Shane Tuttle
Staff
So, you're agreeing the fact there's a difference in your statement of assaulting a fellow citizen and mine taking out a person hell bent on the destruction of our country?
The arguement is repeatedly dependent on a strained definition of torture, an exploded view of what the scope of what waterboarding is or has been used for (asphixiation, dunking heads underwater, drowning, law enforcement applications), or the use of a fascist state scenario to try to keep a hold of the hash interrogation=torture sophistry.
How is pointing out precedent "diversion?"
So, does that mean waterboarding is not torture or that it is okay to torture certain people?
So, you're agreeing the fact there's a difference in your statement of assaulting a fellow citizen and mine taking out a person hell bent on the destruction of our country?
Well this sleep deprivation thing is clearly intolerable. Miss a night or two of sleep and your being tortured because if you miss 3 to 6 months you'll DIE.
Looks like we're a torture society all around. Sleep deprivation makes a midwatch torture if you worked a double yesterday. WIDESPREAD in systematic torture in the military. Doctors working as interns are subjected to repeated and pervasive torture for what? To become phisichians. Horrific! We are truely morally bankrupt.....
Well this sleep deprivation thing is clearly intolerable. Miss a night or two of sleep and your being tortured because if you miss 3 to 6 months you'll DIE.
Bring up examples where soldiers or civilians were waterboarded and people were ultimately punished for it doesn't show anything because thats not what is being discussed here.
Still disagree?Defining something that leaves you whole, uninjured, and as well 20 minutes after as were before (esentially frightening them into spilling their guts about he details) requires a very strained definition of torture and facing it for threatening ANY nations national security or for killing their innocent civilians for the purpose of causing terror is hardly unreasonable let alone immoral.
Still disagree?
and you have the cajones to claim others are making false comparisons. What a joke.I assume you wouldn't brandish a loaded firearm at someone that had broken into your home and threaten to shoot them either. THAT will frighten them with the fear of eminent death, that's torture, you need to vacate your home and call 911 instead.
The difference between "waterboarding" in training, and real-life waterboarding is that you can be absolutely 100% sure that someone who "waterboards" you in training isn't going to kill you, because that would make the training useless, no?
Still disagree?
What did this guy do to deserve to be complely in your power by being held hostage by you and fear for his life?There is a world of difference between being willing to use lethal force to defend your family and yourself from an immediate and direct threat versus taking a defenseless prisoner who is completely in your power and torturing them for information they may or may not have.
WRONG WRONG WRONG
That is FAR from 100%. It becomes more of a 'hope' The thoughts "WTF!.......are these people INSANE?!?!..........does the chain of command know what's going on here?!?!?!?!............how many people die in THIS training excercise?!?!?!..........is anyone even watching what is happening?........what the hell?!?!?!?!" overwelm ANY sense of a begnign training.
As one who spends most of his life in Manhattan, rides the R train to work almost every day, and sits in a 51st floor office just a couple blocks from the NYSE, I know I'd be right in the middle of any such attack. I say "yes", I still disagree. I am not suicidal, but I will not abandon my morals or my principles in the name of fear. We're quickly becomming a nation of scared little ninnies, far too ready to compromise our liberties, our morals, and our principles for a false sense of security.
What did this guy do to deserve to be complely in your power by being held hostage by you and fear for his life?
Arent these only-half-related examples just plain ignorant?
So you would have supported the President's position about alowing the attack to take place rather then 'abandon his morals and principles in the name of fear'.