Should Bush or members of his administration be prosecuted for torture?
Yes, Bush should be prosecuted for torture, because he encouraged it, if not outright ordered it to be done, and hurt America's international image.
It is bad enough that Bush ordered the torture of prisoners merely suspected of being terrorists, but the fact that he and his administration got away with it clean is an affront to American law and justice. The people who did the actual torturing got off because they claimed they were ordered to do it, but then the man giving out the actual orders got out of the punishment as well. It leaves a bad taste to have such war crimes go unpunished. The Nazis didn't get off by claiming they were only following orders, and then Hitler did not get to pardon himself after WWII. I don't see why Bush should be able to skip his punishment.
Posted by: H_BairdBush and his gang should be prosecuted for torture if the evidence is there.
I understand that there was a need to keep us safe after 9/11, but the bottom line is that if torture is illegal under foreign or domestic law, and they did indeed authorize it, then they should be prosecuted according to law. Terrorism is no excuse, especially when the overall objectives are questionable. If this were some 2nd or 3rd world country engaging in torture, America would be up in arms over their "inhumane practices." I love my country but we shouldn't have it both ways.
Posted by: gwynisinI think that those responsible for the torture that occurred under the Bush administration should be prosecuted, because that is what should happen in a civilized society.
In the "war on terror", many people were arrested under false pretenses and for incorrect reasons. There is evidence that some of the people arrested were tortured. Americans believe they are civilized, but civilized nations don't support torture, whatever the reasons behind it. We need to show that, even when we are hurt, we don't seek revenge in the wrong places.
Posted by: FourBoydPeople of the world will not live in fear!
If we stoop to our enemies level and torture people we set no example at all. It tells the world we are brutes and since we have told countries for centuries not to torture people and as a free society with a justice system each person will have a trial and be sentenced accordingly. We preach that each person will be treated humanely and this includes being fed,showered,clothed properly. We do this so our own people who are held as prisoners will be treated in the same manner and not beaten,tortured and raped then killed after our enemy our done with them. We as a people of the United States are supposed to be showing the world what a super power is and that we are not a nation to be feared but a nation that is there to help. Any nation that is feared and hated will fall. It will fall because all who fear it will join together and take it down. People will not live in fear. Just ask Hitler.
Posted by: AnonymousTorturing innocent people(and treating them like dogs) on unproven terrorist acts is against every code of human rights.
Giving death penalty to a person belonging to another country, forget the fact that he was a former national leader, is nothing but brutal and extremely arrogant and against the basic right of every human being to have justice. And all this savagely acts are performed in the name of melioration of the nation to which he belonged, and it is pretty clear that there is absolutely no support from the general public of the nation concerned.
Posted by: Ni4IKixIt seems that Obama has not seen fit to prosecute Bush or the members of his administration for torture but honestly I do believe that he was guilty of it and that he should have been tried for it along with other members of his administration.
President Bush has frequently said that he believed that water boarding was okay to use and yet it has been said to be torture by international law. He and his administration condoned other tortures as well with the excuse that they were needed to stop terrorism yet there are very few if any cases where this torture did end up stopping any terrorism. It is likely that the torture did in fact make Americans less safe and that it in fact has made our standing in the world less than it was before. It also violated our nation's laws. So, yes, Bush and his administration should face charges and should be penalized if found guilty in a court of law.
Posted by: SportyHartI believe that Bush should be prosecuted just as any other person that committed the same act would be.
Torture is wrong no matter what. The ends do NOT justify the means. We say we fight for freedom and justice in the world, yet we torture people just like the last dictator we defeated in Iraq.
Should the world declare war on us?Posted by: R4wHaywaYes, they should. They allowed and encouraged it, so they should pay for it.
Bush and his minions should pay for their torture crimes. That kind of barbaric behavior shouldn't be ignored or allowed to let slide. He and his administration may not have personally tortured people, but they knew it was going on and had no problem with it. Sort of like how Charles Manson wasn't present when the Tate/LoBianco murders took place, but he is serving time for it nonetheless. If you give orders to allow that kind of behavior and you get caught, you should pay.
Posted by: PinkMych
The issue of torture goes well beyond the Bush administration, and it is pointless to prosecute them.
