Had Al-Zarqawi been captured alive, would you advocate torturing him for information?

Status
Not open for further replies.
Yes i do see how slippery the slope is. In my first post i stated that i wouldn't expect any different if i was caught. The purpose of terrorisim is to terrorize. I don't fault the methods they use it's the cause in which they are using it for.
 
I don't fault the methods they use
Click to expand...

That's fair enough, then. Difference in perspective. You respect their tactics and their terror; you just disagree with their cause. You cannot, then, denounce them for the public beheading of Nick Berg, for instance; they did it to rally their own and dishearten us...."anything to win".

For myself, I consider them scumbags, medieval barbarians, vermin and base lowlifes, not worthy to breathe my air. I feel this way, not because of their cause, but because of the level to which they stoop to "win". And I would certainly hope that my nation, my government and I would insist that we be better.

YMMV and you have that right.
Rich
 
I don't fault their methods because they are effective. I would much rather they as a group would listen to reason and be more yielding in their stance toward nonmuslims. I don't believe that they should take such a hard line in their beliefs. To go to such extremes to push your ideological views on someone is what i don't beleive in. To live and let live would be nice but looking back in history i haven't found one society that has done that. Having to stoop to their level is regrettable but i do beleive it's better than letting them win. Thanks for the discussion. I don't normally get involved in these threads
 
For myself, I consider them scumbags, medieval barbarians, vermin and base lowlifes, not worthy to breathe my air.
Click to expand...

Rich, can I quote you on that for my signature? That's a really good way to express how we feel about terrorists.

Rapier144; just a question for you.

In my first post i stated that i wouldn't expect any different if i was caught.
Click to expand...

Are you or have you been deployed to an area like that; or do you say that from the safety of your keyboard? If I were in Iraq right now, I'd expect that, but I'd wouldn't treat them the same way in return.

Imagine if some military force occupied the good old USA tomorrow. If they tortured us, we as citizens would resist heavily. Now, If we were to torture people in Iraq, they would resist even more than they already are. You see what I mean? We are trying to win the support of the public, not to oppress them.... that would be too easy; and wouldn't be what we want anyways.
 
I don't fault their methods because they are effective. I would much rather they as a group would listen to reason and be more yielding in their stance toward nonmuslims. I don't believe that they should take such a hard line in their beliefs. To go to such extremes to push your ideological views on someone is what i don't beleive in. To live and let live would be nice but looking back in history i haven't found one society that has done that. Having to stoop to their level is regrettable but i do beleive it's better than letting them win. Thanks for the discussion. I don't normally get involved in these threads
Click to expand...

When I was a young lad I used to tell my mother that I should be allowed to do all the things that my peers where doing. She asked me if they jumped off a cliff, would I jump off a cliff. I said No and Mother won the discussion. Once you jump off that cliff there is no return.
 
torture

For those who would torture the terrorists, I understand your feeling. It is an honest, and common emotional reaction. They have caused a lot of pain, and we want then to suffer pain, in return. It is not what we should do, but it is how we feel.

As far as physical torture for information, no. That is not our way. It is not right. No matter how emotionally satisfying the thought might be, we hold ourselves to a higher standard. And rightly so.

Also, our use of torture would justify their position, in their own, and many other's eyes.
 
rapier144 said:
I don't fault their methods because they are effective.
Click to expand...
I feel very sorry for you. :(

The Romans used crucifixion quite effectively to keep the Hebrews in line.
Tomás de Torquemada managed to convert thousands to Christianity by burning people alive.
Southern whites used whippings to keep their slaves under control.
Lenin and Stalin made use of gulags to effectively keep their own people working.
Hitler had a very effective method of getting rid of "undesirables."

All greatly effective methods of achieving their goals, eh? Can't fault them, can you... :barf:

-Dave
 
1 - punishment that isn't cruel or unusual doesn't work (thus we have repeat offenders who obviously don't care about doing a little time in the can or paying fines)

2 - i wouldn't torture or kill him if he were alive, simply because it would make him a martyr. On the other hand, I wouldn't let him sleep, eat, or bathe as much as he'd like to, either...
 
Torture him? Awww, that's all in the past now.

I say torture his faction - lop off that dead mans head, plop it on a stick in the blazing sun, point a 24-hour web cam on it, and let the whole world watch it rot.
 
Had Al-Zarqawi been captured alive, would you advocate torturing him for information?
Click to expand...
Not really.

Course I sure wouldn't go out of my way to prevent it either.....

Fact of the matter is I really don't care one way or the other.
I had no idea who he was two weeks ago, and two weeks from now I'll probably forget who he was.

To me he's just another one of the "good ones" - just like the two Gitmo ones that hanged themselves the other day.
 
You bet!!

If it would yield information that would save just ONE innocent life. When the battery cables are hooked to his privates just remember: Red to positave and black to negative!!!!!
 
Torture him? I agree that he had no reason to expect protection under the relevant international laws and conventions pertaining to such, and I don't think that he had any reason to expect protection under our own laws, either. So, I have no real problems with the application of torture, legally speaking. We would be justified in using it if we wanted to. But, I have 2 practical reasons to advise against it. First, we do have the need to win the PR war, and that means that we have to maintain the high moral ground. Torture, even when applied to those who are not protected against it by law, erodes that high ground. Second, we would have to factor in the reliability of the intel gained by torture. Historically, intel gained by torture is unreliable.

What I would be in favor of is isolating him and filling him full of "Babble Juice": Sodium Thiopental and interrogating him, and even then I wouldn't believe him.
 
As much as it would satisfy my emotional need to inflict upon the inflicter, I would have to say no from the moral standpoint. A couple of reasons.

Among the top reasons for no, is that I would have to live with my actions upon my judgement. And before I was judged by God, I would have to live with looking at myself in the mirror. Sometimes the greatest enemy lies within the self.

The well posted and expressed belief that we have to maintain the highground.

We do have a public relations war to win, in addition to the war on terror. Remember, we have to share the planet with these other countries.

Again, well posted statement that the gained information would be questionable.

But some of my other thoughts are a little different. What context was the original question in?

Would we do it, if it was sanctioned by our superiors? Well, then no, again that would be from the moral standpoint.

Would we do it, if it was only to be known among you and those closest to you? Again, no. Because something like that you can't keep secret. Just look at Abu Graib, they weren't even trying to get info, just humiliate the prisoners. Now there in a whole new dimension of trouble.

And again, no. Because as a nation, we have already declared our stance on torture very publicly. The Abu Graib soldiers are facing serious charges. We are investigating the recent massacre, (I can't remember what Iraqi city it was in. Not exactly torture related but still in the public spotlight). And most importantly, saddam hussein is on trial right now for, among other crimes, torture. If we were to participate in such an act willingly, we might as well drop the torture charges against him.

No, if we caught him alive he would be on trial, same as hussein. Because it wouldn't take long before the whole world found out we had him, and then it wouldn't really be up to any one person anymore. The world would demand that he recieve judgement from the Iraqi people. If they want to torture him, let them do so, they're probably better at it than we are anyway.:cool:
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top