[Slingin Sammy 33]

Originally Posted by saden1

No I wouldn't resort to torture because I wouldn't assume torture was the only viable means of archiving the desired result. Furthermore, your argument for torture in this instance would pave the way for using torture in any scenario where someone's life is in danger.

Very carefully worded response. I didn't say torture, I said waterboarding. On a scale of 1 (being standard jail treatment and ask a few questions) to 10 (chainsaws, blowtorches, and electric shocks to gentials), I'd put the waterboarding the CIA did to the Al Qeada terrorists at about a 3. While liberals and intellectuals debate policy and what constitutes torture, people need to make decisions to save lives. If I know (or have a very strong chance) I could save the lives of the Iraqi family by waterboarding someone who was planning their rape/murder, I'd do it and sleep like a baby.

Obviously this is a hypothetical and we could go on with these all day, bottom line is the Bush Admin. did what they believed was in the best interest of the country to save lives. Much worse was done by the Clinton Admin. If you are strictly against the actions the Clinton Admin. took in the mid-90s (which based on an earlier post I think you are) I respect that, not agree, but definitely respect.