450 posts IS a worse crime than wanting to kill us .
POSTED BY: AURaptor
UPDATED: Friday, May 22, 2009 14:59
VIEWED: 29463
PAGE 8 of 46
Quote:Perhaps because there is reason to believe that lives are at stake.
Originally posted by thatweirdgirl:
If there is still a question of validity than why risk infringing on human rights? Why risk damaging our country's image? Why risk the sanity of interrogators?
Quote:No more so then the question of killing in self defense. You’re killing another person to benefit yourself in that case? How do you feel about killing in self-defense?
Originally posted by thatweirdgirl:
If it's not a moral question of harming another person to benefit yourself than what it is?
Nihil est incertius vulgo, nihil obscurius voluntate hominum, nihil fallacius ratione tota comitiorum.
Nothing is more unpredictable than the mob, nothing more obscure than public opinion, nothing more deceptive than the whole political system.
-- Cicero
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Ah, so in your mind INTENT is the key difference? We torture, but we don't "intend" to kill? And when we do kill, we kill for a good cause, and kinda by accident? So even if our means are questionable our goals are good?
---------------------------------
It's the end of the world as we know it, and I feel fine.
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
A crime is a crime. Torture isn't worse than murder, but it's still a fucking crime.
And you chickenshits justifying it as not being torture are cowardly little chumps afraid to face the truth. Our country long ago designated waterboarding as torture, and imprisoned many apanese for that very crime.
You excuses are meaningless.
"I thoroughly disapprove of duels. If a man should challenge me, I would take him kindly and forgivingly by the hand and lead him to a quiet place and kill him."
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Quote:Signym, moral relativism means that you are applying different judgments to different cultures. The acceptable morals are relative based on culture or ethnicity or environment.
Originally posted by SignyM:
So moral relativism is saying that its better to kill someone even thought you weren't specifically targeting them, than to kill someone on purpose? Does "intent" come into this? Or just the final outcome?
Nihil est incertius vulgo, nihil obscurius voluntate hominum, nihil fallacius ratione tota comitiorum.
Nothing is more unpredictable than the mob, nothing more obscure than public opinion, nothing more deceptive than the whole political system.
-- Cicero
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Quote:
Originally posted by AURaptor:
I've never seen any where near the rage and anger toward the terrorists as I've seen displayed for those who decided that harsh interrogation, and NOT torture, was worth engaging in when the lives of 1000's of civilians was at risk. The phony, mock indignation of the Left over the NON issue of water boarding is a bit much to take.
Not to muddy the water with facts, but the memos that just came out state that the torture of Iraqis was not conducted to save 1000's of lives, but to establish a link between Al Qaeda and the Iraqi government, in other words, political CYA for an unjustified war.
And for 100 years, according to the Geneva Conventions which our nation upheld until the Bush Admin. decided to pretend it was legal and appropriate, waterboarding was a serious issue, was considered torture, and outside the authoritarian fringe, it is still a serious issue and is still considered torture.
One wonders how far you would be willing to further move the goal post, since we are a long long way away from frat hazing here.
HKCavalier
Hey, hey, hey, don't be mean. We don't have to be mean, because, remember, no matter where you go, there you are.
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Quote:The intent does motivate methods. If the intent is to find information, then it doesn’t really do that much good to torture a person to point that he can no longer provide truthful information. On the other hand, if the intent is to extract confessions, then that is exactly what you want to do. There is a difference.
Originally posted by SignyM:
Ah, so in your mind INTENT is the key difference? We torture, but we don't "intend" to kill? And when we do kill, we kill for a good cause, and kinda by accident? So even if our means are questionable our goals are good?.
Nihil est incertius vulgo, nihil obscurius voluntate hominum, nihil fallacius ratione tota comitiorum.
Nothing is more unpredictable than the mob, nothing more obscure than public opinion, nothing more deceptive than the whole political system.
-- Cicero
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Quote:That's kind of what I'm getting at. If you had simply said that it's worse to kill a lot of people with a car bomb than it is to waterboard a single person I would agree. OTOH it seems to make a difference to you WHO is doing the killing, and for what reason. It's not okay for "terrorists" to kill people with car bombs, but okay for "governments" to kill people with missiles?
Signym, moral relativism means that you are applying different judgments to different cultures. The acceptable morals are relative based on culture or ethnicity or environment.
---------------------------------
It's the end of the world as we know it, and I feel fine.
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Quote:How do you feel about someone walking off a cliff?
Originally posted by Finn mac Cumhal:
How do you feel about killing in self-defense?
The laughing Chrisisall
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Quote:I suspect that there is a set of circumstances in which even the hardest of resolve will crack.
Originally posted by AgentRouka:
So if the information extracted is just as likely to be false as during non-torture interrogation, why bother? You win nothing. I sincerely doubt that pain is going to motivate any fanatic to suddenly sell out their ideals when they could just as easily lie and obfuscate, so "penetrating that resolve" doesn't seem like something that would happen.
Nihil est incertius vulgo, nihil obscurius voluntate hominum, nihil fallacius ratione tota comitiorum.
Nothing is more unpredictable than the mob, nothing more obscure than public opinion, nothing more deceptive than the whole political system.
-- Cicero
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Quote:I smell some moral relativism comin' off that statement.
Originally posted by SignyM:
It's not okay for "terrorists" to kill people with car bombs, but okay for "governments" to kill people with missiles?
The laughing Chrisisall
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME