America is Safer/Better Because We No Longer Torture -- Wouldn't You Agree?

United States
April 20, 2009 7:25pm CST
President Obama talked about the shame torturing "detainees" brought to our country. He now states that we are safer and better able to represent our true values now that we do not torture. 1. Was the US shamed by what has happened? 2. Is the US safer if/when we do not torture? 3. Was it really torture all along?
1 person likes this
5 responses
@murderistic (2278)
• United States
21 Apr 09
Was the US shamed? I don't know, but I know that I was ashamed of the US for the torture and extraordinary rendition of people who were not even given a fair trail to prove their guilt. I would say that the US is much safer by Obama's attitude toward torture and the Muslim world. It will be much harder for terrorist recruiters to find people to do their dirty work for them if America has a more friendly image. But "much safer" does not mean "invincible." As long as the US supports Israel and is at war in Muslim nations we will be at risk for terrorist attacks.
2 people like this
@Taskr36 (13963)
• United States
22 Apr 09
I don't think this will cut back on their recruiting at all. Terrorists are fanatics who want to kill everyone that does not believe as they do. These are sick people who are more than happy to murder children to hurt their enemy. The recruiters won't hesitate to tell lies and the media in the Muslim world sympathizes with terrorists so Obama's actions aren't going to change what al Jazeera puts out. Clinton spent years trying to get peace between Israel and Palestine yet that didn't stop terrorists from attacking us during his term. Bush sent more aid to Africa than any leader in history yet we still were attacked under his presidency. Nobody was accusing us of torture until long after 9-11 so you can't say that was used as a recruiting tool prior to 9-11.
@missybal (4490)
• United States
21 Apr 09
What I can't believe is how weak our interrigation techniques are. I was expecting far worse a report than what came out and it's incredible that they were able to extract information to prevent so many terrorist attacks. I mean by this description of torture I've done more to torture myself to put food on the table. And our military has done more water boarding to it's own members in training exercises then we have used against the enemy. If putting a Caterpillar in a cell with a terrorist is going to save lives I'm all for it. Nothing on that report is one tenth as bad as what they would do to us. I believe by releasing this information the terrorist groups are able to recruit more. Here they have what is the worse thing the American people will do to you if you are captured. You get to look forward to some very nice Art classes for one in prison. And now these "torture" techniques are not even going to be used? Okay we will ask them very nicely to please help us and if they do lets consider giving them a green card while we're at it...
• United States
21 Apr 09
I wish it was just caterpillars...
@missybal (4490)
• United States
21 Apr 09
LOL... Sounds like a good idea to me... But Obama would not be too happy with it I'm sure. The U.S. was careful to extract information without leaving lasting injury to the interrogation subjects. But what kind of interrogation techniques are going to be used by this administration if any at all?
@bobmnu (8157)
• United States
21 Apr 09
First of all None of the detainees had any legal rights under International Law. The agreements and Treaties are very specific on how you treat different people. When you are fighting a war there are certain rules you are to follow. You must wear a recognizable Uniform and represent a specific country and be in the organized Military unit. You can not use civilians as shields. You must be a citizen of that country where you are fighting. If you do not meet one of these criteria you are an illegal enemy combatant and have no rights at all. That is clearly stated in the Geneva Conventions (there are several such treaties), and in other international agreements. Both sides would be wise to read before they speak.
@anniepa (27955)
• United States
24 Apr 09
1. Was the US shamed by what has happened? Let's just say it wasn't our most "shining moment" by a long-shot! 2. Is the US safer if/when we do not torture? That's hard to say for sure but I feel confident we're no LESS safe if we don't. 3. Was it really torture all along? Even House Minority Leader John Boehner says it is! Annie
• United States
21 Apr 09
i don't really know what that is all about. who really knows what we did to detainees. i don't know that we are safer for not torturing anymore. i don't see how that makes us safer. i am american and i don't really feel shamed. it wasn't me torturing anyone, if torture was even happening. the media doesn't always tell the truth about what happens.