Torture ? What torture ?

As a meager follow up to that.....
By labeling it a war and them combatants, we are giving them validation for their self image as a noble holy warrior. We should treat the ones that cause us grief as thieves and murders, and rest ignore.

And that doesn't mean dropping our viligence.

 

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(Alnilam @ Sep 20 2006, 12:17 PM) [snapback]322273[/snapback]</div>

I believe the technical term is Chickenhawks. There are even right-wing commentators that are actively arguing against the doctrine of force protection. While there may be instances of force protection which stymie more direct, aggressive action, if we jettison this then we severely jeopardize the all-volunteer military.

Notice the latest news about the "extra-ordinary rendition" of that Canadian to Syria for torture by the US authorities. The sheer mind-boggling irony of this is astounding. I thought we hated the Syrians but we then turn around and outsource our torture to them?

 

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(Alnilam @ Sep 20 2006, 12:17 PM) [snapback]322273[/snapback]</div>

I have a post today on this topic exactly. Are we putting our soldiers at greater risk by enforcing rules of conduct related to combat that our enemy does not adhere to?

Our Supreme Court made another supreme mistake by in effect granting al-Qaeda nation status in the Hamden decision. Are we are going to compound that mistake by granting them protections of the Geneva Conventions when they have not even signed them - much less conduct themselves by its guidelines.

As a WWII vet you can probably attest to the fact that the Soviets were forced to sign the Geneva Conventions after WWII when they saw their troops were "mishandled" far worse than soldiers of other nations who were signaturies of the Conventions.

And yet, I am of the belief that the Conventions by themselves are wothless unless said countries are willing to enforce a "penalty" to soldiers of countries who do not abide by them. By removing this check and balance you totally negate any worthiness of the Conventions themselves.

And I am not sure that by our signing of the Geneva Convetions - that they become "Constitutional". The Constitution serves as a pretty good framework that we live by - I am sure you are aware of the war-time powers it grants the executive??

Your views please.

 

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(dbermanmd @ Sep 20 2006, 12:41 PM) [snapback]322290[/snapback]</div>

Yes - Hitlers excuse for mistreating Soviet POWs was that the USSR was not a signatory to the Geneva Conventions. Not the best precedent to base your argument upon.
<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(dbermanmd @ Sep 20 2006, 12:41 PM) [snapback]322290[/snapback]</div>

Because no penalties are stipulated, the whole framework is worthless? Completely disagree. We do have a number of mechanisms to deal with war crimes including the ICC or even ad-hoc tribunals like the Nuremburg Trials.
<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(dbermanmd @ Sep 20 2006, 12:41 PM) [snapback]322290[/snapback]</div>

Foreign_policy_law_of_the_United_States

 

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(triphop @ Sep 20 2006, 01:07 PM) [snapback]322306[/snapback]</div>

Unfortunately, your link will require reading and isn't sufficiently simple for the Doc. If you'll allow me to pull a pertinent quote from that page:

 

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(triphop @ Sep 20 2006, 01:07 PM) [snapback]322306[/snapback]</div>

To help me along here... When al-Qaeda captures and tortures an American POW to death - what do we do?

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(tleonhar @ Sep 19 2006, 09:43 PM) [snapback]322009[/snapback]</div>

How does Article III apply to this conflict?

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(efusco @ Sep 20 2006, 10:17 AM) [snapback]322205[/snapback]</div>

I wont - but you dont think it would be easier for iran to let its nuke "walk" if not facilite its trip to the US? NoKo is completely isolated and far easier to maintain a almost complete surveillance on. Iran would be impossible to monitor the transportation of a small nuke. And Iran will use them - they have stated so - they have a belief in creating a second caliphate - they want to kill and they want to die doing so.

 

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(dbermanmd @ Sep 20 2006, 01:26 PM) [snapback]322319[/snapback]</div>

We make a strongly worded speech in the United Nations. Seriously there is nothing you can do. But you are missing the point - Its about us and how we treat our POWs. We cannot even begin to expect humane treatment on the battlefield if we do not treat our POWs well. The Geneva Conventions are about discipline - you train your soldiers that this the line that you do not cross. Of course soldiers in the heat of battle will cross that line, but that does not mean that the law is bad or is not necessary.

 

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(dbermanmd @ Sep 20 2006, 12:26 PM) [snapback]322319[/snapback]</div>

I fail to see how torturing POWs on our side helps when they torture our soldiers. You think of torture as revenge, a form of law enforcement or deterrent? Because I think even those in the government that advocate torture argue its only for the information.

 

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(dbermanmd @ Sep 20 2006, 09:41 AM) [snapback]322290[/snapback]</div>

First, I am not a WWII vet. I'm not that old, but I grew up during it and learned from what I saw. Sorry if I implied that. Further, I've never been in a war nor shot at in anger, so I have no direct experience with the mind alterations that must cause. I was an AF (and Navy, by a peculiar circumstance) pilot for around six years, flying nuclear laden B-47s and B-52s. And I took my job seriously, learning everything I could about what I was doing and my potential future during the "cold" war. Part of my training involved a couple of in-depth schools involving POW life, escape, information sharing at such places, etc, given by some pretty dedicated instructors who thought nothing of enforcing their points with a touch of rigor. Nothing like McCain went through, I hasten to add. Even though I had the sure knowledge that the hard times would be over in a week or so, I would like to assure you that many of these hours had a full sixty minutes with no time off for coffee.

My point wasn't that I did anything heroic (I didn't) but that I was taught the expected American military conduct, an honor code, and lots of discipline in those times. I was proud to be an officer. Many are leaving during these times, ashamed of what they have seen and done. Military training has considerably changed my whole life from the callow, know-it-all youth I once was.

