RE: Getting into the grey (Full Version)

All Forums >> [Community Discussions] >> Dungeon of Political and Religious Discussion



Message


tazzygirl -> RE: Getting into the grey (9/5/2009 5:49:47 PM)

and yet you feel a need to defend someone else against the big, bad, stupid tazzy....

hmmm

interesting

alot more interesting than yourself

but there ya go, toots!




Arrogance -> RE: Getting into the grey (9/5/2009 6:27:41 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: tazzygirl

and yet you feel a need to defend someone else against the big, bad, stupid tazzy....

hmmm

interesting

alot more interesting than yourself

but there ya go, toots!


*Facepalm* Idiocy. .

Okay, sorry to you other folks, I promise this is my last post in derailment of this thread.




tazzygirl -> RE: Getting into the grey (9/5/2009 6:29:03 PM)

~sighs~

no, even that isnt fair, because not all young people are like this.

to the OP and those posting.. my appology.




TheHeretic -> RE: Getting into the grey (9/5/2009 7:29:52 PM)

Like I'm in any position to get offended about a thread I started getting off onto a tangent...  LOL




tazzygirl -> RE: Getting into the grey (9/5/2009 7:32:15 PM)

LOL.. sure why not!




SL4V3M4YB3 -> RE: Getting into the grey (9/6/2009 8:05:27 AM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: tazzygirl
when was the last time we heard about Russia having these problems (not internally created) or the Middle East?

It helps if all the media is run by the state. You don't hear about it for other reasons but in any case I wasn't talking about modern Russia. I was talking about the time people used to disappear and nobody knew why. Actually for some not much has changed you'll find those with all the money favour moving to the UK or other parts of Europe over their own homeland.
quote:


im not condemning them for what they do there. im comdemning them for what they do here. in this case, im no bleeding softy.

I think you'd probably want them to stop if you saw what they did even if the person they were doing it to was the devil himself. Compared to other nations the US are novices regarding their methods. You should not make such statements because they are too easy to make when you are isolated from the actual suffering involved.
quote:


On whose word does a suspect have the ability to kill anyone? Why are people so ignorant that they think no innocent person has ever been tortured for information they don't have based on the telepathic abilities of an interrogator? Get your head out of the sand and realise these people are suspects not proven criminals and even if their guilt had been proven the thing that separates us morally is we won't stoop to their level.
quote:


and they know we sont.. which gives them license to do pretty much what they want.

There are strategic advantages to act the way they do and also there are advantages for us to act the way we do. They will not win based on us having a moral code, they may take advantage of it but if there is enough evidence against them it is irrelevant how much they try to take advantage of our justice system. We don't say 'oh we must torture a crime boss because he is taking advantage of our legal system', we have to find a way to gather evidence against him, build a case, prosecute it and sentence him. It does not matter what field of criminal activity the process is the same and can't be escaped forever by playing the system.
quote:


Here is the simple lesson for you: we are not them, nothing they do will make us the animals they are. What next are we going to justify to beat them, you want us to become as bad as them and make no distinction between suspects and convicted criminals?
quote:


works for them, dont it.

Does it work for them have they won yet this war? How exactly do they win this war of theirs?

For me there is only one measure it's an important measure not pie in the sky stuff :

How much have they changed us compared to how much have we changed them?

I make this point continuously but they can only change us when we change who we are as a result of what they are doing to us.

On the basis of your posts here I'd say they are winning, I'd make that judgement based perhaps on you never thinking torture was a good idea before 911, but I'd only be guessing as to what your opinion on torture was before 911.
quote:


tell ya what... when it works in the UK, we will give it a go here. you cant solve your own terrorists problems, and you give the US grief?

Terrorism is a global problem these days you must be having a laugh if you think the US or any other nation is going to solve this issue alone. Not even with all your military power will you ever be able to stop someone coming into your country and planting a bomb. You have to take a pragmatic approach be vigilant and see what you can do defensively. If all your actions are seen to be pure defence and not pre-emptive aggressive actions on other territories then perhaps sooner or later any argument they have will have no voice to a wider audience. Most people around the world are good people able to distinguish right from wrong, some people have warped values and are able to convince others of their values based on demonstrated half truths relating to US actions in other parts of the world. If you are seen as whiter than white your cause will garner more sympathy than theirs.
quote:


explain to me whats fair about a system that concerns itself with one over the welfare of the many.

There are many people in US custody not just one. Let us look at this recurring question of yours from another perspective. If a terrorist blackmailed you saying 'you must kill everyone in this school or a nuclear bomb will be set of in this city', would you agree to that?

