Effectiveness of Torture

Upchurch said:
The humanity of the person being tortured, in the case of KSM, was lost long ago. It is the humanity of those doing the torturing that is the issue.
Click to expand...

Why is KSM not a human? What are your standards for humanity? If someone falls short of your judgment of what is human then can we do anything with them?
 
Last edited:
tsig said:
Why is KSM not a human? What are your standards for humanity? If someone falls short of your judgment of what is human the can we do anything with them?
Click to expand...
While I don't think he should be tortured, he lost any claims at humanity through his actions which, as corp pointed out, includes this.

corp and BAC are correct in that KSM is a very bad personTM. As such, I have very little concern for his well being. I am more concerned about we accord ourselves for our own sake rather than his.
 
Upchurch said:
While I don't think he should be tortured, he lost any claims at humanity through his actions which, as corp pointed out, includes this.

corp and BAC are correct in that KSM is a very bad personTM. As such, I have very little concern for his well being. I am more concerned about we accord ourselves for our own sake rather than his.
Click to expand...

Just when did he cease to be human? I think for own sake we must treat him as human.
 
Upchurch said:
I absolutely agree we should treat him as human for our own sake. That doesn't mean I consider anything more than human garbage.
Click to expand...

Why would you do this? Is it easier to discard people than to learn about them?

Are you at some pinnacle where you can see the worth of each person?
 
tsig said:
Just how are you different from the very bad man?
Click to expand...

Isn't it obvious?

Unlike KSM, I've not been involved in the murder of thousands of people already, nor am I involved in additional plots aimed at hopefully (from the terrorist's perspective) killing thousands more in the future.

Through this continued nonsense, you are only demonstrating that you, like many liberals, really don't understand evil. You are only demonstrating that you see a moral equivalence between a person inducing pain to save thousands of lives and a person murdering thousands of people. I think most people, it they understood that was really where you are coming from would shake their heads in disgust and dismiss your views out of hand. So I'm trying to help them understand that. :D
 
BeAChooser said:
Isn't it obvious?

Unlike KSM, I've not been involved in the murder of thousands of people already, nor am I involved in additional plots aimed at hopefully (from the terrorist's perspective) killing thousands more in the future.

Through this continued nonsense, you are only demonstrating that you, like many liberals, really don't understand evil. You are only demonstrating that you see a moral equivalence between a person inducing pain to save thousands of lives and a person murdering thousands of people. I think most people, it they understood that was really where you are coming from would shake their heads in disgust and dismiss your views out of hand. So I'm trying to help them understand that. :D
Click to expand...

There is no such thing as evil. It exists only in your head. Or in your hands.

You are the one advocating pain as a truth device.
 
BeAChooser said:
You bandie the word torture around knowing full well what image it conjures (flayed skin, pulled teeth, electricity cooking genitals) in the minds of most people. You do this knowing full well that the enhanced interrogation techniques that were approved for use by the CIA, like waterboarding, are nothing like that.
Click to expand...

So what? Let's assume that standard torture advanced interrogation techniques entail waterboarding but not cooking genitals. So you are saying waterboarding is fine, but flaying or cooking genitals isn't fine, since you make this distinction.

Answer me this, yes or no: would you flay someone's skin/pull their teeth/cook their genitals, to maybe save the lives of hundreds or thousands?
 
Morrigan said:
Answer me this, yes or no: would you flay someone's skin/pull their teeth/cook their genitals, to maybe save the lives of hundreds or thousands?
Click to expand...

No. But I would inflict some TEMPORARY pain and discomfort on him/her ... as in waterboarding. You see, I can respond rationally. In contrast to those on your side of this debate who see inflicting temporary pain and discomfort as morally equal to (or even worse) than letting hundreds or thousands of people die when *maybe* you could have saved them by simply inflicting that temporary pain and discomfort. :D
 
corplinx said:
That is silly.
Click to expand...

No, it's not.

Perhaps you aren't familiar with the scientific method.
Click to expand...

Actually, I am. Are there any studies on the effectiveness of torture?

My educated guess based on reading about how water boarding works, reading about its past results, talking with someone who has undergone the procedure, and looking at my own incident with drowning panic in the past lead me to postulate that water boarding is to some degree effective.
Click to expand...

Just like a homeopath's educated guess based on what they read and past results.

I am not sure anyone would dispute that water boarding breaks people. How good that condition is for information gathering is in dispute.
Click to expand...

Torture can break people. There are many ways people act when they are broken. Do you know if broken people give accurate information? It seems to me that broken people can confess to witchcraft.

An educated guess is not a fact but neither is it dismissed out of hand. A doctor's prognosis can often be an educated guess.
Click to expand...

I can dismiss your educated guess because it merely reflects your personal bias.

I think you are bending skeptical inquiry to suit your desired outcome.
Click to expand...

Hardly. I'm looking for facts and evidence, not opinions based on episodes of 24.
 
BeAChooser said:
No. But I would inflict some TEMPORARY pain and discomfort on him/her ... as in waterboarding.
Click to expand...

So it's ok to cause a person trauma, as long as it's physically temporary...why? Would you advocate such treatment on a child? The pain is only temporary, right?
 
BeAChooser said:
No.
Click to expand...
No? NO?!?

You would let tens of millions of people die simply because you won't take a pair of pliers and rip out the teeth, one at a time, from a VERY BAD PERSON? It's only temporary. He can get bridges and/or dentures later and it will save the lives of tens of millions of people!

Why do you love KSM so much more than tens of millions of innocent US citizens?

And you think you have the morally *superior* position?
 
BeAChooser said:
No. But I would inflict some TEMPORARY pain and discomfort on him/her ... as in waterboarding. You see, I can respond rationally. In contrast to those on your side of this debate who see inflicting temporary pain and discomfort as morally equal to (or even worse) than letting hundreds or thousands of people die when *maybe* you could have saved them by simply inflicting that temporary pain and discomfort. :D
Click to expand...

You have no way of knowing all that. If one had all the knowledge proposed in your scenario there would be no need to torture.
 
tsig said:
You have no way of knowing all that. If one had all the knowledge proposed in your scenario there would be no need to torture.
Click to expand...

This has been pointed out to BaC many times.

His argument still depends entirely on an impossible hypothetical, one where you know that only by committing the crime of torture you will save millions of innocent lives. My typical reply is that I reject the hypothetical as impossible for the very reason you've indicated, tsig.
 
BeAChooser said:
letting hundreds or thousands of people die when *maybe* you could have saved them by simply inflicting that temporary pain and discomfort. :D
Click to expand...

You're being disingenuous again. Torture is defined as the intentional infliction of severe pain. Let's not talk about "some" pain or "discomfort". (At least you're not repeating "a little pain" like you were doing before.)

Why is it when you formulate this hypothetical you don't say the word "torture"? You're trying to frame it as a minor thing relative to a completely unknown chance of maybe saving a life or ("hundreds or thousands" of lives).
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top Bottom