And? Just the regular "the nazis is bad, so what ever comment I now associate with it must be equally bad"?
Okey, lets talk about Nazis and World War 2. If the US would had used torture, strip searches at the border, and a spy in every product and phone, I am sure the Nazis would have a bunch to say about the US. Their news information about bombings of civilian targets was surely not too far off from the truth (the US used the same old argument that the enemy are hiding under hospitals, schools and weddings then as now).
But thats all ancient history. Instead Lets ask us a simple question: If you were a POW, under which countries would you fear for your life? The U.S. Is to me on that list, which has some clear implication on the words like freedom, democracy and "the good side".
Please don't try use informal fallacies as a way to move the discussion. Such arguments do not belong here, do not become you, and when ever one is written a kitten cries somewhere in the world.
If my choice is between being a POW under the "care" of US, NK, China, Russia, Belgium, Norway and Iceland, I would not pick the US. Would you?
Why asking such questions when the answer is obvious? It doesn't contribute anything to a civil discussion. If the choice is between a country that torture, and a country that do not, the choice is obvious. If one is asked to pick between two countries that both perform torture, the obvious answer is to not pick either.
The US has condone acts of torture. When it has not condone it officially, they often refused to use the full force of the law against people who has committed illegal, immoral, and plain evil acts against prisoners and civilians.
Read the legal actions against those responsible for the Abu Ghraib torture, and compare that to trials of personal who participated in Nazi army and conducted similar act of torture and violent acts. How many people in the world has just got a few years in prison for pleading guilty to torture, in a place which deaths was ruled as homicide from torture?
