2006-09-16

Right-Wingers: Why is Your President Convinced That Torture Makes Americans Safer?






















"Mr Bush told reporters at a hastily arranged press conference that his controversial plans were essential for the protection of the United States.

"He was speaking a day after four key Republican senators rebelled, backing an alternative draft proposal."

Even though Republicans are finally speaking up against Bush's attrocities, the president is determined that his way is the only way.

Question 1: What's up with your boy?

Question 2: Why have Republicans been so slow in condemning this criminal and immoral behavior?

Question 3: Is this condemnation coming because it is election season and the President is more unpopular than ever?

6 comments:

Paul Hue said...

I oppose Bush on this. So do many other repo voters. I advocate zero torture; I advocate treatment of these prisoners so well that fighters prefer getting captured to figthing. I advocate that military personel realize that even under the best circumstances -- peace time in a civilized nation like the US -- innocent people get arrested. Therefore, some fraction of the captured people in Iraq are innocent. Thus treat all prisoners with this in mind: better to treat a killer better than he deserves than to mistreat an innocent person.

For a supposed "small govt" advocate, Bush sure goes for lots of big govt solutions. Torture and prison are very big govt operations.

Nadir said...

Thanks, Paul.

That's the answer to the first question. What about the other two.

Paul Hue said...

2. Many repos and their voters apparently believe in torturing people accused by US military personel of participating in either in the Islamic terrorism crusade, or for whatever reason fighting against the pro-democracy forces in Iraq. They are correct that the Geneva Convention does not cover such captured persons, who neither wear a military uniform nor fight under the authority of a government signatory to that document. However, I believe that the interests of decocracy and freedom are better served by applying this document anyway.

3. I believe that some repos who believe as I do had previously not opposed Bush due to Bush's previous popularity. However, Bush's popularity has been creeping upward lately, though suppport for his Iraq war has not.

Paul Hue said...

http://www.alertnet.org/thenews/newsdesk/N18316511.htm

Here's one reason why zero torture is so important: here the good guys arrested the wrong man... and tortured him. The good guys must realize that if even local USA police arrest innocent people, this is bound to happen on battlefields. What could be worse for the war for civilization than torturing innocent people?

Paul Hue said...

My fellow war mongers really must stop advocating torture! It is preposterous.

Paul Hue said...

Nadir: I also wonder why your president wants to argue for, and impliment, torture, even on people who are certainly child killers, slavers, rapists, etc. I assume that you share my view of the honkies who owned slaves or who served in the KKK: I would not want to have tortured them. The act of torturing and exacting retribution can debase the righteous, which seems to explain how the revolutions in Haiti, France, Cuba, Rhodesia, etc. devolved merely into new forms of tyrany.