How is lying to a hostage taker in order to save lives or shooting someone to save a friend any different than waterboarding someone to save lives...many lives? I mean isn't shooting someone more severe?
Some opponents of waterboarding talk about preserving our constitutional rights...but what about the constitutional rights of those who lives are endanger? We forget about their freedom.
Would any of you not use waterboarding...if it could have stopped 911?
Would any of you not use waterboading...if it could prevent someone from killing YOUR family?
I think these are tough questions that we need to ask. We don't necessarily have to know right now...but I think we need to think about it thoroughly before we discount it.
I agree with waterboarding if there is a strict criteria that justifies it (which I am sure there is...for legal means)
Why? Because I want to protect the constitutional rights of others.
Where am I wrong?
All points are welcome...I CAN TAKE IT.
2007-12-12 16:45:40 · 12 answers · asked by Anonymous in Politics & Government ➔ Politics
G.W Quack...
not based on reality...really..?
Interesting?
hmm....
How about
911?
Kobar Towers?
WTC Attack 1993?
Embassey Bombings Tazania/Kenya
Project Bojinka
UK 7/7
The Project Bojinka look-a-like from the UK
The JFK Airport Plot
Are you saying....those were not real?
Interesting?
2007-12-12 18:03:39 · update #1
g,
You bring up some good points..
But ask anyone who works in the Military/CIA (if you know someone) or FBI, ATF,...All those organizations are procedural driven...
Maybe back in the day I could agree with you...
Also keep in mind that the CIA just doesn't go off of what the individual is saying...They colloraborate and cross reference with other sources...
The CIA operative who just spoke out even admitted that the agents had to layout and spell out to the higher-ups why waterboarding was recommended.
To argue that torture (which I don't think waterboarding is) does not bring about truthful information is not entirely true.. The absolute truth...is it can and cannot give you the correct information. That is why information is always collaborated. All intel agencies...use redundant methods to obtain probality of the reliability of information. This is common sense.
2007-12-12 18:12:05 · update #2
Ted S
ooooooooooooooo!!!
That was a great come back Teddy...
How long did it take you to think of that one...you d!p$sh!t?
and for your information....
Waterboarding is not a Wet-T Shirt Contest...get a clue man.
And who is your crew?
MF....please...
That's right...MF please...incase you deaf.
grow some hair on you nuts before you bust it out.
What are you Rosie O'Donnell? Need a support group from your crew to the dirty work?
2007-12-13 03:58:51 · update #3
Oh.....and stop by again...
Teddy.....
You hear.
: )
2007-12-13 03:59:46 · update #4
I waterboard dumb beotches like venom for fun with my crew on wednesday mornings...then we pitch pennies for conservative souls
Oh yeah you are right its not torture....venom loves being waterboarded..don't ya hunny
you are talking about my nuts and busting one out...you are a very naughty girl...it wouldn't be a wet t contest either...you would quite likely drown on a wet washcloth...but you are used to being choked out aren't you honey? I'll take my ten points now
2007-12-12 21:47:07 · answer #1 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 1⤋
Torture is wrong, but some things are even more wrong. Are we talking about choosing the lesser of two evils.
A captured enemy combatant doesn't have any "constitutional rights". That's why we keep them outside the US.
When does interrogation become torture? Being held in a camp could be considered torture. Sleep deprivation could be torture.
The question above comes down to "when do the ends justify the means?"
The rules on what is and is not allowed are vague for a reason. We need to have some unpleasant options available if we need them. If it came down to the lives of my Friends and family, I would do what ever it takes and I would expect MY government to do the same.
Why is everyone picking on poor Venom this morning?
2007-12-13 10:38:40 · answer #2 · answered by mjmayer188 7 · 0⤊ 1⤋
All governments that torture people do it for what seems to them justifiable reasons of saving lives or control insurrections. People subjected to torture will confess and give both true and false information and implicate innocents in imaginary plots to stop the torture. You will still be faced with the problem of finding the truth, and you will end up with a security service composed of sadist and breaking a prisoners will becomes more important than the truth. The corrupting influence of using such techniques can be seen both in history and in countries today that indulge in human rights abuses. The people who wrote our constitution lived at a time when such practices were common and realized that you can not preserve a free society if the government can engage in torture. I am not willing to scrap the constitution which insures our freedom and that millions have fought and died for in order to possibly save a few lives. We ask our solders to risk their lives daily, it is not too mush to ask everybody to else to bare a small amount of risk to preserve our freedom
2007-12-13 02:16:58 · answer #3 · answered by meg 7 · 1⤊ 0⤋
well... a few points that have been somewhat touched on...
