LOLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLL if you believe that, you are just fooling yourself. What about Vietnam, nahhhh no torture happened there either... right? You are probably right about it not being ordered by top executives, but doesn't mean it did not happen in other wars. Torture is a part of war, and anyone who thinks differently has no clue about obtaining information from someone whom is hell bent on not speaking to their enemies. At least they didn't pour Battery acid in the terrorist eyes like they did to our soliders.
I don't even know what this means? I have no desire to be microchiped and take trains to a fema camp.
I never said we were torturing only known terrorists. I said if they are, then I'm fine with it. And they can know definitively that someone is a terrorist, others maybe not so much. I thank you for inlcuding me in your ignorant citizenry group, just b/c my viewpoint happens to be different than yours.
The torture was bad and as you say, might have caused some deaths. I also hold the media responsible. They think they are doing good by exposing our government (really they are trying to make a name for themselves), but in reality, they are also causing deaths, but that is another topic all together.
Order that liberals defend people: 1. Terrorists who have vital information 2. Homeowners who don't pay their mortgages 3. Unemployed 4. People who contribute nothing in taxes to the government 5. Hard working, honest Americans KSM got dunked in water -- boo freaking hoo. Excuse me for not rushing to his side to offer him moist towelettes and after dinner chocolates. Look up the thread on here -- waterboarding was used 5 times over the course of 5 years. And every instance proved successful at acquiring great information. But that's just the facts.... sorry libs
Since repeated evidence has shown that very few (if any) are "known terrorists" (whatever that means - talk about subjectivity...), I'd argue your little disclaimer moot and, well, ignorant.
And we should. Afterall, it's a government by the people for the people. And those that believe otherwise, they should stop bullying cuba for not allowing their people to log in to clutchfans. As for torture, the CIA has been in the torture business since the 70s, encouraging fascist leaders to have their military chain of command train in the SOA. Fine, everyone does it, then just don't get caught. =)
We have had this debate in here about 40 million times. To save us 100+ posts of repetition, even if you could convince me that suspending any semblance of human decency in the name of human indecency was sensical, you'd still be left trying to explain to me exactly what constitutes terrorism. Furthermore, you would then have to justify that definition with the utter travesty of current terrorism-law implementation. What separates us from those that would wish us death, pain, and misery is not only our resolve to defeat them, but our resolve not to become them in the process.
I don't like torturing innocents, like many radicals and terrorist do, but I'm not too concerned with the guilty. So I guess we will just agree to disagree. And I love how people on both sides of the isle love to call people with opposing view points ignorant and naive, etc. I'm not just singling you out, I've seen from many others.
It's not your viewpoint per say, it's the rationale (or lack thereof) behind it that is ignorant. This is not splitting hairs. The word (ignorant) is accurate because there is no data that would indicate torture is worthwhile for any logical purpose. You cannot trust any data you "aquire", and you simultaneously harbor an enormous amount of ill repute with allies and enemies alike. This is indisputable and has been hashed and rehashed on this forum repeatedly. IIRC, the freaking pentagon admits to this reality. Of course, you could admit that the only motivation is revenge.... In which case I wonder why you have not advocated torture for far more tangible crimes.
first of all you admitted your naivety. secondly its against the law. but international and domestic. and i'd venture to say its against customary international law, which means even if you pull out of the treaties, the obligations are still binding on you. ergo, the US cannot torture in today's world without committing a serious international crime.
You are telling me that in no cases, absolutely zero, that valid information was acquired through torture?
So the ends never justify the means. I guess you are right, I am naive, but many others on both sides, even the ones calling me naive, do not have first hand knowledge.
That's a trick question, but I'll bite regardless. I would not know the answer to that question. Nor would a number other than zero change my conviction. And that's not irrational: even if you could prove that the case, it would not be worth the price of such blatant hypocrisy. You cannot claim a righteous cause while utilizing the methods of the unrighteous. If you counter that the ends justify the means, you would basically be admitting that the ends = the means, rendering your own position subject to the punishment you advocate.
There was also torture at Gitmo. Like I said there were many different reasons why people joined. But we do know for a fact that some people joined because of the torture. This is a first hand account. I'm only talking about what the military on the ground who are doing the actual interrogation and talk to the actual insurgents are saying. I guess you want them to get real too. Good luck with that.
That's just asinine. If that's what you call a liberal, I'd guess exactly zero fit into the category as you define it here. Stick with the topic, Rush. Bush (or more appropriately, probably, his appointed cronies) lied and cheated his way around the rules to do a lot of things, and now that someone has the power to call BS, some of it is coming out. Deal.
I don't doubt that some valid information may have been gathered at some point. But... 1. That doesn't mean it's the most effective way to get information. We know that it isn't. 2. That doesn't mean it was necessary.
I can somewhat agree. If there are other ways, "rapport building' as I think you mentioned then, great. But I'm also not opposed, if necessary, to other measures. I'm glad I don't have to make that call.
