US tortured Afghanistan detainees

Stormbringer · Post by **Stormbringer** » 2004-06-23 09:37am

evilcat4000 wrote:
Stormbringer wrote:You know, given the behaviour of an increasing number of these fuckwads I would find it hard to care if they crucified them and then lit them on fire as street lamps.
But that makes the US no better than the evil enemy they are fighting. The US would lose it's moral highground.

Frankly, the more that we see of these people the less it seems the moral high ground matters. These people have already decided that we're irredeemably evil and there's nothing at all we can do to change that. So I do really have to wonder what the point of following all the nicities is when we do not receive the same consideration from the enemy.

Post by **Darth Wong** » 2004-06-23 09:39am

Stormbringer wrote:
evilcat4000 wrote:
Stormbringer wrote:You know, given the behaviour of an increasing number of these fuckwads I would find it hard to care if they crucified them and then lit them on fire as street lamps.
But that makes the US no better than the evil enemy they are fighting. The US would lose it's moral highground.
Frankly, the more that we see of these people the less it seems the moral high ground matters. These people have already decided that we're irredeemably evil and there's nothing at all we can do to change that. So I do really have to wonder what the point of following all the nicities is when we do not receive the same consideration from the enemy.

Since the US has not been following these "niceties" for a very long time, how do you know this?

Mr Flibble · Post by **Mr Flibble** » 2004-06-23 09:42am

Stormbringer wrote:Frankly, the more that we see of these people the less it seems the moral high ground matters. These people have already decided that we're irredeemably evil and there's nothing at all we can do to change that. So I do really have to wonder what the point of following all the nicities is when we do not receive the same consideration from the enemy.

Because those nicities are what separates you from the enemy, and because they are the MORAL thing to do. All this "they do terrible things" as an excuse for you doing bad things (note, not as bad as the terrible things by a long shot) seems to me to be much like the child's, excuse of "but he did something worse" it doesnt excuse immoral behaivour.

Stormbringer · Post by **Stormbringer** » 2004-06-23 10:23am

Darth Wong wrote: Since the US has not been following these "niceties" for a very long time, how do you know this?

Do you seriously believe that Al-Queda really hates us because the prisoner abuse scandals?

Skelron · Post by **Skelron** » 2004-06-23 10:28am

Stormbringer of course not... but it does add to the general hatred others might feel, and makes people who might not have joined Al Quadia more likely to listen to the propaganda, thereby helping to recruit others to the cause...

Durandal · Post by **Durandal** » 2004-06-23 10:31am

Stormbringer wrote:
Darth Wong wrote:Since the US has not been following these "niceties" for a very long time, how do you know this?
Do you seriously believe that Al-Queda really hates us because the prisoner abuse scandals?

Do you seriously believe that those scandals aren't affecting the situation at all?

Illuminatus Primus · Post by **Illuminatus Primus** » 2004-06-23 11:22am

Darth Wong wrote:Since both are illegal, yes. What part of this do you not understand? Do you really think that beating a man who is suspected of being a terrorist to death in a US prison is somehow on some elevated moral plane compared to Al-Quaeda beheading a prisoner, particularly when the former has happened more times than the latter?

Well in war, one may execute those who violate the Geneva rules on uniforms and such.

I wouldn't characterize these guys' deaths as "executions" but I just wanted to add a nitpick.

Illuminatus Primus · Post by **Illuminatus Primus** » 2004-06-23 11:25am

Stormbringer wrote:Frankly, the more that we see of these people the less it seems the moral high ground matters. These people have already decided that we're irredeemably evil and there's nothing at all we can do to change that. So I do really have to wonder what the point of following all the nicities is when we do not receive the same consideration from the enemy.

BECAUSE YOU SHOULD NOT ARBITRARILY, RANDOMLY KILL POTENTIALLY INNOCENT PEOPLE.

God, do you guys really look at it as some sort of stuffy legal technicality? Its disgusting.

Joe · Post by **Joe** » 2004-06-23 11:27am

Illuminatus Primus wrote:
Darth Wong wrote:Since both are illegal, yes. What part of this do you not understand? Do you really think that beating a man who is suspected of being a terrorist to death in a US prison is somehow on some elevated moral plane compared to Al-Quaeda beheading a prisoner, particularly when the former has happened more times than the latter?
Well in war, one may execute those who violate the Geneva rules on uniforms and such.