A. how are you sure there are strict criteria? the vast majority of people were SURE that Nixon wouldn't do Watergate, but he did? trusting politicians is a very tricky thing...
B. where do you draw the line? what if an American could have information that you think could save lives? what if he wasn't "breaking" do you maybe drown him to find out? and who is supervising the program? how do you know they won't come for you one day?
C. CAN YOU PROVE THAT THEY KNEW SOMETHING? if you can't, then you can't say that you're protecting the rights of others by doing something... you're doing a LOT of assuming here... and people lives are on the line...
D. tourture is often ineffective and gets few solid results, according to every study I've seen on it...
this all comes down to "I don't want to give the government the freedom to basically do whatever it wants with NO visible controls just because I'm afraid"...
MANY more people have been killed by governments with little or no oversight (soviets, nazis) than by terrorists... and the citizens of those nations thought it was "stupid" to suggest that anything like that would ever happen
2007-12-13 01:22:03 · answer #4 · answered by Anonymous · 3⤊ 1⤋
I agree! Our Citizens have the right to life and the persuit of happiness. These terrorists take away our rights by attacking and killing us. Therefore, they should lose all their rights. People seem to forget that we are in a war with people who want to detroy us at any cost because their demonic book(The Koran) orders them to kill us. This war is World War III and will escalate very soon. I think that they should hang the whole lot and save us the money and the trouble.
2007-12-13 02:02:11 · answer #5 · answered by Apostle Jeff 6 · 0⤊ 1⤋
Those animals would saw your head off with a dull knife if the tables were turned. Michael Savage, radio talk show host, once said "I don't care if they stick dynamite up their rectums and dangle them from helicopters." I agree. They are told in their training not to talk because the Americans can do nothing to them, short of feeding them a plateful of yummy pancakes. There are too many people here who want to make this a reality, no matter how many American lives it costs.
the Constitution applies to citizens of the United States. It does not apply to prisoners of war, or enemy combantants from another nation. The argument that they have constitutional rights is wrong and stupid. You going to give them an absentee ballot too? Gee, I bet they'd vote democrat.
2007-12-13 00:57:40 · answer #6 · answered by Anonymous · 3⤊ 2⤋
torture is unreliable i heard an hour long radio interview with a guy who did interrogations in Iraq he said that the stuation u describes is hollywood not real and quite often u get false info or just enrage zealots with such tactics. He said that there are beter methods of getting information by negotatianging wearing people down trickery.
2007-12-13 00:57:06 · answer #7 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 1⤋
First of all, Constitutional Rights do not apply to those who are not Americans. Policy is different than the constitution. The no torture thing is not part of the Constitution, it is the law that we (our elected officials) passed, making it policy.
Second of all, when one of those guys gets an American, they chop off his/her head!! If you don't believe me, go check out www.michaelsavage.com . Watch this, then reply to this question with the point of view that we shouldn't be torturing these fools to get the answers we need to win this war and to keep my children safe.
The only way to scare a psycho is to be crazier than them.
Therefore, Scare the **** out of them!! Waterboarding?? This is MERCY to these people for what they deserve, not torture!!
2007-12-13 00:58:37 · answer #8 · answered by Anonymous · 4⤊ 2⤋
It is so interesting to see cons still clutching at straws to defend this.
Torture is illegal. It is also notoriously unreliable when it comes to gaining information so it is unlikely you can justify the saving lives argument.
We have convicted people for waterboarding in the past.
Why are Republicans so desperate to rationalize something that is patently wrong?
2007-12-13 01:22:45 · answer #9 · answered by Sageandscholar 7 · 1⤊ 2⤋
Water boarding is fine, as long as it is not used on a US citizen. I would find that unconstitutional, but our constitution does not cover those outside of borders.
They act like animals and only understand that kind of treatment back.
2007-12-13 02:39:53 · answer #10 · answered by wcowell2000 6 · 0⤊ 1⤋