Originally Posted by pan6467

Why because I am simply asking what defines the "least" torture. Not just the POW's and detainees but the convicts in our prison system.

I even gave an example that not one person has defined as torture or not in their opinion.

Withholding one day's rations and exercise is that torture? I'm not asking if Abu Gharaib was torture, that almost 99% of the people (including myself) would say "yes, that is torture."

Let's say you continue to ignore that simple question, then in some camp prison etc.... some people say they were withheld food and exercise for a day . All of a sudden we have people screaming that is torture.

Now, how can you call it torture if when asked if it is before it happens you refuse to answer. You say it's documented in things that go to extremes one way but barely touch the minimum and thus leave it wide open.

Are you scared that people will go to that limit and stop?

Well if you do not set the min. people will go to the max.

I truly do not see why this is so had to have a true discussion on without being told I'm drinking someone's koolaid. It's something I find interesting and would like to see other's views.

It's easier to point to laws and say see....... (but you do that to immigration and people tell you, the laws don't matter, or any law people like to pick and choose from, but I digress). It's easier to follow a mob when a mob gets going....

But it is hard and requires true individuality and deep thought to stand up, have your own views and freely discuss them.

Kahn, thank you for your post.... I overlooked it and I apologize. I agreed about the daily rations to some degree. And not to ague semantics but if torture is torture then what is the limit? Because ANYTHING can be considered torture by someone.... that is my point where do we draw that line? Between what is to some and what is truly acceptable to the most.