• 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!

Does defense justify torture?

Does defense justify torture?


  • Total voters
    49
Torture doesn't make people tell the truth, it make people say whatever the torturer wants them to say. Period.

please go read what i posted on this and reply to that, because unfortunately this simplistic claim isn't fully accurate.

I have seen torture work, and work well.
 
In that hypothetical example, chasing after indictments for the underlings who were given specific authority for that specific procedure would certainly be in poor taste.

Naturally, most of the responsibility lies on the person who was in charge and giving the orders. But I don't think any "underling" should be required to follow orders that result in the violation basic human right standards, against his conscience. "I just followed orders" has been an excuse for horrible crimes way too often.

For example, I would consider it intolerable if a police officer could be fired or even face charges, just because he denied the order to torture a suspect.
 
Last edited:
If the torture is grey-area and not finger chopping etc, then it becomes distasteful?

Limiting the hypothetical to police is not acceptable. Police should not have such authority, given the extreme rarity of cases. It would be federal intel.
 
Last edited:
If there is evidence of torture and no evidence of success, I don't see how they have a choice.

About how much failed torture would you say the US is guilty of?

Well people are writing suicide notes in blood on their cell walls, force fed anti-depressants so they wont do it blah blah blah, cracking their skulls open bleeding trying to end their lives because they're treated to such an inhumane degree etc. (but no concern on anyones part mind you).

Given common sense, you could say given the number of 'mickey mouse' detainees who have no information, secret torture camps, where they are likely training eastern europeans to do the same (again who cares, its just an experimental torture network in eastern europe :roll:), I'd say 90% of the torture program is a crock of fascist oppressive right wing human ****.

Basic civil (and perhaps even human) rights end in the US and every nation on earth all the time. It's called prison. Prison violates human rights. Having knowledge to stop the murder of 1000s should also allow the violation of human rights.

No it doesnt, according to what international agreement does it?
 
please go read what i posted on this and reply to that, because unfortunately this simplistic claim isn't fully accurate.

I have seen torture work, and work well.

Spill right and I might chop my finger off. :roll:
 
If the torture is grey-area and not finger chopping etc, then it becomes distasteful?

I'm not an expert on the question what exactly is torture and what is not. But as far as I know, torture is pretty clearly defined in international law and agreements. Interrogation methods that are not considered torture, but just a little harsh, are certainly in order.
 
Amnesty International wants Bush prosecuted for his roll in waterboarding. One of the defenses of Bush I have come across is that torture is when used to defend innocent lives. I will admit, it is an interesting question for me to explore.

What is your opinion?

My opinion is that this is BS. No one in the French government has ever had to answer for the hundreds of thousands of Algerians publicly tortured as a matter of policy. And now that four or five people have been waterboarded post 9-11, Amnesty International wishes to make a declaration of self righteous accusation? **** 'em.

We belong to a nation that dropped two atomic bombs on two Japanese civilian cities in the name of national security. We are a nation that took part in bombing civilian cities across Europe in the name of all of Western Europe's security. But today, we choose to pretend for the international audience that we should be dragged through the gutter along with there Nazis and there immoral terrorists for the "torture" of an extreme few for own national security?

Do people actually believe that spies during the Cold War were treated to 4 Star Hotels and a spa program? When all of western Europe was being protected did they search so deeply to find imperfect methods to criticize? What we do for our cecurity (and others) is a matter for the shadows. Bush's only mistake was publicly condoning it for the exceptions, which gave the hypocritical world their stage. All it takes is one waterboarding from America to allow them their preachings on how we are "all the same now."

Maybe we should just drop a nuclear bomb or two. That generation was called "great." Again...**** 'em and their sense of self-righteous tone.
 
Last edited:
We belong to a nation that dropped two atomic bombs on two Japanese civilian cities in the name of national security. We are a nation that took part in bombing civilian cities across Europe in the name of all of Western Europe's security.

