Forum for discussing local and world politics and issues. All views are welcomed. Let your opinions be heard on current news and politics.
All standard guidelines apply to this board, No Flaming, No Taunting, No Foul Language,No sexual innuendos,etc..
As politics can be a volatile subject, please consider how you would feel if your comment were directed toward yourself.
Any post deemed to be in violation of guidelines will be deleted or edited without warning or notification. Any continued misbehavior will result in a ban or hidden status, so please play nice!!!
*"Moderators are here for a reason. If a moderator (or Global Moderator or Fencer) requests that a discussion on a certain subject to cease - for whatever reason - please respect these wishes. Failure to do so may result in being hidden, or banned."
...any act by which severe pain or suffering, whether physical or mental, is intentionally inflicted on a person for such purposes as obtaining from him, or a third person, information or a confession, punishing him for an act he or a third person has committed or is suspected of having committed, or intimidating or coercing him or a third person, or for any reason based on discrimination of any kind, when such pain or suffering is inflicted by or at the instigation of or with the consent or acquiescence of a public official or other person acting in an official capacity. It does not include pain or suffering arising only from, inherent in, or incidental to, lawful sanctions.
I think waterboarding does cause severe pain and suffering. The pain might not be physical, but it certainly is psychological. Since it was part of an interrogation procedure, it was used to obtain information. It was used to coerce information or confession from captives and it was done by intelligence agents acting on behalf of the government.
It was out of this definition that waterboarding became classified as a form of torture.
I think the litmus test would be as to alternative applications of the procedure by governments other than that of the US. Suppose that an American soldier or intelligence officer was captured by an enemy and subjected to waterboarding. Would it be acceptable then?
There is no doubt in my mind that waterboarding and similar techniques are used not only by the US, but by many countries around the world. By the legal definition under the UN CAT (see above) I think waterboarding is torture. If we say that it is OK for our side to use it, then we should not be surprised when our enemies start using it against us.
(do skréše) Vlitni do špilo v to rano! Při vepoštěni taho si aj se sópeřem namontojte "táhnót a pobét toť" a furt dokola oževojte léstek bóchánim do klávese F5! (TeamBundy) (okázat šecke vechetávke)