Poll: Is torture acceptable?
This poll is closed.
Yes, we should be able to do whatever's necessary regardless of the ethical concerns or consequences 0% 0 0%
Yes, but only in specific situations where there's no viable alternative 11.54% 3 11.54%
No, it doesn't work and is morally repugnant 80.77% 21 80.77%
Other. Please explain. 7.69% 2 7.69%
Total 26 votes 100%
* You voted for this item. [Show Results]

The Torture Debate - Yes, yes with caveats, or no?
Post Reply
 
Thread Rating:
  • 0 Votes - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
27-01-2017, 12:39 AM
RE: The Torture Debate - Yes, yes with caveats, or no?
No, absolutely not.

That is not the America that I swore to defend, and that is not an America I would ever fight for. Ever.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 6 users Like Thumpalumpacus's post
27-01-2017, 05:12 PM
RE: The Torture Debate - Yes, yes with caveats, or no?
I voted for "Yes, but only in specific situations where there's no viable alternative".

I'm old enough to support the old adage 'fight fire with fire'. For too long the West has pussyfooted around the issue of Islamic (and other) terrorist activities against its countries and states. Can anybody give me any sort of ethical and/or moral justification why we shouldn't torture a captured terrorist who's just just killed thirty innocent little kids and their mothers, or bombed a hospital or a school, or cut the throat of a non-involved journalist?

Assuming they have knowledge of pertinent information about their cell leaders or weapon sources, or future operative plans, why shouldn't we attempt to force them to divulge this? Ultimately, does anybody give two fucks as to whether these scumbags live or die? I hope not.

I'm a creationist... I believe that man created God.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
27-01-2017, 05:19 PM
RE: The Torture Debate - Yes, yes with caveats, or no?
(27-01-2017 05:12 PM)SYZ Wrote:  I voted for "Yes, but only in specific situations where there's no viable alternative".

I'm old enough to support the old adage 'fight fire with fire'. For too long the West has pussyfooted around the issue of Islamic (and other) terrorist activities against its countries and states. Can anybody give me any sort of ethical and/or moral justification why we shouldn't torture a captured terrorist who's just just killed thirty innocent little kids and their mothers, or bombed a hospital or a school, or cut the throat of a non-involved journalist?

Assuming they have knowledge of pertinent information about their cell leaders or weapon sources, or future operative plans, why shouldn't we attempt to force them to divulge this? Ultimately, does anybody give two fucks as to whether these scumbags live or die? I hope not.

While I can agree with the sentiment, torture should never be legal. To officially condone it is to lose any claim to the moral high ground or to claim being a humane society.

However, if I had the kidnapper of my missing child strapped to a chair, I would not hesitate to use torture.

Skepticism is not a position; it is an approach to claims.
Science is not a subject, but a method.
[Image: flagstiny%206.gif]
Visit this user's website Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes Chas's post
30-06-2017, 10:04 PM (This post was last modified: 30-06-2017 10:09 PM by yakherder.)
RE: The Torture Debate - Yes, yes with caveats, or no?
Not directly related to this thread, but I didn't want to create a new one either... Heck maybe it should go in random thoughts, since I don't really have a point but to ramble as I explore my thoughts.

This video popped up recently of a few (presumably) Russian or Russian affiliated soldiers using a hammer to torture a (presumably) ISIS guy. The reactions in the various discussions on the articles displaying the video, Facebook, etc. range from "That's horrible" to "he probably deserved it". As is often the case, I find myself completely unaffected and asking myself "If I had a normal sense of empathy, how would I feel about this kind of thing?"

Assuming the guy was part of ISIS, and assuming he did horrible things himself, as it stands I neither feel sorry for him nor feel that I would gain any satisfaction from seeing him suffer. If he were still a danger, I'd simply put a round in his head and be done with it. If he were not a danger and the rules of engagement dictated that he be detained, I'd turn him over to the MPs and be done with it. No love, no hate, just solving a problem.

