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.
So it's the psychological aspect of it that you consider torture....not the physical.
No it is both.
Just threatening with waterboarding is just a threat and not torture.
The thing is that if you only keep threatening with torture but never do it, it just is an empty threat which makes it irrelevant. So if the psychological threat (the threat of waterboarding) is never turned into actual waterboarding it isn't an effective 'interrogation' technique.
Quote:
Should the 24 hour a day playing of Barry Manilow in the room of a 23 year old or the playing of Ten Inch Nails in the room of a 64 year old be considered torture?
If they object to the music and don't have a way to turn it off it is torture. The same goes for having sex with someone even when she never consented and did not have the physical power to stop it, which makes it rape, which also happens to be torture.
Originally Posted by old_cold No it is both.
Just threatening with waterboarding is just a threat and not torture.
The thing is that if you only keep threatening with torture but never do it, it just is an empty threat which makes it irrelevant. So if the psychological threat (the threat of waterboarding) is never turned into actual waterboarding it isn't an effective 'interrogation' technique.
If they object to the music and don't have a way to turn it off it is torture. The same goes for having sex with someone even when she never consented and did not have the physical power to stop it, which makes it rape, which also happens to be torture.
Have you checked into the actual physical and psycological aspects of waterboarding?
Rape is torture?Not assault? Perhaps you and I use different dictionaries.
Have you checked into the actual physical and psycological aspects of waterboarding?
Are saying that you believe that waterboarding is just swallowing water?
Waterboarding is making the victim's body believe that it is drowning.
In essence waterboarding is the same as rape where the rapist, by forcing himself on his victim, is tricking the victim's body into believing that it is 'just' having sex (a motor reflex, which has nothing to do with the victim's actual awareness).
Exactly like with waterboarding where the victim's body is tricked into believing that it is drowning which causes the involuntarily gag reflex (motor reflex) even when the victim is consciously aware that he isn't drowning.
Quote:
Rape is torture?Not assault? Perhaps you and I use different dictionaries.
Isn't torture also not considered to be an assault also?
Whether it is an assault of the senses through being forced to listen to music continuously or a physical assault by forced sex.
I do not believe in torture as a Nation, but.....on a personal level, let's say someone hurt my child or raped my wife, let's just say I would do ANYTHING to get at who did this to them, that is just the plain truth.......
I do not believe in torture as a Nation, but.....on a personal level, let's say someone hurt my child or raped my wife, let's just say I would do ANYTHING to get at who did this to them, that is just the plain truth.......
I agree with you. I don't believe in the death penalty - but I understand a mother or father getting at the killer of their child or loved one. I don't know that I condone it - but I don't know that I would be able to stop myself in that situation either.
I sympathize with you guys about wanting to punish the guy who killed my kids. And that punishment might include real torture -- not just waterboarding.
But you guys are talking about punishing a killer, the proper terrorist analogy is not punishing but extracting vital information. If someone kidnapped your child and had him hidden in a cellar, wouldn't we all at least waterboard the guy to make him tell us where our child is? I mean, if we don't, then our child dies. Waterboarding, you might think, isn't severe enough -- we should do something more painful so he talks faster. Tricky D and Liberals would say you are doing something immoral in waterboarding the kidnapper. They would label you immoral, make it illegal, and let your child die.
There you go again, throwing around the world Liberal. The evil Liberals! The moronic Liberals! Let's hang all the Liberals! I don't think you even know what a liberal is! It sounds like a Liberal is just anyone who has a different opinion than you do on ANYTHING! Doesn't have the same favorite color as I do - LIBERAL! Doesn't like the same food that I do, LIBERAL! The more you use that word as an insult for everybody that doesn't think the same way that you do - the less intelligent it makes you seem, the less people will actually listen to what you say, the less water your arguments hold. It is just name calling. And most of the people you are calling liberal - don't even seem to be liberal. Now, I am liberal in many aspects - but not all. You calling me a liberal wouldn't offend me. You calling me evil does. Just because someone disagrees with you - it doesn't make them evil. I have a hard time reading your posts and actually hearing what you are saying because of all the name calling. It really detracts from your debating efforts.
That being said, yes, if someone kidnapped my child - I would want to torture them. However, what if I tortured the wrong person? What if they were crazy and would never tell me what I needed to know? If we could all torture people to get information - then nobody would ever really be safe. What if someone matching my description did something horrible - and they took me in and tortured me - only I had no information to give them. And where does it stop? Can anyone be tortured to gain information? I think there have to be laws against torture otherwise we are just as bad as the criminals. If I attacked someone that had attacked someone close to me - I would still know it was wrong. I might still feel like I had to do it - and if that were the case, I would be willing to pay the penalty. But that doesn't make it right. And yes, I am including waterboarding in torturing. I think it is, you don't think so. That's okay with me.
