New Torture Question

Off Topic Politics & World Issues
61

[quote]Vegita wrote:
I would also like to point out that in order for torture to work, there has to be the threat of death being the final outcome. Id we as a country say publicly that we will only waterboard people, don’t you think they listen to the news?

I mean i’m sure newspapers around the world are gonna put that on the front page. US Says it will waterboard" and then with a little bit of research into what waterboarding is, by now, any person in the world (save bushmen) who get captured by the us and are waterboarded are in no way afraid they are going to die. They know it is a tactic that is used to trick them into thinking they are drowning. hey are not getting fingers cut off, they are not physically harmed.

Therefore the technique loses all it’s punch to begin with. I’m sure maybe it could have worked the first few times you used it on someone before all the news got wind of it, but even then, after you fake drown someone for the 4th or 5th time, don’t you think they are eventually going to catch on that you aren’t going to kill them.

V[/quote]

Excellent argument for the use of real torture on terrorists - thanks!

62

[quote]pookie wrote:

Has anyone ever broken and spilled their guts after being panty-headed?
[/quote]

Yep - well, of course she was also zapping me with a cattle prod and cracking that whip ominously at the same time . . . oh wait - sorry wrong context . . .

63

[quote]IrishSteel wrote:
Vegita wrote:
I would also like to point out that in order for torture to work, there has to be the threat of death being the final outcome. Id we as a country say publicly that we will only waterboard people, don’t you think they listen to the news?

I mean i’m sure newspapers around the world are gonna put that on the front page. US Says it will waterboard" and then with a little bit of research into what waterboarding is, by now, any person in the world (save bushmen) who get captured by the us and are waterboarded are in no way afraid they are going to die. They know it is a tactic that is used to trick them into thinking they are drowning. hey are not getting fingers cut off, they are not physically harmed.

Therefore the technique loses all it’s punch to begin with. I’m sure maybe it could have worked the first few times you used it on someone before all the news got wind of it, but even then, after you fake drown someone for the 4th or 5th time, don’t you think they are eventually going to catch on that you aren’t going to kill them.

V

Excellent argument for the use of real torture on terrorists - thanks![/quote]

Well on an effectiveness only argument, I feel real tortue would probably deliver better results that “soft” torture like waterboarding or putting a guy in with bugs. I don’t think it would deliver better results than humane treatment and mental manipulation and mind cracking. Also on a moral and legal front I think real torture is completely and utterly out of the question. So just because real hardcore torture might be better than something does not mean it’s good, or that it’s even effective.

V

64

[quote]dhickey wrote:
orion wrote:

What part of the constition limit tactics used in war?

According to your constitution that is not even a war.

touche. Ok what part of the constitution limits tactics in a military conflict.[/quote]

The part where it says that the government can only do things that it is allowed to do by the constitution?

Where does it say that it can even start “military conflicts” that are conveniently “not wars”?

65

[quote]dhickey wrote:

Oh yeah, you’re going to take a bath on this one. Welcome to the ignor list by the way.[/quote]
For pointing out the obvious? For pointing out U.S War Crimes? Ok.

[quote]
Predictable. Perhaps someday there will be a cure for your mental disorder.
Perhaps one day you will learn to look beyond what the state wants you to believe, and start realizing that the biggest most powerful terrorist state is the United states. Do some reading on what you have done to countries in south-america. Do some reading on vietnam. Read some books by Noam Chomsky.

Noam Chomsky…laughing out loud now.[/quote]
Yes, unbiased criticism from one of the worlds most respected scholars really is quite laughable. Noam Chomsky is unbiased and he backs everything up with facts. I really wish more people would read Hegemony or Survival for instance.

Even if you don’t agree with his conclusions, which is fair, the fact that USA has committed some of the worst war crimes since world war 2 is simply a fact, leaving many countries in ruins. It really is indisputable. Vietnam is one of the more commonly known examples, but there are many more wars in which the USA have committed terrible war crimes, crimes that most of the population in the united states (or the rest of the world for that matter) doesn’t even know about.

66

[quote]molnes wrote:
dhickey wrote:

Oh yeah, you’re going to take a bath on this one. Welcome to the ignor list by the way.
For pointing out the obvious? For pointing out U.S War Crimes? Ok.

Predictable. Perhaps someday there will be a cure for your mental disorder.
Perhaps one day you will learn to look beyond what the state wants you to believe, and start realizing that the biggest most powerful terrorist state is the United states. Do some reading on what you have done to countries in south-america. Do some reading on vietnam. Read some books by Noam Chomsky.

