Support Senator Durbin
The following was Senator Durbin's reaction to FBI reports of prisoners in Guantanamo Bay being chained to the floor, deprived of food and water, and held in extreme hot or cold temperatures for days at a time [link]:
"If I read this to you and did not tell you that it was an FBI agent describing what Americans had done to prisoners in their control, you would most certainly believe this must have been done by Nazis, Soviets in their gulags, or some mad regime - Pol Pot or others - that had no concern for human beings."
Senator Durbin is absolutely correct. This is disgraceful, and those responsible belong in prison. I don't normally come out in support of specific candidates in this way, but I would ask all of my readers to send supportive comments to Senator Durbin [link].
posted by Immoral Majority at 7:57 AM
7 Comments:
I fully support human rights abuses by the military. That's their job. To think that our military is or should be somehow nicer than the other militaries you mentioned is a fantastic illusion.
Sunday, 19 June, 2005
Perhaps this is just me, but I believe that our military should be better than they were in Nazi Germany, or in Cambodia etc. Do you condone genocide? Do you support imperialism?
Monday, 20 June, 2005
It's not just you, it's the vast majority of the american people, but it's based on an illusion. Every nation feels their military is somehow morally justified in their actions.
The National Socialist Worker's Party, and Pol Pot's regime both engaged in the wholesale execution of political opposition. This is pretty much the definition of war. To accept war is to accept genocide(by the loose definition employed here.. not necessarily by genetic determinations but in terms of those opposed to the ideology the war is "about".. wholesale killing by any determination is still wholesale killing)
It's a strange morality that views shooting people as somehow acceptable, while chaining them to the floor is reprehensible.
Monday, 20 June, 2005
There is a big difference between shooting someone on a battlefield, and torturing someone already in custody. In battle, a soldier must kill the enemy to survive. There is a good argument that they shouldn't be in the situation in the first place, and I agree with that in all cases except where the fight is in self defense.
That being said, I don't really support either atrocity. I believe that there is a peaceful solution to all conflicts. Our leadership is unwilling to consider these options because these options do not further US dominace.
Tuesday, 21 June, 2005
Torture is used to illicit information which will ultimately save lives. If the war is in any way justified, the torture is as well. My only point here is that it's just a natural extension of being at war.
Sunday, 26 June, 2005
The use of torture is not an effective means to extract information. The victim will only tell the torturer what he/she wants to hear.
Regardless, torture is a form of punishment. It is used against anyone who may have information.
The fundamental philosophy of the American law enforcement system is that the accused have a right to appeal the accusations against them to an independant body. In the US, that independant body is the court system. It would not make sense to have the police simply choose a suspect, throw him in prison, and if they really think he is guilty, determine a prison sentence, or some other punishment. The act of torture constitutes not only punishment, but punishment which is considered cruel and unusual.
To allow torture as an interrogation tactic is to allow a single group or individual to impose a cruel and unusual punishment, without independant oversight.
Thursday, 30 June, 2005
I agree with everything you said with the following caveat. Do the rights of citizenship extend to everyone in the world or only citizens? If the Bill of Rights applies to all in the world we'd have to put every member of an opposing army on trial before firing a shot. It's not about justice, it's about what's realistic in warfare. Torture is definitely cruel, but it's not unusual.
Yes there's a double standard here, yes it's morally wrong, but it's no more wrong than the internment of the Japanese Americans during WWII. That's probably the closest thing to a just war I can think of, and even then we were not angels. And it's not desirable that we be morally correct in war. I think if we had been as morally correct as your asking our military to be now we would have lost WWII.
Thursday, 30 June, 2005
Post a Comment
<< Home