EDIT: upon further reflection, I owe you better than another movie reference.Lightknight said:
Reviewing the stats.
Pretty scary stats. http://www.encyclopedia.com/topic/prisoners_of_war.aspx
Makes one wonder why we have laws of war at all.
So. Torture.
- Thread starter Queen Michael
- Start date
Recommended Videos
Reviewing the stats.
Pretty scary stats. http://www.encyclopedia.com/topic/prisoners_of_war.aspx
Makes one wonder why we have laws of war at all.
It solves a lot of problems that would be impossible without it.
IMO we should allow rapist and stuff the choice to either spend their 10-20 years in prison or take 3 months of torture so they can live their life more if they choose too.
IMO we should allow rapist and stuff the choice to either spend their 10-20 years in prison or take 3 months of torture so they can live their life more if they choose too.
Interesting. I know I've been spanked at this site just for mentioning how much I enjoy a Bombay Gin Martini. Someone was scandalized that I'd even mention "big boy drink".Queen Michael said:
Ooops. I just did it again
It's an excellent read that really highlights our humane treatment of prisoners by the US in contrast to the inhumane and lethal means used by the other side. We actually pioneered the ethical treatment of POWs.Gorfias said:
However, keep in mind that none of these actually address interrogation techniques. Interrogation is still used by basically every country in the world and it's just the line of what's acceptable that we all squabble over. Limits have been placed on things like sleep deprivation but not a ban on it at all, for example. Having interrogation techniques are not considered to be crimes of humanity unless you're mutilating or killing them.
I'll also point out that members of terrorist organizations aren't strictly deemed as POWs, either. Members of the Taliban likely should have been perceived as POWs since they were a governing authority in Afghanistan and 9/11 could have been called an act of war (albeit also simultaneously a war crime) by a tribal government in Afghanistan for that reason. But non-POW combatants are often given less rights than prisoners who are military of a sovereign nation rather than "rebels" or whatnot.
Because of what happens after the dust settles. Breaching of those laws usually leads to a witch hunt of epic proportions but where actual witches exist. The laws of war do influence the actions of many first world nations that care about the condition of their soldiers. Japan was perhaps extra hard on our soldiers because they expected their own soldiers to commit suicide if captured.
But in any event, these laws are in place to that people may be punished for breaking them as well as for the chance that they could be obeyed by both sides. Germany, for all the atrocities of their concentration camps weren't actually that out of line with their treatment of POWs. Most of the war crime trials conducted afterwards were regarding their concentration camps only. It's just that the concentration camps were so absolutely horrible that it could never be anything but highest priority to talk about. But Japan was technically far more evil during WWII. We seem not to cover it as much because they weren't being evil to Europeans on the same scale as Germany and we didn't have as much intelligence in Asia as we did in Europe. But the Chinese were brutally murdered and enslaved in sometimes worse ways than Germany treated the Jews. The Chinese were killed in larger numbers overall and many more were forced into slavery. Women as sex slaves and men as work slaves.
I've always felt this wasn't covered enough. Not that Germany doesn't deserve the ire they got for their actions, but we really seem to gloss over Japan's actions in that period out of shame over the atomic bombs we dropped to stop the war and save many hundreds of thousands of lives on both sides by showing Japan how utterly disparate the power difference was.
Bridge over the River Kwai is actually one of my favorite military movies. It's probably the number one reason I researched the topic in the way I have despite it going almost entirely uncovered in school.
While I don't necessarily agree with this. I do think it's important to bring up that where some people see long sentences as humane, others (like myself) would see punishments and shorter sentences are more humane. Wounds heal but time is never recovered. People are wasting away in prison who could have had a whipping and a couple weeks of confinement before being released. But we apparently have something against any physical violence and I think that serves to some people's detriment. Nothing is more brutal than forcing the loss of time. I would prefer death by execution to a life sentence.the_dramatica said:
I think you've done a good job showing there are those that surrender even when surrender means likely horrible, even deadly torture treatment. The corollary is proving someone fought on rather than surrender due to fear of how they would be treated if they surrendered.Lightknight said:
So far, this is about the best I can do: http://www.theblaze.com/stories/2014/06/04/what-caught-lone-survivor-marcus-luttrell-off-guard-in-bergdahl-prisoner-exchange/
The guy Lone Survivor is based on, speaking of capture meaning near certain death.
The corollary requires two things when applied to American interrogation techniques. 1 is that the interrogation techniques are deemed soooo terrifying as to be a fate worse than death and 2 is that the fighters on the ground know of it. We've seen some pretty nasty executions happen to our people in their captivity. They haven't seen the same from us. We certainly don't video tape killing their soldiers and send it their way.Gorfias said:
So tell me, would you consider even being water-boarded for a few days followed by years of secure living quarters and solid meals worse than death itself? If they are being fed lies then that isn't our fault or our problem.
Oh absolutely not! Were I some terrorist savage from some hell hole, the idea of American treatment, with unlikely water boarding added to other positive aspects of life style after capture, there would likely be, on balance, in captivity, an improvement in my standard of living!!!Lightknight said:
Hardly terrifying!
I've always been writing very generally: can one fear treatment in captivity so much it makes them fight harder? In theory, yes. Against the US as we currently act? A joke.