Obviously my polemics are distracting you...because your reading comprehension is pretty sad.
While some of you want to talk about punishing the person who kidnaps your child, that's not my argument or concern. Sure, I might want to do it too (most likely I would), but that's not this debate, because what you're talking about is PUNISHMENT or RETRIBUTION.
I'm talking about a PREVENTIVE MEASURE; hence, we are waterboarding the person who has kidnapped your child. If you want to become a super skeptic and say, "Oh, well, we can never know for sure that he did it," well that's your ridiculous option to take. But it's a little pathetic when I'm stipulating that it's the guy who did it; just like Khalid Sheik Mohammed was the guy who plotted to bomb Los Angeles. So all your silly "where doe it stop" is answered by "with the culprit."
You say, "I think it is, you don't think so. That's okay with me." The difference between you and me is that I'm offering a very reasonable argument for why you should agree with me, and since we're trying to be rational here -- not little emotive idiots -- then in light of the fact that you don't have even a remotely good argument for your emotions, er, opinions, then no one should believe what you believe -- not even you!
There, did all that logic and reasonableness distract you from my position? No. What's doing it is your willful ignorance. You see, I'm not here preaching you to -- you're helpless -- I'm here so others who haven't drank the Kool Aid might see that their opinion, whether by intuition or reason, or both, has a strong argument behind it. And our opponents are embarrassingly silent about the topic. Well, that's when they're not wailing about how evil waterboarding is. That would be laughable if their position wasn't itself evil.
Obviously my polemics are distracting you...because your reading comprehension is pretty sad.
While some of you want to talk about punishing the person who kidnaps your child, that's not my argument or concern. Sure, I might want to do it too (most likely I would), but that's not this debate, because what you're talking about is PUNISHMENT or RETRIBUTION.
I'm talking about a PREVENTIVE MEASURE; hence, we are waterboarding the person who has kidnapped your child. If you want to become a super skeptic and say, "Oh, well, we can never know for sure that he did it," well that's your ridiculous option to take. But it's a little pathetic when I'm stipulating that it's the guy who did it; just like Khalid Sheik Mohammed was the guy who plotted to bomb Los Angeles. So all your silly "where doe it stop" is answered by "with the culprit."
You say, "I think it is, you don't think so. That's okay with me." The difference between you and me is that I'm offering a very reasonable argument for why you should agree with me, and since we're trying to be rational here -- not little emotive idiots -- then in light of the fact that you don't have even a remotely good argument for your emotions, er, opinions, then no one should believe what you believe -- not even you!
There, did all that logic and reasonableness distract you from my position? No. What's doing it is your willful ignorance. You see, I'm not here preaching you to -- you're helpless -- I'm here so others who haven't drank the Kool Aid might see that their opinion, whether by intuition or reason, or both, has a strong argument behind it. And our opponents are embarrassingly silent about the topic. Well, that's when they're not wailing about how evil waterboarding is. That would be laughable if their position wasn't itself evil.
You would be a much better debater if you left the juvenile insults out of it. It's very difficult to carry on a conversation with someone when all they are doing is insulting you the whole time like a little kid. I think that it would be easier to take you seriously if you spoke in a more educated, less offensive fashion. But that is just my opinon. Maybe everyone else is silent on the subject because they realize there is no point in trying to reason with you - as I am realizing.
You actually misunderstood almost everything I was saying. The last part of what I was saying was about retribution but the part before that was about preventative measures. My feeling is that if we open the door to waterboarding, where do we stop. Your "at the criminal" comment doesn't apply to what I'm saying. So, we say that waterboarding is okay - next we say that slapping someone is okay, next we say that peeling off their fingernails is okay - where does it stop? Waterboarding is not a cure all - not everyone subjected to it is going to confess - what do we do with them? What if waterboarding isn't enough to get the information that we want from them? Where do we stop? Do you see the point I'm trying to make now? I think we should stop before waterboarding. That is my opinion. I am not an evil person. I'm sorry that you think so. The good news is that no one who knows me thinks that - so I guess I'm doing okay!
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.
No it is both.
So if the psychological threat (the threat of waterboarding) is never turned into actual waterboarding it isn't an effective 'interrogation' technique.
The same goes for having sex with someone even when she never consented and did not have the physical power to stop it, which makes it rape, which also happens to be torture.
Isn't torture also not considered to be an assault also?
