• 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!

Which is worse?

Which is worse


  • Total voters
    40

jamesrage

DP Veteran
Joined
Jul 31, 2005
Messages
36,705
Reaction score
17,867
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Slightly Conservative
Which is worse

Drone strikes that result in innocent people getting killed in countries we are not at war with .
Enhanced interrogation/torture of terrorists?
Both are equally bad.
I do not know


I am sure that by now everyone on this forum has heard about the biased partisan hack CIA report by liberal politicians unless they have been living under a rock for the past couple of days. It seems to me that if these same people going to be outraged over terrorists being water boarded and other ****. Then shouldn't they be even more outraged over innocent people getting killed in drone strikes in countries we are not even at war with? Because after the enhanced interrogation/torture is over the terrorist is still alive, the innocent people that were killed by the drone are not alive.
 
Last edited:
I answered "Both are equally bad" only because we shouldn't do either.

More innocent children have died as a result of drone strikes than members of ISIS were tortured via pornographic pictures. I guess it depends on where your outrage priorities are...and which party is commenting on the actions. The Democrats have done a fine job here in stirring up the outrage from their followers. I'm sure the next $40 million that the Democrats spend will be focused on ending the unnecessary killings of innocent children by the drone strikes.
 
I think America is better than either of those options and they are both bad. We need to just get the hell out of there, well everywhere, and worry about our own for a change.
 
meh, it's war ...declared or not. Win or lose, one lives and dies with the consequences.

Thom Paine
 
I said both are equally bad, especially since I have zero confidence every single person tortured was in fact a terrorist.
 
I think America is better than either of those options and they are both bad. We need to just get the hell out of there, well everywhere, and worry about our own for a change.

Good morning, americanwoman. :2wave:

I agree 100 percent! These people have been killing each other over religious differences for over 1,300 years, and we are not going to change that. How we got duped into joining this fray remains a concern for me, and taking sides is one of the worse decisions that has ever been made, IMO. And we are supposed to try to understand them? If I ran the universe, I would see to it that a mile-deep canyon encircled the entire ME, so they would be completely cut off from the rest of the world, and let them destroy their own civilization, as they see fit, without our help. I feel sorry for the innocents that are dying, especially the children, in this power struggle, but we will be blamed by their propaganda machine for everything that is going on over there, so we become a target since we have become the aggressor! Nice trap we walked into! :thumbdown:
 
Which is worse

Drone strikes that result in innocent people getting killed in countries we are not at war with .
Enhanced interrogation/torture of terrorists?
Both are equally bad.
I do not know


I am sure that by now everyone on this forum has heard about the biased partisan hack CIA report by liberal politicians unless they have been living under a rock for the past couple of days. It seems to me that if these same people going to be outraged over terrorists being water boarded and other ****. Then shouldn't they be even more outraged over innocent people getting killed in drone strikes in countries we are not even at war with? Because after the enhanced interrogation/torture is over the terrorist is still alive, the innocent people that were killed by the drone are not alive.

When the drone strikes first began, I supported them and felt it was a good response to terrorists, especially the bombers that were in Pakistani enclaves and protected by the Pakistani ISI. Since the huge collaterol damage deaths have been made public, my feelings have changed. These collaterol damage targets are on TV when the event transpires so one cannot claim mechanical or technical error as is often done with aerial bombing that strikes civilian targets. I'm even against the aerial bombing because USA policy starts wars by bombing civilian infrastructures to create distress among the civilians hoping that will create anger against their allegedely evil rulers. We are the evil, no question about it. I suspect that this drone program is the major reason Obama doesn't want to prosecute torturors. Blowback from the next administration, eh? Never forget. "War is good business, and business is good."
 
Since the Committee Democrats put this report out, I take it that not a single Democrat ever voted in favor of this program?
 
I voted that drone strikes are the worst, by far.

And let's be clear - drones were developed by the military as a tool of war to be used in war zones where military personnel could not go safely and to enhance tracking of enemy forces. They were only armed, later in the process, in order to facilitate attacks on enemy forces where military personnel could not safely and competently go.

Like many things in government, what once was a great tool of war is now being bastardized and rolled out for any number of other nefarious uses. Drones are now being used to spy on activity of citizens, not enemies. Drones are being sold to corporations and rich individuals for use beyond our control. I'm pretty sure waterboarding is not going to be used on the shoplifter at the local mall anytime soon or by corporations to fight corporate espionage.
 
Ask John McCain if he would have rather been tortured during Vietnam or killed in a bombing.

Having said that, the release of the torture report reminds me of a joke. Two laborers were digging a ditch and their supervisor just watched. One of the laborers put down his shovel and went to the supervisor and said, " why do we do all the work and you just watch and make more money?" The supervisor replied, "intelligence". When asked what he meant, the supervisor led the laborer to a nearby tree, put his hand on it and said hit my hand as hard as you can. The laborer hauled off and swung, the supervisor pulled his hand away and the laborer hit the tree has hard as he could. With his sore hand, the laborer went back to the other laborer. "What did he say," the second laborer asked, Intelligence the laborer replied. "What do you mean" the other guy asked. The first laborer put his hand over his face and said, "hit my hand as hard as you can."

Feinstine just put her hand on her face and said, hit my hand as hard as you can.
 
Ask John McCain if he would have rather been tortured during Vietnam or killed in a bombing.

