I seem to recall that there is a specific treaty that the U.S violated with the use of torture in the war on terror. What treaty is it?

The Geneva Convention. But a 2004 Memo by the administration says: It permits the CIA to take Iraqis out of the country to be interrogated for a “brief but not indefinite period.” It also says the CIA can permanently remove persons deemed to be “illegal aliens” under “local immigration law.” Most specialists in international law say the memo violates one of the most basic rights of the Geneva Convention. During the war in Afghanistan, the administration ruled that al Qaeda fighters were not considered “protected persons” under the convention. Many of them were transferred out of the country to the naval base in Guantanamo Bay, Cuba, and elsewhere for interrogations. By contrast, the U.S. government deems former members of Saddam Hussein’s Baath Party and military, as well as insurgents and other civilians in Iraq, to be protected by the Geneva Conventions. Most legal experts are disturbed by the violations of the Geneva conventions. The former administration had a policy of ignoring laws they found inconvenient.

Some people feel the Geneva Convention does not apply because the combatants were not wearing uniforms. I honestly do not understand that argument. Who cares what they are wearing? We still have an obligation to give all people basic human rights. I don’t care what crimes they committed. We still need to have a higher standard.

Thus far, too many victims have been tallied. Too many families torn apart by suicide bombers, roadside bombs; innocent people slaughtered everywhere. And for what? Hate. We might consider renaming the War on Terror the War on Hatred.

When will we stop them and how? They are in hiding, digging deeper in their tunnels, jumping across our borders, blending into our society, working at our stores, serving us, until one day: Snap. Can we depend on our government to find all those in hiding? Can the government alone be trusted to defend us, ensuring our freedom and prosperity?

First, stop spreading this Chicken Little crap and show some small amount of guts.

Second, stop electing those who (like Bush and his ilk) magnify the threat (for their own purely political reasons) posed by a relatively small, low-tech band of thugs who happened to notice a well known security flaw and managed to exploit it.

Third, stop swallowing every scrap of propaganda that's put in front of you. Learn the true priorities, objectives and capabilities of the terrorists and deal with what they really are. That is how you defeat an enemy, not by spreading irrational fear and otherwise promoting their agenda more effectivly than they ever could have done on their own.

Contrary to the bleating of those who are incapable of understanding that history didn't begin on the day of their birth, terrorism is hardly the greatest threat this country has experienced. In fact, it doesn't reach the top five.

In the past, we have faced national threats with courage and determination. We refused to succumb to fear. We rejected the concept that others would/could affect our internal affairs. We would not allow ouselves to be coerced. Unfortunately, things have changed. We have become a nation of cowering puppies, willing to trade our honor and even our basic liberties in hopes of some guarantee of personal safety offered by those who seek to control us and those, like you, who have submitted to blind, hysterical emotionalism and seek validation of your submission by enlisting others who share your condition.

.

Terrorist and terror organizations are not organized and do not have a central command structure that can be neutralized or destroyed as can be done in a conventional war. In conventional war, once enough of the opponent’s army is rendered unable to fight, the war is over. However, no matter how many terrorists one stops, another person can decide to commit a terrorist act, and the cycle continues. There may never be a “victory” in a war on terror; it may be that the best wc can do is make it harder for them to act, be vigilant and observant.

And please, nothing along the lines of "Bush is a doodie-head." This is a serious question.

In world war 2 Germany had already conqured most of Europe and showed no signs of stopping. If we had not saved their rears the map might look totally different now. Even if they stopped to secure Europe and recoup once finished with Europe (the smart thing to do) it was feared and likely they would push into the Americas, as I think they would have. Thus, we had to stop them or be conqured. Holocaust plays no role as it was not public knowledge until after.

Also, Pearl Harbour was a direct attack by another nations military. We were at war, like it or not. Japan also invaded Alaska and was dug in on land, something that you don't hear much about. Japan was allied with Germany although Germany told them to focus on Russia and meet in Moscow. Why a relatively tiny island would attack the US when it wasn't finished with China is absurd. WWII made us what we are and perhaps we didn't have the rep we have now and they thought they could frighten us.

Terrorists are not attempting to invade or occupy America and do not come from any particular country. The goals of terrorists are uncertain at best.

Also Viet Nam changed things and created a more sensitive culture. We got to see war first hand in full color unedited by military journalists. Nam was the first war where civilian journalists were brought along and at the time everyone was excited to be on TV. The journalists went where they pleased and hopped on any chopper that had room. The blood and guts went straight to your living room at the independent news producers discretion at 5:30 each evening as famalies sat around and watched during diner. A mistake that the military will not repeat. The civilian media today is lead by the hand 'for thier own protection.' Nam also gave rise to the peace and love culture. In other ways it is a much different world today.
(I can stop here but… some other thoughts)

Sometimes it seems like the terrorists just want us to leave the middle east alone. I'm curious as to what you think or are told that the terrorists agenda is. Yes they want to terrorize and kill Americans but what for. In Ireland the terrorists wanted independence from Britain, lack the ability for a military victory so, they hope to scare them into a concession. The definition of terrorist is one that attacks civillian targets in order to pressure a govt into something. What do the muslim terrorists want (not that we should give it or accept it)? Death to the infidels? Bombs every five years won't kill us all. There is a political motivation for these high profile bombings. Don't support Israel is an obvious one. Many in Iraq just want to drive us out of Iraq (seems fair).

Iraq seems more like a gurilla war than terrorists as well. Civillians may be harmed but the intended targets are usually military, local police, and the coalition govt. All of which are legitimate military targets so it's not terrorism. Trying to frighten us by bombings is not a good thing but not an imminent threat either. Protecting our home from terrorists is a job for police, FBI and CIA not soldiers in the middle east. I find it hard to even think of the war on terror as a war at all. It theoretically includes all terrorists not just muslim ones. They occupy no territory and don't have much unity. Remember Timothy McVay was a solo terrorist. Also certain militant Nazi groups in the mid west are classified as terrorists.

The mid east has fought for a long time and even if Iraq is stabilized our actions have not made us many friends there. Thus does not lessen terrorism but increases the number those who wish to do us harm. Although I'm just now starting to think the plan was to fix Iraq and show them how nice it can be and other nations may want it. Iraq was chosen because it's easiest and nobody really liked Saddam anyway, even there. If that's the plan it doesn't seem to be working.

Someone mentions 9/11 and Iraq. The two have little to do with each other yet we hear this again and again with no explanation as why invading Iraq gets you revenge for 9/11. Bin Laden from Saudi Arabia, base in the Sudan, possibly living in Afgahnistan; What does Iraq have to do with it?