Jump to content
IGNORED

US said Waterboarding was a War Crime in 1947


The Lorax

Recommended Posts


  • Group:  Diamond Member
  • Followers:  0
  • Topic Count:  183
  • Topics Per Day:  0.03
  • Content Count:  1,892
  • Content Per Day:  0.30
  • Reputation:   0
  • Days Won:  0
  • Joined:  02/24/2007
  • Status:  Offline
  • Birthday:  09/07/1985

Mukasey won

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Replies 98
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic


  • Group:  Royal Member
  • Followers:  2
  • Topic Count:  115
  • Topics Per Day:  0.02
  • Content Count:  8,281
  • Content Per Day:  1.12
  • Reputation:   249
  • Days Won:  3
  • Joined:  03/03/2004
  • Status:  Offline
  • Birthday:  10/30/1955

And so it is, IF--AND THIS IS A REALLY BIG "IF"--if you have captured an honorable soldier in his required uniform, fighting under his standard, AS PER THE GENEVA CONVENTIONS. These filthy terrorist vermin who hide among, and thereby endanger innocent civilians, do NOT HAVE, and DO NOT DESERVE the protections afforded to honorable soldiers!

These are the lowest, dirtiest, most malevolent pieces of human scum we have ever had to fight! Even the NAZI 'wolf-packs' after WWII usually operated in their uniforms and in such ways as to attempt to minimize innocent civilian casualties.

(edited by moderator)

Link to comment
Share on other sites


  • Group:  Royal Member
  • Followers:  2
  • Topic Count:  276
  • Topics Per Day:  0.04
  • Content Count:  7,474
  • Content Per Day:  0.96
  • Reputation:   51
  • Days Won:  0
  • Joined:  02/25/2003
  • Status:  Offline
  • Birthday:  01/31/1966

[in] 1947, the United States charged a Japanese officer, Yukio Asano, with war crimes for carrying out another form of waterboarding on a U.S. civilian. The subject was strapped on a stretcher that was tilted so that his feet were in the air and head near the floor, and small amounts of water were poured over his face, leaving him gasping for air until he agreed to talk.

Link to comment
Share on other sites


  • Group:  Advanced Member
  • Followers:  1
  • Topic Count:  9
  • Topics Per Day:  0.00
  • Content Count:  499
  • Content Per Day:  0.08
  • Reputation:   3
  • Days Won:  0
  • Joined:  01/21/2007
  • Status:  Offline
  • Birthday:  01/27/1964

This phrase is what seals it for me: until he agreed to talk. You know, if it works on a terrorist and saves lives, I could care less if it's torture or not. To me, there is not a choice between the comfort of a terrorist or the life of a potential innocent victim of his actions.

Link to comment
Share on other sites


  • Group:  Diamond Member
  • Followers:  1
  • Topic Count:  10
  • Topics Per Day:  0.00
  • Content Count:  2,144
  • Content Per Day:  0.34
  • Reputation:   163
  • Days Won:  1
  • Joined:  02/02/2007
  • Status:  Offline
  • Birthday:  11/05/1985

This phrase is what seals it for me: until he agreed to talk. You know, if it works on a terrorist and saves lives, I could care less if it's torture or not. To me, there is not a choice between the comfort of a terrorist or the life of a potential innocent victim of his actions.

Read: The ends justify the means?

Link to comment
Share on other sites


  • Group:  Diamond Member
  • Followers:  1
  • Topic Count:  10
  • Topics Per Day:  0.00
  • Content Count:  2,144
  • Content Per Day:  0.34
  • Reputation:   163
  • Days Won:  1
  • Joined:  02/02/2007
  • Status:  Offline
  • Birthday:  11/05/1985

And so it is, IF--AND THIS IS A REALLY BIG "IF"--if you have captured an honorable soldier in his required uniform, fighting under his standard, AS PER THE GENEVA CONVENTIONS. These filthy terrorist vermin who hide among, and thereby endanger innocent civilians, do NOT HAVE, and DO NOT DESERVE the protections afforded to honorable soldiers!

