Cambridge
Platinum Hoya (over 5000 posts)
Canes Pugnaces
Posts: 5,304
|
Post by Cambridge on Apr 23, 2009 9:40:27 GMT -5
A question for those who oppose any form of "torture". Suppose an intruder has tied up your family and has a knife, preparing to kill them. You step into the room with a handgun in your hand. Is it okay for you to shoot the intruder in the leg and cripple him to save your family? To me, this is the moral equivalent of using "torture" to save lives. 1) You can not craft laws for extreme and personal examples. End of discussion. That is the equivalent of drafting your death penalty laws around Timothy McVeigh or Ted Bundy. The fact that these people make up .0000001% of killers makes it completely illogical and irresponsible to draft your laws and regulations regarding the punishment of murder as if they were the typical case. Similarly, drafting your rules of engagement and interrogation around the highly sensational and largely fictional "ticking time bomb" scenario is irresponsible and irrational. 2) What you described is not torture, it is self-defense. There is an enormous difference from a legal and philosophical stand point. The situation is not analogous. The correct metaphor would be that a group of men broke into my house and kidnapped my wife. A few weeks later I saw some guys who looked like the guys who were involved and happened to be in the wrong neighborhood. I kidnapped them at gunpoint and drove them to a remote location. I tortured them and beat them for several weeks in hopes they would disclose the location of my wife. I followed the leads and names they gave me and tortured and beat the men I found as well. This continued. I am still searching for my wife...however, my son has yet to be kidnapped, thus my technique must be effective as it has prevented my son from being kidnapped or killed. 3) There is a big difference between what I would do PERSONALLY and what I feel comfortable allowing the GOVERNMENT to do. Institutionalization of this type of behavior is a form of empowerment for the government that strips away the tenuous threads of restraint against tyranny. You can only condone torture if you would approve its mistaken use on you. 4) Under you logic, there is no reason we shouldn't torture criminal suspects. 5) Finally, I just don't understand how you can entrust the government with so much power. Me, I distrust them all, regardless of party.
|
|
Cambridge
Platinum Hoya (over 5000 posts)
Canes Pugnaces
Posts: 5,304
|
Post by Cambridge on Apr 23, 2009 9:42:11 GMT -5
And, of course, there is also the issue of how transparent the administration is actually being. Like Pete Hoekstra says, if you're going to have sunlight, then have sunlight. This includes not only the "success" memos that so many are attempting to discredit .... strangely enough without even seeing them yet (how's that work, exactly?), but also the names all of the Congressmen who were briefed, many of whom are acting outraged now, when most likely they went along with this when they learned about the program...repeatedly. Granted, if they had an objection, maybe they were unable to air it publicly, but they could have done so within the confines of all the briefings, which would also be documented. So let's release those too and see how many of these people actually thought it was torture and illegal back then. Talk about your moral relativism. Personally, as I have stated, I don't think they should be ashamed that they approved of this, but if they're going to act like it's shameful, then let's see what they thought then, and not just now when it serves them politically. Yes, I'm talking to you, Nancy Pelosi...among others. I agree with you Boz. But my views on the idiocy of Congress are well-known. I believe I advocated dissolving the House a few weeks back.
|
|
|
Post by strummer8526 on Apr 23, 2009 9:52:09 GMT -5
And, of course, there is also the issue of how transparent the administration is actually being. Like Pete Hoekstra says, if you're going to have sunlight, then have sunlight. This includes not only the "success" memos that so many are attempting to discredit .... strangely enough without even seeing them yet (how's that work, exactly?), but also the names all of the Congressmen who were briefed, many of whom are acting outraged now, when most likely they went along with this when they learned about the program...repeatedly. Granted, if they had an objection, maybe they were unable to air it publicly, but they could have done so within the confines of all the briefings, which would also be documented. So let's release those too and see how many of these people actually thought it was torture and illegal back then. Talk about your moral relativism. Personally, as I have stated, I don't think they should be ashamed that they approved of this, but if they're going to act like it's shameful, then let's see what they thought then, and not just now when it serves them politically. Yes, I'm talking to you, Nancy Pelosi...among others. I agree with you Boz. But my views on the idiocy of Congress are well-known. I believe I advocated dissolving the House a few weeks back. I must have missed that post, but I agree. The House of Representatives is a joke. "Leo, we need to be investigated by someone who wants to kill us just to watch us die. We need someone perceived by the American people to be irresponsible, untrustworthy, partisan, ambitious and thirsty for the limelight. Am I crazy or is this not a job for the U.S. House of Representatives?"
