Offering constructive criticism to the social cripples in our midst since early 2005.

[Spanky]

Originally posted by sgtclub
It's because I am practical and recognize that we are in a time of war and in a time of war bad shit happens on both sides. It is also because I think self defication, while unpleasant, is not the end of the world.

So even though this type of treatment does not serve a purpose we should not be concerned about it?

[Shape Shifter]

Originally posted by Spanky
You can cross post - that is fine. I just don't read the Fashion Board because I never can figure out what people are saying.

Congratulations. You made the big time.

http://lawtalkers.com/forums/showthr...019#post182019

[Tyrone Slothrop]

Originally posted by Spanky
It just disappeared. You are probably right. It has been getting pretty crazy around here. In downtown Palo Alto they killed a cougar and up here in the hills they have trapped a few near my house. This may sound like a stupid question but do Cougars eat Deer?

If you want to get the best info on that, you may need to post it on the FB or the SF/SV Board. Paigow doesn't come here often. I think she's a vegetarian, BTW.

eta: stp

If you have neighbors who are gardeners, they will be irate that you are feeding the deer.

[Shape Shifter]

Originally posted by sgtclub
It's because I am practical and recognize that we are in a time of war and in a time of war bad shit happens on both sides. It is also because I think self defication, while unpleasant, is not the end of the world.

All this is not to say that I think the POWs should be held indefinitely without process. I'm just not sure what that process should be.

We all realize bad stuff happens in war. What has happened is not random, accidental "oops, my bad!" stuff. It's institutionalized.

We're also awareof the difficulties in applying criminal law-type procedure to international terrorists. I don't think a regular criminal trial is necessary. As for the AQ we've picked up, they can rot away in prison for all I care. But we at least need some semi-public forum to determine that they were actually AQ. I don't want my tax dollars used to settle Afghan tribal scores.

[Spanky]

Originally posted by Shape Shifter
they can rot away in prison for all I care.

You guys are starting to make me feel liberal. When we let them "rot" in prison there is no reason to torture them. Correct?

[Shape Shifter]

Originally posted by Spanky
You guys are starting to make me feel liberal. When we let them "rot" in prison there is no reason to torture them. Correct?

Correct. They chose the wrong side. Fuck 'em.

BUT when I say "rot," I mean it metaphorically. I do not think the US should be in the business of torture, or even mistreatment. My bleeding heart believes the old saying about how you can judge a civilization by how it treats its prisoners.

[sgtclub]

Originally posted by ltl/fb
So you are OK with people getting kidnapped and executed? And wouldn't really have a problem with (relatively) random Americans being picked up and held in similar conditions in, like, Syria?

Right, because these situations are so similar.

ETA you've had, what, 3 years now to think about what should be done. Does this wait indefinitely until you decide on a process? Haven't a bunch of courts said it's not legal?

It's not just me, no one has been able to figure it out, other than those that say they should be affored the protections under the Constitution.

[sgtclub]

Originally posted by Spanky
So even though this type of treatment does not serve a purpose we should not be concerned about it?

Concern yes, but outrage? Sorry, I can't get that worked up given who these people and the relatively minor discomfort to which they are allegedly being subjected.

[sgtclub]

Originally posted by Shape Shifter
We all realize bad stuff happens in war. What has happened is not random, accidental "oops, my bad!" stuff. It's institutionalized.

We're also awareof the difficulties in applying criminal law-type procedure to international terrorists. I don't think a regular criminal trial is necessary. As for the AQ we've picked up, they can rot away in prison for all I care. But we at least need some semi-public forum to determine that they were actually AQ. I don't want my tax dollars used to settle Afghan tribal scores.

So I think you and I kind of agree, no?

ETA: does that make me the dumbest?

[Mmmm, Burger (C.J.)]

Originally posted by sgtclub
Concern yes, but outrage? Sorry, I can't get that worked up given who these people and the relatively minor discomfort to which they are allegedly being subjected.

"Minor discomfort"? I suppose that's fact based, but unless you're comparing it to the beheadings that al qaeda use on their prisoners, it seems more than minor. and I don't think you really want to use al qaeda as your baseline.

But spanky has a point--is the treatment actually serving a purpose? Because torture to obtain useful information is morally ambiguous. torture "just because" is not.

[ltl/fb]

Originally posted by Mmmm, Burger (C.J.)
"Minor discomfort"? I suppose that's fact based, but unless you're comparing it to the beheadings that al qaeda use on their prisoners, it seems more than minor. and I don't think you really want to use al qaeda as your baseline.

But spanky has a point--is the treatment actually serving a purpose? Because torture to obtain useful information is morally ambiguous. torture "just because" is not.

Well, there's a possibility that they will get information, and as Rumsfeld (or Cheney?) said, "the prisoners in Guantanamo are, for the most part, very bad people."* And if there's a 90% chance that you are a very bad person, you deserve to be sitting in your feces and forcibly deprived of sleep and stuff like that, right?

*I paraphrase, but there was some kind of a "for the most part" or "on the whole" in there.

[sgtclub]

Originally posted by Mmmm, Burger (C.J.)
"Minor discomfort"? I suppose that's fact based, but unless you're comparing it to the beheadings that al qaeda use on their prisoners, it seems more than minor. and I don't think you really want to use al qaeda as your baseline.

That's why I used the "relatively" modifyer.

But spanky has a point--is the treatment actually serving a purpose? Because torture to obtain useful information is morally ambiguous. torture "just because" is not.

No and agreed.

[Tyrone Slothrop]

Originally posted by sgtclub
Torture.

It is a very, very strange conception of individual rights that holds that a state may torture an individual who may or may not be guilty of a crime simply in order to obtain information from him or her in the name of the public interest, but that the state cannot diminish the value of an individual's property in the name of the public interest, whether or not compensation is paid.

It's sort of like Locke meets de Sade, or something.

[ltl/fb]

Originally posted by Tyrone Slothrop
It is a very, very strange conception of individual rights that holds that a state may torture an individual who may or may not be guilty of a crime simply in order to obtain information from him or her in the name of the public interest, but that the state cannot diminish the value of an individual's property in the name of the public interest, whether or not compensation is paid.

It's sort of like Locke meets de Sade, or something.

Maybe the gov't can take his stuff because they need the money for the war, and war is special circumstances.

This actually would work really well for me.

[sgtclub]

Originally posted by Tyrone Slothrop
It is a very, very strange conception of individual rights that holds that a state may torture an individual who may or may not be guilty of a crime simply in order to obtain information from him or her in the name of the public interest, but that the state cannot diminish the value of an individual's property in the name of the public interest, whether or not compensation is paid.

It's sort of like Locke meets de Sade, or something.

You've made this point before. Do we really need to go through the discussion again?