Someone police this man...
 
Given common sense, you could say given the number of 'mickey mouse' detainees who have no information, secret torture camps, where they are likely training eastern europeans to do the same (again who cares, its just an experimental torture network in eastern europe :roll:), I'd say 90% of the torture program is a crock of fascist oppressive right wing human ****.[/quote

that's funny, because i would say not only do you have no clue about that, but you are unlikely to be able to have a clue about that :)

i'd say 90% of people are all secretly in love with Tina Turner, but refuse to admit to it. go ahead, ask people; do they deny it? AHA!!!!

:roll:
 
My opinion is that this is BS. No one in the French government has ever had to answer for the hundreds of thousands of Algerians publicly tortured as a matter of policy. And now that four or five people have been waterboarded post 9-11, Amnesty International wishes to make a declaration of self righteous accusation? **** 'em.

4 or 5 people waterboarded?

Within days of the 9/11 attacks, the Bush administration began preparing to authorize a set of practices -- meticulously documented in Jane Mayer's excellent The Dark Side -- that are normally associated with brutal military dictatorships. These measures included the systematic use of torture, the suspension of habeas corpus, secret renditions of suspected terrorists, targeted assassinations, and indefinite detention without trial at Guantánamo and other overseas facilities. These practices were endorsed and approved by John Yoo, a mid-level official in the Bush Justice Department's Office of Legal Counsel, and Bush admits in his memoir that he personally approved the waterboarding of captured terrorist suspects. The sordid debacle at Abu Ghraib prison was hardly an isolated incident conducted by poorly supervised subordinates; it was in fact entirely consistent with Bush's post-9/11 approach to human rights and civil liberties. And as Obama's inability to shut down Guatánamo suggests, it may take decades to dismantle these practices and restore America's tarnished international image.

Delusion Points - By Stephen M. Walt | Foreign Policy
 
Amnesty International wants Bush prosecuted for his roll in waterboarding. One of the defenses of Bush I have come across is that torture is when used to defend innocent lives. I will admit, it is an interesting question for me to explore. What is your opinion?

There is no defense for torture.

But let us define torture -- not as psychologically uncomfortable....not as, "Holy crap, I think I'm going to die," but define it once and for all with words that accurately describe what torture really is.

I have a feeling its definition is as slippery as that of pornography. "I know it when I see it." That definition leaves plenty of room for subjectivity.
 
that's funny, because i would say not only do you have no clue about that, but you are unlikely to be able to have a clue about that :)

Funny how it is evident that I already am 'clued', so tell me what you know and I'll cut my finger off.

Cmon.

Chiken

Mother superior gonna track your IP? :lol:
 
Well people are writing suicide notes in blood on their cell walls, force fed anti-depressants so they wont do it blah blah blah, cracking their skulls open bleeding trying to end their lives because they're treated to such an inhumane degree etc. (but no concern on anyones part mind you).

Given common sense, you could say given the number of 'mickey mouse' detainees who have no information, secret torture camps, where they are likely training eastern europeans to do the same (again who cares, its just an experimental torture network in eastern europe :roll:), I'd say 90% of the torture program is a crock of fascist oppressive right wing human ****.

The fact is that you haven't a clue about any of this. Who was waterboarded ("tortured)?" And when? And where? Can you name more than a few names? You are running off of unproven accusations, rumors, and exagerations. Notice how quickly the Democratic Party stopped their bitching about GITMO as soon as Obama took the throne? The Democratic Party has absolutely ignored GITMO ever since. So much for their self-righteous accusations of "torture." The fact is that there was never anything really there other than exxagerations used as a partisan tool by fools and their sheep who were against anything Bush related. In fact, the only thing the fools did was give our enemy a tool in which to use for your undeserved sympathies.
 
