Has the U.S. Been Engaged in Systemic Torture?

[Kanamori]

I think that the situations can lead to it, but I don't think that Bush directed it. Something more should be done so that they occur much less often though.

Anybody who argues differently needs to take a hard look at their moral system.

It's not even that. They often don't need to resort to physical harm to bring the sheer psychological terror that they use. So, no bodily harm, then none of the disgusting fear that goes along only with it.

[Ice]

I have no idea, so i just said maybe.

[Soulforged]

It's within the bounds of reason to make the argument that we need to torture, that this is a necessary evil which we will use in some limited way.

However the treaty signed and ratified(UN Convention against Torture and other ill treatment) by the US excludes such reasons as a possible arguement to justify torture, in fact it appears that torture is never justified. For that I think that the systematic aspect of it exists, justifying this proceedure under the clause of "war situation"... but it's illegitime. The repeated cases seem to show a clear trace of a system of punishment and treatment to detainees that allows torture in someways. After this proceedures come into the public knowledge actions are taken quickly against the performers to not fall into a violation of the signed treaties, thus the situation is healed rapidly:"The true number of such deaths may be higher as there is evidence that delays, cover-ups and deficiencies in investigations have hampered the collection of evidence." Then they could terminate the case over lack of factual substance.
This is also important: "A soldier who acknowledged inflicting more than 30 consecutive knee strikes to Dilawar (a slight, 22 year old taxi driver) as he stood in shackles, told investigators that the blows were standard operating procedure for uncooperative detainees." - "Military commanders rejected a recommendation by army investigators to prosecute soldiers involved, on the ground that his death had been the "result of a series of lawful applications of force in response to repeated aggression and misconduct by the detainee".
"Despite the shocking nature of the treatment described in the above cases, the government still has not referred to any any of the reported abuses as "torture"..." - Article 1, section 1 of the (Convention against Torture and Other Cruel, Inhuman or Degrading Treatment or Punishment): "For the purposes of this Convention, the term "torture" means any act by which severe pain or suffering, whether physical or mental, is intentionally inflicted on a person for such purposes as obtaining from him or a third person information or a confession, punishing him for an act he or a third person has committed or is suspected of having committed, or intimidating or coercing him or a third person, or for any reason based on discrimination of any kind, when such pain or suffering is inflicted by or at the instigation of or with the consent or acquiescence of a public official or other person acting in an official capacity. It does not include pain or suffering arising only from, inherent in or incidental to lawful sanctions." - "The investigation found that while all these tactics applied together could be considered abusive and degrading, each of the tactics was "authorized" under the Army field manual guidelines for the "pride and ego down" and "futility" approaches."
"The USA should therefore withdraw its limiting reservations, declarations and understandings to the Convention against Torture." That's in fact what the same treaty and the Convention of Viena prescript, any measure to remove any obstacle for the effectiveness of the treaty, wich includes any act by any of the three gobernamental organs.
I could keep quoting but the article shows a lot of evidence of a system that allows torture, and I think that the answer is evidently yes, the U.S. government has been engaged in systemic torture.

[Fragony]

What else could you call a a zillion seasons of 'Friends'.