Is waterboarding torture? - Page 62

MC.no.spin · 01-15-08, 06:31 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by independent_thinker2002

No, it's because of the likelyhood of all of those conditions being met. Odds are, if you know who, what, and when, then the where should also be able to be found out through legal means. In addition, there is no guarantee that you would get an honest answer from waterboarding. For me, the ends don't justify the means. I seriously doubt that this situation would arise and meet your conditions.

Dirty Harry was a great movie. It has this basic scenario that you speak of. While entertaining, it is still fiction.

But what if it did?

Many seriously doubted someone would fly a plane into an American building on a suicide mission.

The below clip from Gov. Romney is how I feel about the matter: That the president should have the ability to use his judgement on the situation when there is such a "ticking time bomb" scenario.

This will be an untenable position for the anti-American, anti-establishment individuals out there, more interested in terrorist's rights than American lives.

The Raw Story | Romney: It's not torture unless you admit it

independent_thinker2002 · 01-15-08, 07:15 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by MC.no.spin

But what if it did?

Then a city would be majorly screwed more than likely. If we didn't detect them and their plan electronically, how would we find them? If we did detect it electronically, how wouldn't we find them?

Quote:

Originally Posted by MC.no.spin

Many seriously doubted someone would fly a plane into an American building on a suicide mission.

I didn't. I was at the Taste of Chicago in July, 2001. I asked the group I was with,"What keeps a plane from flying into Sears Tower?" They said, "That would never happen." I said, "Hijackers might do it." So yes, many doubted that it would happen. Regardless, who should we have waterboarded to prevent it from happening?

Who should the Japanese waterboarded to prevent Hiroshima and Nagasaki?

Quote:

Originally Posted by MC.no.spin

The below clip from Gov. Romney is how I feel about the matter: That the president should have the ability to use his judgement on the situation when there is such a "ticking time bomb" scenario.

Would you support an Amendment tearing away another piece of the Constitution? I mean, if you support it for foreign terrorists, on principle, you would allow it to be done on our citizens as well. Correct?

Quote:

Originally Posted by MC.no.spin

This will be an untenable position for the anti-American, anti-establishment individuals out there, more interested in terrorist's rights than American lives.

Nice false dichotomy. Some of us remember what America used to stand for. Apparently you don't.

akyron · 01-15-08, 07:30 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by CaptainCourtesy

Are you really suggesting that you would rather be waterboarded than listen to Hillary or Gore? That's just silly.

It depends on the length of the speech and the wb time.
They can talk for quite awhile.

akyron · 01-15-08, 07:32 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by MC.no.spin

Have I come to a forum that caters to Liberals and seeks to shut out the Conservatives?

Sort of but being the underdog is fun too if you want to look at it that way.

Billo_Really · 01-15-08, 08:01 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by CaptainCourtesy

Are you really suggesting that you would rather be waterboarded than listen to Hillary or Gore? That's just silly.

Well, her butt is getting bigger...

...and she did cut her hair!

MC.no.spin · 01-15-08, 08:03 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by independent_thinker2002

Then a city would be majorly screwed more than likely. If we didn't detect them and their plan electronically, how would we find them? If we did detect it electronically, how wouldn't we find them?

Yes, a bomb going off is a majorly screwed up situation. I am not sure why this scenario is so unplausable for you, perhaps this is your way of dodging the fact you are willing to have the bomb go off without waterboarding a terrorist who has the info on where and when it is going down? Would you feel differently if your family was in the building involved? Would you feel differently if it was your life involved?

Quote:

I didn't. I was at the Taste of Chicago in July, 2001. I asked the group I was with,"What keeps a plane from flying into Sears Tower?" They said, "That would never happen." I said, "Hijackers might do it." So yes, many doubted that it would happen. Regardless, who should we have waterboarded to prevent it from happening?

We should have killed Osama Bin Laden when we had the chance, but Madeleine Notbright screwed it up by letting the Pakistanis know ahead of time we were about to bomb him who tipped off Bin Laden. Not to digress...

Quote:

Who should the Japanese waterboarded to prevent Hiroshima and Nagasaki?

We told them it was coming a few days before it happened. They refused to surrender.

Quote:

Would you support an Amendment tearing away another piece of the Constitution? I mean, if you support it for foreign terrorists, on principle, you would allow it to be done on our citizens as well. Correct?

According to the Constitution the President is already responsible for military strategy. According to Federalist Paper 69:
"It would amount to nothing more than the supreme command and direction of the military and naval forces."

Quote:

Nice false dichotomy. Some of us remember what America used to stand for. Apparently you don't.

