POLL Should WE USE TORTURE - YES or NO

[LG]

:cop:

[Taltarzac]

:cop:


How do you define "torture" LG? I cannot see an absolute answer in this without more context. If someone knew where a terrorist controlled nuclear weapon were to go off, then I would have to say that almost anything could be done to prevent this weapon from going off. But, if this were to find out something like troop movements in Iraq, then that is a different matter.

We certainly should not stoop to the level of those who routinely use the infliction of gross physical and mental pain to get information.

[efrahin]

Depends the kind of enemy you are dealing with. If they only want to see you dead no matter what: YES and 1M times YES

If it is your wife giving you mental torture: NO, that is their job.

[SteveZ]

There is an old saying that a conservative is a liberal who got mugged.

The definition of what is torture is quite broad. It is "physical" only, or does "psychological" fit into it as well? How much "physical" and/or "psychological" action constitutes torture? Where's the bright-line between pressure and torture?

Or is it like the old definition of pornography, which was, "I can't describe it, but I know it when I see it." ? If that's the case, the definition is as subjective as the number of folks trying to make the definition.

All that being said - we would like to always say we as Americans take the moral high-ground in all of our actions. However, we must also remember that just because we "play by rules" doesn't mean others do or will. This "game" called counter-terrorism is deathly serious in determining who wins or loses, and the scoring gets mighty personal the closer to the playing field you find yourself.

Very few of us have ever been in situations where the horror of events personally surround you as much as warfare does, and guerilla warfare is the worst of all. It's easy to condemn the actions of folk who sift through the pieces of friends and live in constant stress of being next on the victim list, especially when the criticism occurs from thousands of miles away by folk sitting on a sofa and not on absolute guard during the next drive, or walk, or chance meeting on the street. It's easy to say "you should have done this" or "you shouldn't have done that" when you're not living though that hell. And saying "I can understand how you feel, but" doesn't cut it, because you don't understand unless you've experienced it.

Does the means justify the end? Sometimes it does, sometimes it doesn't. You just have to appreciate the situation and the fact that humans with all of their emotions are involved.

[efrahin]

SteveZ: very good definition. I am with you.

[stjade]

yes-especially when dealing with an enemy which has no regard for life :agree:

[zcaveman]

I think it depends on the circumstances.

First I have to agree with SteveZ. But then I have to think that there are times in extreme circumstances that you need to do everything possible to get any informantion that you can to prevent a major man-made disaster from occurring.

I know that the TV show "24" is a fake but if you do not think that something like that can occur and that if you have a limited time to get the necessary information to prevent the disaster that you have to do whatever is possible to get that information you are sadly mistaken.

[samhass]

Psychological...yes
physical..no.

[EYANKOWSKI]

IF WE TORTURE THE ENEMY AND THE INFORMATION WE GET SAVES LIVES I'M
ALL FOR IT AND IF YOU THINK OUR MILITARY DOESN'T TORTURE PEOPLE TO
GET INFORMATION YOUR IN LIVING LALA LAND

[golfnut]

every chance we get

[MMC24]

Absolutely, don't you think the innocent families of 9/11 victims are still being tortured today? Regrettably these terrorist's only understand extreme measures and if we can extract any information that would prevent further incidents than the means justify the ends.

[steve0528]

SteveZ,
One line says it all, "You don't understand unless you,ve experienced it" . Thank God that most have not, and pray to God that our children will not need to. Very eloquent and provocative. Thanks.

[hunt9791]

Yes..

[punkpup]

SteveZ you make some salient points.

Intellectually I am extremely conflicted regarding the subject of torture. I am a Quaker and we do not condone violence; physical and/or psychological.

I recognize that we as Americans are in constant danger from an enemy who hates us and has no regard for life including their own and will stop at nothing in the name of jihad. It does not change the fact that I think torture immoral and inhumane; sadly I cannot perceive an effective alternative. Our enemies are not people with whom we can sit and reasonably discuss a peaceful resolution.

God help us all.

[gemorc]

Shouldn't this poll be in the political forum? In the USA, today, this has become a political subject.

[MMC24]

Shouldn't this poll be in the political forum? In the USA, today, this has become a political subject.


Politics is torture!!

[nONIE]

MMC24

:agree:

[John]

Just on days ending in y.

[beartrack1]

Even being a veteran I was having a problem with the subject of torture. But, I started thinking about 9/11, the Marine barracks in Lebanon, The USS COLE and all the American lives lost in these events and so many others as well. I also thought of the hostages taken and our POW's and the Films of Americans getting their heads cut off. I have come to this conclusion. If I could have stopped any one of these events, If I could have saved the life of just one American soldier, If I could keep imagining, that some of these victims, are my own wife, children, friends or neighbors, then I will tell you all that, unequivocally, that I would resort to anything to save them, torture included. How on Earth, could anyone say that they would not ?

