Jump to content

US Torture Report - A Shining Beacon of....I'm sorry I just get so


Recommended Posts

Posted

A perfect example of the kind of broken moral compass rationalizations I was referring to. Thank you for confirming my previous post # 221.

haha you still haven't answered the question. You are forcing YOUR right wing morals on the subject without backing them up with any proof. By what definition is abortion wrong?

Prove me wrong almighty master of the moral compass.

“Be like water making its way through cracks. Do not be assertive, but adjust to the object, and you shall find your way around or through it. If nothing within you stays rigid, outward things will disclose themselves. Empty your mind, be formless. Shapeless, like water. If you put water into a cup, it becomes the cup. You put water into a bottle, it becomes the bottle. You put it into a teapot, it becomes the teapot. Now, water can flow or it can crash. Be water, my friend.”
― Bruce Lee

  • Replies 289
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Posted

Since you believe a mass of cells that has the potential to be a human being after 9 months of gestation has more rights than a prisoner of war, we should investigate and arrest anyone who forcibly expels any mass of cells from their own body and torture them until they confess to such an atrocity?

“Be like water making its way through cracks. Do not be assertive, but adjust to the object, and you shall find your way around or through it. If nothing within you stays rigid, outward things will disclose themselves. Empty your mind, be formless. Shapeless, like water. If you put water into a cup, it becomes the cup. You put water into a bottle, it becomes the bottle. You put it into a teapot, it becomes the teapot. Now, water can flow or it can crash. Be water, my friend.”
― Bruce Lee

Posted

True. It's very subjective. Regardless, I don't have a problem if in rare cases, waterboarding etc is used by professionals. We can agree to disagree.

The problem is you're arguing degree instead of kind. Saying you don't have a problem with it in "rare" (read: justifiable to you) cases, does not condemn torture in any meaningful way. It accepts and thereby condones it. You put yourself in the camp of those who have no regard for human life and only differentiate yourself by degree. Those who stand firm against torture are differentiating themselves in kind. You keep saying torture is subjective, but what's even more subjective is quibbling about when torture is justifiable or not. We have articles of fundamental human rights and international codes we follow for the good of humanity. That you would so blatantly disregard humanity by condoning torture is abhorrent.

Posted (edited)

Torture is wrong, except possibly in the most extreme cases where there is imminent loss of life to a significant number of innocent people. Even then it's still barbaric and disgusting. This senate report only scratches the surface of the US torture policies, the public is not allowed to see any of the "classified" info from the report, let alone the hidden info the authors of the report never found.

The harm to the reputation of the US and its government and the use of the torture revelations as a terrorist and insurgent recruiting tool throughout the years has damaged the US likely around as much (or more) as the torture has benefited the country via whatever scraps of useful "intel" could have been gleaned from it.

Edited by Moonlight Graham

"All generalizations are false, including this one." - Mark Twain

Partisanship is a disease of the intellect.

Posted (edited)

Rare cases could be anything

And here we are. If rare cases could be anything, then they're by definition not rare. You said:

A) You support torture in rare cases.

B) Rare cases can be anything.

Therefore, you support torture for anything.

That is the logic of your arguments.

Edited by cybercoma
Posted

A/ an adult terrorist gets subjected to some physical discomfort in the effort to save people's lives

First of all, "some physical discomfort" is a euphemism to the extreme of hyperbole.

Second, many of the people tortured were not "terrorists." They were suspects, held without due process or trial. They were never convicted as terrorists in any court of law.

Last, you're assuming that torture would save lives, whilst ample research shows that tortured people will admit to anything to stop the torture. The information is wholly unreliable; therefore, the tactics are ineffective. Even Napoleon knew well enough to write to Louis Alexandre Berthier in 1798:

The barbarous custom of having men beaten who are suspected of having important secrets to reveal must be abolished. It has always been recognized that this way of interrogating men, by putting them to torture, produces nothing worthwhile. The poor wretches say anything that comes into their mind and what they think the interrogator wishes to know.

Feel free to catch up to 18th-century thinking.

Posted

Since you believe a mass of cells that has the potential to be a human being after 9 months of gestation has more rights than a prisoner of war, we should investigate and arrest anyone who forcibly expels any mass of cells from their own body and torture them until they confess to such an atrocity?

Abortion is a red herring that is entirely irrelevant to the subject of torture. You're being derailed by someone whose position on torture is so untenable that he has to change the subject.

Posted

Abortion is a red herring that is entirely irrelevant to the subject of torture. You're being derailed by someone whose position on torture is so untenable that he has to change the subject.

It's unbelievable that some posters have tried to turn this thread into an abortion issue. That should be addressed in the numerous other threads that have addressed this topic. It is absolutely a red herring.

I love to see a young girl go out and grab the world by the lapels. Life's a bitch. You've got to go out and kick ass. - Maya Angelou

Posted

The problem is you're arguing degree instead of kind. Saying you don't have a problem with it in "rare" (read: justifiable to you) cases, does not condemn torture in any meaningful way. It accepts and thereby condones it. You put yourself in the camp of those who have no regard for human life and only differentiate yourself by degree. Those who stand firm against torture are differentiating themselves in kind. You keep saying torture is subjective, but what's even more subjective is quibbling about when torture is justifiable or not. We have articles of fundamental human rights and international codes we follow for the good of humanity. That you would so blatantly disregard humanity by condoning torture is abhorrent.

I don't believe water boarding and or sleep deprivation, etc, is torture. So no, I don't condone torture.

Posted

And here we are. If rare cases could be anything, then they're by definition not rare. You said:

A) You support torture in rare cases.

B) Rare cases can be anything.

Therefore, you support torture for anything.

That is the logic of your arguments.