|
|
Bando
Golden Hoya (over 1000 posts)
I've got some regrets!
Posts: 2,431
|
Post by Bando on Apr 23, 2009 9:55:49 GMT -5
If anything, the Senate needs to go. The House is at least representative of the population of the US and doesn't have crazy rules.
Back to torture, ed, your example is simplistic and stupid. Moronically so. Oh, I forgot, the slightest nuance is elitist.
I agree that the best thing to happen would be for all of this to be aired publicly. Then at least we'd have some concrete answers.
|
|
Elvado
Platinum Hoya (over 5000 posts)
Posts: 6,080
|
Post by Elvado on Apr 23, 2009 11:01:25 GMT -5
Just treat everyone like Somali rogue pirates. The media has been breathless in its appreciation of our handling of that one.
|
|
|
Post by strummer8526 on Apr 23, 2009 11:27:46 GMT -5
Just treat everyone like Somali rogue pirates. The media has been breathless in its appreciation of our handling of that one. You really see no difference in those situations? Actually, this analogy speaks to Ed's. Ed, you're right. If someone is holding an American at gunpoint (like someone holding my family at gunpoint), and there is even a slight indication that negotiations will fail, then I want that gunman shot in the head by a Navy Seal. That's not a basis for a national security regime for reasons so obvious that its hard to imagine organizing them into sentence form.
|
|
The Stig
Diamond Hoya (over 2500 posts)
Posts: 2,844
|
Post by The Stig on Apr 23, 2009 11:46:56 GMT -5
Just treat everyone like Somali rogue pirates. The media has been breathless in its appreciation of our handling of that one. Exactly. Remember, there were 4 pirates in the Maersk Alabama case. 3 of them (the ones in the lifeboat) were shot, and another (who was on the warship negotiating) was captured. As far as I'm aware, the one who was captured has not been tortured in any way, and is being given a fair trial in New York. I've got no problems with killing terrorists that are about to attack us. My problem with torture isn't my concern for the terrorists' well-being, my problem is that it degrades us morally, puts our own servicemen and women in danger, and gives us false information. For those of you who say that waterboarding isn't torture, what if Saudi Arabia (to use a random example) were waterboarding American soldiers?
|
|
Bando
Golden Hoya (over 1000 posts)
I've got some regrets!
Posts: 2,431
|
Post by Bando on Apr 23, 2009 11:47:03 GMT -5
Just treat everyone like Somali rogue pirates. The media has been breathless in its appreciation of our handling of that one. You really see no difference in those situations? Actually, this analogy speaks to Ed's. Ed, you're right. If someone is holding an American at gunpoint (like someone holding my family at gunpoint), and there is even a slight indication that negotiations will fail, then I want that gunman shot in the head by a Navy Seal. That's not a basis for a national security regime for reasons so obvious that its hard to imagine organizing them into sentence form. Not to mention there's a difference between shooting someone who has a gun to someone's back and shooting someone who's strapped to a table.
|
|
Elvado
Platinum Hoya (over 5000 posts)
Posts: 6,080
|
Post by Elvado on Apr 23, 2009 12:16:08 GMT -5
You guys are truly priceless. Like carp you bit on that post. Thanks for your consistency.
|
|
Bando
Golden Hoya (over 1000 posts)
I've got some regrets!
