Thread: A question on the constitution

I don't want to come off sounding pro torture, I'm really not, and yes it is wrong. I also agree with every human having basic, universal rights. However, when do you draw the line? When you plant bombs on the side of the road? When you murder women and children to prove a point? When you capture, torture, then behead or burn another human alive? There has to be a line where you no longer have the rights that law abiding, beneficial members of the human race follow. These people you are so strongly defending would kill you in a heartbeat and not have the slightest remorse.

Originally Posted by prodigy

There has to be a line where you no longer have the rights that law abiding, beneficial members of the human race follow. These people you are so strongly defending would kill you in a heartbeat and not have the slightest remorse.

That may be true, but that is also why our society is BETTER than there's. BECAUSE we follow the rule of Law . . . BECAUSE we refuse to debase ourselves by descending to their level . . . BECAUSE we value life, even the lives of the scum you refer to . . . BECAUSE we do not casually discard our humanity like some soiled shirt, to be laundered an put back on AFTER we have done the dirty work you describe.

There IS a line between who WE are as a society, and who THEY are . . . and we DARE NOT cross it. If we do, we are not better than the animals we portray them (accurately) to be.

You guys are right. Let's just all sit in a circle, holding hands and singing songs of joy and peace. That way no one will ever want to hurt anyone else.

That is quite a leap you are suggesting between singing Kumbaya and expecting some level of accountability and responsibility.

Originally Posted by prodigy

So just to clarify, if a known terrorist was captured and he has knowledge of future attacks, it's not ok to force him to give up this information? I mean he obviously is not going to want to say anything, so I guess we can just let him go? It is wrong to torture him, it is wrong to hold him in prison... what is the best way to handle these people? It's a bad situation, there is no right way to do it, but saying all the ways we have used are wrong without acknowledging the options are very limited doesn't really help. These guys don't play by the rules, if they did they wouldn't be here still. If you play a game against someone who doesn't play by the rules, do you think you can still win?

I marked in red the parts I disagree with. There is a right way to do it. I don't see why shouldn't we hold people in prison. We have these ways, we simply want a shortcut and think that doing the wrong thing may not be all that bad after all.

The whole criminal justice system is set up to deal with people who do not play by the rules - we continue to have a functional society with continuously decreasing violence and crime rates, so I would say we are winning by playing by the rules against bad guys who don't.

I think the core of the problem is that despite all the big words a lot of people do take the freedoms we enjoy for granted.
Playing by the rules is what ensures these freedoms.
You do not start with 'known' terrorists, you start with 'suspected' terrorists. You need a process based on rules to move from 'suspected' to either 'known' or 'falsely suspected', because without such process you end up with abusing innocent people and that's where you've betrayed all those ideals.

Is the criminal justice system perfect - certainly not - sometimes we discover we've sentenced the wrong person, sometimes we fail to punish the right person. But not having such system and simply punishing people without due process is far far worse.

Look I'm done, I've thoroughly enjoyed this thread, and I'm sure it will continue without me. Your logic is so illogical and hard to follow. You obviously feel that our criminal justice system somehow extends to foreign people in foreign lands? Anyway it's been fun debating with the several members who have chimed in! To the OP, great thread, definitely stoked a lot of fires! Smooth shaving my friends!

So tell me gugi: In your world of justice, how should the ISIS terrorist be treated? The terrorist who beheaded the Coptic Christians, burned the Jordanian Pilot alive, kidnap and torture innocent people for ransom. Do you believe they deserve a trial or should all terrorist be killed and just let God sort'em out.

Originally Posted by feltspanky

So tell me gugi: In your world of justice, how should the ISIS terrorist be treated? The terrorist who beheaded the Coptic Christians, burned the Jordanian Pilot alive, kidnap and torture innocent people for ransom. Do you believe they deserve a trial or should all terrorist be killed and just let God sort'em out.

I'm pretty sure I already addressed it, but I can do it more directly as well.
I'd start with the fact that this is internal problem for Iraq and Syria. If you're going to solve some other country's internal problems I think you need international mandate, and international involvement.

Because ISIS aren't the only terrorists who kidnap and torture innocent people for ransom and kill them. The fact that they are the ones who happened to be on the TV set doesn't mean that they are the ones who should be the top priority. What did we do for the terrorists before them who kidnapped, tortured, and raped there?

Originally Posted by prodigy

You guys are right. Let's just all sit in a circle, holding hands and singing songs of joy and peace. That way no one will ever want to hurt anyone else.

Nobody is suggesting singing songs of joy and peace while holding hands. Terrorists such as ISIS have to be engaged militarily and any prisoner treated to due process and the executed if found guilty. I do not think you would find too many here that would disagree with that. Due process does not include torture no matter how much you or anyone else wishes it did.

If you are chomping on the bit to get at the military action you will have to wait like everyone else while our respective governments get their acts together and decide on a course of action. Democracies can be slow cumbersome beasts in responding to threats. The alternative would be to live in a dictatorship where decisions can be made quickly and unilaterally.

If people want more and quicker action in a Democracy you have put pressure on your elected politicians and let them know what you think. Sitting in a circle holding hands and singing of peace and joy won't get that done either.

Yea, it's frustrating and difficult not to get your knickers in a knot over the issue.

Bob

Yeah right back to the Mercenary International fast reaction force...

Send them in kill the bad guys, and get them out, let the UN sort out the politics after/during that...

If that happens a few times it might end this stuff