OK perhaps this question is more favourable:

If a terrorist blackmailed you saying 'you must kill everyone in this prison or a nuclear bomb will be set of in this city', would you agree to that?
I wouldn't agree to that because I'd be the one doing something wrong even if it was to kill just one person to save a thousand I wouldn't do that either sorry.
quote:


if i scare you so much, block me, always your option. just never assume you have any understanding of where i am coming from. you didnt walk my path in life, you have not dealt with my losses, nor do you have the capacity to understand my heritage.

I can only read the words you write to form an opinion of who you are, it's up to you to write in such a way that is unambiguous as to what you think and feel about a topic. Nobody gets points for being overly melodramatic it's a discussion nothing more.
quote:


i never once said to torture those without judicial review... i said the option should be available.
now, since you know my mind so well.. according to you... you figure out what that means and try and get it right this time.

Judicial review means a judge decides but that’s a kind of chicken and egg nonsense I've already mentioned because you have to prove guilt to some degree to deem it acceptable to torture that person and often you'd be torturing them because you have no real evidence for a judge to review to make such a decision. You have suspicion.

Perhaps your argument is the same as others have said ‘that having the threat of torture as a deterrent can reduce terrorism’. I’d have to then once again point out that this isn’t the case in other countries that condone torture.






Arpig -> RE: Getting into the grey (9/6/2009 9:07:02 AM)

There really is no grey area here. The question of the right or wrong of torture is irrelevant. Torture is illegal in the US, both through its treaty obligations and through the Bill of Rights. It really doesn't matter if its effective or not, it is illegal,and therefore the government should not be using it....period. If you don't like that fact, then change the laws.
The fact that captured extremists may not break to standard interrogation methods knowing there are no valid threats that can be made against them is irrelevant to the discussion...a red herring  if you would. The facts are the facts and given those facts the whole point is moot.




TheHeretic -> RE: Getting into the grey (9/6/2009 9:19:02 AM)

It's easy enough to say "the law is the law," Arpig, but it is also well established down here that the Constitution is not a suicide pact.  We have laws about all sorts of things and exceptions for all sorts of things.  The treaties that apply to the folks we are discussing here allow us to just take them out back and shoot them. 




Politesub53 -> RE: Getting into the grey (9/6/2009 11:27:57 AM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: TheHeretic

It's easy enough to say "the law is the law," Arpig, but it is also well established down here that the Constitution is not a suicide pact.  We have laws about all sorts of things and exceptions for all sorts of things.  The treaties that apply to the folks we are discussing here allow us to just take them out back and shoot them. 



I would like to see such a treaty Rich. Especially as you previously mentioned KSM who wasnt fighting on any battlefield. I also thought you guys said the Constitution is the be all and end all when arguing over guns, surely you cant just cherry pick the parts that suit your argument.





DomKen -> RE: Getting into the grey (9/6/2009 11:54:17 AM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: Politesub53

quote:

ORIGINAL: TheHeretic

It's easy enough to say "the law is the law," Arpig, but it is also well established down here that the Constitution is not a suicide pact.  We have laws about all sorts of things and exceptions for all sorts of things.  The treaties that apply to the folks we are discussing here allow us to just take them out back and shoot them. 



I would like to see such a treaty Rich. Especially as you previously mentioned KSM who wasnt fighting on any battlefield. I also thought you guys said the Constitution is the be all and end all when arguing over guns, surely you cant just cherry pick the parts that suit your argument.

KSM's capture is something we don't know anything definite about. he was reported captured 2 or 3 times and I don't think it was ever confirmed which time was when we actually caught.

However he was definitely not caught on the battlefield and therefore does not fall under the Geneva Conventiosn definition of illegal combatant and therefore is not subject to summary execution under that treaty.




TheHeretic -> RE: Getting into the grey (9/6/2009 12:06:05 PM)

You mention the battlefield, Polite, so I know you understand what I'm referring to.  I'm not so sure how we are getting from this to gun ownership issues, but I don't think the 2nd is a suicide pact either. 




TheHeretic -> RE: Getting into the grey (9/6/2009 12:24:47 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: DomKen

However he was definitely not caught on the battlefield and therefore does not fall under the Geneva Conventiosn definition of illegal combatant and therefore is not subject to summary execution under that treaty.




That would depend on how we define "battlefield," Ken.  I'm sure the lawyers can drag that out for quite some time.  Don't all military assaults and raids happen on a "battlefield" of some sort?  How much limbo can we create by playing with what the meaning of "is" is?

Honestly, I think the best way to have handled the whole KSM capture would be to have announced that he had been killed in a military raid, and never admit we had him.   

I can appreciate, Ken, that you hold a position that there is no such shade as grey, that everything is black and white.  You are welcome to that position, but I'm completely bored with talking to you about it.  We disagree.