Posts: 2,431
|
Post by Bando on Apr 23, 2009 12:46:19 GMT -5
You guys are truly priceless. Like carp you bit on that post. Thanks for your consistency. Thank you for your continued trolling! Mods, isn't this a site violation? I mean, he's admitting to being a troll.
|
|
|
Post by williambraskyiii on Apr 23, 2009 12:55:43 GMT -5
You guys are truly priceless. Like carp you bit on that post. Thanks for your consistency. Thank you for your continued trolling! Mods, isn't this a site violation? I mean, he's admitting to being a troll. stop being such a little btch. Elvado is one of us...don't whine to your mammy just b/c you don't agree with him. Its not like he is that pestilent Gator troll.
|
|
Boz
Blue & Gray (over 10,000 posts)
123 Fireballs!
Posts: 10,355
|
Post by Boz on Apr 23, 2009 13:06:23 GMT -5
My problem with torture isn't my concern for the terrorists' well-being, my problem is that it degrades us morally, puts our own servicemen and women in danger, and gives us false information. For those of you who say that waterboarding isn't torture, what if Saudi Arabia (to use a random example) were waterboarding American soldiers? The moral argument is fine. I don't happen to agree with it, but I respect your opinion on the matter. As for the second two arguments you make, that is supposition. First of all, our servicemen and women ARE in grave danger, regardless of how we treat prisoners. Do you think if we were treating detainees to cake and comfy chairs that al Qaeda or the Taliban would be treating members of our military similarly? I think that's beyond naive. As for false information, well, a lot of people have said that, but a lot of people are saying that it gave us GOOD information. And again, this is why I think that if we're going to release documents regarding this practice, let's release the full picture here, so we can judge the effectiveness a little more accurately and not based on supposition and hearsay. I don't think either of those second two are nearly as important for you as your first objection -- again respect, but disagree -- so I don't know if it would change your mind anyway if the latter two claims were not true at all. And that's fair enough. As for the last thing you mentioned, I'd be grateful if all that was happening to our captured military on these particular battlefields was waterboarding. I'm not saying I would be happy about it, but it beats some of the other things that could be happening to them. Unfortunately, there are pictures from places like Fallujah which bear that out.
|
|
Bando
Golden Hoya (over 1000 posts)
I've got some regrets!
Posts: 2,431
|
Post by Bando on Apr 23, 2009 13:23:07 GMT -5
Thank you for your continued trolling! Mods, isn't this a site violation? I mean, he's admitting to being a troll. stop being such a little btch. Elvado is one of us...don't whine to your mammy just b/c you don't agree with him. Its not like he is that pestilent Gator troll. Spare me your indignation, you rotting sack of pus. I disagree with Boz and Ed, but I have no doubt that they sincerely hold their positions and are trying to argue them honestly. Elvado just admitted that he's just trying to get a rise out of people, which is the very definition of trolling, a bannable offense on most message boards. Shove your tough guy antics up your ass.
|
|
EasyEd
Platinum Hoya (over 5000 posts)
Posts: 7,272
|
Post by EasyEd on Apr 23, 2009 13:24:25 GMT -5
Thanks for all the legalistic replies to my contention that a family being tied up and being shot in the leg is the MORAL equivalent of the "torture". Does this say we need a law defining torture and how to implement the law? Doesn't even touch on the subject. It says it's MORALLY the same. Got that? MORALLY.
Am I an advocate of actually torturing a prisoner? Like the Pope, of course not. I'm against it but I want some leeway to use coercive measures when it's required - like just after 9-11. And, I believe if you read what the current administration has said, they reserve the right to use coercive measures in extreme cases. Does this mean they are not opposed to using "torture" if American lives are in danger? That's the way I read it.
Now go back to your law books.
|
|
Bando
Golden Hoya (over 1000 posts)
I've got some regrets!