Noam Chomsky…laughing out loud now.
Yes, unbiased criticism from one of the worlds most respected scholars really is quite laughable. Noam Chomsky is unbiased and he backs everything up with facts. I really wish more people would read Hegemony or Survival for instance.

Even if you don’t agree with his conclusions, which is fair, the fact that USA has committed some of the worst war crimes since world war 2 is simply a fact, leaving many countries in ruins. It really is indisputable. Vietnam is one of the more commonly known examples, but there are many more wars in which the USA has committed terrible war crimes, crimes that most of the population in the united states (or the rest of the world for that matter) doesn’t even know about.

[/quote]

wow - the maroon flu is reaching pandemic levels. . . Chomsky is now a respected scholar . . . ONLY by those who agree with his far left perspective . . . but now that we know who you are and where you are coming from . . .I fart in your general direction.

these kind of posts are prim a fascia idiocy and you have earned the PAFI award of the day . . .congratulations and good luck with that - oh BTW, it includes a one way ticket to Yemen - enjoy.

67

[quote]IrishSteel wrote:
wow - the maroon flu is reaching pandemic levels. . . Chomsky is now a respected scholar . . . ONLY by those who agree with his far left perspective . . . but now that we know who you are and where you are coming from . . .I fart in your general direction.

these kind of posts are prim a fascia idiocy and you have earned the PAFI award of the day . . .congratulations and good luck with that - oh BTW, it includes a one way ticket to Yemen - enjoy.[/quote]
Chomsky IS a respected scholar. One of the most respected in the world, both in terms of philosophy and linguistics.

“Chomsky is arguably the most important intellectual alive” - The New York Times

Whether you consider him a respected scholar or not doesn’t really matter. What matters is his arguments. I don’t see a single argument in what you are writing. Just labeling and childish name calling. Which is quite typical of a man who doesn’t have any real arguments.

68

[quote]molnes wrote:
IrishSteel wrote:
wow - the maroon flu is reaching pandemic levels. . . Chomsky is now a respected scholar . . . ONLY by those who agree with his far left perspective . . . but now that we know who you are and where you are coming from . . .I fart in your general direction.

these kind of posts are prim a fascia idiocy and you have earned the PAFI award of the day . . .congratulations and good luck with that - oh BTW, it includes a one way ticket to Yemen - enjoy.
Chomsky IS a respected scholar. One of the most respected in the world, both in terms of philosophy and linguistics.

“Chomsky is arguably the most important intellectual alive” - The New York Times

Whether you consider him a respected scholar or not doesn’t really matter. What matters is his arguments. I don’t see a single argument in what you are writing. Just labeling and childish name calling. Which is quite typical of a man who doesn’t have any real arguments.
[/quote]

WOW- really - the New York Times!! oooohhh, impressive . . . .

Nope, no arguments in my recent post here because there is nothing of substance being argued here . . . I have made multiple arguments on the topic of torture, water boarding, etc and everyone who disagrees ignores the points I raise or goes off and starts another nonsense topic like this one . . .

69

[quote]IrishSteel wrote:
molnes wrote:
IrishSteel wrote:
wow - the maroon flu is reaching pandemic levels. . . Chomsky is now a respected scholar . . . ONLY by those who agree with his far left perspective . . . but now that we know who you are and where you are coming from . . .I fart in your general direction.

these kind of posts are prim a fascia idiocy and you have earned the PAFI award of the day . . .congratulations and good luck with that - oh BTW, it includes a one way ticket to Yemen - enjoy.
Chomsky IS a respected scholar. One of the most respected in the world, both in terms of philosophy and linguistics.

“Chomsky is arguably the most important intellectual alive” - The New York Times

Whether you consider him a respected scholar or not doesn’t really matter. What matters is his arguments. I don’t see a single argument in what you are writing. Just labeling and childish name calling. Which is quite typical of a man who doesn’t have any real arguments.

WOW- really - the New York Times!! oooohhh, impressive . . . .

Nope, no arguments in my recent post here because there is nothing of substance being argued here . . . I have made multiple arguments on the topic of torture, water boarding, etc and everyone who disagrees ignores the points I raise or goes off and starts another nonsense topic like this one . . . [/quote]

I don’t think I have ignored any of your specific points. I may have countered them or disagreed with them if they were opinion based, but certainly not everyone has ignored your points like you say they have.

Also I haven’t heard of the Irishsteel Bestsellers list, so until that list comes out and starts gaining some traction, I think i’ll at least respect the NY times. I may not always agree with them, but thier thoughts and opinions are worth considering.

