Do You Want Obama to pursue Prosecution For Torture

no you said

Keep them from banning guns.

I took that to mean banning all guns. my bad


Unless that's what you meant.

 

You took it to mean that because that is the only thing Obama might actually not sign.

 

interesting comments from john mccain just now on 'face the nation.'

mentioned a former al-qaeda leader in iraq telling him that a large part of their recruiting success was in reaction to abu ghraib.

 

If you don't think the ends justify the means, then you'd have to reject everything from fighting WWII to American Independence.

There is no clean way to fight an enemy. War is a dirty ugly affair and far worse things than torture occur. I'm talking rape, murder, and indiscriminate killing of women and children. Famine, disease, poverty. the list goes on.

All of this done to justify the end.

 

No you don't have to reject that. There are rules and exceptions to the rules. Sometimes bad exceptions to the rules were made in other wars, but for the U.S., torture was never the rule... Until Bush/Cheney. They made it the rule.

 

That doesn't mean we accept or encourage those things.

 

Do you really think that there wasn't an instance of torturing someone under Clinton? Not one incident?

 

Definitely not encourage, and definitely we can frown upon it. But to date, human history has shown us that war and the violation of civil rights go hand in hand.

If someone has critical information that could save many lives, it takes someone of a very special breed of character to not use every means at his disposal to get that information.

To be absolutely against torture in all cases is a form of idealist rigidity. Like I said, 99% of the time, I am against it. Abu Ghraib was a disgrace.

But if someone who given highly reasonable cause to have information that could save lives - and only in that instance - and if they are unwilling to share that info, I do say torture should be an allowable option.

 

There may have been. But what I'm saying any previous instances of torture were the exception and not the rule. That changed with Bush. At that point he made torture the rule rather than the exception. It's not OK if it's the rule or the exception, but it's far worse if it becomes the rule.

 

The problem though is that by carving out legal exceptions you are creating a situation where you condone torture and worse creating a slippery slope were the temptation to use it is greater if there is a legal loophole to do so.

My opinion all along has been that torture is illegal and anyone who does it should bear the scrutiny of the courts. If the argument can be made that there truly was no other options and the situation was so dire its doubtful that there will be convictions.

 

The FBI interrogators are some of the best in the field. the concensus among these expert is that torture does not work.

why try an option that trained experts say does not work. why not try the most effective option. !

 

But Obama's own intelligence guy is saying we got life-saving intel from Bush/Cheney's use of torture.

So what is your reaction to that?

 

Sounds a lot like the arguement the NRA uses to keep assault weapons on the street doesn't it?

 

Let me ask you a few questions:

1. Do you accept the POSSIBILITY that torture can in certain circumstances yield valuable intel that will save american lives?

2. Would you condone the use of torture in that situation?


You should also realize that what will happen if the U.S. completely bans torture is not that people won't get tortured, just that the CIA won't bring in prisoners, they will let foreign countries torture them first. And that will probably be a lot worse. That's not a justification, just that's just the way things go.

 

1. It might, but I don't accept that it is the only way to get the exact same information. There is almost always another way or a better way.

2. I would not condone the use of torture in any situation.

 

For me, I can honestly say I don't know the answer to number 1. I mean, maybe you are right, maybe you are wrong. I don't think any of us really know for sure. You would agree with that right?

as for number 2, I simply disagree. There are situations in life where you must choose the lesser evil. And if you believe that someone has information that could save countless of lives, you must take action. If the CIA could have conducted torture on someone to discover the 9/11 plot and prevent it, would you have condoned it then?

I think there are no absolutes. And while I find most uses of torture disturbing, I don't think we should ever live in a world of absolutes. Didn't George Bush teach us at least that much?

It's easy to be open-minded about race, gay marriage, and other things, and critique others who are not. But it's much harder to be open-minded about things such as torture. Even I feel uncomfortable writing that last statement. But I also think i wouldn't want to tie the hands of those who have a really good reason to use a technique that could potentially save innocent lives.

 

No he didn't say that - I understand the appeal of using a basso-esque tactic and to call it "life-saving" but that's simply untrue. he said it was "high value" There's a substantial difference there. He also did not say it was not obtainable by other means.

 

ok, i associated high value with info that will save american lives.

and no one knows if it's obtainable by other means. you can always use that argument since there's no way to ever do a study that's scientific.

 

Which was a lie on your part.


As much as I would enjoy this, I'm going to watch the rockets now.

 

Sam mentioned some of what I would say.

But as far as torturing to stop 9/11, I think it's a false choice. I think if you had someone who knew about 9/11 you could find that information out more effectively another way. If that guy wouldn't give the info you needed, then you could have checked his contacts and gotten info from them. There is always another way that is probably more effective to get the information.

About knowing anything for sure? Nobody can know that. I will agree. But I'm going on all the best information we have about it right now.