Page 5 of 12 FirstFirst ... 34567 ... LastLast
Results 41 to 50 of 119

Thread: Obama - U.S. will not torture

  1. #41
    Professor

    Join Date
    Sep 2008
    Last Seen
    02-13-09 @ 05:15 PM
    Lean
    Conservative
    Posts
    1,942

    Re: Obama - U.S. will not torture

    Quote Originally Posted by Ikari View Post
    No, I'm saying that if we average a terrorist attack every 10 or 11 years or so, that 8 years after an attack claiming the changed laws have prevented new attacks is an unprovable statement since you are not outside the standard deviation. Do people even take statistics anymore?
    I see. So there's no possibility whatsoever that the CIA or NSA caught whiff of a planned attack and then successfully thwart said planned attack by using tools or taking advantage of changes to the law? None?

    I'm not claiming that the new laws have prevented attacks. They might or might not have.

    But you're completely dismissing the possibility which, imo, is absurd.

    No, the defense of liberty has always been an important duty of freemen.
    Miss the point, much? You're behaving as though the US Constitution intended universal and uninfringed liberty. That simply is not true.

    So you're good with gun control. K.
    Yes, I am. A right to bear arms is not a right from government regulations on the possession of those arms. Just like the right to free speech ain't a right to libel or slander someone. Just like the 4th Amendment right provides protections from unreasonable searches and seizures.

    Don't pretend that American liberty is completely free of infringement or was intended to be free from government interference.

  2. #42
    Student AuHtwoh64's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2008
    Location
    Bloomington, Indiana
    Last Seen
    01-10-15 @ 01:48 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Conservative
    Posts
    162

    Re: Obama - U.S. will not torture

    Quote Originally Posted by zimmer View Post
    INTRODUCING...
    The Department of Feathers and Bubbles.
    Dept. Motto: curia advisari vult (The court wishes to be advised)

    And what happens when we catch Osama?
    Or another individual who may have info about a terrorist attack that will kill thousands?

    I guess we can fall back on the Clinton created tool... Rendition.

    Or we'll just send Obama and Biden in their to talk their ears off.
    Maybe we could send Hillary in a Phyllis Diller outfit with bubbles and feathers... then again that's probably too harsh and would fall under torture.
    So true! An how will Al Queda's plotters interpret this Executive order?

    Could they safely assume that since only the Army Field Manual will be used as a guide to their interrogation, that their organization is safe from penetration just after any single terrorist attack on American soil? In other words will this incite such an attack?


    ...
    AuHtwoh64


    ~ Goldwater in 64 ~

  3. #43
    Sage
    Ikari's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2006
    Location
    Colorado
    Last Seen
    12-08-17 @ 01:05 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Libertarian - Left
    Posts
    54,124

    Re: Obama - U.S. will not torture

    Quote Originally Posted by JMak View Post
    I see. So there's no possibility whatsoever that the CIA or NSA caught whiff of a planned attack and then successfully thwart said planned attack by using tools or taking advantage of changes to the law? None?

    I'm not claiming that the new laws have prevented attacks. They might or might not have.

    But you're completely dismissing the possibility which, imo, is absurd.
    No, you're not reading what I write. I'm not dismissing the agencies efficiency. I'm saying the new laws and abilities granted can not be said with any amount of confidence to have caused a change in the rates of attacks over what we previously had. They can not be credited with keeping us "safe", there's no proof they've had an impact over what we already have.

    Quote Originally Posted by JMak View Post
    Miss the point, much? You're behaving as though the US Constitution intended universal and uninfringed liberty. That simply is not true.
    The limit to our rights and liberty is the rights and liberties of others.

    Quote Originally Posted by JMak View Post
    Yes, I am. A right to bear arms is not a right from government regulations on the possession of those arms.
    Yes it is.

    Quote Originally Posted by JMak View Post
    Just like the right to free speech ain't a right to libel or slander someone.
    That's due to infringement upon someone's rights.

