you really, really try hard enough, two plus two can equal five.

[BigSky]

Hmmm all take your no answer as a NO that the US court has not found what is going on at Gitmo as torture and illegal.

[Bill Peckham]

Hmmm all take your no answer as a NO that the US court has not found what is going on at Gitmo as torture and illegal.

In 1947 the United States charged a Japanese officer, Yukio Asano, with war crimes for carrying out waterboarding on a U.S. civilian. Asano was sentenced to 15 years of hard labor.

[BigSky]

Hmmm all take your no answer as a NO that the US court has not found what is going on at Gitmo as torture and illegal.

In 1947 the United States charged a Japanese officer, Yukio Asano, with war crimes for carrying out waterboarding on a U.S. civilian. Asano was sentenced to 15 years of hard labor.

Hmm still no US court has found what we are doing at Gitmo as illegal or torture now has it!

[George Jung]

still no US court has found what we are doing at Gitmo as illegal or torture now has it!

Oh please....that doesn't mean it isn't so.  It is what it is, we all know that.  Do "we" really want to tell on ourselves and be looked down upon on the worldly stage.  Get real dude.  Counting on the U.S. court to rule our actions at Gitmo as illegal is like conting on the C.I.A. to voluntarily tell on itself every time they misbehave.

[BigSky]

still no US court has found what we are doing at Gitmo as illegal or torture now has it!

Oh please....that doesn't mean it isn't so.  It is what it is, we all know that.  Do "we" really want to tell on ourselves and be looked down upon on the worldly stage.  Get real dude.  Counting on the U.S. court to rule our actions at Gitmo as illegal is like conting on the C.I.A. to voluntarily tell on itself every time they misbehave.

Actually it does.   Just as it does when a law is passed that is said to be unconstitutional, the law is binding until a court rules otherwise.

Hmm what the world thinks must not be too bad since more people strive to come here by far more than anywhere else in the world and they ask us for aid far more than others, not to mention that we donate billions of dollars more in government and private aid than anyone else in the world and those of the world gladly accept it.

[Bill Peckham]

Hmmm all take your no answer as a NO that the US court has not found what is going on at Gitmo as torture and illegal.

In 1947 the United States charged a Japanese officer, Yukio Asano, with war crimes for carrying out waterboarding on a U.S. civilian. Asano was sentenced to 15 years of hard labor.

Hmm still no US court has found what we are doing at Gitmo as illegal or torture now has it!

We're waterboarding at Gitmo and obviously that was a US court (the victors) that found waterboarding constituted a war crime.

[BigSky]

Hmm yet no US court has said the method of waterboarding they are using in Gitmo right now is torture or illegal now have they!

In fact it doesn't look like it harmed old Khalid Sheik Mohammed now did it?

Considering the method that was used in Gitmo of covering the terrorists face with cellophane, and having water poured over it hardly seems to be torture.

[Bill Peckham]

Hmm yet no US court has said the method of waterboarding they are using in Gitmo right now is torture or illegal now have they!

In fact it doesn't look like it harmed old Khalid Sheik Mohammed now did it?

Considering the method that was used in Gitmo of covering the terrorists face with cellophane, and having water poured over it hardly seems to be torture.

It would help if we could all agree on what it is exactly that we are describing. I read this the other day ... it is very powerful
http://boards.straightdope.com/sdmb/showthread.php?t=448717

 I waterboard!
So much talk of waterboarding, so much controversy. But what is it really? How bad? I wanted to write the definitive thread on waterboarding, settle the issue. Torture, or not?

To determine the answer, I knew I had to try it. I looked at my two small children. Surely, in the interests of science?.....

But alas, my wife had objections.

Perhaps her?

Sadly, she is proficient in Ju Jitsu, and I am unlikely to waterboard her.

That leaves me.

[snip]

Next up is saran wrap. The idea is that you wrap saran wrap around the mouth in several layers, and poke a hole in the mouth area, and then waterboard away. I didn't reall see how this was an improvement on the rag technique, and so far I would categorize waterboarding as simply unpleasant rather than torture, but I've come this far so I might as well go on.

Now, those of you who know me will know that I am both enamored of my own toughness and prone to hyperbole. The former, I feel that I am justifiably proud of. The latter may be a truth in many cases, but this is the simple fact:

It took me ten minutes to recover my senses once I tried this. I was shuddering in a corner, convinced I narrowly escaped killing myself.

Here's what happened:

The water fills the hole in the saran wrap so that there is either water or vaccum in your mouth. The water pours into your sinuses and throat. You struggle to expel water periodically by building enough pressure in your lungs. With the saran wrap though each time I expelled water, I was able to draw in less air. Finally the lungs can no longer expel water and you begin to draw it up into your respiratory tract.

It seems that there is a point that is hardwired in us. When we draw water into our respiratory tract to this point we are no longer in control. All hell breaks loose. Instinct tells us we are dying.

I have never been more panicked in my whole life. Once your lungs are empty and collapsed and they start to draw fluid it is simply all over. You know you are dead and it's too late. Involuntary and total panic.

