Foreign Affairs Discussion Group Message Board

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Politics : Foreign Affairs Discussion Group

Public Reply Prvt Reply Mark as Last Read File

Previous 10 Next 10 Previous Next

To: Neocon who wrote (138992)	7/6/2004 3:51:38 PM
From: E	Read Replies (1) of 281500

I see that you prefer to use it both for acts it describes and acts for which it is a transparent denial of a shaming reality, ie a euphemism. That's your choice. I doubt if it is your general custom to describe abuse and torture as simply "abuse." I doubt if it were perpetrated against our soldiers, you would do that. I wouldn't. When people add to their abuses murder and torture, I call them "murderers" and "torturers." But hey, maybe that's just me. As Christopher writes, "We may have to start using blunt words like murder and rape to describe what we see. And one linguistic reform is in any case already much overdue. The silly word "abuse" will have to be dropped. No law or treaty forbids "abuse," but many conventions and statutes, including our own and the ones we have urged other nations to sign, do punish torture—which is what we are talking about here at a bare minimum." Message 20277872

Report TOU Violation

Share This Post

Public Reply Prvt Reply Mark as Last Read File

Previous 10 Next 10 Previous Next