These are the lowest, dirtiest, most malevolent pieces of human scum we have ever had to fight! Even the NAZI 'wolf-packs' after WWII usually operated in their uniforms and in such ways as to attempt to minimize innocent civilian casualties.

(edited by moderator)

Cause terrorists don't deserve basic human rights, right Leonard?

Fun fact: During the revolutionary war, the rebels (us) didn't have a uniform. In fact, we fought Britain by hit and run tactics in the woods. Fortunatly for us, that made us patriots, not terrorists :wub:

Link to comment
Share on other sites


  • Group:  Royal Member
  • Followers:  3
  • Topic Count:  1,360
  • Topics Per Day:  0.21
  • Content Count:  7,866
  • Content Per Day:  1.23
  • Reputation:   26
  • Days Won:  0
  • Joined:  11/22/2006
  • Status:  Offline
  • Birthday:  04/18/1946

This phrase is what seals it for me: until he agreed to talk. You know, if it works on a terrorist and saves lives, I could care less if it's torture or not. To me, there is not a choice between the comfort of a terrorist or the life of a potential innocent victim of his actions.

Read: The ends justify the means?

Yes.

Link to comment
Share on other sites


  • Group:  Diamond Member
  • Followers:  1
  • Topic Count:  10
  • Topics Per Day:  0.00
  • Content Count:  2,144
  • Content Per Day:  0.34
  • Reputation:   163
  • Days Won:  1
  • Joined:  02/02/2007
  • Status:  Offline
  • Birthday:  11/05/1985

This phrase is what seals it for me: until he agreed to talk. You know, if it works on a terrorist and saves lives, I could care less if it's torture or not. To me, there is not a choice between the comfort of a terrorist or the life of a potential innocent victim of his actions.

Read: The ends justify the means?

Yes.

Yes according to man's law, or according to God's law?

Link to comment
Share on other sites


  • Group:  Royal Member
  • Followers:  3
  • Topic Count:  1,360
  • Topics Per Day:  0.21
  • Content Count:  7,866
  • Content Per Day:  1.23
  • Reputation:   26
  • Days Won:  0
  • Joined:  11/22/2006
  • Status:  Offline
  • Birthday:  04/18/1946

This phrase is what seals it for me: until he agreed to talk. You know, if it works on a terrorist and saves lives, I could care less if it's torture or not. To me, there is not a choice between the comfort of a terrorist or the life of a potential innocent victim of his actions.

Read: The ends justify the means?

Yes.

Yes according to man's law, or according to God's law?

How many lives do you want to save? I think God would approve.

Link to comment
Share on other sites


  • Group:  Diamond Member
  • Followers:  1
  • Topic Count:  10
  • Topics Per Day:  0.00
  • Content Count:  2,144
  • Content Per Day:  0.34
  • Reputation:   163
  • Days Won:  1
  • Joined:  02/02/2007
  • Status:  Offline
  • Birthday:  11/05/1985

This phrase is what seals it for me: until he agreed to talk. You know, if it works on a terrorist and saves lives, I could care less if it's torture or not. To me, there is not a choice between the comfort of a terrorist or the life of a potential innocent victim of his actions.

Read: The ends justify the means?

Yes.

Yes according to man's law, or according to God's law?

How many lives do you want to save? I think God would approve.

That brings us to an interesting predicament. Does God justify sin in order to prevent more sin?

It reminds me of the "Subjective Morals" thread brought up earlier in the month.

At what point is it no longer sinful to save the lives of others? Is it ok to torture someone in order to save 10 people? How about 100? How about 1000?

Or does the life of just one person being saved justify the torture of a terrorist? Where do you draw the line, and is your line an absolute, solid line?

What if instead of torturing terrorists, we were to kill them instead. Would that change your view of it, or would it just alter your view of it? Would there still be a "point" in your mind where you could justify killing to save others? What point would that be?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.

×
×
  • Create New...