Torture poll

[Evangelical]

don't be an idiot.

If it's ok for us to torture, why isn't it ok for them to torture?

Us good, them bad?

Exactly, it's good for us to torture them to save our citizen's lives. Whatever they do is wrong...

That's like asking "should Japan nuke two American cities"?

Grow a brain.

 

[noakes 2024]

TITLE 18 - CRIMES AND CRIMINAL PROCEDURE
PART I - CRIMES
CHAPTER 113C - TORTURE

-HEAD-
Sec. 2340. Definitions

-STATUTE-
As used in this chapter -
(1) "torture" means an act committed by a person acting under
the color of law specifically intended to inflict severe physical
or mental pain or suffering (other than pain or suffering
incidental to lawful sanctions) upon another person within his
custody or physical control;
(2) "severe mental pain or suffering" means the prolonged
mental harm caused by or resulting from -
(A) the intentional infliction or threatened infliction of
severe physical pain or suffering;
(B) the administration or application, or threatened
administration or application, of mind-altering substances or
other procedures calculated to disrupt profoundly the senses or
the personality;
(C) the threat of imminent death; or
(D) the threat that another person will imminently be
subjected to death, severe physical pain or suffering, or the
administration or application of mind-altering substances or
other procedures calculated to disrupt profoundly the senses or
personality; and

(3) "United States" means the several States of the United
States, the District of Columbia, and the commonwealths,
territories, and possessions of the United States.

This definition of torture is very broad. It is easy to see how under this definition advanced interrogation techniques can be considered torture. Morally, I don't think a human being should subject another human being to torture. That being said, America should not engage in torture and neither should anyone else.

So to answer the question if captured American troop should be subjected to torture, I say no.

The reason is, a big part of me does not consider the advanced interrogation techniques as bona fide torture. Limits were set and in place to insure that 'torture' was never administered. Are the methods intense? Yes. Do they hurt and possibly cause mental and physical harm? Yes. But I don't believe that American interrogation goes too far. We are not dismantling or disfiguring the human body. The pain and suffering caused through our techniques goes just far enough to push the envelope, but it does not cross into certainty, especially when considered in the context of comparison to our enemies techniques and the overall physical and mental condition of those being 'tortured' . I believe our methods of interrogation are reasonable and should not be considered torture. Thus, if our enemies captured American soldiers and subjected them to the same types of interrogation methods, I would not classify that as a war crime.

 

[biglin]

NOBODY, American or otherwise, should EVER be subjected to torture.

It's unbelievable that a civilised country can even CONTEMPLATE using it, let alone JUSTIFYING its use.

I'm anything BUT an Obama fan but at least he's got THAT one right!

 

[amrchaos]

I wonder does anyone that use the court arguement to decide what is and is not torture understand that the judicial branch of government is just a part of government. In other words, you are allowing government to decide what is and is not torture.

Yes, courts can be wrong...and once you put them on high enough of a pedestal, they can become dictorial.

 

[tigerbob]

I wonder does anyone that use the court arguement to decide what is and is not torture understand that the judicial branch of government is just a part of government. In other words, you are allowing government to decide what is and is not torture.

Yes, courts can be wrong...and once you put them on high enough of a pedestal, they can become dictorial.

May I ask what your quote means? (The one about a better wilderness).

 

[Iriemon]

I wonder does anyone that use the court arguement to decide what is and is not torture understand that the judicial branch of government is just a part of government. In other words, you are allowing government to decide what is and is not torture.

Yes, courts can be wrong...and once you put them on high enough of a pedestal, they can become dictorial.

The Court is part of the government, but is a separate branch just like the legislature and executive as separate branches.

The function of the Court is to interpret laws, regulations, and the constitution against one another, as well as find facts and resolve disputes at lower levels.

That's been pretty well established for a while now.