At Ask Me Help Desk you can ask questions in any topic and have them
answered for free by our experts. To ask questions or participate in
answering them you must register for a free account. By registering you
will be able to:
Get free answers from experts in any of our 300+
topics.
I guess if you say something long enough some people will believe it. I didn't think we were that dumb, though. You DO remember the Supreme Court Justice who said that he can't describe porn, but he knows it when he sees it.
Well, I know torture when I see it, and we torture. I don't care how many times the decider decides to change the meaning of words.
Go ahead, tell me how wonking a guy upside his head repeatedly ain’t torture.
Does the U.S. torture in the same manner as, for example, a terrorist country in the Middle East? If you say no, does it mean that the U.S. does not torture? No. I do not know where President Bush is coming from when he says the U.S. does not torture. Maybe the methods of extracting information are not as vicious as another country's, but it is still there.
Does the U.S. torture in the same manner as, for example, a terrorist country in the Middle East?
Hello shy:
The trouble begins with parsing the word. Bush and Gonzales did it. You're doing it. I won't.
Besides, what kind of question is that???? Do other countries torture people worse than we do??? If the answer is yes, does that mean our torture is ok????? I’m sorry. I don't get it.
There was a time when we didn't torture because of who WE were. We didn't treat people based upon how they treated us. That was a time when we held the moral high ground. We were a good, clean and pure country.
Now we torture, and the excuse we use is, well look at who THEY are.
Take into consideration the level of threat, case by case.
I do know that since I'm not in the unique position of facing the types of people that wish the US, and other nations, were wiped off the face of the earth, I don't know how find out what needs to be found out to prevent more murders.
By just backing away from those we know have information, when they don't tell what they know, even though we asked really, really nicely... would be stupid. What if you knew someone was about to launch a domestic attack on (pick any large gathering), you know who and how, but not when or where... if you could ask, do you think they would tell you? No. So walk away and let them. Now your borderline complicit.
By just backing away from those we know have information, when they don't tell what they know, even though we asked really, really nicely... would be stupid....... Now your borderline complicit.
Hello again Cap'n:
Our enemy's have ALWAYS had information that could save lives.... Nothing is different here. Besides, we won WW II without torturing anyone. How'd we do that?
Complicit in their behavior?????? Nahhhh..... Not even close. We didn't torture nazi's and we're not, by any stretch of the imagination, complicit in what they did.
...we won WW II without torturing anyone. How'd we do that?
What proof do we have that torture occurs now, or that, if it does, it isn't justifiable?
If the same degree of media was available during WWII, would we have seen elements of torture? I believe we would.
I find it difficult to believe any escalated conflict can go without someone's use of persuasion, and without someone labelling their methods as torture.
One thing that has changed is the liberals have changed the meaning of torture to include putting 'panties' on Muslim terrorist's heads. Yet we are suppose to sit back and accept them beheading our contract workers and so forth as if it is just another part of the daily news.
I am so tired of the Politically Correct libs mincing words in a do as I say not as I do way.
If I had a gun and someone was shooting at me I would shoot first.
What proof do we have that torture occurs now, or that, if it does, it isn't justifiable?
Hello again, Cap'n:
Bush and Gonzales say that head slapping and water boarding ISN'T torture. They're saying that because they're doing that.
It's torture. You can call it something else, but that doesn't change what it is. I can call an elephant a stove too.
If you read what I previously wrote, you'll see that it's NEVER justified. That's NEVER. I don't care who THEY are. I care who WE are.
Quote:
Originally Posted by CaptainRich
If the same degree of media was available during WWII, would we have seen elements of torture? I believe we would.
Individuals who acted on their own??? I would guess there were. But as a policy???? No, No and No.
Quote:
Originally Posted by CaptainRich
I find it difficult to believe any escalated conflict can go without someone's use of persuasion, and without someone labelling their methods as torture.
Difficult as it may be for you to believe, but we were NEVER accused of torturing anyone before this - NEVER!!!
"any act by which severe pain or suffering, whether physical or mental, is intentionally inflicted on a person for such purposes as obtaining from him or a third person information or a confession, punishing him for an act he or a third person has committed or is suspected of having committed, or intimidating or coercing him or a third person, or for any reason based on discrimination of any kind, when such pain or suffering is inflicted by or at the instigation of or with the consent or acquiescence of a public official or other person acting in an official capacity."
So like I said, asking too loudly would be intimidating... we'd better get out the kid gloves or just let them have there way and not make them play by the same rules!!
So like I said, asking too loudly would be intimidating...
Hello again, Cap'n:
We're apparently not on the same page here. I don't think asking loudly would be torture.
But you're missing the part about whacking somebody upside their head and waterboarding them. Either we gotta start talking about the same thing here, or we gotta stop talking.
Linear Mode
