RE: "enhanced interrogation techniques" - is a term originally coined by the Nazis.

RE: "enhanced interrogation techniques" - is a term originally coined by the Nazis. (Full Version)

All Forums >> [Casual Banter] >> Off the Grid

Message

farglebargle -> RE: "enhanced interrogation techniques" - is a term originally coined by the Nazis. (5/31/2007 6:52:12 PM)
Ok, how about this one. Forgive the pseudo-code. if ( accomplishes ($GOAL ) ) { Rape; };

thompsonx -> RE: "enhanced interrogation techniques" - is a term originally coined by the Nazis. (5/31/2007 6:54:37 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: lockedaway Post the sources to which you refer. lockedaway: If you tell me which post you are referring to I would be glad to but I cannot read your mind. thompson

Kirata -> RE: "enhanced interrogation techniques" - is a term originally coined by the Nazis. (5/31/2007 6:56:07 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: farglebargle Well, it's a MORAL stance, isn't it. To be precise, it is a stance that relies on a claim to moral superiority. Whether or not it is superior, or even moral at all, is a separate matter. Presenting the logic by which you arrive at the GOOD is this situation creates a problem. When "moral" choices are arrived at by reason, reason is determining your actions -- not morality. There goes the moral claim. The next duck is your logic. K.

farglebargle -> RE: "enhanced interrogation techniques" - is a term originally coined by the Nazis. (5/31/2007 6:56:39 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: lockedaway "Did you read the article, to which this entire thread refers? I suspect not, because that charge is very much answered in the article." What the hell does the above have to do with the relevant point that I raised, which is that you repeatedly compare the U.S., or some aspect of the U.S., to Nazi Germany??? Well, you see, it's losing family in the camps, that makes me especially sensitive to the direct parallels between the Germany in say 1934, and the USA, regarding the way the Rule of Law is being discarded in the name of "The Fatherland"... Sorry.... It's "Homeland" this time around the wheel. Having daughters, I think, makes me especially sensitive to the issue of Self-Governance and it's inter-relationship with Freedom and Liberty. If THEY are deprived of choice in ANY aspect of their lives, are they truly free, and if they aren't free, how should they be taught to react? "Life During Wartime", y'know. In other words, "I calls 'em as I sees 'em".

lockedaway -> RE: "enhanced interrogation techniques" - is a term originally coined by the Nazis. (5/31/2007 6:56:48 PM)
Your post number to which I responded is probably listed on my post, isn't it? If not it is concerning your war of 1812 post. But our conversation is going to be quite short if you aren't going to show me the courtesy of answering the question I just asked in my prior post to you.

farglebargle -> RE: "enhanced interrogation techniques" - is a term originally coined by the Nazis. (5/31/2007 6:58:03 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Kirata quote: ORIGINAL: farglebargle Well, it's a MORAL stance, isn't it. To be precise, it is a stance that relies on a claim to moral superiority. I have no problem saying that I am BETTER than some child-rapist, or torturer. No problem at all.

lockedaway -> RE: "enhanced interrogation techniques" - is a term originally coined by the Nazis. (5/31/2007 7:00:55 PM)
I gotta tell ya, pal, I really don't care a hoot in hell about your alleged concerns because you may have had family that suffered in WWII. See....millions upon millions of families suffered during WWII and it is still bullsh*t for you to compare any aspect of this country to Nazi Germany. It is an emotional, stupid and disrectful comparison and you make it all of the time. Now I corrected you once before about comparing this country to Nazi Germany and I told you that a valid comparison was to compare us to Peru. After I pointed that out to you, you became noticeably quiet. Nope....you LIKE TO COMPARE US TO THE NAZIS. Why? Is it in your family history? Is it because the jews were one of the major targets of the Holocaust? What is it?

