Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
[quote=GCSTroop;3106168]War does not determine who is right, only who is left. - Bertrand Russell
<I like that quote because it kind of makes you think about the brutality of war and how anything goes. It's a sad thing.. wars are.
The problem Mike, is not so much us stooping to their level. The problem seems to be that many view waterboarding as non-torture. >
They may say it's not torture, but I don't for a minute believe that they don't know it's torture. They simply approve of torture and are ashamed to admit it.
War does not determine who is right, only who is left. - Bertrand Russell
<I like that quote because it kind of makes you think about the brutality of war and how anything goes. It's a sad thing.. wars are.
The problem Mike, is not so much us stooping to their level. The problem seems to be that many view waterboarding as non-torture. >
They may say it's not torture, but I don't for a minute believe that they don't know it's torture. They simply approve of torture and are ashamed to admit it.
I understand what you are saying, and I am sure they do know that it is torture. They are just trying to circumvent their own rules.
After the publication of Courting Disaster by Thiessen, I think we can put to rest the lie that waterboarding doesn't work. It works. It worked. And thank goodness we used it.
For people who aren't completely brain-dead or politically biased (ahem, Liberals), then a 'ticking time bomb' scenario like the one considered in this thread poses a serious dilemma. We are, I think, naturally disinclined towards waterboarding human beings, but then we're also disinclined to slapping, imprisoning, and shooting them, yet sometimes the circumstances warrant such action. People who simply insist that 'waterboarding is always wrong no matter what' are juvenile thinkers and moral degenerates because (1) they would eliminate the most (and possibly only) effective way of stopping such crimes, and (2) they somehow consider waterboarding a single individual (even the terrrorist who plotted the attack) more heinous or morally offensive than murdering innocent people. And it's morally heinous to take an ethical or political stance that sanctions letting innocent people die just so we can spare waterboarding a terrorist.
Liberals often insist that waterboarding is torture. You know why? Because they don't have an argument for why we should abandon the practice of waterboarding, especially in ticking time bomb scenarios like the case of Khalid Sheik Mohammed. So, because the notion of waterboarding isn't all that repulsive to people, they must distort the actual debate and make it a 'torture debate.' That's silly at best; sinister at worst. If you can't explain why waterboarding is wrong, then why would labelling it 'torture' then make it wrong? It wouldn't, yet that's all they're trying to do. After all, if actual acts of torture are wrong, then they're wrong because of some properties, qualities, or characteristics they possess, not because they belong to a group with the title "torture acts." So, if waterboarding is morally wrong, then why? If you cannot come up with an answer, then it's probably because one, two, or maybe all three of these are true: (1) waterboarding is not morally wrong. (2) waterboarding is not torture. (3) torture is not morally wrong. I think (1) is definitely right. And if you think so too, then you'll soon see why (2) and (3) are unimportant to this debate.
Last edited by fiveredapples; 05-21-2010 at 05:43 PM..
Reason: clarity
LoL, next you're suggesting that there is no right or wrong.
Isn't that the Devil's ( aka Tricky D) greatest trick; convincing the world that there is no evil?
That it all is just a matter of perspective?
Really, that's your philosophical response -- that I'm Keyser Soze?
I used terms like "morally heinous" and "not morally wrong", and you came away thinking, 'this guy doesn't believe in morality.' You have a special gift, my friend.
Please explain to us how your response isn't exactly the type of response I said Liberals give: evassive sophistry.
So, while your response is severely disappointing, you did not disappoint.
Last edited by fiveredapples; 05-22-2010 at 03:44 PM..
Reason: grammar
Please explain to us how your response isn't exactly the type of response I said Liberals give: evassive sophistry.
Stating that waterboarding isn't morally wrong or that torture is not morally wrong is the equivalent of trying to legalize rape.
FYI: rape = torture and torture = rape.
Furthermore the road to hell is paved with good intentions. There is no such thing as committing an evil act (like torture) for the greater good, simply because evil only begets evil.
You have (YET AGAIN) failed to argue for why waterboarding is morally wrong. Instead, as expected, you are simply assuming that it is, which is why you think your little equivalence statement is actually compelling. It isn't.
Second, I have not stated that torture is not morally wrong. I have only stated that waterboarding isn't morally wrong, and since it makes perfect sense, morally and prudently, to waterboard someone as a means to prevent them from carrying out an immoral act (which happens to be a crime, too), it's hard to understand how waterboarding is immoral.
I've already explained the Liberal's ploy of making this a 'torture debate,' but now you've upped the ridiculousness and made it a 'rape debate.' Congratulations on raising the bar.
Spare us your pithy maxims. They're vapid and unhelpful here. I do like the emoticons, though -- they tell me how frustrated you are. It's a common symptom of people who don't know how to argue for premises they've always taken for granted.
Last edited by fiveredapples; 05-22-2010 at 05:09 PM..
Reason: spelling
I have only stated that waterboaring isn't morally wrong, and since it makes perfect sense, morally and prudently, to waterboard someone as a means to prevent them from carrying out an immoral act (which happens to be a crime, too), it's hard to understand how waterboarding is immoral.
Like I've posted before the road to hell is paved with good intentions.
Life is not math were 2 negatives become a positive.
Next you'll try to convince me that waterboarding is an act of love instead of an act of torture. I guess that you would fit right in with the Inquisition were torture was used to forcefully convert people; they physically (and psychologically) tortured people to 'save' their immortal souls.
I mean the Inquisition used torture for the greater good which makes it all right, right?
"Life is not math were [sic] 2 negatives become a positive." -- Tricky D
I feel like I'm arguing with an infant. This could only be applicable if waterboarding is a negative. But that's precisely what this whole debate is about. So for you to characterize it as a negative, evil, and a wrong, is question begging. I don't know how I can make this clearer to you without the aid of crayons and apple sauce.
If I were to claim that '2 + 2 = 4', you'd likely respond with, "Next you'll try to convince me that dragons exist." You'd then add an emoticon to show us how ridiculous you think I am for thinking that dragons exist. You'd then feel self-assured that I'm wrong (that 2 + 2 = 4) because I think dragons exist. Here's a philosophical tip: address people's claims, not your imaginary attributions.
Let's recount how this debate has been "progressing."
First, I give a commonsense account for why waterboarding isn't morally wrong.
Second, you assume that waterboarding is torture.
Third, you imagine that I'll next say that torture isn't morally wrong.
Fourth, you equate torture with rape (for no apparent reason).
Fifth, you imagine that I'll next say that waterboarding is an act of love.
Sixth, you then characterize such silly thinking (which you've made up and attributed to me) as on par with Inquisition mentality.
You, sir, lack intellectual integrity. I gave a commonsense argument for why waterboarding isn't morally wrong, and you've now accused me of supporting The Inquisition. The Inquisition!!! Wow. I'm waiting for you to call me a racist.
Last edited by fiveredapples; 05-22-2010 at 05:48 PM..
Reason: spelling
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
LoL, next you're suggesting that there is no right or wrong.
aka Tricky D) greatest trick; convincing the world that there is no evil? 
There is no such thing as committing an evil act (like torture) for the greater good, simply because evil only begets evil.
I guess that you would fit right in with the Inquisition were torture was used to forcefully convert people; they physically (and psychologically) tortured people to 'save' their immortal souls. 
