Is Torture Acceptable?

Verywell said, blackjack...


Funny Quigs; I'm not so sure an American person is worth more than any other person in the world by sheer virtue of the accident of his birth.....
I've known a few underhanded Americans I wouldn't piss on if they were on fire...

Does that make me a traitor, or just a pussy liberal pseudo- intellectual humanist?

 

withdrawn; wasn't meant to stir the pot....

 

I am going to hate myself in the morning for saying this....... after all I did say I was done with this thread.... But, CAN'T WE ALL JUST GET ALONG ?

 

DEAD MANS CURVE .... ?

 

That is not entirely correct. The United States of America created internment camps for (I know) Japanese Americans. That being said they weren't tortured, experimented on, or otherwise disposed of in nasty ways, but they were uprooted from their homes unjustly.

We have no moral high ground. That being said they can cut off our citizen's heads and broadcast it on the internet, but we can't water board? Really?

 

tacmotusn....... I don't think anyone's pissed off or anything, just a good debate.

I should have been clearer. It was more a reference to the treatment, and I agree with you completely it was unjust.

As horrible as they may be.... yes, that's exactly what I'm saying. The word can is very different from the term legally allowed.

Please don't get me wrong, I think their treatment of prisoners/people in general is beyond appalling. I can't think of a word to describe people that throw acid in women's faces and drill holes in people just to make them suffer, and anyone guilty of such a crime deserves death (and then some).

 

Most people that know me recognize that I am usually somewhere right of Attilla the Hun but on this one, I strongly beleive that no matter how many lives it might save, torture is wrong. I might torture someone that harmed my family for revenge, it would still be wrong. The problem isn't so much a matter of moral high-ground as it is the give an inch take a mile principal; who decides what level of torture is acceptable? How far will that definition be stretched? We have already seen most of us be labeled as potential domestic terrorists or at least, right-wing extremists, is it that far a jump to make us ememy sympathizers and potential candidates for the little tortures? Lets just taze em a few times or near drown them for a while and see what they say? One example, read the 1934 gun control act and see that .22 rimfires are defined as non-firearms but a .22 machinegun is a machine gun. Is there something wrong with our trial system that makes anyone really willing to sacrifice that for a dark basement and a bucket of water? The point that is being missed, is that if it is acceptable for a few, then who discerns if it is acceptable for us all? I would fight to my dying breath and attempt to kill anyone that tried to torture me, a friend, or a member of my family. If I survived the torture, I would try to kill anyone associated with the practice; you would become forever irrevocably, my ememy. There is no time limit on that as long as I breath. A trial by peers and sentence handed down is acceptable and has worked through-out the history of our Republic. For those of you that support this practice for whatever justification, I pray for you.

 

So all we have to do to make everybody happy is farm out the torture to Egypt or UAE like we did a few years ago and everybody will be happy ,that is except the ones under the gun .

Problem solved .

 

I don't think we should become that which we find disgusting in others. Maybe I'm too old fashioned but I think that being a just nation is at least as important as being a strong one. Engaging in torture seems to go against the most valued principles of our nation. I think we lose more than we gain by engaging in it.

 

+1!

And welcome to the Monkey, Egret.

 

Yep.

 

I have read answers here and there and this is my answer, I am for torture "but only" for as long as I know for sure that this individual is holding the needed information to same my family or my troops.

A fishing expedition by torturing ant ransom is unaceptable.

 

Who do you trust to make that decision? The president? Is he going to get his hands dirty? Maybe a General? Nope, he's going to pass it down the chain of command and how long does it take before a NCO starts making the decisions? Then what law agency decides they need the same power or persuasion? Remember when SWAT teams were only used for major hostage incidents? If you can't see this happening post haste, then you are hiding your head in the sand and there is the problem.

 

TALK DIRTBAG, OR I SHOOT YOUR FRACKING BUNNY WABBIT!

 

Could not agree more.

OGM