So in summary:

You are saying that if it saves lives, it is ok to torture. I realize it is fun to dismiss water-boarding as a frat house antic, but if you do some research on it you will find that every person that has ever been waterboarded all reached the same conclusion. It is a TORTURE.

Instead of taking the moral high ground, you are saying "if it will save lives" it is OK.

So lets fast foward to Iran,

A recon plane flies over Iran.
They shoot it down, they torture the pilot because he might have information about emminant American attacks on their soverign nation. How many people work at a nuclear facility?

Would they be justified, by your position and logic, (Not you SS, I know you think that non-democracies have ZERO rights/justifications/reasoning to do ANYTHING) in torturing an American Pilot to prevent the bombing of their citizens?

As SS said earlier, we are NOT moral equivilants of any terrorist or Iran.
We should not LOWER our national morality for any reason.

The argument that it "saves lives" could be used to justify any atrocity you can imagine. Pro-active nuking of China = saves American lives.

Reagan didn't torture and he was dealing with 10K nuclear weapons pointed at us, not 3 airplanes.
10K nukes = don't torture.
500 Radical Muslims with Box cutters = torture????

To Rebellion,

I think the story matters because -
1) It establishes National Virtues and where we stand.
2) The story doesn't include all the people we handed over to other nations for "interrogation". We know for a fact that Egypt tortured the hell out people for us.


Ixtellor

__________________
_______________________________________
George W. Bush "I don't think our troops ought to be used for what's called nation-building"

Blasphemy is a victimless crime.

Do you have proof otherwise? If not, why should we take your word?

__________________
JMS gets another English lesson:

Quote:

there is no "mostly unique;" thats like saying "sometimes always," its an oxymoron - its either one or the other.

The result:

Quote:

By the mid-19th century unique had developed a wider meaning, “not typical, unusual,” and it is in this wider sense that it is compared. The comparison of so-called absolutes in senses that are not absolute is standard in all varieties of speech and writing.

Why would it? Our troops have been tortured decades before we did it.

__________________
JMS gets another English lesson:

Quote:

there is no "mostly unique;" thats like saying "sometimes always," its an oxymoron - its either one or the other.

The result:

Quote:

By the mid-19th century unique had developed a wider meaning, “not typical, unusual,” and it is in this wider sense that it is compared. The comparison of so-called absolutes in senses that are not absolute is standard in all varieties of speech and writing.

If I was a family member of someone killed in a terrorist attack "the moral high ground" won't replace the empty chair on Thanksgiving. So thanks anyway.

These were Al Qaeda captives. What country's flag does Al Qaeda fight under? Does Al Qaeda fight according to the rules of war? You're comparing terrorists with countries that fight under the rules of war. The US doesn't target civilians. Al Qaeda does. Flipping your example on its head, if we captured a pilot that might attack a US facilty as part of a war we engaged in then we would not have the right to waterboard. If they were targeting civilians we would. See the diff?

Actually yes...besides the fact that torturing would start WWIII, we are talking war versus attacking civilians.

We're talking specifically waterboarding. And the story was that it was somewhat widespread, the possibility of innocents being tortured, etc. A big blow up. Over three known terrorists. This story is the Y2K of torture. As the political cartoon astutely points out, 30 seconds of water up the nose for thousands of lives. You can have the high ground, I'll take them living instead.

__________________
JMS gets another English lesson:

Quote:

there is no "mostly unique;" thats like saying "sometimes always," its an oxymoron - its either one or the other.

The result:

Quote:

By the mid-19th century unique had developed a wider meaning, “not typical, unusual,” and it is in this wider sense that it is compared. The comparison of so-called absolutes in senses that are not absolute is standard in all varieties of speech and writing.

How is water boarding torture. I believe for an act to be torture requires a method which will risk permanent harm or disability to the individual, or imminent organ failure, or death.

I don't see how water boarding does this. It just gives the illusion of drowning, its a controlled situation, there is no risk of death, or any serious harm or organ failure. So in that regard, I would have no problem with such a method to high value detainees.

You could argue that its inhuman or cruel treatment, but my personal opinion is that it isn't. Various US government agents did it, to test it, and I doubt they would have if it was cruel or inhuman.

But, whatever you consider this method, its still stupid to release to the world what methods you are using, especially when you know it will cause outrage in your own country, and a decline in prestige abroad.

__________________
"Conservatives are not necessarily stupid, but most stupid people are conservatives." — John Stuart Mill

No. Why would it help?

You honestly believe a terrorist is going to think "Well, we should torture him because we need this information, but because the US doesn't use torture themselves, I cant bring myself to do it; I think we can do without the information". You REALLY believe they will reason it that way?

These are terrorists. They think like animals. They will not care one way or another. Its like expecting a lion to feel sorry for the gazelle it is eating alive.

__________________
My Political Blog (Last post Feb 14) - My MySpace Page

Good point...apparently the US "tortures" its own employees.

__________________
JMS gets another English lesson:

Quote:

there is no "mostly unique;" thats like saying "sometimes always," its an oxymoron - its either one or the other.

The result:

Quote:

By the mid-19th century unique had developed a wider meaning, “not typical, unusual,” and it is in this wider sense that it is compared. The comparison of so-called absolutes in senses that are not absolute is standard in all varieties of speech and writing.

It used to be the US presidents condemned torture instead of falling in love with it.

I'm not quite sure what you are asking.

"Civil liberties???" The only civil liberties I see that were unprotected was of the 3000+ that were killed on 9/11. Fortunately because of this procedure, many other innocents were saved. And that's a good thing.

__________________
"This is a time for a national imperative not to fail in Iraq." Condoleeza Rice, January 11, 2007