No, actually it's wealth and education. Sorry if holding KSM underwater for 35 seconds doesn't make me feel bad. Next time, we should be considerate and offer him a mint julep and some chocolate truffles.
Why do you keep trying to suggest the mighty U.S. military use tactics that have been shown not to work? Why do you keep acting like the only other alternative is truffles and a mint julep? Are you really that limited? You think you know more than our military, and the brave men who have been doing the successful interrogations? It is saddening to see you pushing the U.S. to use tactics which are proven failures, when we know of techniques that actually work. I'll root for the U.S. to use the tactics that do work, and not waterboarding torture.
Guys, Trader, FD Khan, and others demonstrate the fact that a lot of these people want these guys tortured out of revenge. You have to understand the mindset. Arguing about whether we got valuable info is pointless. they don't care.
Yeah, basically the mindset of those we normally define as the enemies of freedom and democracy. It's really hard to read. I'm no pacifist. I'm happy punishing these guys as we would any mass-murderer, etc, but abandoning our morals and the rule of law only reduces us. The fact that the world sees us as just another torturing government means the terrorists win that PR battle, big time. If we're going to call terrorists barbarians, which they indeed are, we need to make sure we aren't acting like barbarians. The concept seems so simple, even if one lacks moral guidance completely. Why is the concept of torture breaking along party lines? That's an interesting subplot here, speaking to mental and emotional phenotypes.
Agreed. The mass murders and torture that Saddam committed came from this same way of thinking. At least initially it was revenge.
I'm against torture in theory, but I approve of it for this ****head. I would have staked him to an ant bed. I know that I don't seem consistent, but I'm honest.
KSM probably feels the same way about you. The only difference is you haven't acted on it. If you sink to the level of your enemy how are you and he any different?
It's interesting. You and I might say we have to create a difference by walking the walk, whereas some others (I'm guessing) say there are absolutely intrinsic differences. So even if we act a little bad here and there, we are a priori morally superior. I can sympathize with that... but it's a tough sell to the rest of humanity.
count me as another who doesn't feel a bit sorry that rat-b*stard was waterboarded 183 times. Should have been 3,000 times, if you ask me, then bury his useless waste of an ass in pigs blood like DaDa said.
Um, nobody feels sorry for him. I guess the two sides of this conversation (sic? ) just don't really hear one other. Of course I have part of me that wants to tie the dude to an ant hill. Anyone who attacks NYC, including Zeke Thomas, deserves that. But the point is who we are, who we say we are, and who we want to be. I want nothing in common with the f*ing terrorists. I want anyone and everyone on this planet to see a very, very clear difference in the deeds and words of the US of A when held against tyrants and terrorists. That's where I'm coming from. All this stuff about coddling, truffles, and sympathy really misses the whole point of morality. Morals aren't about teddy bears and unicorns. They're about making the difficult correct decision in dealing with other human beings, and making those decisions consistently.
Why do the libpoosies take KSM's side on this? How can anyone argue for better treatment for the man who killed 3,000 people? It just doesn't make sense. Believe me, giving him truffles and mint juleps won't work. It's the height of naivete to assume otherwise. These animals only understand one language and that's the language of pain. These arguments about honor, moral codes, and the Geneva Convention don't mean squat to terrorists, other than offering them places of refuge. The libpoosies are actually working on their behalf when they make these stupid arguments.
and let's not forget, this is one guy who was involved with 9-11. most of the guys we are interrogating aren't.
Oh, I see your point. I just happen to think there is an ugly side of humanity that only understands violence, and that sometimes that violence can only be met with violence. But we didn't chop his head off and he's still alive. Pretty big difference between us and them, right there. Sure, it's always best to avoid a fight. Always. I truly believe that. But sometimes you have to fight back because you're not given a choice. It ain't pretty....just reality.
Agree entirely with your point about violence. I'm all for fighting, despite the dishonest & cliche PR campaign about libruls. Again, I'm not a pacifist. Knocking the Taliban out of Afghanistan = good. Killing high profile terrorists when you find them = good. Torturing people, even scum of the earth = stupid (according to reports, and studies, and the army field manual), immoral, & terrible PR all in one poop burrito. Agree cutting a head off is worse, but why even set foot on that barbarian spectrum? We're better than they are. Ah well, I've said my piece.
There would still be the very real difference of me not killing or torturing the innocent. I'd say that is a very big difference. I don't know how effective waterboarding is in general, but at what point do they say either he has told us everything he knows, or he isn't going to give us any information? I'd have to say that does indeed sound like going well beyond interogation. At that point you have to consider it torture. He deserved a heck of a lot worse.
A coward too afraid to use anything but internet baby-talk for the sake of avoiding the ban hammer is calling other people p*****s? High-larious.
Why do you act like you have the understanding of a dirt mound? You present the argument of a simpleton who can't understand there are more than two options(torture or mint juleps). You owe me for trying to help you not appear like such a complete and total simpleton with the reasoning power of a 7 year old. The arguments are about what is effective to help us WIN the war on terror. Some of us actually care about that. Not one person in this thread has taken the side of KSM. We have taken the side of reason, and protecting U.S. troops and citizens.