Having said that, the release of the torture report reminds me of a joke. Two laborers were digging a ditch and their supervisor just watched. One of the laborers put down his shovel and went to the supervisor and said, " why do we do all the work and you just watch and make more money?" The supervisor replied, "intelligence". When asked what he meant, the supervisor led the laborer to a nearby tree, put his hand on it and said hit my hand as hard as you can. The laborer hauled off and swung, the supervisor pulled his hand away and the laborer hit the tree has hard as he could. With his sore hand, the laborer went back to the other laborer. "What did he say," the second laborer asked, Intelligence the laborer replied. "What do you mean" the other guy asked. The first laborer put his hand over his face and said, "hit my hand as hard as you can."

Feinstine just put her hand on her face and said, hit my hand as hard as you can.

Feinstein, partisan CIA report, California....

I see a common thread and result showing here.
 
"Both are equally bad."

Mainly because they both perpetuate a cycle that causes continual complications for us. No matter if we are talking about a torture program or a drone strike program we end up creating hostility around the globe from our actions. No reasonable argument can be made that we instill enough fear in our handling of things to prevent actions against us or our interests. The harsh truth is no matter what justification we have for either program we end with the realization that our justifications are not a bullet proof vest from future aggression (of some degree by someone.) Since we know those future actions tend to happen, we have the completed cycle driven by those who suggest we go to new steps only to find those as well upset way too many around the globe as well.

Besides, both programs are a step back from another argument. How we actually fight wars these days has the consequence of needing these other programs to handle "targets."
 
Both are not equally bad. The drone strikes are worse due to the collateral damage and the subject doesnt walk away from a drone strike with some lost sleep
 
When the drone strikes first began, I supported them and felt it was a good response to terrorists, especially the bombers that were in Pakistani enclaves and protected by the Pakistani ISI. Since the huge collaterol damage deaths have been made public, my feelings have changed. These collaterol damage targets are on TV when the event transpires so one cannot claim mechanical or technical error as is often done with aerial bombing that strikes civilian targets. I'm even against the aerial bombing because USA policy starts wars by bombing civilian infrastructures to create distress among the civilians hoping that will create anger against their allegedely evil rulers. We are the evil, no question about it. I suspect that this drone program is the major reason Obama doesn't want to prosecute torturors. Blowback from the next administration, eh? Never forget. "War is good business, and business is good."

The use of drones and precision munitions is far more accurate and less collaterally damaging than ever before. If you believe "we are the evil" then you must have believed that your entire existence since bombings before were so less accurate. Looks like you are at an impasse and i suggest you withdraw your citizenship
 
The use of drones and precision munitions is far more accurate and less collaterally damaging than ever before. If you believe "we are the evil" then you must have believed that your entire existence since bombings before were so less accurate. Looks like you are at an impasse and i suggest you withdraw your citizenship

I fully concur with the narrow aperture througn which you are exposed to cognition. I suspect you are the one that the blind squirrel seeks. I could be wrong. I keep reading that for each actual drone targetted score, there are 28 collaterol scores or deaths of innocents including women and children. I keep forgetting it's "kill 'em all, let God sort 'em out."
 
I wonder if the intel that lead to the deaths of civilians came from those that were tortured.
 
I say that the drone strikes are worse, as the the second option forces me to assume that we KNOW that the people being tortured are terrorists.


At least in that case, guilty people are the ones suffering, not innocents.
 
Which is worse

Drone strikes that result in innocent people getting killed in countries we are not at war with .
Enhanced interrogation/torture of terrorists?
Both are equally bad.
I do not know


I am sure that by now everyone on this forum has heard about the biased partisan hack CIA report by liberal politicians unless they have been living under a rock for the past couple of days. It seems to me that if these same people going to be outraged over terrorists being water boarded and other ****. Then shouldn't they be even more outraged over innocent people getting killed in drone strikes in countries we are not even at war with? Because after the enhanced interrogation/torture is over the terrorist is still alive, the innocent people that were killed by the drone are not alive.

You forgot about all the innocents that died under the hands of the Bush Administration with the invasion of Iraq.
 
I answered "Both are equally bad" only because we shouldn't do either.

More innocent children have died as a result of drone strikes than members of ISIS were tortured via pornographic pictures. I guess it depends on where your outrage priorities are...and which party is commenting on the actions. The Democrats have done a fine job here in stirring up the outrage from their followers. I'm sure the next $40 million that the Democrats spend will be focused on ending the unnecessary killings of innocent children by the drone strikes.

How many innocent Iraqis have died as a result of the Bush-led invasion of Iraq? How many, Tres?
 
I say that the drone strikes are worse, as the the second option forces me to assume that we KNOW that the people being tortured are terrorists.


At least in that case, guilty people are the ones suffering, not innocents.

To quote a cia official from the documentary "Manhunt". "Thats not torture, it uncomfortable, but torture? Come on!!"
 
How many innocent Iraqis have died as a result of the Bush-led invasion of Iraq? How many, Tres?

Yes im sure you blame america and bush for all the terrorists that killed innocent iraqis.
 
I fully concur with the narrow aperture througn which you are exposed to cognition. I suspect you are the one that the blind squirrel seeks. I could be wrong. I keep reading that for each actual drone targetted score, there are 28 collaterol scores or deaths of innocents including women and children. I keep forgetting it's "kill 'em all, let God sort 'em out."

Link? On the 28-1 ratio
 
The use of drone strikes is justifiable, since they are conducted in self-defense and against targets that we cannot readily access with ground troops. Although they do kill innocent people (and obviously this should be minimized whenever possible), they are much safer for civilians than any other tool that we have at our disposal. Torture, on the other hand, is committed against those who no longer pose a threat to us and is not conducted in the battlefield, so it is therefore an unnecessary violation of the rights of those who are being tortured.
 
Back
Top Bottom