Waterboarding

[spence]

Originally Posted by buckman

Is it OK if you know they have info???? Answer me, why is it so bad to put a bug in a cage with a known terrorist, but it's fine to blow the crap out of a suspected terrorist's home and kill him and his kids? I'm just trying to find a tiny shread of consistancy with the anti" torture" crowd

I believe the Geneva Convention would stipulate that a prisoner isn't capable of fighting back. You don't seem to be getting this...

Also, the assertion that it's fine to kill a terrorist's wife and kids isn't really valid. Generally speaking, collateral damage is taken very seriously precisely because it is such a big deal. More often than not we'll avoid using force for this reason, and I'm sure with hindsight at times it's even been considered a mistake.

The notion that the "anti-torture crowd" lacks consistancy based on your question is silly because you're trying to apply black and white tests to an issue, like most issues, that is very complex and situationally dependent.

Many people who are generally against the use of torture (as I am) don't base their position simply on the basis that it's unethical (which is highly relative), but also the factor that many credible experts believe it's not reliable.

The same could be said for the death penalty (which I'm also generally against). If it was more cost effective and a proven deterrent I think you'd find more people willing to accept it. But it's not...

Even as a cost/benefit analysis it doesn't make a lot of sense.

-spence

[buckman]

Originally Posted by spence

I believe the Geneva Convention would stipulate that a prisoner isn't capable of fighting back. You don't seem to be getting this...

Also, the assertion that it's fine to kill a terrorist's wife and kids isn't really valid. Generally speaking, collateral damage is taken very seriously precisely because it is such a big deal. More often than not we'll avoid using force for this reason, and I'm sure with hindsight at times it's even been considered a mistake.

The notion that the "anti-torture crowd" lacks consistancy based on your question is silly because you're trying to apply black and white tests to an issue, like most issues, that is very complex and situationally dependent.

Many people who are generally against the use of torture (as I am) don't base their position simply on the basis that it's unethical (which is highly relative), but also the factor that many credible experts believe it's not reliable.

The same could be said for the death penalty (which I'm also generally against). If it was more cost effective and a proven deterrent I think you'd find more people willing to accept it. But it's not...

Even as a cost/benefit analysis it doesn't make a lot of sense.

-spence

It didn't say it is fine to kill a terrorist's wife and kids . It's what happens when, in some instances Obama approves bombings in Pakastan.
Your right this isn't a black or white thing. Some would consider, as I do, that what the CIA did was harsh interrogation at worse. I don't consider it torture.

Many credible experts believe it's reliable. That's why they did it.

And I have yet to see a person put to death for murder repeat the crime. It is 100% effective. Bundy will never kill again. Trust me

[Cool Beans]

Here's a log for the fire.....

Do Liberals consider abortion as torture?

It's ok, to rip the little guy out and leave him on the counter to die (Obama voted for this), but I can't drip water on a canvas draped over some terrorists face?????

[RIROCKHOUND]

Originally Posted by Cool Beans

Here's a log for the fire.....
Do Liberals consider abortion as torture?

This is off topic...
No, but I'm not a fan of using it for birth control or population control either, I'm Pro-choice, not a rabid ra-ra abortion guy; most liberals probably fall in this category.

[scottw]

[QUOTE=Cool Beans;686559]Here's a log for the fire.....

Do Liberals consider abortion as torture?

abrtion is the first sacrament of the religeon of the left, it's euphoric...but, you can't call it abortion anymore...we're way beyond that polarizing term that the conservatives have so sullied...it's..."the enlightened elimination of unwanted punsishment for behavior taught in kindegarten procedure"...or...Altrnative Democrat Voter Registration Guaranteed Loyalty for Life Program...

[EarnedStripes44]

Originally Posted by buckman

Many credible experts believe it's reliable. That's why they did it.

Who, #^&#^&#^&#^& Cheney? Donnie Rumsfeld....the "chicoms"

Originally Posted by buckman

And I have yet to see a person put to death for murder repeat the crime. It is 100% effective. Bundy will never kill again. Trust me

Assuming the deathrow inmate is the actual murderer and not some mentally handicapped raggamuffin. You really think the state of Texas or Virginia has never executed someone wrongly convicted of a capital crime. Thats all I need to oppose it. I leave the bloodlusting for rest.

[buckman]

Originally Posted by EarnedStripes44

Who, #^&#^&#^&#^& Cheney? Donnie Rumsfeld....the "chicoms"


Assuming the deathrow inmate is the actual murderer and not some mentally handicapped raggamuffin. You really think the state of Texas or Virginia has never executed someone wrongly convicted of a capital crime. Thats all I need to oppose it. I leave the bloodlusting for rest.

Sounds like collateral damage. Something that we strive to avoid. So I take it you are fully opposed to the US bombing anywhere,anytime and for any reason.

[EarnedStripes44]

Originally Posted by buckman

Sounds like collateral damage. Something that we strive to avoid. So I take it you are fully opposed to the US bombing anywhere,anytime and for any reason.

Collateral damage is one of the challenges confronting the execution of asymetrical warfare. I do agree we have got to be surgical and much depends on intelligence.

But as it relates to Bush-doctrine-war, I oppose any "US Bombing anywhere, anytime and for any reason"

Now with regard to the death penalty, prosecutors dont always get good "intelligence" on the situation and its not cost effective. I can understand support for the death penalty in theory, but real world practice speaks volumes to our civil imperfections.

Not to mention that it seems death sentences are handed out like candy when the victim is white. Simply put, the courts in Ohio would have us believe that the lives of whites are worth more than blacks.


I think were talking to different types of collateral damage.

[basswipe]

As an American,a decendent of genocide(Armenian that is) and most of all a Veteran I am appalled by the idea that we(our government) tortured people.

We're Americans.Are we not better than this?Do we need to step down to the level of the religious/political fanatics in order to gain info?

We're American.Want info?Dominate the freaks and force them through shear firepower and technology.Waterboarding my ass,we are better than that.

We're better than torture.We're American.

[buckman]

Originally Posted by basswipe

As an American,a decendent of genocide(Armenian that is) and most of all a Veteran I am appalled by the idea that we(our government) tortured people.

We're Americans.Are we not better than this?Do we need to step down to the level of the religious/political fanatics in order to gain info?

We're American.Want info?Dominate the freaks and force them through shear firepower and technology.Waterboarding my ass,we are better than that.

We're better than torture.We're American.

IT WASN'T TORTURE!

[buckman]

Originally Posted by EarnedStripes44

Collateral damage is one of the challenges confronting the execution of asymetrical warfare. I do agree we have got to be surgical and much depends on intelligence.

But as it relates to Bush-doctrine-war, I oppose any "US Bombing anywhere, anytime and for any reason"

Now with regard to the death penalty, prosecutors dont always get good "intelligence" on the situation and its not cost effective. I can understand support for the death penalty in theory, but real world practice speaks volumes to our civil imperfections.

Not to mention that it seems death sentences are handed out like candy when the victim is white. Simply put, the courts in Ohio would have us believe that the lives of whites are worth more than blacks.


I think were talking to different types of collateral damage.

This isn't about the Bush doctrine. I asked about Obama bombing in Pakastan and how it balances with his decision to ban harsh interrogation.

The courts do take black on black crime one way and black on white crime quite the different. It is not always the case but there is about a 10% difference. That's not a reason to stop capital punishment. If it were "fair" more blacks would be on death row, not less.