V

70

[quote]Vegita wrote:
tom63 wrote:
pookie wrote:
GDollars37 wrote:
Makavali wrote:
Bill Roberts wrote:
Nor panties on head as torture.

???

Someone had a good time last night.

He’s talking about something that, while not torture, is stupid and demeaning. Done to detainees at Bagram, Guantanamo and elsewhere.

Has anyone ever broken and spilled their guts after being panty-headed?

They were going to put bugs on a guy who was afraid of them. I’m sure it would work in the right case. Some people are afraid of kitties and other weird stuff. while frightening to them, i think it’s silly. I alos think just because it scares the crap out of them, it’s not torture.

I use the scale of if I did it to gals on a schoolyard, bugs, and didn’t get tinto trouble, or we do it to our own troops in training, it’s not torture. Cutting off fingers is torture.

Playing to someone’s weakness is not torture.

Scaring someone or creeping them out also isn’t the best way to get them to tell you what they do know if it is anything at all. Again, why do something thats innefective. I’m not so much morally against putting bugs on someone, but it just seems pointless and stupid. The fact that it is a tactic used by boys on a schoolyard to scare the girls should give you an idea of why it is not a good tactic.

V[/quote]

And you know so well jhow to get info out of terrorist zealots, how? One guy was know to have a fear of insects and they were going to use that. You are seriously delusional.

71

[quote]molnes wrote:
dhickey wrote:

Oh yeah, you’re going to take a bath on this one. Welcome to the ignor list by the way.
For pointing out the obvious? For pointing out U.S War Crimes? Ok.

Predictable. Perhaps someday there will be a cure for your mental disorder.
Perhaps one day you will learn to look beyond what the state wants you to believe, and start realizing that the biggest most powerful terrorist state is the United states. Do some reading on what you have done to countries in south-america. Do some reading on vietnam. Read some books by Noam Chomsky.

Noam Chomsky…laughing out loud now.
Yes, unbiased criticism from one of the worlds most respected scholars really is quite laughable. Noam Chomsky is unbiased and he backs everything up with facts. I really wish more people would read Hegemony or Survival for instance.

Even if you don’t agree with his conclusions, which is fair, the fact that USA has committed some of the worst war crimes since world war 2 is simply a fact, leaving many countries in ruins. It really is indisputable. Vietnam is one of the more commonly known examples, but there are many more wars in which the USA have committed terrible war crimes, crimes that most of the population in the united states (or the rest of the world for that matter) doesn’t even know about.

[/quote]

He’s a respective scholar by leftists. Milton Friedman a respective scholar, but the marxists, socialist, and leftist don’t like him much. the only place where chomsky’s ideas work is in the ivory towers of academia.

72

[quote]tom63 wrote:
molnes wrote:
dhickey wrote:

Oh yeah, you’re going to take a bath on this one. Welcome to the ignor list by the way.
For pointing out the obvious? For pointing out U.S War Crimes? Ok.

Predictable. Perhaps someday there will be a cure for your mental disorder.
Perhaps one day you will learn to look beyond what the state wants you to believe, and start realizing that the biggest most powerful terrorist state is the United states. Do some reading on what you have done to countries in south-america. Do some reading on vietnam. Read some books by Noam Chomsky.

Noam Chomsky…laughing out loud now.
Yes, unbiased criticism from one of the worlds most respected scholars really is quite laughable. Noam Chomsky is unbiased and he backs everything up with facts. I really wish more people would read Hegemony or Survival for instance.

Even if you don’t agree with his conclusions, which is fair, the fact that USA has committed some of the worst war crimes since world war 2 is simply a fact, leaving many countries in ruins. It really is indisputable. Vietnam is one of the more commonly known examples, but there are many more wars in which the USA have committed terrible war crimes, crimes that most of the population in the united states (or the rest of the world for that matter) doesn’t even know about.

He’s a respective scholar by leftists. Milton Friedman a respective scholar, but the marxists, socialist, and leftist don’t like him much. the only place where chomsky’s ideas work is in the ivory towers of academia.
[/quote]

no, you just don’t know anything about linguistics. you could easily argue that chomsky is to linguistics and syntax what Friedman was to economics

and he actually criticizes liberals and other bastardizations of libertarian socialism (anarchism) like Marxists and Leninists.

and i believe those same ivory towers built Friedmans career and gave him a noble prize for it.

but youre right, why pat attention to details? much easier to paint a canvas with broad brushes.