Aswad -> RE: "enhanced interrogation techniques" - is a term originally coined by the Nazis. (5/31/2007 7:01:13 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: DesertRat You'd lose. I don't know who Ward Churchill is...or was...whatever. And, no, I don't think all Americans are fascists. Just the ones who condone torture. My opinions on torture and American foreign policy aside... Fascism is not related to torture, per se. It is the doctrine that the state constitutes a larger organism, a "higher being" if you will, than the individual, and that the importance of an individual lies in their contribution to the collective. Kind of like how cells in the human body are individual cells that contribute to the human whole. It is a doctrine I wholeheartedly disagree with, being of the opinion that the collective was formed to aid the individual and has no other value or independent existance. However, it is also a doctrine I do not see present in America to an extent deserving the label. Is there tons of stuff I disagree with in their foreign policy? Yes. Is the use of torture something I condone as an act of government under present circumstances? No. But to say that either is intrinsic to, or indicative of, fascism, is- IMO- undervaluing the scope and nature of the abomination of fascism, and entirely inappropriate. Fascism is the worse crime, in my eyes: it devalues and abuses the individual that allows it to exist, as a parasite with no redeeming value, and runs contrary to everything anyone practicing BDSM should (IMHO) believe in. Don't sell the bad guy short.

thompsonx -> RE: "enhanced interrogation techniques" - is a term originally coined by the Nazis. (5/31/2007 7:01:24 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: lockedaway Re-read what I said. Try to focus on the part where I say "giving the benefit of the doubt". Now you understand what that means...right? I never said I had conclusive proof for one side or the other, did I???? Nope, I said that the people that have employed it, specifically water boarding, was that it worked. Now who am I going to give the benefit of the doubt to? Am I going to excoriate members of our military or our intelligence for using it although I find it reprehensible? No...I'm not. If they say it works and that they have obtained valuable intel then I'm going to say "do it, then." Does that answer your question? Now, hows about answering mine. IF you had conclusive proof that enhanced interrogation worked, would you support the use of it. Yes.....or......No. lockedaway: More weasel words...it appears that you consider opinion to be justification. If you can't deal in facts then please do not waste my time. thompson

lockedaway -> RE: "enhanced interrogation techniques" - is a term originally coined by the Nazis. (5/31/2007 7:02:44 PM)
Maybe you are....maybe you're not!!! [image]http://www.collarchat.com/micons/m28.gif[/image]

lockedaway -> RE: "enhanced interrogation techniques" - is a term originally coined by the Nazis. (5/31/2007 7:04:21 PM)
That was certainly a gutless post! You asked me a question about my support of enhanced interrogation and I answered it. I turned your question back on you and you won't answer it. Gutless!

thompsonx -> RE: "enhanced interrogation techniques" - is a term originally coined by the Nazis. (5/31/2007 7:04:22 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: lockedaway Your post number to which I responded is probably listed on my post, isn't it? If not it is concerning your war of 1812 post. But our conversation is going to be quite short if you aren't going to show me the courtesy of answering the question I just asked in my prior post to you. lockedaway: Tell me which war you want to quibble about and I will cite for you. thompson

lockedaway -> RE: "enhanced interrogation techniques" - is a term originally coined by the Nazis. (5/31/2007 7:05:26 PM)
You are no longer relevant. There is no discourse that can be had with you.

farglebargle -> RE: "enhanced interrogation techniques" - is a term originally coined by the Nazis. (5/31/2007 7:10:33 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: lockedaway I gotta tell ya, pal, I really don't care a hoot in hell about your alleged concerns There is none so blind, as he who chooses not to see. Take my comments under advisement. PRAY they are not prescient. quote: it is still bullsh*t for you to compare any aspect of this country to Nazi Germany. Hitler used Fear of Jews to deprive formally Democratic Germans of Equal Protection and Due Process. Bush used Fear of Muslims to deprive formally Democratic Americans of Equal Protection and Due Process. See the similarity?

Aswad -> RE: "enhanced interrogation techniques" - is a term originally coined by the Nazis. (5/31/2007 7:12:13 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: farglebargle Torture is, like Rape, INHERENTLY EVIL, and therefore there is NEVER any justification for it. Perhaps. It is inherently undesireable, if committed on a non-consenting party, I would agree, and such would also be the case for most western schools of ethics. I will refrain from commenting on the concept of "evil", save to say that I have not found the concept useful in any context. Perhaps you might substitute "abominable" or somesuch? That said, given the choice between such an atrocity against a stranger, and losing the people I love, I'd have to go with being the bad guy. Then again, I consider survival from the naturalist side: you do what you have to do. This does not, however, imply that I mean it is currently being used for acceptable reasons. quote: If you'll rape someone for a GOOD reason, you'll rape them for ANY reason. This does not follow. If you are willing to do X to survive, it does not follow that you'll do X to get yourself killed when you want to live, for instance. Suffice to say that if you'll hurt someone given what you consider an adequate reason (I will not bring justification into it; I would not feel justified in doing such a thing, even if I, in my opinion, had due cause to do it) then you will do it for any adequate reason, because you have the capacity to do it when you have the need to. That does not imply that you would do it for what you consider inadequate reasons, or that you would do it "just for kicks", or even like doing it.

