Originally Posted by skizziks

are you under the impression that i don't realize what goes on in those countires and are you under the impression that i am confusing war with a viable justice system?

no, i have given this some thought, and no you misunderstood my point entirely.

the point of my examples was: the only guy who was actually concerned was the guy facing the threat of bodily harm. if the criminals have nothing to fear, they will do what they want knowing nothing bad (direct bodily harm) will happen to them. if they think they will be harmed in some way, they react a whole lot differently. war or not, they were humans and reacted humanly. i can only assume that the threat of direct bodily harm in response to bodily harm would deter a whole lot more criminals.

i also dont see specific punishement for a specific crime as "open approval of brutality." when you commit a certain level of crime, e.g. rape, murder, irrevocable bodily harm caused by acid thrown to the face, you pretty much have decided you are no longer part of society, and so you dont get the benefits of belonging to the society.