Oh hell yes. We treated them appallingly.

Doesn't in any way alter the fact that America has given up its moral highground on torture, 'disappearances' in the form of extraordinary renditions, and indefinite imprisonment without legal process.

Interrogation by torture.

Says who?

Nawwww... :p

Says the fact that they're taking people to secret prisons in torture-friendly countries.

More fraternity pranks being called torture. Puh-leeze. :rolleyes:

Well here's what actual torture is, so that we remember the difference between this and turning the thermostat down.

http://www.thesmokinggun.com/archive...2torture1.html

http://cellar.org/2007/aqtorture1.jpg

http://cellar.org/2007/aqtorture2.jpg

http://cellar.org/2007/aqtorture4.jpg

http://cellar.org/2007/aqtorture5.jpg

Just because our techniques aren't as brutal as Al-Qaeda's methods doesn't make it any more right or justified.

I totally disagree.

We're so firmly in semantics-land here, that just to say what we do is "torture" puts us in moral equivalence with, you know, actual torture, things that nobody disagrees is torture.

And that's where the argument is now: Carter says "America tortures", by his definition of torture, which he has expanded as wide as he can because then we don't have an argument about whether it's ok to slap somebody. Stuff your mama did to you as a kid is now "torture". Stuff you would do to win a $100 bet is now "torture". Stuff weaker than any 15 second segment of Jackass is now "torture". And why. Because it's the only way to win the argument.

Right on -- we can even do more than that. Some people have been able to fast for as many as thirty days or more and they did it willingly. Imagine what kind of great information we could extract if we withheld food for even longer periods of time! Bring them right to the edge of death and make them talk. In the end it isn't torture -- not a mark on 'em! They'll live. We never ratified -- never even signed -- the Inter-American Convention, so we can do everything from beat someone "less-than-severely" everyday for months on end to perform mock executions so often the prisoner suffers cardiac arrest or embolism from stress. Again: not torture! Death by natural causes, people pull pranks worse than this, etc etc.

On a parallel, I once had a neighbor with a husband who screamed, insulted, mocked, and called her worthless everyday for years while they were married. She had the nerve to call these non-physical events "abuse" and ended up saying she needed prescribed medication to keep the panic attacks away to function normally in society and sleep at night. Guy never laid a finger on her and now she says she's having trouble with relationships because someone yelled at her. Whatever. Geeze. My mom yelled at me when I was a kid and I turned out just fine. :rolleyes:

You've got it wrong. "Things that nobody disagrees is torture" is essentially the set of things that Al Qaeda does that we don't. You're the one in semantics-land, Mr. "Stuff your mama did to you as a kid".

Yay us that we aren't as bad as Al Qaeda, but it doesn't excuse the things that we do.

As long as you are ok with Americans being treated that way, then fine.
I'm not.
If we adopt the tactics of the enemy we ARE the enemy.

How is that not what's what I said. What AQ does, everybody agrees is torture. What we do, not everybody agrees is torture. The definers, such as Carter, call it torture in order to make the moral equivalency case.

But your line of thinking "we are not as bad as Al Qaeda" contains the notion that "we are bad", and now that is your starting point and you're working to prove it. You could just as easily start with "Al Qaeda does much MUCH worse things than we do, 999 times out of 1000, ordered and instructed from the top, motivated by inhumanity as a part of their very nature... and that is what makes Al Qaeda bad and us good. That said, we are overdue for discussions and instruction about where the limits are and why."

But you didn't, and that suggests to me that you are shooting at that moral equivalency notion and I don't understand why.

That is the beauty and curse, depends on which way you take it, of American media. President Carter can say what we do is torture and then someone else can look into it deeper, make a rebuttal, than someone else can take a different viewpoint, make an opinion, and so on. That is the best available way to take at this issue on a subjective topic such as this. It is also the best way to learn.

For my personal view on the topic, I can see how slapping can be considered torture since torture is so situational. If I am a guard and need to take a prisoner somewhere and he resists, so I pistol whip him, that will usually not be seen as torture. But, if I take two kids, this actually happened by the way in Greece, and force them to slap each other as hard as they can while all the guards chant and mock them without any greater purpose, I would definitely consider that torture because it is pointless entertainment for the guards on the behalf of the prisoners. Pistol-whipping is without a doubt considered more brutal than slapping, but when put in different situations, one comes out much worse than the other because of intentions.

When we look farther into the topic, we get a greater understanding and can then make a better judgment on how we should react.

I don't see how that makes us "good". I am not suggesting moral equivalency because the scenario can never allow it with such different environments, but Al Qaeda should not be a factor in this discussion at all. If your child is getting C's in math and he points out that he is doing better than his neighbor, who gets F's consistently, how would that make your child good at math? Whenever I brought up that excuse my father always said that what he is doing doesn't matter and looking back my father was right, and I believe that should also be applied to this situation. What Al Qaeda is doing should not determine how we treat our prisoners since we live in different environments and should strive for different goals, doing so only seems like a cop-out to me unless you can show me otherwise.

Only because it's us saying it's not. Before we were doing it we agreed that it was. That's why the Bush administration had to issue new definitions of torture.