Torture has been around for ages, and the Bush administration needs not hold the brunt of the entire system, which is broken. For years, the military has used its way, police forces have used their way, and punishing only the Bush administration would be a moot point. It will not fix a broken system by punishing them. They are mere pawns in something much greater than how they acted or what they decided was OK.
Posted by: PointlessElbert47I do not believe that members of the Bush administration should be prosecuted for torture.
There has been no evidence that the Bush administration as a whole or one member of the administration knowingly ordered members of the U.S. military or intelligence agencies to torture prisoners of war. While torture may have taken place there has been no evidence brought to light to show that it was a systematic program of torture.
Posted by: 5hinyNessNo, both the D.J. and White House counsel reviewed and advised that it was not torture.
Even though it goes against popular opinion, the President is not an all knowing all seeing god. Almost every decision made is made under the advice of individuals who are experts in their given fields. Before choosing the protocols for asking hard questions, the Department of Justice, the DOD and the White House counsel fully research the subject, come up with guidelines which they present to the President for his approval. If the President did order the use of torture some one down the line would have refused seeing it as an illegal order.
Posted by: EIvMd0ggI oppose this, because Bush did not pursue terrorists with the motive of torturing them.
Although Bush and his administration were not completely perfect or moral, they were simply doing what they thought was best for America at the time. They had no idea that their actions would be seen as torturous in the near future. They should not be prosecuted for their actions, because they have claimed time and time again that they were merely fulfilling their patriotic duty.
Posted by: PrettyVince50Neither Bush, nor any members of his administration should be prosecuted for torture.
Though there was definitely torture ordered by Bush and members of his administration, neither should be prosecuted. If they were, then you would have to prosecute everyone who has ever tortured anyone. It seems that every country has been responsible for that at one time or another. No, torture is not right. Neither is murder. But both are seen as necessities of war. If military personnel aren't prosecuted for murder, how can we prosecute a president for as much?
Posted by: elen111Neither Bush nor members of his administration should be prosecuted for torture because they were just doing their jobs.
When there are military actions put in place sometimes certain things need to be done that is questionable by others. One such thing is trying to do whatever they can to get out pertinent information from terrorists. These terrorists have no concern for human life and should be treated in whatever means necessary in order to get whatever is needed. In this sense, Bush and his administration should not be prosecuted.
Posted by: eyeslikethatI do not believe that Bush and his administration should be prosecuted for torture, due to the gravity of the situation at the time.
Torture is occasionally a necessary step in obtaining information from enemies. I think that, because of the gravity of the situation, and the fact that millions of citizens could have been in danger, torture was a necessity. The information had to be obtained quickly in order to save lives. Without torturing the enemy into giving up information, many Americans might have died.
Posted by: ToxicAndrNo, not if that torture was totally necessary for the greater good of mankind.
Torture, as a very last result, is justifiable when it could result in a huge benefit for mankind. It is not something that should be used on a whim, or without extensive consideration. It should only be doled out in the minimum amounts necessary to achieve a goal. And, when it doesn't seem to be effective, it should be stopped. If Bush and his boys had to use torture to save human lives than so be it. There's no reason to feel good about it. But, as a last option, it is something that must be done to stop the suffering of the innocent.
Posted by: MohaI0v35Prosecuting someone for torture can actually be a moral grey area, and I believe that torture can fall under this, in some circumstances.
Whilst I believe that, in the vast majority of cases, torture is wrong, an extreme moral dilemma can be poised that will cause even the staunchest opponents of torture to change their tune. Say that a city is under threat from a terrible weapon, with the potential for thousands to die. You have here a person that knows the location of the weapon and how to stop it. He or she will not speak. What do you do? We see here then that, in the face of absolute catastrophe, one can justify torture, and I believe that it is under this moral dilemma that it would make prosecution of the Bush administration for torture impossible.
Posted by: R4yAnychNo, I do not think Bush and his administration should be prosecuted, because the criminals deserved it.
The prisoners at Guantanamo Bay were treated harshly, but they were also war criminals who committed heinous crimes against America and its citizens. The torture they endured was justifiable as punishment for their outrageous deeds. It was also necessary to use such measures to gain valuable intelligence information that could be used to find more criminals. Bush should not be prosecuted, he should be hailed.
Posted by: 5c4ryOgdon