Yes of course, I support torture for anything. :rolleyes:

Posted

It's unbelievable that some posters have tried to turn this thread into an abortion issue. That should be addressed in the numerous other threads that have addressed this topic. It is absolutely a red herring.

I'm just trying to figure out why simulated drowning on a known adult terrorist is so abhorrent, but a scalpal to the back of the head of a 7 month unborn baby is acceptable to you people. It's somewhat confusing.

Posted

I don't believe water boarding and or sleep deprivation, etc, is torture. So no, I don't condone torture.

It doesn't matter what you believe. Your beliefs are entirely irrelevant. They are torture by any reasonable definition. That's like saying you don't believe stuff falls to the ground due to gravitational pull.

Posted

It doesn't matter what you believe. Your beliefs are entirely irrelevant. They are torture by any reasonable definition.

No, that's just not true.

Posted (edited)

Abortion is a red herring that is entirely irrelevant to the subject of torture. You're being derailed by someone whose position on torture is so untenable that he has to change the subject.

This is true. My apologies for enabling Bryan to derail the thread by bringing up entirely unrelated topics. Back to the topic at hand.

I'm just trying to figure out why simulated drowning on a known adult terrorist is so abhorrent, but a scalpal to the back of the head of a 7 month unborn baby is acceptable to you people. It's somewhat confusing.

Spoke to soon. Here we go again.

Edited by PrimeNumber

“Be like water making its way through cracks. Do not be assertive, but adjust to the object, and you shall find your way around or through it. If nothing within you stays rigid, outward things will disclose themselves. Empty your mind, be formless. Shapeless, like water. If you put water into a cup, it becomes the cup. You put water into a bottle, it becomes the bottle. You put it into a teapot, it becomes the teapot. Now, water can flow or it can crash. Be water, my friend.”
― Bruce Lee

Posted

That's exactly what you said.

By anything I meant it could be a number of different things. I shouldn't have been so broad. I'm sorry you took it as completely literal.

Posted

I'm just trying to figure out why simulated drowning on a known adult terrorist is so abhorrent, but a scalpal to the back of the head of a 7 month unborn baby is acceptable to you people. It's somewhat confusing.

Now it is a 7 month old unborn fetus. You stated earlier, it was a 8 month old fetus. The issue of the age of a fetus 'taking a scalpal to the back of the head' as been addressed in other threads. Again, this is nothing but a red herring.

I love to see a young girl go out and grab the world by the lapels. Life's a bitch. You've got to go out and kick ass. - Maya Angelou

Posted

Now it is a 7 month old unborn fetus. You stated earlier, it was a 8 month old fetus. The issue of the age of a fetus 'taking a scalpal to the back of the head' as been addressed in other threads. Again, this is nothing but a red herring.

When you have no logical argument, resorting to changing the subject is the oldest trick in the book.

“Be like water making its way through cracks. Do not be assertive, but adjust to the object, and you shall find your way around or through it. If nothing within you stays rigid, outward things will disclose themselves. Empty your mind, be formless. Shapeless, like water. If you put water into a cup, it becomes the cup. You put water into a bottle, it becomes the bottle. You put it into a teapot, it becomes the teapot. Now, water can flow or it can crash. Be water, my friend.”
― Bruce Lee

Posted

Now it is a 7 month old unborn fetus. You stated earlier, it was a 8 month old fetus. The issue of the age of a fetus 'taking a scalpal to the back of the head' as been addressed in other threads. Again, this is nothing but a red herring.

How do you think they are killed then? Regardless, 7 months, 8 months, doesn't matter. Why is that acceptable, but simulating drowning, not real drowning, but simulating it, on an adult terrorist is abhorrent. Why?

Posted

When you have no logical argument, resorting to changing the subject is the oldest trick in the book.

If there's logic in the pro-abortion, anti-interrogation argument, please present it.

Posted

How do you think they are killed then? Regardless, 7 months, 8 months, doesn't matter. Why is that acceptable, but simulating drowning, not real drowning, but simulating it, on an adult terrorist is abhorrent. Why?

We have had this discussion in other threads and I won't address it here, other than to say, no doctor in Canada would allow abortion of a fetus at 7 or 8 months.

I love to see a young girl go out and grab the world by the lapels. Life's a bitch. You've got to go out and kick ass. - Maya Angelou

Posted

We have had this discussion in other threads and I won't address it here, other than to say, no doctor in Canada would allow abortion of a fetus at 7 or 8 months.

Why wouldn't they allow it? How can they not allow it when it's not against the law? Why shouldn't they allow it anyways?

Posted

Why wouldn't they allow it? How can they not allow it when it's not against the law? Why shouldn't they allow it anyways?

Sorry, I'm done with the abortion issue.

I love to see a young girl go out and grab the world by the lapels. Life's a bitch. You've got to go out and kick ass. - Maya Angelou

Posted

If there's logic in the pro-abortion, anti-interrogation argument, please present it.

It's been presented, you refuse to acknowledge any of it. And have not presented any of your own. Let's see your logical arguments, other than your arguments from personal incredulity which hold no basis in logic and shifting the burden of proof and evidence without providing any of your own.

“Be like water making its way through cracks. Do not be assertive, but adjust to the object, and you shall find your way around or through it. If nothing within you stays rigid, outward things will disclose themselves. Empty your mind, be formless. Shapeless, like water. If you put water into a cup, it becomes the cup. You put water into a bottle, it becomes the bottle. You put it into a teapot, it becomes the teapot. Now, water can flow or it can crash. Be water, my friend.”
― Bruce Lee

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Unfortunately, your content contains terms that we do not allow. Please edit your content to remove the highlighted words below.
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.


×
×
  • Create New...