USA says: We do not torture, do not make it illegal!

[Grok]

White House:  "We do not torture."

White House:  "We will vetoe any bill that outlaws torture."

Secret Prisons run by US outside the US to avoid US law:
http://www.cnn.com/2005/POLITICS/11/08/prison.probe/index.html

Discuss.

[Arta]

If true, a shameful and reprehensible state of affairs. Deeply hyprocritical, and yet completely unsurprising. This is entirely the kind of story I have have come to expect from the Bush administration.

Additionally, stating "We do not torture", and then vetoing a bill to outlaw the same, is exactly the kind of transparently deceitful crap that I, and most of the rest of the world, have come to expect from the Bush administration. Recently, my own government has said similar things, and I am equally appalled by that.

I reiterate that I am dumbfounded and completely unable to comprehend why there is anyone of sound mind left who doesn't think that Bush and Blair are a pair of lying, devious, manipulative hypocrites. I find it deeply saddening, not to mention worrying, that there are so many intelligent people who, out of party loyalty, stubborness or reason_x, are unable to see that this is the case.

[Topaz]

There are things that are done away from the public eye, for the public's safety. I trust that the White House will do the right thing.

[Arta]

Our leaders no longer deserve our trust.

[Yegg]

Our leaders no longer deserve our trust.

Although most often true, no matter what decision is made, there will always be many people still unsatisfied.

[Banana fanna fo fanna]

Our leaders no longer deserve our trust.

But ours do.

[CrAz3D]

Eh, I don't believe torture is right, but I also believe it is a legitimate function of war.

What is legitimate isn't always right (in a moral sense)

[hismajesty]

If we don't do it why waist money enacting a law to keep us from doing it?

I don't care if we do it or not; what's more important: possibly saving millions, or hurting one person?

[iago]

Are you on crack? How could you possibly defend torture?  (Both hismajesty and crazed)

Torture is one of the most horrible things that can be done.  It's brutal, and savage, and has no place in a supposedly civilized nation. 

[CrAz3D]

Are you on crack? How could you possibly defend torture?  (Both hismajesty and crazed)

Torture is one of the most horrible things that can be done.  It's brutal, and savage, and has no place in a supposedly civilized nation. 

It is brutal, it is savage, & sometimes it may be necessary.  It is somewhat like "the world isn't fair" kind of a thing.  Yes torture is wrong, yes it hurts people, yes it has benefits.  Not everything in the world works all nice & pretty like

[MyndFyre]

Torture is one of the most horrible things that can be done.  It's brutal, and savage, and has no place in a supposedly civilized nation. 

No.  Rape is one of the most horrible things that can be done.  Flatly killing people for no reason (i.e. suicide bombing, flying planes into buildings, cold-blooded murder, etc.) is one of the most horrible things that can be done.  If we're getting worthwhile information out of one or two people that can save thousands more, it ought to be justified.  And we all know damn well that the other side wouldn't hesitate to do it right back to our guys (in fact, we've seen it).

[Adron]

And we all know damn well that the other side wouldn't hesitate to do it right back to our guys (in fact, we've seen it).

This also means that you should not be upset when the other side is doing it. I.e. when American soldiers are captured and tortured, do not make an outcry. It is just a legitimate, expected business that will happen to those who choose to join a war.

[Forged]

Torture is one of the most horrible things that can be done.  It's brutal, and savage, and has no place in a supposedly civilized nation. 

No.  Rape is one of the most horrible things that can be done.  Flatly killing people for no reason (i.e. suicide bombing, flying planes into buildings, cold-blooded murder, etc.) is one of the most horrible things that can be done.  If we're getting worthwhile information out of one or two people that can save thousands more, it ought to be justified.  And we all know damn well that the other side wouldn't hesitate to do it right back to our guys (in fact, we've seen it).

Yeah, I know, right, Fuck the Geneva Convention.  We don't need any rules for organized war! [/sarcasm]

To try saddamm hussien for autrocitys and warcrimes seems a little hypocritical if we are going to allow our own troops to torture people...

[Arta]

And we all know damn well that the other side wouldn't hesitate to do it right back to our guys (in fact, we've seen it).

...which is exactly why we shouldn't do it. Is there nothing to be said for leading by example? If we announce to the world that liberty and freedom and due process are our values, and then torture people, then we're announcing that we're hyprocrites. You can't have it both ways. We will never win 'hearts and minds' if our militaries show any of the same qualities as the people we claim are brutal, inhuman terrorists.

To say that 'the world is not pretty and nice' and then claim the same as justification for adding to the unpretty, unnice state of the world is a tautology, and a fairly obvious one. The world will never become a better place than it is unless people realise that that attitude is the reason that the world is horrible now.

We have claimed a higher moral standard as our justification for the war on terrorism. We have said that we are for freedom of speech, freedom from fear, freedom from tyranny. These are the principles on which we have embarked on this war. To ensure our safety, and to preserve our way of life. To claim that moral high ground and then debase it by making use of such evils as torture and illegal imprisonment is the basest kind of hyprocrisy.

[Topaz]

How else do you propose to extract information from terrorists? Offer them tea and biscuits?