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

[cybercoma]

I don't encourage it. But I do understand the necessity of techniques like water boarding and or sleep deprivation in rare circumstances. It should be kind of like abortion. Safe, legal and rare!

Really, Shady? Torture should be like abortion?

Remember when you used to put some effort into trolling? What happened, man?

[cybercoma]

As expected, a majority of polled American agree that it's torture, but sometimes justified:

According to a CBS News poll conducted Dec. 11-14 of 1,003 adults, 69 percent say they believe waterboarding is torture, though 49 percent think the practice, along with other enhanced interrogation techniques, is sometimes justified. Thirty-six percent think that the practices are not justified in any circumstance.

The survey also found that 57 percent of Americans think some interrogation tactics are effective in eliciting reliable information that helps prevent future terrorist attacks in some cases, even though the Senate report concluded that they are not an effective means of acquiring intelligence or gaining cooperation from detainees.

Just because people have opinions that doesn't mean that they're valid. It doesn't matter if 100% of Americans think torture is a-ok and useful for interrogations. It's still wrong and a violation of fundamental human rights.

Edited December 16, 2014 by cybercoma

[bush_cheney2004]

Just because people have opinions that doesn't mean that they're valid. It doesn't matter if 100% of Americans think torture is a-ok and useful for interrogations. It's still wrong and a violation of fundamental human rights.

Your opinion is no more "valid" than those who support torture to any degree. Welcome to the club. Check your morals at the door.

[cybercoma]

Your opinion is no more "valid" than those who support torture to any degree. Welcome to the club. Check your morals at the door.

Yes, actually it is. If you can't see the problem with "check your morals at the door" attitude when it comes to torturing people then you have absolutely no place condemning Iran, North Korea, China, Saudi Arabia, or any other nation of violating human rights. You might as well bring all of your troops home. If you can't objectively see that torture is wrong, then at best I feel sorry for you, at worst you should be locked away before you harm others with that sociopathic attitude.

[cybercoma]

The same sociopathic attitude that I might add shrugs at unnecessary and preventable deaths, calling them a "mistake."

[bush_cheney2004]

Yes, actually it is. If you can't see the problem with "check your morals at the door" attitude when it comes to torturing people then you have absolutely no place condemning Iran, North Korea, China, Saudi Arabia, or any other nation of violating human rights. You might as well bring all of your troops home. If you can't objectively see that torture is wrong, then at best I feel sorry for you, at worst you should be locked away before you harm others with that sociopathic attitude.

Why are you still responding to my posts ? I have not condemned those nations (or Canada) for "torture" and benefiting from the fruits of "torture", just noted that it occurs in many nations under many different circumstances. To deny this is naive.

I support "enhanced interrogation" methods that are effective.

I have committed no crime, but you would have me locked away....how progressive !

Nobody needs your pity...it is worthless.

Edited December 16, 2014 by bush_cheney2004

[dre]

You and others miss the point.

Torture causes enormous pain and, for the most part, damage to the body.

Waterboarding and sleep deprivation cause emotional distress and exhaustion.

You can condemn them as inhumane, but no, they aren't the same as torture.

Which would you rather experience, waterboarding and sleep deprivation, or having your fingernails ripped out slowly one by one?

Torture can be mental OR physical. Thats both the literal definition and internationally accepted legal definition. One of the most famous forms of torture involves nothing more than dripping water on someones forhead for a prolonged ammount of time.

[Shady]

Torture can be mental OR physical. Thats both the literal definition and internationally accepted legal definition. One of the most famous forms of torture involves nothing more than dripping water on someones forhead for a prolonged ammount of time.

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.

[dre]

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.

Its not subjective though... or at least its no more subjective than anything else.

And what are those rare cases? The silly "bombs about to go off" scenario?

In the case being discussed here, the tactic was simply being used was investigative in nature, and backed up by a trumped up threat to national security (terrorism which is not even a stastically significant threat).

Thats setting the bar really really low. If you give the government license to torture under such flimsy rationalization, you MUST realize that its use will become commonplace... Especially any time theres a percieved threat to national security.

[Big Guy]

I often hear the scenario of : "If your children have been kidnapped by an individual, you had control of that individual, he refused to give you information that would save your childrens life - would you resort to torture"?

I would answer - Yes! I would use any means available to me be it; fingernail pulling, electrical shocks, systematic digit removal, slow removal of certain body parts and/other anything else I could think of. I would do that knowingly that I would be prosecuted for the act and maybe even charged with murder if my interrogation techniques went too far.

When a country decides to validate torture then it declares that it is up to the interrogator to decide what means are necessary to attain the end. The interrogator is allowed to do so with impunity.

That does not work, leads to abuse of the decision making power and I would not support it.

Edited December 16, 2014 by Big Guy

[Shady]

Its not subjective though... or at least its no more subjective than anything else.

And what are those rare cases? The silly "bombs about to go off" scenario?

In the case being discussed here, the tactic was simply being used was investigative in nature, and backed up by a trumped up threat to national security (terrorism which is not even a stastically significant threat).

Thats setting the bar really really low. If you give the government license to torture under such flimsy rationalization, you MUST realize that its use will become commonplace... Especially any time theres a percieved threat to national security.

Rare cases could be anything, like catching the mastermind of a huge terrorist attack, and wanting to find out about the network of terrorists, and/or if there are any upcoming plots. 3 people were waterboarded, 10 years ago. I'm fine with it being rare, safe and legal.

[bush_cheney2004]

... I'm fine with it being rare, safe and legal.

Touche....just like those who support abortions !

[Shady]

Touche....just like those who support abortions !

