torture is justified if information obtained saves american lives.Therefore logic would dictate that iraqi's would feel the same way and thus torture allied pow's.anyone care to discuss?
2006-10-24 09:11:55 · 12 answers · asked by mine of useless information 1 in Society & Culture ➔ Other - Society & Culture
if he said that, he's a fool. Torture saves no lives and extracts no information. Anyone being tortured (no matter how "strong" they appear to be) will say or do whatever is required to make the torture stop.
That is not information. At best, it is an unreliable confirmation of what the torturer already believes to be the case. At worst, it is a means of obtaining a confession from an innocent. If the information is ever accurate, it is accurate by accident.
Torture gains nothing and costs hugely, in trust, dignity and human suffering.
2006-10-24 09:20:08 · answer #1 · answered by wild_eep 6 · 1⤊ 0⤋
Well, yes - based on that logic then anyone would feel justified in torturing someone if they thought it would save lives.
Did he specify American lives? Typical US arrogance.
2006-10-24 16:15:17 · answer #2 · answered by Hello Dave 6 · 0⤊ 0⤋
If torture would save one American soldier's life, I only have one question. Where does the red lead go???
2006-10-24 16:15:21 · answer #3 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
These "allowances" are being made to ultimately imprison the US populace. Look carefully at the language. YOU are not exempted if the government suspects you are involved in terrorism.
Eventually, people will become numb to this and the kind of totalitarianism you read about in Nazi Germany will take place here.
Don't be surprised if someday boots kick in your door in the name of "terrorism".
2006-10-24 16:12:50 · answer #4 · answered by Salami and Orange Juice 5 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Wonder how Clint would feel if he was the soldier being tortured. Hmmmmm, Clint??
2006-10-24 16:14:30 · answer #5 · answered by MyPreshus 7 · 1⤊ 0⤋
That's why actors should never be politicians. They are shallow and vain.
Ronald Reagan was no better, nor is Schwartzenegger.
2006-10-24 16:16:54 · answer #6 · answered by Rich N 3 · 0⤊ 0⤋
its a sign of our times i suppose . celebrity now endorsing torture ..
2006-10-24 16:27:50 · answer #7 · answered by belter777 2 · 0⤊ 0⤋
That's why celebrities should not be asked about politics.
2006-10-24 16:16:50 · answer #8 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
It's only ok if Americans do it, obviously - one rule for them etc....
2006-10-24 16:15:46 · answer #9 · answered by Mr Glenn 5 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Whawazat???
2006-10-24 16:13:34 · answer #10 · answered by jb 4 · 1⤊ 0⤋