73

[quote]PB-Crawl wrote:
tom63 wrote:
molnes wrote:
dhickey wrote:

Oh yeah, you’re going to take a bath on this one. Welcome to the ignor list by the way.
For pointing out the obvious? For pointing out U.S War Crimes? Ok.

Predictable. Perhaps someday there will be a cure for your mental disorder.
Perhaps one day you will learn to look beyond what the state wants you to believe, and start realizing that the biggest most powerful terrorist state is the United states. Do some reading on what you have done to countries in south-america. Do some reading on vietnam. Read some books by Noam Chomsky.

Noam Chomsky…laughing out loud now.
Yes, unbiased criticism from one of the worlds most respected scholars really is quite laughable. Noam Chomsky is unbiased and he backs everything up with facts. I really wish more people would read Hegemony or Survival for instance.

Even if you don’t agree with his conclusions, which is fair, the fact that USA has committed some of the worst war crimes since world war 2 is simply a fact, leaving many countries in ruins. It really is indisputable. Vietnam is one of the more commonly known examples, but there are many more wars in which the USA have committed terrible war crimes, crimes that most of the population in the united states (or the rest of the world for that matter) doesn’t even know about.

He’s a respective scholar by leftists. Milton Friedman a respective scholar, but the marxists, socialist, and leftist don’t like him much. the only place where chomsky’s ideas work is in the ivory towers of academia.

no, you just don’t know anything about linguistics. you could easily argue that chomsky is to linguistics and syntax what Friedman was to economics

and he actually criticizes liberals and other bastardizations of libertarian socialism (anarchism) like Marxists and Leninists.

and i believe those same ivory towers built Friedmans career and gave him a noble prize for it.

but youre right, why pat attention to details? much easier to paint a canvas with broad brushes.[/quote]

LMAO - seriously? Marxists/Leninists bastardized anarchism? WTF? Dude - that’s not a bastardization - the two ideologies aren’t even related!! You couldn’t have picked two more diametrically opposed concepts - and you certainly could not have put the horse before the cart chronologically worse than that either . . .oh well, off to bed, you guys really crack me up . . .

74

[quote]tom63 wrote:
He’s a respective scholar by leftists. Milton Friedman a respective scholar, but the marxists, socialist, and leftist don’t like him much. the only place where chomsky’s ideas work is in the ivory towers of academia.
[/quote]
To say that he is only respected by leftists is just plain wrong. He is probably the single most respected man in social sciences today. In fact no other living scientists have been cited more than he has in academic texts. But that doesn’t prove anything does it?

I’m also curious to which ideas of his you only think will work in “the ivory towers of academia”?

The reason i brought him up in the first place in this thread is because he has written probably the best books on the US imperialistic agenda. It is important to be aware of the violence committed by the USA in other countries to understand what is happening now.

There is a reason for why there are terrorists in the first place. I’m not saying terrorism is legitimate in any way, in fact I believe it to be some of the worst crimes a man can commit. I’m merely contesting the legitimacy of the US invasions on foreign soil, for no other reasons than to protect the interests of the US. The US have killed millions of people since WW2. Why this is OK is hard for me to grasp. To kill millions of poor defenseless people is obviously nothing to be worried about. Not when the crimes are committed by the USA, if a few thousand people in the USA gets killed however…

75

[quote]Vegita wrote:
Since none of the pro torture people answered this question posed by Orion and myself, let me start a new post where this is the premise specifically we are debating.

If the government or the proponents of torture are only looking to save lives, why are you not arguing for the outlaw of the automobile. There is no basic human right that says anyone is entitled to drive or ride in an automobile. You could save Far more people by outlawing the automobile than you could by torturing any suspected terrorist. over 500,000 people have died in an automobile related accident since 1994.

over 40,000 people in the US each year die as a result of this machine, yet it is not outlawed, you can operate on at 16 years of age, and when mixed with an over the couter drug, Alcohol, is just as deadly as a bullet or a bomb.

So again to re-emphasise, why do you feel it is ok to violate someones basic human rights with an act of evil (torture) in the name of saving a life, when you do not feel it is the right choice to outlaw an automobile which there is no basic human right violated. It would be inconvenient as hell sure, but you could at least sleep at night, and you would do more to saving lives.

V[/quote]

Ya have to ask the question though. How meny people who were the cause of those auto deaths, whether it be from alcohol, laziness, speeding, or just bad driving, got into thier car and said ‘well I think im going to go cause an accident and kill someone today’. Probably not too meny, where as a terrorist who picks up arms against us has made a conscious decision to kill americans. I think thats a good starting point.

