1. Does torture guarantee that we get correct information from detainees?

 

2. Since many of those supporting torture are Christians here, let me ask if the ends justify the means. Is abortion OK if the baby is to live a tough life? Is the death penalty OK even if, since we are not omnipotent like God, we can never know for sure? If I think my neighbor is a pedophile, without any proof, is it OK for me to kill him, to prevent a (very uncertain) immoral act from happening?

 

And lest you not agree from my common sense analysis proffered in an earlier post, please consider the following quote from Dennis Blair, Obama's Director of National Intelligence (who has defended the practices in discussion here):

 

"high value information came from interrogations in which those methods were used and provided a deeper understanding of the al Qaeda organization that was attacking this country."

 

The quote can be found in today's WJS on page 4 of an article titled: Obama Opens a Door to Inquiry on Terror Interrogations.

 

I was typing this post while you were typing your last post. Nonetheless, I'll leave the info up since it is rather compelling coming from a kind of important member of Obama's administration.

I'd like you to spell out your answer so I can then use it against you.

 

As Malcolm X once said "by any means necessary" when it comes to defending my loved ones.

Lets say we've got two detainees and we know that #1 has info on an upcoming terrorist act in the U.S. He's not budging, though, and we can't get the needed info to thwart the supposed attack. To "encourage" him to change his stance, the interrogators pull out a sword , decapitate #2, and then tell #1 that that's what awaits him if he doesn't start talking.

 

Acceptable?

 

That's not torture, that's murder. Now though torture to a great extent is psychological. I'd be all for showing him a "live video feed" of us decapitating suspect #2 but not really going through with it. If in his mind he thinks that we really did what he saw on video, then he'll tell us the info then, if he was going to at all.

Perhaps, but the attitude of many in this thread is that "well they do it, so why shouldn't we." That is a problematic position...

 

But not as problematic as the naive stance of "We're better than that", which I find completely ironic sense much of the world is complaining about the US's imperialistic approach towards other country's and it's feeling of superiority towards others.

When I saw the title of this thread, I thought you were going to say something about watching Kevin Costner act.

 

That...was....CLASSIC! :lol:

What about the precident that is set with our future enemies? Not Al Queda, but those that we have yet to have a problem with? Will they use our examples of how to treat our people that they capture?

 

For me, it comes down to what is right for ME to do, not what has been done to me.

 

 

In which case is it ever right to kill, injure or harm another human being?

http://www.cnsnews.com/public/content/article.aspx?RsrcID=46949

 

CIA Confirms: Waterboarding 9/11 Mastermind Led to Info that Aborted 9/11-Style Attack on Los Angeles

 

(CNSNews.com) - The Central Intelligence Agency told CNSNews.com today that it stands by the assertion made in a May 30, 2005 Justice Department memo that the use of “enhanced techniques” of interrogation on al Qaeda leader Khalid Sheik Mohammed (KSM) -- including the use of waterboarding -- caused KSM to reveal information that allowed the U.S. government to thwart a planned attack on Los Angeles.

 

Before he was waterboarded, when KSM was asked about planned attacks on the United States, he ominously told his CIA interrogators, “Soon, you will know.”

 

According to the previously classified May 30, 2005 Justice Department memo that was released by President Barack Obama last week, the thwarted attack -- which KSM called the “Second Wave”-- planned “ ‘to use East Asian operatives to crash a hijacked airliner into’ a building in Los Angeles.”

 

KSM was the mastermind of the first “hijacked-airliner” attacks on the United States, which struck the World Trade Center in New York and the Pentagon in Northern Virginia on Sept. 11, 2001.

That's where you're wrong. Its not what they want from us. They don't understand phrases like "compassionate war" and "Geneva Convention." They think we're too weak to do what needs to be done. We made the same mistake when we surrendered the Philipines to the Japanese. They hated those who surrendered because it showed a lack of honor. The saying "know thine enemy" doesn't mean know who they are. It means understand them; know why and how they fight; understand what being a warrier means to them; and, learn what it takes to break them.

 

It's exactly what they want from us. The release of the these memos evinces it: we've had to subvert and undermine our own laws to resort to tactics more associated with Stalin's Soviet Union and the Khmer Rouge. That's far more damaging than anything a disbanded group of poorly organized religious zealots will unleash militarily.

After all what's a few thoudand lives when we can claim moral superiority.:ohbrother:

http://www.cnsnews.com/public/content/article.aspx?RsrcID=46949

 

I would encourage all engaged in this debate to read that article if they have not done so already.

 

It's easy to take the ground that the ends do not justify the means; until you get specific examples of real instances of what the ends may have been had we not used the means.

 

The article also explains that waterboarding has been used on only three people and there are some rather narrow defined parameters when its use was permitted.

It's exactly what they want from us. The release of the these memos evinces it: we've had to subvert and undermine our own laws to resort to tactics more associated with Stalin's Soviet Union and the Khmer Rouge. That's far more damaging than anything a disbanded group of poorly organized religious zealots will unleash militarily.

You mean like mass murder of millions? I didn't know that we did that. I am outraged.

It's exactly what they want from us. The release of the these memos evinces it: we've had to subvert and undermine our own laws to resort to tactics more associated with Stalin's Soviet Union and the Khmer Rouge. That's far more damaging than anything a disbanded group of poorly organized religious zealots will unleash militarily.

 

Well, then if that's their goal, lets just change our laws to permit it (to the extent you feel our use of the methods was in fact a violation of our laws, which conclusion I'm not in agreement with).

2. Since many of those supporting torture are Christians here, let me ask if the ends justify the means. Is abortion OK if the baby is to live a tough life? Is the death penalty OK even if, since we are not omnipotent like God, we can never know for sure? If I think my neighbor is a pedophile, without any proof, is it OK for me to kill him, to prevent a (very uncertain) immoral act from happening?

 

That has nothing to do with this thread. Religion and politics are separate in our great country. None of those things should come into play when considering this.

As Malcolm X once said "by any means necessary" when it comes to defending my loved ones.

 

And you can reconcile that position and your position on torture, how?

It's exactly what they want from us. The release of the these memos evinces it: we've had to subvert and undermine our own laws to resort to tactics more associated with Stalin's Soviet Union and the Khmer Rouge. That's far more damaging than anything a disbanded group of poorly organized religious zealots will unleash militarily.

 

I disagree but let's assume it's true. Let's also assume Obama and his advisors are smart enough to realize the consequences. Then, why release the memos?