At Ask Me Help Desk you can ask questions in any topic and have them
answered for free by our experts. To ask questions or participate in
answering them you must register for a free account. By registering you
will be able to:
Get free answers from experts in any of our 300+
topics.
George calls me naive. He could be right. I used to think of us as the good guys. We wore the white hats. We were the ones who stood up against human rights violations in the world. We walked the walk, and we were proud of it, too. No, we didn't torture. And no, I'm not the only one with those ideals.. Because I believed in them, I spilled my blood for my country.
But, maybe George is right. Maybe we're not any better than the scumbags who attacked us. I thought we were. But, I was wrong. We torture. I never thought we would. George calls the guys we torture murdering SOB's - and they are. That’s why it’s ok to torture them.
But, in the past, we didn’t abstain from torture because of who our ENEMY'S were. We abstained from torture because of who WE were. George thinks we should abandon those principals. I don’t.
In fact, not only do I believe we can win a war without destroying the Constitution, but I believe we can do it without torturing our prisoners.
If my belief in those ideals and the rightness of our cause is naive, then I plead guilty.
excon
PS> (edited) Tom AND DC too, will most likely dig up something Clinton did or Carter did, and say that Bush isn’t doing anything different. To that, I say bunk!
I don’t know were you fought but I was in Laos and Cambodia and the interrogations I witnessed you would call torture. To suggest that America is no better than The Terrorist is parroting al Qaeda, our enemy.
Bushg, I thought like you did. I was so upset when that young girl (in the photos) was taking so much heat and worse, and we were getting our heads chopped off (literally).
I thought, what's the big deal? She's standing next to a pile of naked bodies, which I gave her credit for, because they looked so dirty. Okay, it's not something I would do, but I wasn't in her shoes and who knows what I would do over there if I saw one of ours getting hurt or worse.
But then......
I saw this show, sorry I can't remember the name. It was actually a documentary that clearly depicted what our fine young men and women were PERMITTED to do. In their hearts they did not want to do these awful things....but did.
I wasn't very proud watching and held back tears when the victims, whose faces we generally see when we visualize "the enemy", shared the torment that they endured at our hands.
My stomach was sick and my heart was low. We are better then this.
I used to think ...for God's sake they are beheading us....we need to and should be able to defend "by any means necessary".
Until....I actually saw what that meant.
What's the difference? Why can they take off our heads and we can't torture in return?
Because we know better and our young men and women will have additional mental and emotional scars to contend with.
Let our intellegence and civilized hearts help to lead the world to dignifed ways, not by mirroring the very things we are trying to rid of and change.
The world is never black and white or right or wrong. There are shades of gray and torture sits in that gray area.
If someone kidnapped a love one this same person send you a video tape. On the video a masked man explains terms of the ransom (which you dont have). While analizing the tape someone notices a mirror in the backround and on the mirror there is a reflexion of a picture of man and woman. The woman in the picture is the cleaning lady. The police bring her in for questioning and she requests a lawyer. The lawyer advices her not tell them anything and she is released.
What do you do?
Me..I'm beating that information out of her.
But lets say I just recognize the person voice I wouldnt torture that person.
I think a lot of Americans are naive in this regard. Yes, we've always tried to be the "nice guys." But look where it's gotten us. The U.S. gets bullied and scapegoated constantly, usually by enemies who are much weaker than we are. But we're too kind and gentle to fight back, at least with any degree of effectiveness, even though we easily have the capability to do so. And when someone wants to attempt to fight back, like George, they get a huge guilt trip put on them by all of those who want to insist on continuing to play the nice guy role, even though it results in us getting attacked and scapegoated more and more. We've made examples of our enemies in the past, a la Japan in 1945 and Libya in 1986. But people tend to forget and, if we don't do more of that sort of thing, there's going to be more and more terrorist acts directed against the U.S. and Americans abroad. As it is, it may already be too late since we haven't aggressively fought back in the past, because a lot of Americans feel guilty doing so. For the most part, the U.S. has not been a truly aggressive nation and, for the most part, shouldn't be. Sure, we may have occasionally invaded a country where communism was spreading or where blatant genocide was occurring or that had served as gateways for drug trafficking into the U.S. In short, we've taken an aggressive stand against those countries that have engaged in human rights violations, all in the interest of preventing ourselves from eventually becoming likewise victimized. And anyone who truly believes that our nation, strong and proud and guardians of liberty as we may be, is immune from being conquered by forces who don't subscribe to the same ideals of liberty and human rights that we espouse is truly naive. To this end it is often necessary for us to take a stand which, sadly, involves loss of life, both American and foreign. But when we are the ones put on the defensive, when we are attacked and victimized in spite of, or maybe because of our desire to maintain liberty and freedom for all, then anything goes, and I mean anything ; occupation, torture, nuclear attacks, etc. Our only alternative is to lie down and let them come and get us. And that's exactly what we've been doing.
What do you do? Me.. I'm beating that information out of her.
Hello Married:
You bring up an excellent point.
I'm not such an ideal fellow in my private life. In fact, I'd do exactly what you'd do.
But, my country shouldn't adopt our vigilantism as policy. Thank God cooler heads than ours prevailed when they wrote the Constitution and the Geneva Convention.
In the documentary that I saw, it seemed that the prisoners really and truly didn't have any information to give, none. And trust me I am furious as heck what has been done and is contiuned to be done to us and those countries that stand by our side.
I still see red, white and blue and a whole lot of stars...when I think about what was done to the USS Cole. I can not even see straight when I think about that. That was a direct hit on our defense and I wanted us to do something...wince....but barely a whisper was heard.
I want us to defend strong and proud and push back as hard as we can, but when it comes to prisoners, I don't want us to torture.
There are ways that dectectives get individuals to admit to a murder, robbery or whatever crime that has been committed and torture is not a part of the interrogation.
We can get out of them what we need, we have brilliant minds and ways to find things out, I think our intellegence level exceeds our need to invoke torture.
And I do have a soft heart - so yes saying no to torture for me, most would think is a given.
I have a rough tough kick where it hurts kind of hubby and he watched the documentary too and was very quiet. I think he too was unsure how right it actually was.
I in no way am faulting any individual who approved or acted out the actions that I saw on the documentary. I was not and will never be in their shoes. I love our military with all my heart and will never 2nd guess them. What I am saying is I think we are brilliant enough to get what we need without resorting to torture.
Linear Mode
