Im curious if this falls into simply liberal ***** versus right wing alpha categories, or if it's mixed.
Im curious if this falls into simply liberal ***** versus right wing alpha categories, or if it's mixed.
Torture? No. Absolutely not.Im curious if this falls into simply liberal ***** versus right wing alpha categories, or if it's mixed.
Torture? No. Absolutely not.
I have no problem with enhanced interrogation, sleep deprivation, confined space disorientation, loud music, barney marathons, light and heat disorientation. Waterboarding, I'm undecided on.
As long as I have a box of kleenex and a bottle of jergins.You're OK with Barney marathons? You sick bastard
Elmo (speaking as a stay at home dad one foot firmly in the realm of insanity) is our best weapon.Torture? No. Absolutely not.
I have no problem with enhanced interrogation, sleep deprivation, confined space disorientation, loud music, barney marathons, light and heat disorientation. Waterboarding, I'm undecided on.
Im curious if this falls into simply liberal ***** versus right wing alpha categories, or if it's mixed.
I think we have to ask the question without looking at results. To me, it's unAmerican in nature, but I felt the same about the lack of due process for suspected terrorists in Gitmo.You'd have to define "torture." Waterboarding, to me, is not torture. We have medical supervision at the interrogation. We use this technique on our own soldiers. As for this kind of enhanced technique, I would use it if lives were at risk and the guy being interrogated knows the information to stop it.
Let me pose a counter hypothetical question to you. If a dirty bomb or a chemical weapon is about to go off in NYC and we have a captured terrorist that can help us stop it, what lengths would you go to to save potentially hundreds of thousands of lives?
I have same feelings.Torture? No. Absolutely not.
I have no problem with enhanced interrogation, sleep deprivation, confined space disorientation, loud music, barney marathons, light and heat disorientation. Waterboarding, I'm undecided on.
Torture? No. Absolutely not.
I have no problem with enhanced interrogation, sleep deprivation, confined space disorientation, loud music, barney marathons, light and heat disorientation. Waterboarding, I'm undecided on.
I think we have to ask the question without looking at results. To me, it's unAmerican in nature, but I felt the same about the lack of due process for suspected terrorists in Gitmo.
Waterboard? I don't like it, but I don't know the technique (it seems to be differentiated from torture by most). But I wouldn't allow anything that uses intense pain or fear of death to acquire any information.I answered your question, don't dissemble. We have to look at the size of the risk we face otherwise we can't intelligently evaluate the situation.
Again, if hundreds of thousands of lives are at stake, what would you do to try and get that information out of a terrorist? Would you waterboard, for example?
Yes, the conservatives need something to make them feel like badasses to satisfy their ego that they can't satisfy by their own accomplishments.
Bone spur Donnie is a perfect example. Can't fight his way out of a wet paper bag.
Yes, the conservatives need something to make them feel like badasses to satisfy their ego that they can't satisfy by their own accomplishments.
Waterboard? I don't like it, but I don't know the technique (it seems to be differentiated from torture by most). But I wouldn't allow anything that uses intense pain or fear of death to acquire any information.
Waterboard? I don't like it, but I don't know the technique (it seems to be differentiated from torture by most). But I wouldn't allow anything that uses intense pain or fear of death to acquire any information.
I'm guessing our enemies will just continue to do the same. You know, chop off heads, set fire to folks in cages, strap on a suicide vest, run over us with semi trucks...that sort of thing.How do you think our enemies will treat our military personnel that get captured now?
If they're "radical" Islamic terrorists, I'd make 'em eat a Pork Chop. They'd talk.
I do not believe in punishment by members of an agreement. But I do not believe it is reasonable to hold one party to rules of war when the other party is not signatory. Both parties have to obey the rules of war like Geneva Convention.I answered your question, don't dissemble. We have to look at the size of the risk we face otherwise we can't intelligently evaluate the situation.
Again, if hundreds of thousands of lives are at stake, what would you do to try and get that information out of a terrorist? Would you waterboard, for example?
Living by principle is tougher than doing whatever wins.Suck it up snowflake. The world isn't all sunshine and rainbows.
Says the guy bragging he will tell the veteran congressman his mom is a ***** to his face. Go sit down boy.Yes, the conservatives need something to make them feel like badasses to satisfy their ego that they can't satisfy by their own accomplishments.
Bone spur Donnie is a perfect example. Can't fight his way out of a wet paper bag.
I agreeLiving by principle is tougher than doing whatever wins.
Living by principle is tougher than doing whatever wins.
Ok then....saving what America stands for is more important than saving American livesThis issue isn't about winning. It is about saving lives. Something very real and far more important than "winning."
Truman dropped the nukes. He saved millions of lives regardless of what a minority of liberal historians tell us. Was that wrong? How many of us would not be here today, if Truman had not acted?
This is not that dissimilar. Extracting information to save countless lives is not some game. It can be very real and thank God I am not the one to have to make the call as to how far to go. Obama can get on his soapbox and say that is not who we are. It's easy, he's not faced with Truman like decision.
And I think we could've gotten a Japanese surrender without the bomb or invasionThis issue isn't about winning. It is about saving lives. Something very real and far more important than "winning."
Truman dropped the nukes. He saved millions of lives regardless of what a minority of liberal historians tell us. Was that wrong? How many of us would not be here today, if Truman had not acted?
This is not that dissimilar. Extracting information to save countless lives is not some game. It can be very real and thank God I am not the one to have to make the call as to how far to go. Obama can get on his soapbox and say that is not who we are. It's easy, he's not faced with Truman like decision.
I just don't see how you could trust any information gained via torture. I would be spitting out everything I'd ever heard to end it.
And I think we could've gotten a Japanese surrender without the bomb or invasion
And I think we could've gotten a Japanese surrender without the bomb or invasion
You can't...and we have other means which are much more reliable.
Ok then....saving what America stands for is more important than saving American lives
By allowing further Russian invasion and continuing the bombing campaign until the Japanese agreed to unconditional surrender. They were already seeking a peaceful end, and were unhappy with Russian occupation of Manchuria.How?
The scenario that you are CREATING to argue a point beside the point. Do we negotiate with terrorists? No. Some positions we need to take and let the cards fall how they fall.Then the hundreds of thousands of lives lost, would be on you. But, you have your principles to sleep on. Boom, this issue is not nearly as simple as you're making it out to be.
The scenario that you are CREATING to argue a point beside the point. Do we negotiate with terrorists? No. Some positions we need to take and let the cards fall how they fall.
No....maybe Jason Bourne saves those lives at the last minute. Never know.I gave you a hypothetical. That is not an unrealistic hypothetical. And what you said is that you would sacrifice those lives.
I actually agree with him. I think the idea is bigger and more important than the lives, truly. But I've also been willing to trade mine for this nation, so, I'm admittedly biased.I gave you a hypothetical. That is not an unrealistic hypothetical. And what you said is that you would sacrifice those lives.
By allowing further Russian invasion and continuing the bombing campaign until the Japanese agreed to unconditional surrender. They were already seeking a peaceful end, and were unhappy with Russian occupation of Manchuria.