Uncle Sam has his own gulag

[assoholic]

"The 20th century has shown repeatedly that when security forces use torture abroad, they soon begin using it at home, first on suspected "terrorists," then dissidents, then on ordinary suspects."



http://www.canoe.ca/NewsStand/Columnists/Toronto/Eric_Margolis/2004/12/04/765847.html

 

[langeweile]

The comparisson of the Gulag with Guantanamo is ludacris at best. The author of that article has no idea what he is talking about.
In any of the Gulags there was no chance to any trial at all, and if you died nobody gave a crap. Slave labour was the order of the day.

i don't agree that people should be tortured at all. However some coersion is necessary. To what degree? I don't know.
Let's don't forget who we are dealing with. Most of those guys will blow up any of us, including your wife and kids, without breaking a sweat, if given the chance.
Torture is a dirty business, but so is terrorism.

 

[Ranger68]

"Ludacris"? .....
Isn't that a rapper?


It's *ludicrous* why? What kinds of trials are going on at Guantanamo? The gulags weren't about slave labour, for god's sake - they were about exile and imprisonment.

"Some coercion is necessary" does not agree with "i don't agree that people should be tortured at all". Clearly, you should think about this some more.

Your final argument is a terrible one - that we should lower ourselves to the level of the terrorist. It's arguments like this that have engendered the scandal at Abu Ghraib - which has done more to further endanger US security than anything imaginable - short of invading Iraq in the first place.

 

[langeweile]

"Ludacris"? .....
Isn't that a rapper?


It's *ludicrous* why? What kinds of trials are going on at Guantanamo? The gulags weren't about slave labour, for god's sake - they were about exile and imprisonment.

"Some coercion is necessary" does not agree with "i don't agree that people should be tortured at all". Clearly, you should think about this some more.

Your final argument is a terrible one - that we should lower ourselves to the level of the terrorist. It's arguments like this that have engendered the scandal at Abu Ghraib - which has done more to further endanger US security than anything imaginable - short of invading Iraq in the first place.

Military trial have been going on in Guantanamo for the 9 month or so, maybe longer.
They are a bunch of motions in front of the US courts as to the legitimize of those trials.

Do you really believe that we can "politely ask" some of those boys for info?? Now you are dreaming.

Sorry about the rapper...damn english language.

 

[langeweile]

http://search.npr.org/search97cgi/s97_cgi?cleanQuery=guantanamo&ResultTemplate=allow_re_sort.hts&SortSpec=Date+Desc+Score+Desc&ViewTemplate=docview.hts&collection=ALL02&Action=FilterSearch&filter=topic_filter.NEW.hts&QueryText=

here are some links about the trials in Guantanamo

 

[Ranger68]

Do you think anyone else in the world thinks these trials are fair?

Anyway, I wasn't clarifying *my* position on torture, I was asking you for yours, since your two statements were contradictory. I think it's fair to say we know where you stand, though, and that your statement "i don't think people should be tortured at all" was a lie.

 

[langeweile]

Do you think anyone else in the world thinks these trials are fair?

Anyway, I wasn't clarifying *my* position on torture, I was asking you for yours, since your two statements were contradictory. I think it's fair to say we know where you stand, though, and that your statement "i don't think people should be tortured at all" was a lie.

This is a difficult question to clarify my position on. Mainly because there is no "humane torture". Torture is a terrible means to extract information with, but what other choice is there? Especially if it can save yours or somebody elses life.

Here it goes( I know I am going to catch hell for this):
The answer is not black and white, since there are different definitions of torture out there.
i would say that some of those i find acceptable as a means of extracting information of known suspects.
Sleep deprevations, physchological torture and certain drugs I find necessary and acceptable.
Beatings, electrical shock treatments and rape etc... not acceptable.
Hope i make any sense at all.

 

[danmand]

i don't agree that people should be tortured at all. However some coersion is necessary. To what degree? I don't know.

Reminds me about the old joke about the women who would sleep with me for 1 million.....

 

[assoholic]

..thanks for the responses. The only thing I would add is this.
Torture does not work as a means of getting information. Becuase the person being tortured will say anything to make it stop.
So torture, of the kind any Occuppying army engages in after awhile. Northern Ireland , Kashmir , Iraq exct. Serves one real purpose, as a means of population control & revenge.
Dont mess around or else you may end up....
Even if you wanted to, you can't stop Individual soldiers for exacting revenge after one of their buddies gets his legs blown off.
As long as the US is there, this will continue. The question is, is it worth it ?
Our Society will change if we are there too long.
As DQ has said, I think we have passed the Rubicon.
Unfortunately few have seemed to have noticed.

 

[Asterix]

"Ludacris"? .....
Isn't that a rapper?


It's *ludicrous* why? What kinds of trials are going on at Guantanamo? The gulags weren't about slave labour, for god's sake - they were about exile and imprisonment.

Say what now? Under Stalin, the gulags were all about slave labor. Inmates were used as forced labor in a variety of work projects often under brutal conditions, the White Sea/Baltic canal and the Baikal-Amur railroad to name a couple. Also they were used extensively in the lumber, oil and mining industries, many of them in the far north. Stalin himself considered the camps essential to economic growth, and were continued to be used as a source of slave labor until his death.

 

[assoholic]

..it was both, as well take a look at the Texas penal system, while not to the extent of the Gulags. It too has become big business.

 

[Ranger68]

Stalin had lots of strange views. The work done at the gulags was NOT essential to economic growth. I can refer you to lots of works on the subject, if you wish further reading.

 

[Asterix]

Stalin had lots of strange views. The work done at the gulags was NOT essential to economic growth. I can refer you to lots of works on the subject, if you wish further reading.

Of course Stalin had many strange views, too many to mention. I didn't say the work done at the gulags was essential, simply that Stalin believed it to be. His successors realized it was not working, and began to dismantle it almost immediately after his death. I was mainly challenging your statement that the gulags were not about slave labor, when clearly under Stalin, they were.

 

[Peeping Tom]

A few things:

Torture, barring its application in exceptional cases, by extremely skilled agents, indeed does little. However, it is a poor means of population control, due to its inherent methodology and utter inefficiency. Brute force displays are much more realistic, especially as they are usually done in public, for all to see. One gets a better impression by seeing an execution for littering rather than hearing surrealistic tales of dark dungeons - more so given the mental state of those who might emerge.

As for actual torture, I don't recall seeing just where in the UCMJ it is allowed. To the contrary, consider those who recieved brutal setences for some practical jokes at Ahbu Grahib (sp).

The cases of individual troops going renegade have no effect on society, as those actions are already proscribed by the UCMJ and offenders will get a heavy hand on sentence day. It probably can't be stopped entirely but it is at insignificant levels compared to past abuses. Consider the forced march of German troops from Stalingrad, or its counterpart in the retaliatory enslavement / medical experimentation / mass murder of captured commie troops by Germany.

..thanks for the responses. The only thing I would add is this.
Torture does not work as a means of getting information. Becuase the person being tortured will say anything to make it stop.
So torture, of the kind any Occuppying army engages in after awhile. Northern Ireland , Kashmir , Iraq exct. Serves one real purpose, as a means of population control & revenge.
Dont mess around or else you may end up....
Even if you wanted to, you can't stop Individual soldiers for exacting revenge after one of their buddies gets his legs blown off.
As long as the US is there, this will continue. The question is, is it worth it ?
Our Society will change if we are there too long.
As DQ has said, I think we have passed the Rubicon.
Unfortunately few have seemed to have noticed.

 

[langeweile]

..it was both, as well take a look at the Texas penal system, while not to the extent of the Gulags. It too has become big business.

I suggest you read up on the Gulag issue, once you have done that, point out one, remember just one, prison within the USA with the same conditions.
Thanks

 

[langeweile]

I don't believe that torture doesn't work.
I also believe that one should suffer in the place of many.If torture means that we can get some infromation to save many innocent lives so be it. Sorry, but this is how I feel.
It showed not however be used as a form of entertainment and it should be targeted to a very few "high value targets".
Ask the families of 9-11 and other crimes, how they feel about that.
All to often we are worried about the purpetrators and not the victims.

 

[Ranger68]

Of course Stalin had many strange views, too many to mention. I didn't say the work done at the gulags was essential, simply that Stalin believed it to be. His successors realized it was not working, and began to dismantle it almost immediately after his death. I was mainly challenging your statement that the gulags were not about slave labor, when clearly under Stalin, they were.

I think even that statement is debatable. Stalin *said* a lot of things.
I think the interpretation that the gulags were primarily about herding dissidents away from the rest of society is perfectly valid. Surely you believe that Stalin was interested in getting rid of "political undesirables", no?

 

[Ranger68]

I don't believe that torture doesn't work.
I also believe that one should suffer in the place of many.If torture means that we can get some infromation to save many innocent lives so be it. Sorry, but this is how I feel.
It showed not however be used as a form of entertainment and it should be targeted to a very few "high value targets".
Ask the families of 9-11 and other crimes, how they feel about that.
All to often we are worried about the purpetrators and not the victims.

Where's your evidence that torture works?

I think you may be surprised what the families of 9/11 victims say regarding the use of torture.

 

[Ranger68]

I suggest you read up on the Gulag issue, once you have done that, point out one, remember just one, prison within the USA with the same conditions.
Thanks

What books have you read on the Gulags? What did they have to say about the differences between the Gulags and modern prisons? Or Guantanamo?

 

[happygrump]

A couple of things:

1. One of the reasons that the West does not (generally, anyway) torture prisoners for information is because, in doing so, that invites other countries to use torture on the West's soldiers, and maybe even civilians, should they be captured;
   
2. Misinformation strategies are part and parcel of training by all forces across the world, be they legitimate armies or terrorist organizations like Al Quaeda (sp?). Torturing a prisoner only to get tainted information is rather pointless, isn't it?;
   
3. Prisoners will often say anything to get the torture to stop. This has been shown again and again. All you have to do is look at, for instance, the Salem Witch Trials where people admitted to consorting with demons, to find relief from a device known at the "boot";
   
4. The "eye for an eye" argument also falls flat. That's why, in modern Western democracies, the decision about the punishment of criminals is not left up to the victims of their crimes.
   [/list=1]
   
   There's more reading here. It seems, to me, a pretty balanced article.
   
   BTW... the gulags were about the incarceration of political enemies of Stalin, based on his own whims.