76

[quote]lixy wrote:
Don’t forget kitchen knives.

Those evil bastards will be our curse![/quote]

Havn’t you heard of the plans in the UK to outlaw kitchen knives with pointed blades…

77

[quote]dhickey wrote:
molnes wrote:

So no wonder your little nerves are all frazzled from terrorists being waterboarded, or having to wear panties on their heads. You just can’t stand that.
This is just sad. You are a smart man, but you are completely brainwashed by the US imperialistic agenda. Some are terrorist, some are not. If there is a suspicion they will be taken to prison with no fair trial or anything. How would you feel if Iran invaded your country because of suspected terrorist activity, and you were captured for being a terrorist, but there wasn’t any good evidence for it, only suspicion?

I would say “no fair, it is morrally acceptable to raid my country and bomb us, but you better not waterboard me or I’m telling the UN”. I would then request a trial and laywer in Iran with protection under sharia law. I wonder how that would work out for me?

Obviously terrorism is a problem, and there is no justification for killing innocent civilians. However nobody does this better than the United states. After WW2 USA has been one of the worst nations when it comes to this, killing millions of innocent defenseless people. But where is your concern for them? Why can’t you see the atrocities committed by the United states? Which has been far more numerous than that of the terrorists in the middle-east?

Oh yeah, you’re going to take a bath on this one. Welcome to the ignor list by the way.

Predictable. Perhaps someday there will be a cure for your mental disorder.
Perhaps one day you will learn to look beyond what the state wants you to believe, and start realizing that the biggest most powerful terrorist state is the United states. Do some reading on what you have done to countries in south-america. Do some reading on vietnam. Read some books by Noam Chomsky.

Noam Chomsky…laughing out loud now.[/quote]

Dhickey this is the point you wouldn’t expect a fair trial in Iran. You should in the US. It’s part of what makes western countries what they are. To torture someone on nothing more than suspicsion takes away one of the good points about our society.

78

[quote]molnes wrote:
tom63 wrote:
He’s a respective scholar by leftists. Milton Friedman a respective scholar, but the marxists, socialist, and leftist don’t like him much. the only place where chomsky’s ideas work is in the ivory towers of academia.

To say that he is only respected by leftists is just plain wrong. He is probably the single most respected man in social sciences today. In fact no other living scientists have been cited more than he has in academic texts. But that doesn’t prove anything does it?

I’m also curious to which ideas of his you only think will work in “the ivory towers of academia”?

The reason i brought him up in the first place in this thread is because he has written probably the best books on the US imperialistic agenda. It is important to be aware of the violence committed by the USA in other countries to understand what is happening now.

There is a reason for why there are terrorists in the first place. I’m not saying terrorism is legitimate in any way, in fact I believe it to be some of the worst crimes a man can commit. I’m merely contesting the legitimacy of the US invasions on foreign soil, for no other reasons than to protect the interests of the US. The US have killed millions of people since WW2. Why this is OK is hard for me to grasp. To kill millions of poor defenseless people is obviously nothing to be worried about. Not when the crimes are committed by the USA, if a few thousand people in the USA gets killed however…

[/quote]

Chomsky isn’t taken seriously by conservatives. Believe what you want, but Usama bin Laden is highly respected by many Muslims, maybe millions, but I don’t care for him much.

79

[quote]orion wrote:
dhickey wrote:
orion wrote:

What part of the constition limit tactics used in war?

According to your constitution that is not even a war.

touche. Ok what part of the constitution limits tactics in a military conflict.

The part where it says that the government can only do things that it is allowed to do by the constitution?

Where does it say that it can even start “military conflicts” that are conveniently “not wars”?

[/quote]

Is that what we are talking about? You are correct but this is fucking stretch for this argument. So if congress had declared war on terrorist, it would be ok to torture them according to the constitution?

80

[quote]lou21 wrote:

Dhickey this is the point you wouldn’t expect a fair trial in Iran. You should in the US. It’s part of what makes western countries what they are. To torture someone on nothing more than suspicsion takes away one of the good points about our society.[/quote]

So why would they expect one in our country. Especially the ones that have never set foot in our country.

So one of the good points of our society is that we kill people, often innocent, in war but we don’t waterboard them?

If someone where to say that they are 100% against any kind of torture and also 100% against any killing or war, I would get that.

But to say that sometimes killing and war is justified but torture never is, just makes zero sense from a logical standpoint.