Posts: 2,431
|
Post by Bando on Apr 23, 2009 13:25:06 GMT -5
The point is though, Boz, is that we can't even begin to complain about such treatment by al Qaeda if we're doing the same thing. Our response shouldn't be to bring ourselves to their level.
|
|
TC
Platinum Hoya (over 5000 posts)
Posts: 9,464
|
Post by TC on Apr 23, 2009 13:35:18 GMT -5
Mods, isn't this a site violation? I mean, he's admitting to being a troll. Obviously not, hifi is still around.
|
|
Boz
Blue & Gray (over 10,000 posts)
123 Fireballs!
Posts: 10,355
|
Post by Boz on Apr 23, 2009 13:35:27 GMT -5
The point is though, Boz, is that we can't even begin to complain about such treatment by al Qaeda if we're doing the same thing. Our response shouldn't be to bring ourselves to their level. And my point is that we are not at all at their level, not even close. Not by 1,000 miles. What we do, call it what you like, we do with constant medical supervision to protect the physical safety of those we are interrogating (I do not deny that these methods may create some psychological damage). What they do, they do with nooses and incendiary devices and swords. The damage is quite a bit more permanent. I should also add that, while we may have accidentally rounded up some of the wrong people, what we do, we do to people who are actively battling us. What they do, they do to anyone, whether they are carrying a gun, or maybe just a pen and paper to write a story for a newspaper.
|
|
Elvado
Platinum Hoya (over 5000 posts)
Posts: 6,080
|
Post by Elvado on Apr 23, 2009 13:45:33 GMT -5
Oh Please. I bust your nuts? once with a comment and now I'm a troll. I have forgotten more about GU basketball than most of you will ever know. but you're playing right out of the new Left playbook of banning all contrary opinions and/or removing impediments to your Obamian utopia. Kind of like how he succeeded early in his career by getting people removed from ballots.
I may have made a troll-like comment, but I am no lemming. Mirror time boys.
|
|
|
Post by williambraskyiii on Apr 23, 2009 13:49:55 GMT -5
stop being such a little btch. Elvado is one of us...don't whine to your mammy just b/c you don't agree with him. Its not like he is that pestilent Gator troll. Spare me your indignation, you rotting sack of pus. I disagree with Boz and Ed, but I have no doubt that they sincerely hold their positions and are trying to argue them honestly. Elvado just admitted that he's just trying to get a rise out of people, which is the very definition of trolling, a bannable offense on most message boards. Shove your tough guy antics up your ass. you are a big time tool. I'd green-light waterboarding on all band geeks.
|
|
Cambridge
Platinum Hoya (over 5000 posts)
Canes Pugnaces
Posts: 5,304
|
Post by Cambridge on Apr 23, 2009 14:00:22 GMT -5
Thanks for all the legalistic replies to my contention that a family being tied up and being shot in the leg is the MORAL equivalent of the "torture". Does this say we need a law defining torture and how to implement the law? Doesn't even touch on the subject. It says it's MORALLY the same. Got that? MORALLY. Am I an advocate of actually torturing a prisoner? Like the Pope, of course not. I'm against it but I want some leeway to use coercive measures when it's required - like just after 9-11. And, I believe if you read what the current administration has said, they reserve the right to use coercive measures in extreme cases. Does this mean they are not opposed to using "torture" if American lives are in danger? That's the way I read it. Now go back to your law books. Ah yes, the Michael Dukakis parlor trick. I'm heartless because I am able to differentiate between what my red-blooded visceral reaction to a situation would be and that higher standard to which I wish to hold the government. Silly me. I'm a cold, calculating lawyer. Why have any rules? Toss out due process, its a joke. Vengeance for all. Accountability for none. Let God sort 'em out. I thought we founded this country with the explicit idea that we were rejecting tyranny in all forms, but most importantly and vitally, that tyranny which subjects a citizen's body and property to the unchecked whims of the government. Why is it that people's disdain for law only exists when they disagree with it? I certainly hope Ed that you are never falsely accused and suffer at the hands of a merciless and faceless government who ignores your basic human rights because it reasonably suspects you may be involved in something naughty. On Edit -- I'm not some public defender either or a tree hugger. I'm corporate litigator who spends his days defending corporate America from the torch bearing mobs of populist outrage. I'm basically inside the castle with Frankenstein.
|
|