I wouldn't characterize these guys' deaths as "executions" but I just wanted to add a nitpick.

Another nitpick: I think the rule is you're allowed to shoot combatants in civilian clothing on sight, but you can't just execute them on a whim if you choose to take them prisoner.

Illuminatus Primus · Post by **Illuminatus Primus** » 2004-06-23 11:29am

That makes no sense. You're generally allowed to shoot combatants period on sight. Its called combat.

I think what it might be in summarily executed. You can kill them for the crime of wearing civilian clothes but you cannot hold them and interrogate them and then torture them until they die and then pass it off as because they were in civilian clothes.

Gil Hamilton · Post by **Gil Hamilton** » 2004-06-23 01:43pm

Stormbringer wrote:And of course the fact that a lot of people are trying to stop the abuse and killings counts for something.

It counts for alot. After all, now that it's public knowledge and they couldn't ignore it anymore, they are bending over backwards to make abuse and killings stop.

Knife · Post by **Knife** » 2004-06-23 06:34pm

Illuminatus Primus wrote:

That makes no sense. You're generally allowed to shoot combatants period on sight. Its called combat.

I think what it might be in summarily executed. You can kill them for the crime of wearing civilian clothes but you cannot hold them and interrogate them and then torture them until they die and then pass it off as because they were in civilian clothes.

Under military law and GC, once you take a prisoner, you are then responsible for his safty. So on a battle field, a guy with civilian clothing AND a weapon is a legal target. But if you buttstroke him and then take away his weapon, you've just taken a prisoner and you have to safe guard him from the enemy and from your own troops.

MKSheppard · Post by **MKSheppard** » 2004-06-23 06:39pm

Durandal wrote:Do you seriously believe that those scandals aren't affecting the situation at all?

They already hate us with a passion, so I dont' see the scandals making
it any worse. Fucks sake, lets just start using Napalm again, I can't see
how we can get any more hated in the world's eyes.

Joe · Post by **Joe** » 2004-06-23 06:43pm

There's no doubt the prison abuse scandal has made things much worse. Public opinion among the Iraqis (except the Kurds, of course) has shifted considerably in our disfavor since the scandals broke, possibly beyond the point of salvage.

Aaron · Post by **Aaron** » 2004-06-23 06:46pm

MKSheppard wrote:
Durandal wrote:Do you seriously believe that those scandals aren't affecting the situation at all?
They already hate us with a passion, so I dont' see the scandals making
it any worse. Fucks sake, lets just start using Napalm again, I can't see
how we can get any more hated in the world's eyes.

You know Shep, if you had actually spent some time at the sharp end you might not be so willing to use it. Did you ever stop to think that if the USA starts buring people alive with napalm that these rebels and extremists might start doing the same thing to captured USA civvies and soldiers? Besides why use napalm when there are more effective weapons like CBU's available.

Durandal · Post by **Durandal** » 2004-06-23 07:55pm

MKSheppard wrote:
Durandal wrote:Do you seriously believe that those scandals aren't affecting the situation at all?
They already hate us with a passion, so I dont' see the scandals making it any worse.

Then you're a short-sighted idiot. What a surprise. Remember how al Qaeda's recruitment shot up after we invaded Iraq? I'd say that qualified for "making the situation worse." If a US invasion of a Muslim country can fuel al Qaeda's recruitment, I'd say it's a good possibility that reports of US soldiers torturing Arab men (many of whom were completely innocent hold-over prisoners from Hussein's regime) by taking advantage of their religious beliefs and stripping them naked and then forcing them to have sex with a female soldier (all while being caught on camera) would infuriate a lot of Muslims around the world.

The invasion of Iraq is the worst possible thing that could have happened to the War on Terror. Because of it, terrorist recruitment actually went up, and anti-terrorist think-tanks are now postulating that al Qaeda has regained much of its former base as a result of our diddling in Iraq. The situation can always get worse; this administration should have shown everyone at least that much.

Fucks sake, lets just start using Napalm again, I can't see how we can get any more hated in the world's eyes.

Get over your "Everyone hates America no matter what we do, oh woe is us" bullshit. Other countries may think that Bush is a fucktard (which he is), but only the most radical of people will actually say that the US is as bad as al Qaeda. We've got plenty of room to sink, and just because you can't imagine people hating us any more than they do doesn't mean that we should just go gung-ho and start napalming innocent people.