Torture...

Force it out of them?

  • Yes

    Votes: 41 74.5%

  • No

    Votes: 14 25.5%
  • Total voters
    55
  • Poll closed .
smoothmarine187

smoothmarine187

Well-Known Member
Definetely, such as a captured terrorist that has a bomb set to blow up hundreds of people. Even a few people for that matter.
 
Larry Gude

Larry Gude

Strung Out
I don't accept...

Nucklesack said:
The real poll question should be, does what's been reported meet the definition of Torture?
Click to expand...

...that anyone actually thinks of what has been reported is even remotely torture. Jeez, we live in the land of convicts who sue if they don't have a wide screen TV as being cruel and unusual.

So, no, the question stands; how about using REAL torture?
 
itsbob

itsbob

I bowl overhand
smoothmarine187 said:
Definetely, such as a captured terrorist that has a bomb set to blow up hundreds of people. Even a few people for that matter.
Click to expand...
:yeahthat:

Like tomorrow if we captured the person in charge of importing the explosives into Iraq for making car bombs.. anything it takes to find the conduit.. his one life or self esteem does not matter if we can save the lives of hundreds of innocents.
 
Chain729

Chain729

CageKicker Extraordinaire
Damn... I thought this thread would be more entertaining. :ohwell:

All jokes aside, I don't agree with torture. If we toture our captives we are no less animals than they are. If we stoop to their level, if we go against what we stand for, than we are nothing more than the powerful hypocrites they make us out to be. Have you seen "The Siege?" Recall the scene where they tortured the guy just to find out that he didn't know anything? Just to find that he was nothing more than a one-time errand boy who was looking to get his daughter's wedding paid for? Would you want that blood on your hands?

That said, I don't agree that what's been reported since we've been over there is torture. And, at the same time, I don't have a problem executing them, drenching them in pig's blood, mutilating the corpses and throwing them in a ditch :shrug:
 
lovinmaryland

lovinmaryland

Well-Known Member
Chain729 said:
Damn... I thought this thread would be more entertaining. :ohwell:

That said, I don't agree that what's been reported since we've been over there is torture. And, at the same time, I don't have a problem executing them, drenching them in pig's blood, mutilating the corpses and throwing them in a ditch :shrug:
Click to expand...
:killingme my god :killingme
 
Larry Gude

Larry Gude

Strung Out
No...

Chain729 said:
If we toture our captives we are no less animals than they are. If we stoop to their level, if we go against what we stand for, than we are nothing more than the powerful hypocrites they make us out to be.
Click to expand...

...that's just not rational. You do not and can not become a mass murder by brutalizing a mass murder in an effort to stop mass murder. You are trying to serve a greater good and that is a morally correct thing to do and if we leave morality out of it and turn it into a simple exercise in math, killing one to save 2 stands for itself.

Now, if I find my neighbor is going to rob my house and I rob his first, that does make me no better than him.

It seems the fear is that the government will just run wild and torture people to confess to speeding tickets. I find that mindset exactly like the anti- gunners who argue we'll have OK corrals and people killing each other over parking spaces if we don't ban them all.
 
Chain729

Chain729

CageKicker Extraordinaire
Larry Gude said:
...that's just not rational. You do not and can not become a mass murder by brutalizing a mass murder in an effort to stop mass murder. You are trying to serve a greater good and that is a morally correct thing to do and if we leave morality out of it and turn it into a simple exercise in math, killing one to save 2 stands for itself.
Click to expand...

IIRC, Sadam torturing people was part of the reason we called him inhumane and evil.

And I'm sure that they say the same thing about torturing captives. In their eyes, their God tells them that they're morally correct with what they do. An horrific act is an horrific act, no matter how much you rationalize it. Rationalizing doesn't make anything any less immoral.

Larry Gude said:
It seems the fear is that the government will just run wild and torture people to confess to speeding tickets. I find that mindset exactly like the anti- gunners who argue we'll have OK corrals and people killing each other over parking spaces if we don't ban them all.
Click to expand...

You're right, those that fear that are idiots.
 
Larry Gude

Larry Gude

Strung Out
Nah...