The fact is that you haven't a clue about any of this. Who was waterboarded ("tortured)?" And when? And where? Can you name more than a few names? You are running off of unproven accusations, rumors, and exagerations. Notice how quickly the Democratic Party stopped their bitching about GITMO as soon as Obama took the throne? The Democratic Party has absolutely ignored GITMO ever since. So much for their self-righteous accusations of "torture." The fact is that there was never anything really there other than exxagerations used as a partisan tool by fools and their sheep who were against anything Bush related. In fact, the only thing the fools did was give our enemy a tool in which to use for your undeserved sympathies.

No, you tit for tat hacked for half this paragraph and didnt say a thing.

The fact is that you haven't a clue about any of this. Who was waterboarded ("tortured)?" And when? And where? Can you name more than a few names? You are running off of unproven accusations, rumors, and exagerations.

Weird, funny how other governments such as those in..."Europe" are concerned about the illegal torture camps.
 

4 or 5 was just a number. You are welcome to place your own. But instead you merely produced a permission slip that showed nothing. Who has been waterboarded? And where? Surely, with the hundreds of thousands tortured publicly by the French and the many more by the Germans you can place a number of substance to this. But you can't. A very few have been substantiated and most of those who have used it to get off of his stage of guilt are full of ****. You people don't have anything but rumors and exaggerations.
 
4 or 5 was just a number. You are welcome to place your own. But instead you merely produced a permission slip that showed nothing. Who has been waterboarded? And where? Surely, with the hundreds of thousands tortured publicly by the French and the many more by the Germans you can place a number of substance to this. But you can't. A very few have been substantiated and most of those who have used it to get off of his stage of guilt are full of ****. You people don't have anything but rumors and exaggerations.

It's not because France did something bad that it gives the US a free pass to do the same.
 
So.... who knows what.... since we've only waterboarded a few... what type of torture are we using on the rest. Apparently CPwill has seen torture 'work' but hell, for all we know this thread threatens his livelihood if he were to divulge more :roll:
 
No, you tit for tat hacked for half this paragraph and didnt say a thing.

I statedplenty. You dodged because you are unable to back up your accusations. The truth is that you know you are running off of yesterday's Democratic fumes.


Weird, funny how other governments such as those in..."Europe" are concerned about the illegal torture camps.

What camps? Where? Since you are unable to back up your accusation of mass torture, do you at least have anything substantial on these "torture" camps? I guess these European governments care more about embarrassing America than shutting down what is in their own countries? Or are they even what you think they are? Got anything other than more rumor and exaggeration for this bit at least?
 
Yes, I believe torture is justified if it is to save innocent lives, however I think it's still a bad idea. Primarily because it isn't that effective. Some people are extremely resistant to torture (and it's hard to tell who will resist and who won't), and others will say whatever they think will make their torturers stop, regardless of whether it is true or not.
 
Has torture ever been used effectively as a policy to extract information to any effective purpose? In this century people have been tortured for political repression as a rule, it was rarely if ever effective and the more lucrative results of these regimes was planting agents in networks of interest. Nazis and Soviets would torture people for months at a time (with no limits on their techniques), receive no pertinent info and ship their victims off to camps or to execution...... What chance is there that a Muslim who believes he does the work of God himself is going to give in to a nation occupying his territory?........Elaborate on this statement, please..I know of no nation occupying "Muslim land".In fact, just the opposite may be true.... As far as I'm concerned the support for the policy of torture at this point is to prevent a loss of political face.
I think that the primary purpose of torture is revenge, not information.
Any man so far gone as for him to think that he is doing his "God's work".........cannot be successfully tortured,physically...
 
Well, pardner.... I dont know how the 'law' and international coercion by the hegemonic state works... but how is it they just make this stuff up?

I statedplenty. You dodged because you are unable to back up your accusations. The truth is that you know you are running off of yesterday's Democratic fumes.

Issue more hackery to back it up now* :roll:

Regimes of the past in europe who tortured sure override and make an excuse that we are right to do it.

;)
 
Back
Top Bottom