[l2ridehd]

Torture for the sake of torture, no. Torture to get information that will save lives of innocent people. yes. Torture to save lives of those that protect our freedom. yes

There is all this huge controversy about water boarding. I always thought it was tying someone to a board and then dunking them upside down and holding them under water and at some point drowning them. I finally found out exactly what it was. Leaning someone backwards so the head is lower then the rest of their body, then placing a cloth over the head and pouring water on them. Makes you feel like drowning but it is impossible to drown. Well guess what. When I went through flight school in the military, they did that to us. Didn't know what it was called back then, but they were showing us what to expect if we were captured. That and several other types of torture. Don't know if they still do it or not. Was it hard? yes. Did I live? yes. So I would guess there are several thousands of US military personnel who have been through this. And if this will get information that will save US lives, then by all means please continue to put every terrorist we can find through it.

[SteveZ]

Being subjected to nonstop political rhetoric, claims of "I'm the best for the job" and "s/he is not as qualified as I," followed by all of the self-claimed experts providing their commentary of what was said and meant - Now THAT'S torture !

[another Linda]

I heard recently, NPR I think, that many military experts questioned the accuracy of the information obtained by torture feeling that much of it was false or worthless at best, and misleading at worst. If that is indeed so, what's the point? If torture doesn't enhance anyone's security, why do it?

[ejp52]

Even being a veteran I was having a problem with the subject of torture. But, I started thinking about 9/11, the Marine barracks in Lebanon, The USS COLE and all the American lives lost in these events and so many others as well. I also thought of the hostages taken and our POW's and the Films of Americans getting their heads cut off. I have come to this conclusion. If I could have stopped any one of these events, If I could have saved the life of just one American soldier, If I could keep imagining, that some of these victims, are my own wife, children, friends or neighbors, then I will tell you all that, unequivocally, that I would resort to anything to save them, torture included. How on Earth, could anyone say that they would not ?
Well said beartrack. :agree: 100%

[beartrack1]

Another Linda,

With all due respect, I would not take anything that NPR had to say, seriously but, that of course is only my opinion. Before you make a final judgement on this issue, please allow me to ask you a question; Think of someone that you love more than anything. Now that person has been captured by terrorists, and like Daniel Pearl, he is put on Television by these murderers and they threaten to cut off his/her head. Our government has captured a suspect that they know has information of the where abouts of the terrorists and if he tells what he knows, your loved one will be saved. They ask you, if they should torture him to get the information that will save this person that you love. Yes or No

And your answer would be?????

[Taltarzac]

Another Linda,

.... Think of someone that you love more than anything. Now that person has been captured by terrorists, and like Daniel Pearl, he is put on Television by these murderers and they threaten to cut off his/her head. Our government has captured a suspect that they know has information of the where abouts of the terrorists and if he tells what he knows, your loved one will be saved. They ask you, if they should torture him to get the information that will save this person that you love. Yes or No

And your answer would be?????


How often do they know the right questions to ask though? http://www.americanthinker.com/2004/10/torture_as_an_interrogation_te.html

From this article it does not look like the military often has the person who would have the kind of information needed. ???

[beartrack1]

This is not about the media and the biased articles that they write to further their own agenda. I asked a hypothetical question. I know how I would answer it. a big yes. I would do anything, take any chance to save my loved one. How would you answer my question Tal ?

[another Linda]

John McCain had an article in Newsweek where he questioned the use of torture exactly because in his experience it yielded bad information. Whatever you think of the publication, I have great respect for Sen. McCain. Also, when my son was stationed with a Blackhawk group in Korea, I was surprised at how many of the pilots -- not exactly a liberal bunch -- were horrified at the prospect. So, hypotheticals to me make little sense in this case. People who have much more experience than I question the efficacy. I was repeating their question.

[Taltarzac]

This is not about the media and the biased articles that they write to further their own agenda. I asked a hypothetical question. I know how I would answer it. a big yes. I would do anything, take any chance to save my loved one. How would you answer my question Tal ?


If you are asking if I would defend my loved ones, yes. But, self-defense and defense of others only goes so far.

[beartrack1]

Tal & Another Linda, I respect your opinions and your right to avoid answering my question. If that question was posed to me I would answer it by saying " do what ever it takes to get the information needed " You will never know whether or not the information is valid until you get it. Torturing a terrorist is a chance that I willing to take. While I am being considerate of these killers, someone I love or some American soldier is being murdered. Sorry but, these terrorists do not deserve any sympathy from the very people that they would love to annihilate.

[KTCOED47]

YES