Legalizing Illegal immigrants

[LongHaul]

Rooster7,

Clarify a few things for me. You say you dont consider insurgents as being innocent. Insurgent being anyone who is fighting against the government in their own country. Which would have made ALL the rebels we supported in Afghanistan when we trying to free them from the Russians, insurgents. Which would mean the Russians would have been perfectly justified, by your standards, to torture any and all of these people. I wonder if you would have been on the Russians side were we now discussing them torturing Afgan insurgents. The current Iraqi insurgents are fighting against a government not of their choosing but one we put in power after toppling the established government, also not of their choosing. Agree with us and what we are doing or its strike one, three and we torture you? The only way you can be considered innocent if you accept our military occupation. How is that what we are supposed to be about?

   You ended with this; My contempt is for a false, self-serving portrayal of our nation, which defames our history, our military, and our current and past presidents. This is what I find disgusting. This really baffles me because until this topic hit I always sided with most of your beliefs if not always with your approach. You seemed true to your convictions and consistent in your positions. If we were camped side by side at a Jamboree wed probably get along just fine as long as politics or religion never came up. You declare what your in contempt of as being false, yet offer (in your previous posts in this thread) only that they are false because you believe them to be. I didnt see any thing which portrayed our Nation, the American people and the concepts upon which this country stands and was founded, in a negative light. What I read were criticisms of governmental policy and positions. Our History is our History we as a Nation have done what we have done and allowed our elected leaders to do what they have done. Deformation implies untruth, historical reference is accurate or inaccurate, I cant figure out how one would defame our history. Again I see no instance where anyone has said even the slightest thing negative about our men and women in uniform. Unlike the Viet Nam era when returning vets were met with Baby Burner and physical assault in airports(red paint), todays vets are not blamed for what they have been assigned to do. In fact I think they are supported better by the general public than by the National Military which requires each state National Guard unit to supply and equip their respective units in the field. Those military personnel, some are so ready to commit torture on behalf of, cant get the equipment and supplies they need to do the job or protect themselves because Uncle Sam is saying Its not my job! If anyone is showing disregard and disrespect for those in uniform today its the President who sent them there without figuring out how to supply them and the Pentagon who should have more regard for combat personnel. You finish the sentence with and our current and past presidents. I seem to remember you being, well, less than supportive of Clinton. Isnt he a past President? Or doesnt he count?

LongHaul

[Rooster7]

LongHaul,

 

Did I overreact? Its not my goal to make you my enemy to make unnecessary and harsh distinctions. You are probably a great guy, who loves his family and neighbors. Just the same, I am tired of defending our country. Despite having a long history of reaching out to other nations and being the victim of heinous terrorists acts, America is portrayed as the victimizer vice the victim. This I can barely tolerant from the French. Yet, when my own countrymen fuel the fires, I tend to implode. So, while I am sorry that I may have come off as someone whose one step away from the deep end, I feel as if you and others are pushing the likes of me to the edge of the proverbial pool.

 

By the way, my previous statement about insurgents was not meant to be generic. I was specifically addressing the situation in Iraq. Furthermore, as I have stated several times before I am not advocating torture. I just understand why our military may resort to it, given specific individuals and scenarios. Beyond this assertion, I have pretty much remained silent. If youre putting me on the other side of the fence (from you), because I cant say where I stand on this as a moral issue, then so be it. Im not 100% convinced that its the moral high ground to provide murderous and vile men with a bed, three meals a day, and other comforts, while they withhold information that will lead to the eventual torture and killing of innocent men, women, and children.

 

[Hunt]

"Im not 100% convinced that its the moral high ground to provide murderous and vile men with a bed, three meals a day, and other comforts, while they withhold information that will lead to the eventual torture and killing of innocent men, women, and children."

 

Let me try this from another angle that might help. One of the brightest characteristics of our national system is that we are have a government of laws, not of men. What this means is that there is no king--no person who has discretionary power over everyone else. All the elements of our government have checks and balances, and oversight. We elect our leaders, and even the unelected leaders can be removed.

If Congress were to pass a law authorizing torture under certain specified circumstances, requiring a decision by a judge, say, as it does for a search warrant---that would be one thing. I would strongly disagree with it, and I would urge my representatives to vote against it. I might assist in efforts to have it declared unconstitutional.

But to learn that agents of our government are secretly torturing prisoners in overseas prisons without any kind of review or oversight, is something else entirely. It is an example of government by men, not laws. It's government by shadowy men who act on their own, without anyone or anything to restrain them. There's no way to know or verify if they're making the right decisions, or to punish them if they do wrong.

And once the CIA does this overseas, what's to stop the FBI or your local police department from doing it here, with US citizens?

So the argument is that this practice is un-American, not just because torture is un-American, but because giving that kind of power to a few hidden men is un-American.

[SR540Beaver]

I see both sides of the argument. For me, the America I grew up in would never resort to torture. Of course, the America I grew up in didn't have a 9/11. Still, as Hunt pointed out, we are a nation of laws and part of our strength and greatness has been due to adhering to the law regardless of circumstances. Do we allow the acts of others to define our actions? Do we stoop to their level? From everything I've read and heard from intelligence experts, the information obtained thru torture is extremely suspect. Put a person under enough pain and stress over a period of time and they will tell you anyting you want to hear or make up things they think you want to hear.

[packsaddle]

Even if one doesn't agree with John McCain's view of torture, it is clear that torture produces little progress, especially if it is information. The scenario in which the terrorist suspect is tortured to provide details of an impending attack is flawed by the possiblity that the suspect might not actually HAVE that information. But under torture he will produce something that is virtually assured to lead us in the wrong direction...and incidentally, because we think we know something falsely, the actual terrorists might actually have an easier task. This whole line of reasoning is bogus.

On the other hand,

 

http://www.phrusa.org/campaigns/action_alerts/libya.html

 

This is not a scenario. It is real. The health workers may or may not have infected hundreds of children in Libya. But their torture to extract confessions hardly contributed to the truth. On the contrary, the truth may never be fully known because of all the political repercussions as a result of the torture. But then, that very well could have been the intended outcome of the torture.

In the end, those children will still be dead and infected. And we may never know whether the health workers were responsible, or if Libyan health practices were responsible. This is sad. But torture has contributed nothing to the situation but more confusion, and quite possibly, execution of innocent health workers.

[Rooster7]

Heres another thing of which I remain unconvinced... that federal judges make the best safeguards against travesties of injustice, especially those perpetrated against the law abiding people of the United States. You say - we should remain a nation of laws. Thats great. I agree - whenever individuals have direct control of the rights of another, there is plenty of room for error and abuse. However, before we go after those in military for taking the law in their own hands, lets tidy up the Supreme Court. Theyve been taking the law in their own hands for the last 40 plus years. I realize that comment takes this thread off topic but then again, we werent exactly debating immigration policies anymore. ;-)