From our Constitution:

“ We the People of the United States, in Order to form a more perfect Union, establish Justice, insure domestic Tranquility, provide for the common defence, promote the general Welfare, and secure the Blessings of Liberty to ourselves and our Posterity, do ordain and establish this Constitution for the United States of America. "

From the Declaration of Independence:
" We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness.--That to secure these rights, Governments are instituted among Men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed, --That whenever any Form of Government becomes destructive of these ends, it is the Right of the People to alter or to abolish it, and to institute new Government, laying its foundation on such principles and organizing its powers in such form, as to them shall seem most likely to effect their Safety and Happiness. "

I believe in a Creator and I LOVE MY COUNTRY. Can you say the same thing?

Quote:

In the aftermath of September 11, fewer than 100 terrorists have been held in the CIA's secret prisons, and fewer than one third of those have been subjected to what CIA Director Michael Hayden calls "special methods of interrogation," and what others called torture.

"The intelligence they produce is absolutely irreplaceable," Hayden said. "It's been crucial in giving us a better understanding of the enemy we face as well as leads on taking in taking other terrorists off the battlefield."

The CIA says it no longer uses waterboarding.

Cheney confirmed waterboarding was used to interrogate Khaled Sheikh Mohammed, the senior Al Qaeda operative now being held in Guantanamo Bay, adding that the use of the technique was "a no-brainer."

Waterboarding: Interrogation Or Torture?, Technique Dates Back To Spanish Inquisition And Has Been Used By World's Cruelest Regimes - CBS News

buttonpsi · 01-16-08, 01:11 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Reverend_Hellh0und

I don't watch that much,thank you. And how mythical was it to think that planes would fly into buildings.

Yes, almost like a planned archetype of lost individual freedoms.

buttonpsi · 01-16-08, 01:18 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Reverend_Hellh0und

If I had information knowing the operation was in fact going to take place, That planes were going to crash into the WTC, and an admittd conspirator of the operation?

That would be the person.

no problem. over and over again until we were certain that we stopped them.

If you had that information you might actually be working for the FBI. You might be living with an informant. Maybe if it was you instead of those other agents we could have prevented it?

buttonpsi · 01-16-08, 01:22 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by akyron

Sort of but being the underdog is fun too if you want to look at it that way.

Or if you want to get into real semantics where a liberal is more consrevative than the conservatives in office that said "conservatives" would die to support. The underdog is the idiot who spends too much money on wars we can't win...and I don't see how that could ever-in any way be considered "conservative"...but okay if you want to think of it that way, go ahead.

independent_thinker2002 · 01-16-08, 01:34 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by MC.no.spin

Yes, a bomb going off is a majorly screwed up situation. I am not sure why this scenario is so unplausable for you, perhaps this is your way of dodging the fact you are willing to have the bomb go off without waterboarding a terrorist who has the info on where and when it is going down? Would you feel differently if your family was in the building involved? Would you feel differently if it was your life involved?

No, I think that it is unplausable that waterboarding would save the day. A suitcase bomb very well could happen. Talk about a needle in a haystack. Probability is on their side. Even if we waterboarded every person we caught, eventually they will succeed. That doesn't mean I like it. I don't wish it to happen. But that is the reality of it.

Your appeals to emotion (I thought only liberals made decisions based on how they feel?) don't phase me. Yes, it would suck. I don't want any Americans to die. But they will, eventually. The President told us to go shopping. I have. I, like Isreal, refuse to live in fear. Trying to "not die" is not living IMO.

Quote:

Originally Posted by MC.no.spin

We should have killed Osama Bin Laden when we had the chance, but Madeleine Notbright screwed it up by letting the Pakistanis know ahead of time we were about to bomb him who tipped off Bin Laden. Not to digress...

Who should we have waterboarded?

Were we supposed to invade Pakistan's airspace without warning? Talk about NOTBRIGHT.

Quote:

Originally Posted by MC.no.spin

We told them it was coming a few days before it happened. They refused to surrender.

So if we are given warning, should we surrender?

Quote:

Originally Posted by MC.no.spin

According to the Constitution the President is already responsible for military strategy. According to Federalist Paper 69:
"It would amount to nothing more than the supreme command and direction of the military and naval forces."

So you are of the Cheney school of the President being a monarchical position that can ignore laws when it suits them?

Quote:

Originally Posted by MC.no.spin

I believe in a Creator and I LOVE MY COUNTRY. Can you say the same thing?

No, I don't believe in a creator. I love my country.(Does typing in all caps make you more patriotic than me?)