    Quote Originally Posted by JMak View Post
    Just like the 4th Amendment right provides protections from unreasonable searches and seizures.
    Yes, yes it does.

    Quote Originally Posted by JMak View Post
    Don't pretend that American liberty is completely free of infringement or was intended to be free from government interference.
    Government can involve itself once the rights of another has become involved. But don't pretend that American liberty is completely at the mercy of the government or was intended to be dominated by the government at its discretion.
    You know the time is right to take control, we gotta take offense against the status quo

    Quote Originally Posted by A. de Tocqueville
    "I should have loved freedom, I believe, at all times, but in the time in which we live I am ready to worship it."

  4. #44
    Ideologically Impure
    Simon W. Moon's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2005
    Location
    Fayettenam
    Last Seen
    Today @ 09:11 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Conservative
    Posts
    16,893
    Blog Entries
    5

    Re: Obama - U.S. will not torture

    Quote Originally Posted by zimmer View Post
    Is this another academic theory that sounds good on paper but wilts under the harsh light of reality?
    It's the other way around. Experienced hands are saying that torture's not reliable. Armchair generals and Jack Bauer fans are the ones who're promoting the option.
    Quote Originally Posted by zimmer View Post
    Me thinks so, because to claim man can withstand torture and not reveal vital info has been blown to shreds with some terrorists we have captured.
    That statement defeats itself. No need for me to comment further.
    Quote Originally Posted by zimmer View Post
    You can feel good about terrorists being protected as innocent civilians are executed.
    Tell me, is it moral to not do everything humanly possible to spare innocent men, women and children from a terrorists attack?
    If the answer is "yes" then we side together. If not, then you seem to think a terrorists short term health is more important. Broken bones and ripped skin heals.
    Saying it's about suspects well-being shows you're missing the point. What you seem to be refusing to ask yourself is about the relative efficacy of techniques.
    "Tell me, is it moral to not use the best methods available to spare innocent men, women and children from a terrorists attack?"
    Quote Originally Posted by zimmer View Post
    It may seem cold, but these are the types of decisions Obama must make. Do we protect terrorists or innocent civilians?
    It may seem a stupid question with an obvious answer, but it's the type of decision Obama must make. Do we use our best methods for obtaining information or do we use less reliable ones?
    I may be wrong.

  5. #45
    Phoenecian
    Indy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2006
    Location
    Chicago
    Last Seen
    03-22-13 @ 04:36 PM
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    2,089

    Re: Obama - U.S. will not torture

    JMAK,

    We've already covered that we were being attacked this whole time. The last one was Sep. 2008 for god's sake. Let me put it this way: THE POLICIES WERE A FAILURE.
    Affiant further sayeth not.

  6. #46
    Ideologically Impure
    Simon W. Moon's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2005
    Location
    Fayettenam
    Last Seen
    Today @ 09:11 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Conservative
    Posts
    16,893
    Blog Entries
    5

    Re: Obama - U.S. will not torture

    Quote Originally Posted by Indy View Post
    JMAK,
    We've already covered that we were being attacked this whole time. The last one was Sep. 2008 for god's sake. Let me put it this way: THE POLICIES WERE A FAILURE.
    Well, there were a couple of times or so I forgot to change my underwear.
    I may be wrong.

  7. #47
    Phoenecian
    Indy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2006
    Location
    Chicago
    Last Seen
    03-22-13 @ 04:36 PM
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    2,089

    Re: Obama - U.S. will not torture

    Quote Originally Posted by Simon W. Moon View Post
    Well, there were a couple of times or so I forgot to change my underwear.
    Damn you Simon Moon!
    Affiant further sayeth not.

  8. #48
    Professor

    Join Date
    Sep 2008
    Last Seen
    02-13-09 @ 05:15 PM
    Lean
    Conservative
    Posts
    1,942

    Re: Obama - U.S. will not torture

    Quote Originally Posted by Ikari View Post
    No, you're not reading what I write. I'm not dismissing the agencies efficiency. I'm saying the new laws and abilities granted can not be said with any amount of confidence to have caused a change in the rates of attacks over what we previously had. They can not be credited with keeping us "safe", there's no proof they've had an impact over what we already have.
    I am reading what you posted. Don't act foolish.