Why do people (and I'm primarily talking about the soldiers involved) have to be all emotional about it and make it into a situation that didn't need to exist?


Edit: Heck maybe the whole thing was staged. That patch seems too obvious to be accidental. Or maybe I'm just over analyzing it. Either way, same thoughts on the subject.

'Murican Canadian
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
01-07-2017, 12:07 AM
RE: The Torture Debate - Yes, yes with caveats, or no?
Nope, it's never acceptable in my opinion. It should be illegal in all cases. Even if it was guaranteed to work, there should be moral lines that aren't crossed. If you do it, you're now a terrorist justifying the means by the ends. Like all terrorists.

I have a website here which discusses the issues and terminology surrounding religion and atheism. It's hopefully user friendly to all.
Visit this user's website Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
01-07-2017, 02:20 AM
RE: The Torture Debate - Yes, yes with caveats, or no?
(26-01-2017 11:37 AM)Lord Dark Helmet Wrote:  All studies? Or just ones you agree with?

The CIA says without a doubt, torture has saved American lives.

That's good enough for me.

Do you remember back when the United States had ideals? Ones that were so important and worthwhile, that upholding and maintaining them was worth the price?

Do you remember when human dignity and freedom were like that?

Do you remember when being less safe was the cost of freedom? When we were willing to pay the cost to ensure and protect human dignity?

Do you remember what it's like to be brave in the face of danger, to accept that danger head on, because the cost of guarding freedom was worth it?


I remember. I'm willing to forgo torture, even if it does work, because I think we should be better than that. But being better than that imposes a risk, and it's a risk I'm willing to bear, because I think having the moral high ground is worth it. You cannot lead the world through example with torture.


You can go back to cowering in your basement next to your guns and ammo. Pussy.

Every one of your garbage political opinions always comes back around to you being scared shit-less. I wonder why that is?

[Image: E3WvRwZ.gif]
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 3 users Like EvolutionKills's post
01-07-2017, 02:27 AM
RE: The Torture Debate - Yes, yes with caveats, or no?
(27-01-2017 05:19 PM)Chas Wrote:  While I can agree with the sentiment, torture should never be legal. To officially condone it is to lose any claim to the moral high ground or to claim being a humane society.

However, if I had the kidnapper of my missing child strapped to a chair, I would not hesitate to use torture.

Which is precisely why you, nor anybody else, should ever be in such a position.

The ones carrying out justice need a level of distance and dispassion (and yes, empathy as well) so that they do not succumb to our more base instincts, our desire for retribution.

[Image: E3WvRwZ.gif]
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
01-07-2017, 05:58 AM
RE: The Torture Debate - Yes, yes with caveats, or no?
(26-01-2017 11:37 AM)Lord Dark Helmet Wrote:  The CIA says without a doubt, torture has saved American lives.

That's good enough for me.
That;s sorted then.

Oh, hang on, I'm not American. It's definitely not good enough for me.

“I am not responsible for actions of the imaginary version of me you have inside your head.” - John Scalzi

Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 3 users Like Norm Deplume's post
01-07-2017, 06:03 AM
RE: The Torture Debate - Yes, yes with caveats, or no?
(26-01-2017 11:37 AM)Lord Dark Helmet Wrote:  
(26-01-2017 11:27 AM)Revenant77x Wrote:  Except all studies of torture show it does not work. You are much more likely to get a false positive than usable intelligence.

All studies? Or just ones you agree with?

The CIA says without a doubt, torture has saved American lives.

That's good enough for me.

It's not a surprise you're naive enough to believe anything the CIA says.

Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
01-07-2017, 06:12 AM
RE: The Torture Debate - Yes, yes with caveats, or no?
Of course the fucking CIA, the one doing the torture, is going to say torture works. They're never going to say it doesn't work. Jesus fucking Christ.

Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes GenesisNemesis's post
Post Reply
Forum Jump: