Torture in Other Countries

idk if america should get invovled all i know is that australia willl do whatever whilst John Howards pm

musicmad93:

idk if america should get invovled all i know is that australia willl do whatever whilst John Howards pm

Which might not be for much longer! [election in November]

sorry, had to. xD

yes america is not the only country but we all should chip in to stop this crap

you cant stop torture in other countries. to give money to some charity would do nothing but go into the pockets of the people in charge. but let me ask you this, why is it that we are so worried about torture in the mild east and so on but through out south america there is the same things going on and sometimes worse shit. in our own country there are so many problems with corruption and murder and drugs, why is no one willing to talk about how to fix that but are willing to talk about problems far away like our country is so much better. it is pointless

i think an important factor to note in this debate, which most people dont know about, is that countries like America are involved in torture too. be it through the CIA or by deporting detainees to places were torture is not illegal.

i think torture is wrong and inhumane in all circumstances and that no countries should participate in this. how this should be enforced and if America should act as a global police force im not really sure. maybe not.

Broken, you have a point, which is to say that the title of this thread is somewhat unfair. To speak out against "torture in other countries" and neglect to mention your own is complete hypocrisy. Perhaps this could be renamed to the something like "International Relations in Regards to Torture". Or maybe just have a thread on how countries interact with one another, because this thread will inevitably lead there.

i don't think that any one country has a right to meddle in the affairs of any other country unless it directly affects their citizens... for instance, if one country is tourturing americans, then the US would have reason to be involved. but if that's not happening, then the US should leave the other country alone... but then again... that's just my view...

genresR4losers:

i don't think that any one country has a right to meddle in the affairs of any other country unless it directly affects their citizens... for instance, if one country is tourturing americans, then the US would have reason to be involved. but if that's not happening, then the US should leave the other country alone... but then again... that's just my view...

im just playing the devil's advocate here
but then by that logic should Britaain and America and France etc. not have become involved in WWII to stop the holocaust as it did not directly afffect their own citizens?

where do you draw the line between the right to govern your own and the right for every human to have basic rights?

genresR4losers:

i don't think that any one country has a right to meddle in the affairs of any other country unless it directly affects their citizens...

What about Darfur? Nearly half a million people have been slaughtered by their OWN government. The government starves, rapes and tortures its own people. The military bombs it's own people, burns it's own villages and destroys everything in it's path.

You can't sit there and tell me that after 500,000 people die and thousands more are raped and tourtured, that we should just ignore it all ? It's perfectly fine to you that half a million people die, so long as their not Americans?

^no... that's not what i meant by that statement... i suppose i should have specified....

what i meant was that countries shouldn't meddle in small scale things. things like what's going on in Darfur, or in the case of WWII, that wasn't what i was referring to in this instance. i was referring to the US going in every country that it thinks it can help that really doesn't need it... such as the current situation...

idk if that makes sense... but that's what i was trying to say...

Ok, I think I understand where you're going. But it leaves me with one question: where do you cap the limit off at? In other words, how many people tortured are considered "small scale" and how many are considered "large scale" and at which point do you say it's time to step in and help?

Regarding things like Darfur, that should be up to orginazations outside the government to take care of.

beeblebrox:

But it leaves me with one question: where do you cap the limit off at?

do we only have to get involved when it is vast numbers of people or
should every human be given the same basic human rights?

another issue does it matter who they are as to whether they should have the same rights?
everyone would probably agree that different races should all have the the same rights but what about criminals and terrorists? do they deserve basic human rights too?

DIE! DIE! DIE!:

Regarding things like Darfur, that should be up to orginazations outside the government to take care of.

i think this is probably true, but the only thing we have is the United Nations and as you probably know they aren't very effective.

i understand what you are saying
it is a moral obligation not any other kind

i think it is important that countries are given their soveriegnty and nations look after their own people and dont get involved in other nations problems and then make them worse [which has happened so many times before like you pointed out] but i also think all humans should be given some basic human rights, which not all countries give.
there are international protocols and declarations but not all countries abide to them and they aren't very enforcable.

im still a little unsure on this one-
do we go for the rights of the nation or the rights of the people?
national sovereignity or world police?

i still think that the entirety of the american population should get to voice their opinion on who we help and who we don't. right now, we don't get a choice to do so... i don't know about you, but i sure as hell don't agree with everything that comes from Washington DC... i think that if we're going to help prevent torture in other countries, we should at least get a say in where we go, if we go at all... but then again... that's just me.

that is how a democracy works in theory so i take your point.
the citizens should be able to dictate the direction in whichthe country goes.
but are they oblidged to think a certain way?

U.S really shouldn't get involved
They're really broke from all of the wars they've had/having.
past and present wars

brokenwings:

that is how a democracy works

But we aren't a Democracy...Just a defromed form of it..Democracy is What you see in the anti war protest that is a true democracy((Which is we chant "Tell me what a Democracy looks like" "this is what a democracy looks like"

I think that All Countries should get involved not just America. But first we should stop torcher done by america. I know we dont do it in the country but the take the prisoners of war to other countrys and torcher them there