Exactly. I'm just trying to figure out their moral compass. It's ok to have rare instances where an 8 month old unborn baby takes a scapal to the back of the neck, but God forbid under even rarer instances, a terrorist murderer has water poured on him in a simulation. That's over the top dammit!!!

Edited December 16, 2014 by Shady

[poochy]

The same sociopathic attitude that I might add shrugs at unnecessary and preventable deaths, calling them a "mistake."

You're making some awfully scummy judgments of peoples character based upon your fairy tall view of what the world should be. Show some maturity.

[poochy]

I dont think we should be torturing people, I also don't think we should be firebombing cities, but we do what we must and sometimes it's not pretty, it's all bad, how many people have we 'tortured' with our bombs? How many have they?

[dre]

I don't encourage it. But I do understand the necessity of techniques like water boarding and or sleep deprivation in rare circumstances.

No you dont.

[Moonlight Graham]

You and others miss the point.

Torture causes enormous pain and, for the most part, damage to the body.

Waterboarding and sleep deprivation cause emotional distress and exhaustion.

You can condemn them as inhumane, but no, they aren't the same as torture.

Which would you rather experience, waterboarding and sleep deprivation, or having your fingernails ripped out slowly one by one?

You're wrong. The United Nations Torture Convention and the International Criminal Court Act both define torture as inflicting "severe pain or suffering, whether physical or mental...".

[Shady]

No you dont.

Yes I do. You don't.

[jacee]

I'm fine with it being rare, safe and legal.

You would do it?

Just askin because ... I read an account of a US soldier involved in doing 'interrogation' and he was a mess of PTSD after. Unless you're a sadistic sociopath, being assigned such duty can destroy a person.

.

Edited December 17, 2014 by jacee

[bush_cheney2004]

You're wrong. The United Nations Torture Convention and the International Criminal Court Act both define torture as inflicting "severe pain or suffering, whether physical or mental...".

Well hell, that would apply to many U.S. college and university frat/sorority organizations, military training, etc.

Don't haze me 'bro !

[Bryan]

Exactly. I'm just trying to figure out their moral compass. It's ok to have rare instances where an 8 month old unborn baby takes a scapal to the back of the neck, but God forbid under even rarer instances, a terrorist murderer has water poured on him in a simulation. That's over the top dammit!!!

No kidding. Which is worse...

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

...or...

B/ an innocent unborn child is cut up and ripped apart at the behest of the mother because he's inconvenient.

The former is practical and logical, the latter is purely barbaric. Yet many on the left are offended by A/, yet think B/ is a right. Moral compass? Broken.

Edited December 17, 2014 by Bryan

[PrimeNumber]

No kidding. Which is worse...

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

...or...

B/ an innocent unborn child is cut up and ripped apart at the behest of the mother because he's inconvenient.

The former is practical and logical, the latter is purely barbaric. Yet many on the left are offended by A/, yet think B/ is a right. Moral compass? Broken.

There is no support for fetuses as legal persons in any international human rights codes. The Universal Declaration of Human Rights says that "All human beings are born free and equal in dignity and rights." Key word being born. Virtually all national constitutions do not treat fetuses as persons or citizens. American citizenship is limited to those "born or naturalized in the United States", as per the 14th Amendment and the word "Everyone" in the Canadian constitution has been deemed by the Supreme Court not to include fetuses. But unfortunately terrorists are human beings and do in fact have rights.

[Bryan]

There is no support for fetuses as legal persons in any international human rights codes. The Universal Declaration of Human Rights says that "All human beings are born free and equal in dignity and rights." Key word being born. Virtually all national constitutions do not treat fetuses as persons or citizens. American citizenship is limited to those "born or naturalized in the United States", as per the 14th Amendment and the word "Everyone" in the Canadian constitution has been deemed by the Supreme Court not to include fetuses. But unfortunately terrorists are human beings and do in fact have rights.

Black people weren't legally people until they were. Women were property. Evil isn't OK just because a piece of paper says so. Wrong is always wrong whether the law says so or not.

[PrimeNumber]

Black people weren't legally people until they were. Women were property. Evil isn't OK just because a piece of paper says so. Wrong is always wrong whether the law says so or not.

By what definition is abortion wrong, your own? The Catholic churches? Unlike torture, abortion is entirely subjective. There is no definitive proof an embryo or fetus has an inkling of conscious thought. The only answer you can provide is an emotional response based on your assumption that a mass of cells that looks nothing like a human being, is a human being. Which of course would mean that we should be arresting and punishing every teenage boy and every women the moment she expels her egg every month, because it is the murder of a mass of cells that have the potential to become a human being after 9 months of gestation.

I personally believe that restrictions on abortion should occur at the third trimester and do consider this a disturbing facet of our abortion laws in Canada. But to equate all abortions to torture is asinine and proves you know nothing about the subject save for what your conservative handbook tells you.

[Bryan]

By what definition is abortion wrong, your own? The Catholic churches? Unlike torture, abortion is entirely subjective. There is no definitive proof an embryo or fetus has an inkling of conscious thought. The only answer you can provide is an emotional response based on your assumption that a mass of cells that looks nothing like a human being, is a human being. Which of course would mean that we should be arresting and punishing every teenage boy and every women the moment she expels her egg every month, because it is the murder of a mass of cells that have the potential to become a human being after 9 months of gestation.

I personally believe that restrictions on abortion should occur at the third trimester and do consider this a disturbing facet of our abortion laws in Canada. But to equate all abortions to torture is asinine and proves you know nothing about the subject save for what your conservative handbook tells you.

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