Arpig -> RE: Getting into the grey (9/6/2009 12:45:26 PM)

quote:

The treaties that apply to the folks we are discussing here allow us to just take them out back and shoot them.
True, but those treaties do not allow you to torture them. End of discussion really.




DavanKael -> RE: Getting into the grey (9/6/2009 12:54:46 PM)

Torture happens, it's a reality.  In fact, in ugly circumstances, it's a necessity.  If I felt it was necessary to protecting me and mine, I would give great thought to how to cause extreme pain to another while keeping them alive and attempting to acquisition the information I desired and carry forth with that.  Seriously.  I mean, what's the quandry: either we have balls enough to protect ourselves or not.  If there's damage and death to be done, I want someone other than me and my loved ones taking the damage and/or doing the dying. 
  Davan
(Who has been accused of being overly optimistic and utopian but is absolutely dead serious about protecting Her and Hers)




SL4V3M4YB3 -> RE: Getting into the grey (9/6/2009 1:07:50 PM)

Far better to be accused of being a realist rather than a fantasist.

An armed gang broke into my house the other day and stole a family member, luckily for me I was able to torture them to find out where their hideout was.

Ludicrous!




GoddessImaginos -> RE: Getting into the grey (9/6/2009 1:09:42 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: DavanKael

Torture happens, it's a reality.  In fact, in ugly circumstances, it's a necessity.  If I felt it was necessary to protecting me and mine, I would give great thought to how to cause extreme pain to another while keeping them alive and attempting to acquisition the information I desired and carry forth with that.  Seriously.  I mean, what's the quandry: either we have balls enough to protect ourselves or not.  If there's damage and death to be done, I want someone other than me and my loved ones taking the damage and/or doing the dying. 
Davan
(Who has been accused of being overly optimistic and utopian but is absolutely dead serious about protecting Her and Hers)



{{{~*AGREES WITH THIS POST, EVERY WORD~*}}}




Sanity -> RE: Getting into the grey (9/6/2009 1:22:35 PM)


How about if we just play a really terrifying game of "good cop bad cop" with them. That okay?

quote:

ORIGINAL: Arpig
True, but those treaties do not allow you to torture them. End of discussion really.




Arpig -> RE: Getting into the grey (9/6/2009 1:34:05 PM)

It isn't a question of OK or not. It is clearly illegal. International treaties to which the US is a signatory as well as the Constitution (cruel and unusual punishment) make it so. It doesn't matter how useful or needful it may be, it is still illegal,and as such the government should not be doing it.
I understand, and even sympathize with the various reasons put forth in favour of torture, Hell I can even envision myself wanting to use it in certain circumstances, but that doesn't change the facts. It is illegal, and as such the government,especially, should not be engaged  in it.




Sanity -> RE: Getting into the grey (9/6/2009 1:55:26 PM)

I can see the script for Monty Python's greatest movie ever forming here in this very thread. Starring Will Smith though, and maybe with that guy from 'Airplane' in it too.

"How about if a bad cop were to take a jelly donut from a box and begin eating it in front of a terrorist without offering him one?"

"NO - you must always be perfectly nice and polite to these terrorist chaps at all times, regardless of the circumstances."








DomKen -> RE: Getting into the grey (9/6/2009 2:29:52 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: TheHeretic

quote:

ORIGINAL: DomKen

However he was definitely not caught on the battlefield and therefore does not fall under the Geneva Conventiosn definition of illegal combatant and therefore is not subject to summary execution under that treaty.




That would depend on how we define "battlefield," Ken.  I'm sure the lawyers can drag that out for quite some time.  Don't all military assaults and raids happen on a "battlefield" of some sort?  How much limbo can we create by playing with what the meaning of "is" is?

Honestly, I think the best way to have handled the whole KSM capture would be to have announced that he had been killed in a military raid, and never admit we had him.   

I can appreciate, Ken, that you hold a position that there is no such shade as grey, that everything is black and white.  You are welcome to that position, but I'm completely bored with talking to you about it.  We disagree.

IOW if someone has a well thought out position contrary to yours you don't wish to hear from them because they might convince others. Although I will give you a 'nice try' for the back handed ad hom in the last paragraph. Anyone who had read my posts over the years would know better than to accuse me of not seeing the world in shades of grey.

However in this case there is no grey. Torture does not reliably produce useable intelligence therefore engaging in torture is a waste of effort if the goal is gathering intelligence.




Page: <<   < prev  1 2 [3] 4   next >   >>

Valid CSS!




Collarchat.com © 2025
Terms of Service Privacy Policy Spam Policy
4.296875E-02