Chain729 said:
IIRC, Sadam torturing people was part of the reason we called him inhumane and evil.

And I'm sure that they say the same thing about torturing captives. In their eyes, their God tells them that they're morally correct with what they do. An horrific act is an horrific act, no matter how much you rationalize it. Rationalizing doesn't make anything any less immoral.



You're right, those that fear that are idiots.
Click to expand...


...they said that, but, we're there for the oil.

Now, if you'd like to equate Saddam's use of torture to the use of it by the US government's, by all means. Continue.

Then, you can compare civil rights here and there. Legal system here and there. Standard of living here and there. Intellectual and political freedom here and there. Housing standards, overall quality of life, entertainment, environment and so on and so forth.

Every argument needs context unless we're going to debate this in a hypothetical context of 'perfect world' -ism.
 
C

Celts

New Member
People will admit to anything to stop physical torture...
And not all of it is true.
However..use of drugs to get the truth out is better.

I vote use drugs instread of physical torture...

(FWIW: torture to me is extreme physical treatment like they used in the middle ages/dark ages... not sure what they use today..)
 
Last edited:
Papi4baby

Papi4baby

New Member
Im going to say yes, but i aprove of it only to a certain degree. And also we have to be very careful with it. We don't want that turn into an innocent person.
 
Chain729

Chain729

CageKicker Extraordinaire
Larry Gude said:
...they said that, but, we're there for the oil.
Click to expand...

:killingme For the record, I stay out of political debates, I have supported the war from the beginning. I think we should've done it right the first time.

Larry Gude said:
Now, if you'd like to equate Saddam's use of torture to the use of it by the US government's, by all means. Continue.

Then, you can compare civil rights here and there. Legal system here and there. Standard of living here and there. Intellectual and political freedom here and there. Housing standards, overall quality of life, entertainment, environment and so on and so forth.

Every argument needs context unless we're going to debate this in a hypothetical context of 'perfect world' -ism.
Click to expand...

Now you're reaching. Calling a duck a dog, doesn't make it one; just like "sticking feathers up your butt doesn't make you a chicken." No matter how you rationalize it, torture is torture and the founding fathers didn't include that bit about "creul and unusual punishment" in our constitution if they thought it was OK in some instances.

So... context... is it OK to put a guy's head in a vice and tighten it until his eye popps out because he kidnapped 10 people and won't tell you where they are?
 
Chain729

Chain729

CageKicker Extraordinaire
Larry Gude said:
...that was sarcasm?
Click to expand...

Actually no, I was agreeing with you. Like you, I don't buy into the Ok Corral theory... or the worsening torture theory... or a few others. Some things domino, some things don't. "help" from the gov't has domino'ed. The "entitlement" feelings of irresponsible morons has domino'ed. I don't see police torturing people over speeding tickets in this country. And I don't see allowing the populace to arm and defend themselves leading to anarchy :shrug:
 
Larry Gude

Larry Gude

Strung Out
See...

Chain729 said:
:killingme For the record, I stay out of political debates, I have supported the war from the beginning. I think we should've done it right the first time.



Now you're reaching. Calling a duck a dog, doesn't make it one; just like "sticking feathers up your butt doesn't make you a chicken." No matter how you rationalize it, torture is torture and the founding fathers didn't include that bit about "creul and unusual punishment" in our constitution if they thought it was OK in some instances.

So... context... is it OK to put a guy's head in a vice and tighten it until his eye popps out because he kidnapped 10 people and won't tell you where they are?
Click to expand...


...this is where these things go; it has to be perfect or nothing; What if this highly unlikely scenario plays out, huh? Or, what if we stick a needle in some guys eye and pour salt in his wounds, what then, huh? What if we stick him in a wood chipper, huh? This is why we are a nation of lawyers.

Now, if you're mind leads you to those kinds of extremes, what in the world is a piece of paper, some law, going to mean if the government starts sticking peoples heads in vices?

You take a look at some of the common, usual punishments of our Founders day and you look at what the American left is going :jameo: over today and get back to me on the word context.

I'm confusing ducks and dogs?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top