lockedaway -> RE: "enhanced interrogation techniques" - is a term originally coined by the Nazis. (5/31/2007 7:15:19 PM)
No I don't. I see where Bush has incarcerrated illegal combatants and those suspected of committing or conspiring to commit acts of terrorism against the U.S. This AGAIN goes back to that famous prior thread when we got into a protracted discussion about trying terrorists in State courts. So...you are wrong to compare this country to Nazi Germany. Period. Why don't you have the moral courage to admit you are wrong (just like on the UDHR issue) and get away from it? Why Fargle? Why oh why? LOLOLOLOL like I really care. You wanna compare this country to Nazi Germany? Many hundreds of thousands of Americans gave their lives for you to have the right to spew such stupidity.

farglebargle -> RE: "enhanced interrogation techniques" - is a term originally coined by the Nazis. (5/31/2007 7:15:48 PM)
quote: That does not imply that you would do it for what you consider inadequate reasons, or that you would do it "just for kicks", or even like doing it. I think when you create the infrastructure, that mindset is inevitable, the "Dumb 21 year old PFC who did something..." when you don't have strict discipline, people are going to get raped up the ass with broomsticks. This ties into the challenges of an Occupation force vs. an Invasion Force, and how come Bush is so stupid he doesn't know the difference, much less how to properly command either?

Aswad -> RE: "enhanced interrogation techniques" - is a term originally coined by the Nazis. (5/31/2007 7:16:46 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: lockedaway Saddam tortured people...well...just cuz. [...] Are you making a moral equivalent argument that water boarding a terrorist is equal to giving a woman who failed to wear her head covering an acid bath? Do not confuse Saddam with the Taliban. The latter example is from the Taliban regime, not from Iraq. In fact, the main targets of Saddam's violence were the religious fundamentalists, many of whom supported such atrocities as that example. Saddam did not condone their beliefs or their willingness to let their beliefs harm others in such a way. Net result? He oppressed the majority of his population, because the majority of his population was abominable to his mind. There are people now moving out of Iraq because they fear what things will be like when the US withdraws, and the islamic fundamentalist majority gets control (what is supposed to happen in a democracy, really: the majority rules). Exactly because they don't want to risk such things for failing to wear their head cloths or whatever.

lockedaway -> RE: "enhanced interrogation techniques" - is a term originally coined by the Nazis. (5/31/2007 7:20:23 PM)
Are you talking about the "woman failing to wear her head covering" or the "acid bath" part? I'm certain I heard that Saddam used acid baths. If I'm wrong about the woman not wearing her head covering, I was actually trying to be .... metaphorical? Saddam's campaign of torture wasn't limited to political dissidents or members of particular religious sects. To my knowledge, anyone could have been subject to being whisked away and tortured. I'm I'm incorrect then I stand corrected.

farglebargle -> RE: "enhanced interrogation techniques" - is a term originally coined by the Nazis. (5/31/2007 7:21:55 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: lockedaway No I don't. I see where Bush has incarcerrated I don't see how, without Due Process and Equal Protection, Bush can lawfully incarcerate anyone. quote: illegal combatants and those suspected of committing or conspiring to commit acts of terrorism against the U.S. Y'all got EVIDENCE to support those charges? Because if you do, those CRIMINALS MUST BE CHARGED, TRIED, and if found Guilty, EXECUTED in full accordance with The Law. Terrorism, and Conspiring to Commit are CRIMES under U.S. Law. This IS a Constitutional Republic, isn't it? Do I need to explain the special significance of the Rule of Law under a Constitutional Republic? Or are you advocating the OBSTRUCTION OF JUSTICE? Are you really SOFT ON CRIME? SOFT ON TERRORIST CRIMINALS? Or do you just hate the fundamental underpinnings of Justice and Our American Way of Life?

Page: << < prev 3 4 [5] 6 7 next > >>

Collarchat.com © 2025

Terms of Service

0.046875