Water boarding vs.

[MikeWaters]

Of course you don't. Russians and Chinese don't see a slipperly slope either.

[Tex]

Originally Posted by MikeWaters

Of course you don't. Russians and Chinese don't see a slipperly slope either.

See previous comment about doomsday arguing.

[MikeWaters]

Doomsday? Freaking history of the world is about oppression and totalitarianism.

[Tex]

Originally Posted by MikeWaters

Doomsday? Freaking history of the world is about oppression and totalitarianism.

The history of the US is not.

[Tex]

For reference, this falls under my definition of torture:

"They took my husband away in front of me. I found his body in the morgue a few days later. He had multiple bullet wounds and his eyes had been gouged out," one woman tells me, forcefully twisting a tissue in her hands as if it somehow could ease her agony and erase the chilling memory.

...

Her husband's body bore the "signs of torture." How many times has that phrase been used? It's such a common phrase it's as if what really happened gets glossed over: skin scraped off their bodies, fingernails ripped out, horrifying screams of pain before death.

http://www.cnn.com/2008/WORLD/meast/...men/index.html

[MikeWaters]

Originally Posted by Tex

For reference, this falls under my definition of torture:



http://www.cnn.com/2008/WORLD/meast/...men/index.html

Do you support the use of such techniques if there is a ticking bomb?

[Indy Coug]

Originally Posted by MikeWaters

Do you support the use of such techniques if there is a ticking bomb?

Those techniques aren't necessary.

[Cali Coug]

Originally Posted by Indy Coug

In the great Hereafter, when those millions of dead people come up to you and wonder why you let them die and allowed them and their loved ones to suffer untold pain and anguish, do you confidently look them in the eye and tell them you made the right decision?

Let me get this straight:

In your version of the hereafter, people will come up to me upset that I "let" them die? And they will blame me instead of the people who killed them? And the untold pain and anguish I "allow" people to suffer when they lose their loved ones is worse than the untold pain and anguish you wanted me to inflict on the person I should have tortured?

What kind of a screwed up afterlife are you looking forward to?

[Cali Coug]

Originally Posted by Tex

I understand that this is the philosophic argument. I'm saying that in practice, we're not slippery sloping anywhere. This is just doomsday arguing, like when people freaked out over the "library book" provision of the Patriot Act. "What's next?!" they said. "It's a slippery slope!!" Then a year or two later, out comes John Ashcroft who says, "It's never been used."

I don't accept the argument that waterboarding is de facto torture, but even if I did, it's application has been narrow and controlled. I don't see a slippery slope here.

Narrow and controlled? How do you know? Because John Ashcroft said so?

[Cali Coug]

Originally Posted by Indy Coug

Those techniques aren't necessary.

Which must explain our use of extraordinary rendition. If waterboarding was 100% effective, why would any other method ever be used?