Asking a question is not making a point. I don't believe we adopted the Geneva Convention with the intention of following it against only other signators. The Soviets were a pretty strange lot. They executed a large number of their own people who were returned from German POW camps on the theory that 1) they weren't very patriotic in getting captured in the first place and 2) after they had seen the "glories" of life outside of Russia (in a German POW camp!) they would become restless Russians. I would argue that by signing the convention they made at least a token argument against savage treatment. But they, too, believed that they could do anything to people who fell into their hands. Are they our example?

Soldiers don't sign conventions. They just die because of orders from those who have. Or become captives. Penalizing them doesn't really have much influence on a ruthless leadership. We just punish the Privates twice. Lot of good that does!

And yes, international agreements have the force of law and are subject to constitutional provisions, becoming "constitutional" in the process. Ignorance of the law is no excuse, so we should all read up a little.

Al Queda is a small group in Iraq, never present until after we came. We are fighting Iraqi citizens unhappy with us for any number of reasons. Many of them don't like us real bad. So let's see what we can do to improve the situation. I know! How about stacking a bunch of naked guys on top of each other until one of them breaks and shouts out the Iraqi war plan! Or whip them with a cable (the Canadian guy later found innocent) or semi-drown them repeatedly to bring forth the "truth." Hell, if you did that to me, I'd deliver my sainted mother to a brothel at the insane asylum! Anything to get them to stop! McCain even signed some papers when the pain level got too high. Real good intel plan!

As for the wartime powers we give to our President, I think it makes him Commander in Chief. Which section legalizes torture? I'm going to look right after I post this. And I think it says something about Congress being the body to declare war. Roosevelt, after Pearl Harbor, went to Congress to ask them to do this. I think he might have done it himself if that was how it should have been done.

And we all know the sorry military records of Bush, Cheney (and Clinton.) Clinton at least acknowledges it now. Rumsfeld is about the only guy in this motly crew who ever wore a uniform. He was a junior naval aviator and that floated him right to the top of this crowd. He's the military expert now!

I think I'd feel lower than a coal miner's instep if I got captured by some Iraqis right after Abu Ghraib was exposed. The ancient Romans could wander the empire without fear. Nobody messed with them after they said the magic words, "Civitas Romanus sum." "I am a Roman citizen." Think that would work today? Americans abroad sometimes pretend to be Canadians to avoid abuse. That's how high the "American Way" is now valued. Once upon a time it was.

 

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(dbermanmd @ Sep 20 2006, 10:26 AM) [snapback]322319[/snapback]</div>

Why, you have the President greet his body when it is returned. Flags everywhere at half-staff! And you throw the biggest funeral his home town ever saw, with the mayor and governor there. Even in callous New York City! And you have a parade and a 21 gun salute. And you make sure his wife is well taken care of forever. And you get his kids appointments to West Point. And you put up a monument to him so that he will never be forgotten (Think Nathan Hale.) (For simplicity, I have assumed masculine gender. Everything works both ways.)

Or, instead of all that, we can go kick the crap out of some enemy soldier who falls into our hands.

I don't know how to set up a poll here, but I wonder how it would go.

Oh, the question is "What do we do?" not "What should we do?" Forget what I just wrote. (The government already has.)

 

Alnilam,

Thank you so much for both your service and your two previous posts!!!!!

It is clear that you took your military training seriously and more so your pride and respect for this county is something you represent to the highest degree. Knowing there were and are people with your respect for our laws in our country's service makes me know there is still hope for the United States. Now if only the respect you have existed in our executive branch...

Thanks again, for being a true hero!

 

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(EricGo @ Sep 19 2006, 09:46 AM) [snapback]321612[/snapback]</div>

due process. . . DUE PROCESS!!! i hope you get the chance to tell the thousands of family members of those lost on 9/11 that you're sorry you couldn't see their family get justice served because you were just too concerned with DUE PROCESS to see these sick bastards for what they really are. i don't know what any one else here thinks and to a great degree don't really care, but when you quote me and then say things like this, this really sickens me. sad thing is many people over the centuries have died for you to have the right to your moronic opinion

 

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(pogo @ Sep 19 2006, 04:20 PM) [snapback]321863[/snapback]</div>

pogo the post i responded to very early in this thread had clear law enforcement implications in it and that was what prompted this particular response. now that i have clarified the scope and intent of my comment, please enlighten me as to the other points i have missed in this thread up to my first post.

 

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(Schmika @ Sep 19 2006, 03:15 AM) [snapback]321466[/snapback]</div>

Beheading isn't torture - it's murder!

 

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(captain archer @ Sep 20 2006, 11:34 PM) [snapback]322720[/snapback]</div>

Just wondering....

You call yourself "Captain." Have you earned this title somehow or are you self-appointed? What branch of the service were you in?

 

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(Alnilam @ Sep 22 2006, 02:17 AM) [snapback]323268[/snapback]</div>

alnilam please read my sig. it is only a reference to the woefully implemented, but brilliant concept of the pre-"star trek" tv series ENTERPRISE.

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(EricGo @ Sep 22 2006, 08:35 AM) [snapback]323325[/snapback]</div>

here is at least something we can agree upon, we are indeed very different. you follow the left-leaning liberal mantra "you can't really know what it is like until you've been there" and i don't. one doesn't require military service (although i will admit it helps) to understand passionately the purpose, mission and personal sacrifice that is required of a member of the armed forces of any country. i have endeavored to speak only of those things that i have made a "reasoned" inquiry into. you however have chosen to exhibit the poor taste route of those that lack the means of an adequately reasoned disagreement -- the course of personal insult. nowhere have i stooped to name-calling, although if you stretch it i guess you could take it personally that i called your opinion moronic; however if you do that is your choice and your problem not the intent of my words and not my problem.