    Now you've shifted the goal posts from stopping any attacks to changing the rates of attacks. No one has argued that the new laws and the tools they've provided changed the rate of terror attacks. The argument is that the new laws and tools have enhanced law enforcement's ability to and the ability of intelligence agencies to detect, investigate, and ultimately, stop attacks.

    The limit to our rights and liberty is the rights and liberties of others.


    Still dealing in cliches, eh? Our constitutional form of government neither affirms this nor grants this unlimited liberty.

    Yes it is.
    Not according to the framers.

    That's due to infringement upon someone's rights.
    Oh? There's a right not to libeled or slandered?

    Yes, yes it does.
    Hence, you recognize then that our liberty is subject to government infringement. Therefore, you know that our liberty rights are not unlimited. So why are you arguing that they are?

    Government can involve itself once the rights of another has become involved. But don't pretend that American liberty is completely at the mercy of the government or was intended to be dominated by the government at its discretion.
    I am pretending neither. Now you are not reading what I have posted....errrr...you're deliberately misrepresenting my earlier comments.

    I said that "There is no grant of universal and uninfringed liberty. There has always been and always will be a strong tension between public safety and liberty and we see that in our own Constitution and the amendments attached to it."

    Deal with that, otherwise, shut up!

  9. #49
    Professor

    Join Date
    Sep 2008
    Last Seen
    02-13-09 @ 05:15 PM
    Lean
    Conservative
    Posts
    1,942

    Re: Obama - U.S. will not torture

    Quote Originally Posted by Indy View Post
    JMAK,

    We've already covered that we were being attacked this whole time. The last one was Sep. 2008 for god's sake. Let me put it this way: THE POLICIES WERE A FAILURE.
    Yeah, yeah, I saw the blunder of citing "US soil". The fact remains that we have not seen another terror attack here in the US.

    Even so, has anyone considered/compared that to Clinton's watch? WTC 1; Khobar, two US embassies, USS Cole, etc., etc. versus post-9/11? I mean, if you want to play games with semantics like US soil, don't you kinda have to consider actual events?

  10. #50
    Educating the Ignorant
    zimmer's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Last Seen
    Today @ 07:31 PM
    Lean
    Conservative
    Posts
    14,373
    Blog Entries
    12

    Re: Obama - U.S. will not torture

    Quote Originally Posted by Simon W. Moon View Post
    It's the other way around. Experienced hands are saying that torture's not reliable. Armchair generals and Jack Bauer fans are the ones who're promoting the option.
    That statement defeats itself. No need for me to comment further.
    Saying it's about suspects well-being shows you're missing the point. What you seem to be refusing to ask yourself is about the relative efficacy of techniques.
    "Tell me, is it moral to not use the best methods available to spare innocent men, women and children from a terrorists attack?"

    It may seem a stupid question with an obvious answer, but it's the type of decision Obama must make. Do we use our best methods for obtaining information or do we use less reliable ones?
    Simon,

    Waterboarding worked. It busted an attack in planning. Saving lives. That makes several of your points not only moot, but false.

    I'm not saying this should be standard practice, but in a pinch the option shouldn't be yanked off the table. There might be a time it is necessary.

    What then?

    Sorry (insert city), we just didn't feel we could rough-up Ahmed the Terrorist in an attempt to save the lives of your citizens. Ask Obama.

    As for Jack Bauer moments (I don't watch 24 by the way), if somebody suggested terrorists would fly planes into the WTC, Pentagon and had one planned for the Capitol... people like you would have claimed it was too fantastic and I should go back to my TV fantasies.

    Plan for the worst, hope for the best.
    Last edited by zimmer; 01-23-09 at 01:02 PM.
    The Clintons are what happens...
    when you have NO MORAL COMPASS.

Page 5 of 12 FirstFirst ... 34567 ... LastLast

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •