|
TEAYCHES posted:What's the statute of limitations on torture? Morally there is none and why should we give a gently caress about what the law says it is?
|
#
¿
Dec 10, 2014 12:58
|
|
|
|
| # ¿ May 14, 2024 06:35 |
|
|
SedanChair posted:John Yoo should be executed. I'd be willing to compromise for "tried under Nuremberg principles, found guilty, sentenced to death, have sentence changed to life in prison on humanitarian grounds, let out of prison once medical professionals determine he's about to die anyway". We have room for this fucker in the prison in Scheveningen where we put the other war criminals and I'd be so loving happy paying my taxes every year knowing it's funding this fucks imprisonment you'd have no idea.
|
|
#
¿
Dec 10, 2014 14:55
|
|
|
SedanChair posted:Compelling, but I want to see his smooth, fat head drop into a basket. Your thoughts? I'm principally against the death penalty but my level of caring for war criminals is pretty low so uh, whatever I guess? euphronius posted:NYT still refusing to use the word "torture" seemingly. Even the USA Today has the word "torture" in the headline. All the news fit to print. Orange Devil fucked around with this message at 16:09 on Dec 10, 2014 |
|
#
¿
Dec 10, 2014 16:03
|
|
|
An unknown number of dogs, Portugese and otherwise, would have gotten raped, tortured and killed by the CIA or third parties in service of the CIA. Evidence that very serious people would claim was compelling would be presented to the UN showing Portugal to be a rogue terrorist state that must be invaded. Bombing would commence shortly, within a few years, Brazil would be invaded for good measure.
|
|
#
¿
Dec 10, 2014 17:01
|
|
|
fade5 posted:E: Or did this happen some time in the past, like back when Gaddafi was still in power? You know how Gaddafi was, after decades of hostility, getting closer and closer to the West before the whole Arab Spring thing happened? Think about how that happened. Jagchosis posted:john yoo explained his strategy for appearing slick in interviews to me: government types are generally given a set of 2 or 3 talking points to repeat with different wording, and journalists (and stewart) know this, so if you anticipate what talking points the journos are expecting in advance just completely talk around it and talk about something that they don't expect, but make it sound like you're answering their question. please tell me if he deploys this strategy on CNN, or if he's refined it Jagchosis suffered more consequences for ommitting punctuation from this post than Bush & Cheney et al ever will for rectal feeding, waterboarding and straight up murder. Serious question, how does anyone still take any US law seriously after this? Orange Devil fucked around with this message at 11:30 on Dec 11, 2014 |
|
#
¿
Dec 11, 2014 11:05
|
|
|
hobbesmaster posted:We hanged the officers that ordered war crimes after WWII, not the men that did them (they'd have been shot if they refused after all). This isn't entirely true. There are cases of Germans refusing orders on ethical grounds and most of the time the reaction was to just get someone else to do it instead. That said, there's a clear precedent of trying, convicting and hanging or imprisoning for a long long time those who order these kinds of crimes.
|
|
#
¿
Dec 12, 2014 00:34
|
|
|
Rygar201 posted:
It actually omits parts about the bronze bull that always stood out to me. It was carefully crafted with all kinds of piping so that once a fire was kindled underneath it and the person locked inside started boiling alive, the screams this person would produce would sound like a bull, to entertain everyone around.
|
|
#
¿
Dec 12, 2014 17:03
|
|
|
MariusLecter posted:Sometimes I think mostly what happened is along the lines of something posted in the Cops makin me lol thread. It's much much worse morally though. If you kill or torture someone to save your own life then that's pretty bad but you can empathize, but doing it to benefit your career, not even like "I'll be out of a job and then how will I take care of my family" but straight up "it'll be better for me if I do this" is thoroughly repugnant. Even so it was basically decided to let them get away with it and go after just the people doing the ordering. 70 years later we can't even have that.
|
|
#
¿
Dec 13, 2014 21:28
|
|
|
computer parts posted:They did do something - they stopped. Guantanamo is still open. Bagram is still open. I flat out don't believe the US is not currently torturing people.
|
|
#
¿
Dec 14, 2014 23:34
|
|
|
Anubis posted:Closing Gitmo was specifically banned by congress in such a way that Obama literally had no choice in the matter. Again, there are things to insult the man on but Gitmo really isn't one of them unless you somehow think he should have vetoed the spending bill and sent the country into default. Did Congress make him triple the number of people held in Bagram too? Guantanamo still has a black site. Lawyers and NGOs still do not have proper access to people held in Guantanamo. These people still don't get proper trials. Based on the facts, am I really to conclude there is not currently torture going on in Guantanamo?
|
|
#
¿
Dec 15, 2014 13:35
|
|
|
twodot posted:Perhaps I should state this more directly, I believe two things: 1) The government believes it is justified in holding these people indefinitely, and 2) They believe their reasons for believing that are legitimate. I propose that 1) is true, but 2) is badly reasoned. Do you have an issue with that? Yes. You are wrong on point 1 and also quite probably evil.
|
|
#
¿
Dec 17, 2014 12:09
|
|
|
|
| # ¿ May 14, 2024 06:35 |
|
|
The way I read his post it sounded like he was saying the government is right to believe indefinite detention is justified. If he wasn't saying that, then I rescind my statement on the probability of his evilness.
|
|
#
¿
Dec 17, 2014 14:20
|
|