There is absolutely nothing you can do about it. It would be like telling you not to blink while I stuck a hot needle in your eye.

At the time my lungs emptied and I began to draw water, I would have sold my children to escape. There was no choice, or chance, and willpower was not involved.

I never felt anything like it, and this was self-inflicted with a watering can, where I was in total control and never in any danger.

And I understood.

Waterboarding gets you to the point where you draw water up your respiratory tract triggering the drowning reflex. Once that happens, it's all over. No question.

Some may go easy without a rag, some may need a rag, some may need saran wrap.

Once you are there it's all over.

I didn't allow anybody else to try it on me. Inconceivable. I know I only got the barest taste of what it's about since I was in control, and not restrained and controlling the flow of water.

But there's no chance. No chance at all.

So, is it torture?

I'll put it this way. If I had the choice of being waterboarded by a third party or having my fingers smashed one at a time by a sledgehammer, I'd take the fingers, no question.

It's horrible, terrible, inhuman torture. I can hardly imagine worse. I'd prefer permanent damage and disability to experiencing it again. I'd give up anything, say anything, do anything.

The Spanish Inquisition knew this. It was one of their favorite methods.

It's torture. No question. Terrible terrible torture. To experience it and understand it and then do it to another human being is to leave the realm of sanity and humanity forever. No question in my mind.

[BigSky]

 

The guy has no experience in the method and tried it on himself.      That is like someone trying to do their own operation.

Hmm the fact is professionals have had this done to themselves and they did not consider it torture, so that far outweighs some pseudo experiment by some  amateur.


But next time we need to extract information we will use your useless method of getting information.   OK?

Because as we all know......TERRORISTS are people too.   

[glitter]

 

[boxman55]

If a terrorist attacks an American whether it be on American soil or elsewhere as far as I'm concerned we should start cutting his toes off untill he starts talking...extreme tough sh..            Boxman

[Bill Peckham]

I forgot you lacked human empathy. I think most Americans know right from wrong and the difference between justice and vengeance. Fake executions, triggering the deeply ingrained human terror of drowning - not to mention the secrete renditions and off the books gulag, the only thing that can save the employees of this administration is insisting they don't remember remember and destroying evidence - loosing tapes, wiping hard drives. I wonder how thorough they'll be - it's hard to put the tooth paste back in the tube.

Remind me - has Don Rumsfeld left the United States since retirement?  Kinda odd that a guy with his connections and I am sure numerous speaking opportunities doesn't want to leave US soil.

[BigSky]

Fake executions, triggering the deeply ingrained human terror of drowning - not to mention the secrete renditions and off the books gulag,

Yes that is soooo much worse than crashing f-ing planes into buildings killing thousands of INNOCENT CIVILIANS.   Making someone think they might die instead of actually killing them.

[Bill Peckham]

That's it right there isn't it. It isn't about any individual and what they do or do not have in there hearts. It's about continuing to seek random vengeance (as compared to targeted justice against the actual perpetrators who remain at large) for 9/11 six years after the fact, this sounds like a pathology rather than a tactic in the long War ON Terror.

[BigSky]

That's it right there isn't it. It isn't about any individual and what they do or do not have in there hearts. It's about continuing to seek random vengeance (as compared to targeted justice against the actual perpetrators who remain at large) for 9/11 six years after the fact, this sounds like a pathology rather than a tactic in the long War ON Terror.

You are flat out wrong.

Its not about vengeance.  Its about making sure they are not given the opportunity to commit such acts against us again.  Its called protecting ones self. 

If it were about vengeance we would execute ALL terrorists we catch on the battlefield.

[Bill Peckham]

http://www.supremecourtus.gov/oral_arguments/argument_transcripts/07-5439.pdf

page 21 & 22 in regard to the Kentucky death penalty case and the eighth amendment prohibition of cruel and unusual punishment. I think Scalia is saying that the Founder's intent was to prohibit tortuous conduct which would be intentionally inflicting pain. This I am sure is right but doesn't it get to the ridiculous core of what the torture supporters are denying? It is clear that inflicting intentional pain on someone who is fully under your control is fundamentally against core American values.

[Bill Peckham]

http://abcnews.go.com/print?id=4583256
I'm not a lawyer but it does seem clear that what is described in this ABC News report are by existing legal definitions which have been in place for decades, "war crimes" and the that those who committed them -- "the most senior Bush administration officials", are then war criminals.

Sure they'll never actually face prosecution but their wives will likely have to travel to Paris or anywhere else outside the US alone during their long, long retirement. It will be interesting to see if Bush leaves the US after January 2009. Maybe that's why he is so keen on seeing China and the Olympics now while he still can. Though China along with Saudi Arabia and North Korea will probably remain be places he can still visit.

[BigSky]

Piss and moan some more about it bill.

Free the world, torture a terrorist, or two, hell maybe even three or four or more!!!!

[Bill Peckham]

Freedom is torture; up is down; right is left; black is white. I'm starting to understand the torture party's tactics. I'm sure next we'll hear that Bush is doubleplusgood.