"Don't tell me it doesn't work -- torture works"

Davocrat

Former Staff
Apr 2007
54,449
44,276
Orangemanbad
How is posing next to a corpse torture?

Am I missing something?
Yes, you're missing the ARTICLE content.

Here, I'll help you out:

"I would bring back waterboarding, and I'd bring back a hell of a lot worse than waterboarding," Trump said in a Republican primary debate in New Hampshire in February 2016.

"Don't tell me it doesn't work -- torture works," Trump said at a campaign event in South Carolina later that month. "Half these guys [say]: 'Torture doesn't work.' Believe me, it works."
First of all, it's a case of Trump undermining America's higher standards (like saying it's okay to pose with a human trophy, even a 12-year-old). Second of all, what does Trump know about torture? "Believe me, it works."<--??? WTF.

You okay with America torturing people, Jeremy? Yes or no.
 
Sep 2019
2,189
573
Idaho
Yes, you're missing the ARTICLE content.

Here, I'll help you out:



First of all, it's a case of Trump undermining America's higher standards (like saying it's okay to pose with a human trophy, even a 12-year-old). Second of all, what does Trump know about torture? "Believe me, it works."<--??? WTF.

You okay with America torturing people, Jeremy? Yes or no.
Title of the link is deceptive. Goes from Trump supporting the Navy SEAL to supporting torture. Odd lead in.
 

The Man

Former Staff
Jul 2011
48,865
36,769
Toronto
I remember the case of Yury Budanov, a Russian military colonel


In March 2000, while involved in the operations in Chechnya at the time, and possibly, allegedly, while drunk, he raped and murdered an 18 year old Chechen girl, Elza Kungaeva

Budanov later claimed, in his defense, that Kungaeva was an insurgent sniper (FWIW, they DID, Chechen separatists and jihadis, employ female snipers, on occasion) and that he legitmately acted to neutralize her, as such. But, it was proven that he raped and tortured her, before killing her, either way.

Her family fought for years for justice, and, in 2009, Budanov was actually finally sentenced to 10 years in prison for the murder, which galvanized public opinion countrywide, with Slavic Russian nationalists/far right backing Budanov, while Chechens and many other Muslims in North Caucasus, of course, hating him.

In 2004, he was suddenly let out, on a bs pardon by none other than Vladimir Shamanov, a now former military general (and Budanov's commander) by then sitting as Governor of Chelyabinsk region, where he was doing his time.

In 2011, Budanov was shot dead in Moscow, by a Chechen man, Yusup Temerkhanov

likely in revenge for Elza. That man then himself was arrested and imprisoned, and then died in a prison camp in Siberia under murky circumstances (some reports say neo Nazi inmates killed him in revenge, in turn, for Budanov...)

Russian nationalist graffitti celebrating Budanov...


Violence and brutality only begets more of same, over and over...

Don't go down that road, my friends...
 
Sep 2019
2,189
573
Idaho
Only because you don't like the content.

Sorry if the reporter wrote it this way.

Just curious: do you think we should torture? Yes or no, please.
It was an odd and awkward transition.
I support water boarding and don't consider it torture. True torture I'd be against except in the most extreme case where there was no other choice. Say we captured a terrorist that laughed about knowing where a nuke was and when it would blow up. I'd torture him myself if need be in an attempt to get him to tell where it was.
 
Sep 2014
5,201
1,669
South FL
Somebody being tortured will say anything, true or false, to stop the torture. So really the only way it would be effective is if the truth can be independently verified. If somebody kidnapped your daughter and you had the kidnapper in captivity would you apply torture to make the kidnapper reveal the location of your daughter? I wouldn't hesitate to do it.

For sure, not torturing people is a very high ideal, but defending my daughter is a higher one.

Of course I have a defense here and that's necessity.

Torture is illegal, and it should be illegal, its obviously an extremely aggravated form of assault and batter, but anybody charged with torture should be able to plead the affirmative defense of necessity.

And then we'll let judges and juries decide.

Find me guilty, I can live with that at the very least the defense would be a mitigating circumstance for purposes of sentencing.

In fact, I would generally say that the overriding issue is one of partial mitigating excuse, not complete justification/vindication with respect to war crimes, generally, not just torture, which is a specific kind of war crime (though civilian police can obviously be guilty of employing torture, this thread seems to contemplate the use of torture in the context of armed conflict). The various fact patterns must each be individually analyzed for purposes of assessing culpability but the fact remains the soldiers are being placed in inherently unnatural situations. Ultimately the laws of war generally impose a duty on belligerents to wear uniforms so the other side can distinguish between combatants and non combatants. The LOAC imposes the obligation to engage belligerents with distinction and proportionality. Indeed, there is the concept that belligerents should not be targeting non-combatants or otherwise violating what we would generally call the laws of armed conflict or simply the 'Geneva Convention'

But you see, here's the rub in asymmetric guerilla warfare. The guerillas are the weaker party and can't afford to wear uniforms since to do so would make them easy targets for the other side. So, they don't and typical tactics employed by guerillas is to 'hug' the civilian population to make targeting the guerillas a politically costly event. There is another consequence of not wearing uniforms and that is the other side winds up finding it extremely difficult to 'distinguish' between combatants and non-combatants. In the soldiers' minds what's happening as a result is everybody now looks like a potential combatant and since your life is on the line, why should he take the risk?

Let's not forget that the failure of the guerillas to wear uniforms is itself an independent war crime. The modern day francs-tireurs are treated differently than that faced by the Prussian Army in France in the 19th Century who were subject to summary execution as un-uninformed spies. Nevertheless, for purposes of assessing criminal liability in the context of the laws of armed conflict, the fact that our soldiers are subject to criminal liability for targeting non-combatants needs to assess the totality of the circumstances and that must necessarily include the fact that the enemy's tactics are unequivocally intended to confound the ability of our soldiers to distinguish between combatants and non-combatants in a way that clearly imposes emotional distress on our soldiers. This is a strong mitigating circumstance, partially excusing the criminal conduct in question.

Of course, each individual circumstance is different. I am suggesting the existence of a mitigating circumstance which naturally does not preclude the existence of aggravating circumstances.
 
Last edited:
Sep 2014
5,201
1,669
South FL
Don't go down that road, my friends...
Well, we did, we have been embroiled in a perpetual state of armed conflict including what is now a multi-generational conflict.

Actually the record is quite clear that of all the Presidents in my living memory, which is basically Reagan on (I really don't remember Carter) Trump is the single most peaceful one. By far I might add.
 
  • Like
Reactions: The Man