• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

How to Make Terrorists Talk

Or negotiate with them like we did with the IRA, wasn't Begin the Nobel peace prize winner classed as a member of a terrorist group.

I disapprove of all acts of violence.
 
Against terrorists? We have tons of proven effective methods we can use as far as interrogation.

Name me 10 proven effective methods you think Mr. Obama can use
 
Are you saying torture is the only way to get information from a terrorist?

Define Torture, what you call Torture and what I call torture are most likely different. Waterboarding is not Torture I don't care what the rest of the World says and since I had to go thru Waterboarding during SEAR School I'm telling you it's not and I can point you to any Military Pilot of Special Force's Folks who had to go thru SEAR School will tell you the same thing.

Oh and one other item terrorist don't get the niceties of the Geneva Accords.
 
Define Torture, what you call Torture and what I call torture are most likely different. Waterboarding is not Torture I don't care what the rest of the World says and since I had to go thru Waterboarding during SEAR School I'm telling you it's not and I can point you to any Military Pilot of Special Force's Folks who had to go thru SEAR School will tell you the same thing.

Oh and one other item terrorist don't get the niceties of the Geneva Accords.

You are certainly welcome to your views. I disagree, and not for any legal reason(I will let others argue with you over that), but for a moral reason. I think torture and physical abuse of prisoners is wrong, and that it makes us a lesser country than we can be to use those techniques. This puts us at an impasse.
 
Define Torture, what you call Torture and what I call torture are most likely different. Waterboarding is not Torture I don't care what the rest of the World says and since I had to go thru Waterboarding during SEAR School I'm telling you it's not and I can point you to any Military Pilot of Special Force's Folks who had to go thru SEAR School will tell you the same thing.

Oh and one other item terrorist don't get the niceties of the Geneva Accords.

Well we are going to disagree on waterboarding, but the point still stands, is torture (even including waterboarding if you don't consider it torture) the only ways to get terrorists to talk?
 
You are certainly welcome to your views. I disagree, and not for any legal reason(I will let others argue with you over that), but for a moral reason. I think torture and physical abuse of prisoners is wrong, and that it makes us a lesser country than we can be to use those techniques. This puts us at an impasse.

But here is the thing they aren't Prisoners to be a POW you have to be part of a standing Arm Service hence terrorist don't fall under this discripter hence they don't have any legal items to stand on.

As for real POW I agree with you but as I have said terrorist are Animals.
 
But here is the thing they aren't Prisoners to be a POW you have to be part of a standing Arm Service hence terrorist don't fall under this discripter hence they don't have any legal items to stand on.

As for real POW I agree with you but as I have said terrorist are Animals.

I did not reference the law in my post. I am not commenting on the legality of using EIT's(or torture, I hate euphemisms) as they where used, only on my beliefs concerning the morality of using them.
 
I did not reference the law in my post. I am not commenting on the legality of using EIT's(or torture, I hate euphemisms) as they where used, only on my beliefs concerning the morality of using them.

But here is the problem with your stand ( which I can understand) the Terrorist have no problem with using Bomb Laden Children to walk into shopping Bazars and blowing them up or attacking Military folks from behind Mosque and Churchs or beheading a reporter.
 
But here is the problem with your stand ( which I can understand) the Terrorist have no problem with using Bomb Laden Children to walk into shopping Bazars and blowing them up or attacking Military folks from behind Mosque and Churchs or beheading a reporter.

Uh, yeah. And? I don't see what that has to do with what I am saying. Terrorists are bad people without morals and scruples. I agree with that. We are better I hope.
 
But here is the problem with your stand ( which I can understand) the Terrorist have no problem with using Bomb Laden Children to walk into shopping Bazars and blowing them up or attacking Military folks from behind Mosque and Churchs or beheading a reporter.

Yes, so does that mean that if the enemy rapes women, we should allow our soldiers to rape women? Of course not. Just because the enemy does something bad, does not justify us to use torture IMO.
 
Yes, so does that mean that if the enemy rapes women, we should allow our soldiers to rape women? Of course not. Just because the enemy does something bad, does not justify us to use torture IMO.

No they should be charge and if guilty the full force of the law yused against them. Once again I say define Torture I'm guessing my views are 100% different then everyone else on this board.
 
No they should be charge and if guilty the full force of the law yused against them. Once again I say define Torture I'm guessing my views are 100% different then everyone else on this board.

Nah, they are not. Lots of people have the same or similar views. I am just not one of them, though I do agree that terrorists should be prosecuted to the full extent of the law, and while generally anti-death penalty, I would not argue too loudly in this case.
 
Nah, they are not. Lots of people have the same or similar views. I am just not one of them, though I do agree that terrorists should be prosecuted to the full extent of the law, and while generally anti-death penalty, I would not argue too loudly in this case.

I agree with scorpion that is is not properly defined. Some people here are arguing from a moral standpoint and some from a legal standpoint and some from an emotional perspective. Before it can be discussed properly we all need to be on the same page.
 
I agree with scorpion that is is not properly defined. Some people here are arguing from a moral standpoint and some from a legal standpoint and some from an emotional perspective. Before it can be discussed properly we all need to be on the same page.

This is part of why I both like this debate, and think we need to investigate what happened. Let's gather all the facts, have the debate with all the information instead of only part of it, and decide what we want to do going forward, and make a very clear set of rules so that those who are tasks with implementing any decision can do so without any fear.
 
Back
Top Bottom