MontyB
All-Blacks Supporter
Whispering Death said:MontyB said:I dont see how you come to this conclusion as basically all it says is that you can choose to be a civilised nation what respects human rights for all or not, no one is saying they should be released or a nations security should be diminished just that they should be treated in a way that you would expect to be treated if the roles were reversed regardless of what their views are.
In essence its called civilised behaviour if neither party chooses to adhere to it then what is the difference between the two parties?
First off, I'm getting tired of this stupid argument about what seperates one party from another. My life and the life of my family comprises one party. That is good enough for me. My 14 year old sister doesn't need to die for some high ideal. My 52 year old mother doesn't need to die for some high ideal. Get it?
Here is the flaws in your logic though.
1) You say "no one is saying... a nations security should be diminished". But by not interrogating prisoners, because that is against the geneva convention, you are compromising your security to a VERY significant extent.
2) ...and most importantly. "they should be treated in a way that you would expect to be treated if the roles were reversed regardless of what their views are." I wouldn't take a civilian and saw his head off on worldwide TV. I wouldn't plant bombs in busses and nightclubs. I wouldn't fly planes into buildings. Or is that just a 'difference in view' between me and these terrorists? Their murdering of American POWs and American civilians constitutes a 'difference of view' while coercive interrogation of terrorists by Americans is an atrocity and a violation of the Geneva convention.
Well I guess thats where we differ then as I am prepared to fight for my ideals but I am not prepared to compromise them to "win" as in doing so I have lost.
As for the rest of your rather stirring argument can you please explain how it is you can possibly object to the mistreatment of American "POW's" (a title you seem reluctant to give to those they fight) while stating that it is perfectly acceptable for you to do the same?
On the other hand perhaps we should be realistic and simply agree to disagree as neither of us are really going to change our views.