Mancow Waterboarded, Admits It's Torture

[Trample the Elderly]

Originally Posted by 4mrusmc

I come from the school of: Don't start nothing, won't be nothing.

I thought you renovated that school?

[Schneed10]

Originally Posted by firstdown

The problem with your conclusion is that they were to armies out to fight each other while terrorist hit innocent people. Now if you used the example of them using IED's (might have those letters wrong) while fighting us in Iraq then your statement would make more sense.

You're missing the point. The point is not to compare the Colonial American tactics to those used by terrorists, I'm not arguing whether one is more cowardly than another (the answer to that is clear and not debatable). The point is that if the United States doesn't adapt to the tactics used by the terrorists, we could end up losing just like the British did.

The adaptation we need to make is to get comfortable using whatever means necessary to extract intel.

[Duffman003]

Originally Posted by Schneed10

That's exactly what I'm saying, and it's exactly how the Brits lost the Revolutionary War, they were either too proud to change or too slow to change. Surely you're not suggesting we remain proud and uphold high moral standards at the risk of losing a war?

Would you say that Gandhi was too proud to pick up a gun and kill the British?

I wouldn't say we are being too "proud" to change our morals standards. The people who flew the planes into the World Trade Center are probably happy about our reactions and how we are changing our moral standards to try and stop them. We shouldn't be stooping to their level.

Also, I hope most of you people realize that we are not at war with Islam, there are plenty of people who are Muslim or from the Middle East who are not terrorists and are good people just like you think you are.

[Zerohero]

Originally Posted by Duffman003

Would you say that Gandhi was too proud to pick up a gun and kill the British?

I wouldn't say we are being too "proud" to change our morals standards. The people who flew the planes into the World Trade Center are probably happy about our reactions and how we are changing our moral standards to try and stop them. We shouldn't be stooping to their level.

Also, I hope most of you people realize that we are not at war with Islam, there are plenty of people who are Muslim or from the Middle East who are not terrorists and are good people just like you think you are.

Good lord that's hilarious.

[steveo395]

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.

What are your alternatives to torture? What would you have done with KSM instead of waterboarding him to get information?

[Schneed10]

Originally Posted by Duffman003

Would you say that Gandhi was too proud to pick up a gun and kill the British?

I wouldn't say we are being too "proud" to change our morals standards. The people who flew the planes into the World Trade Center are probably happy about our reactions and how we are changing our moral standards to try and stop them. We shouldn't be stooping to their level.

Also, I hope most of you people realize that we are not at war with Islam, there are plenty of people who are Muslim or from the Middle East who are not terrorists and are good people just like you think you are.

First off, nobody here is saying that about Islam, and frankly I find you a little off base with that comment.

Secondly, you haven't really made an argument. Why shouldn't we "stoop to their level"?

Thirdly, Ghandi won independence from the British. So if anything, I'd say it was the British who failed to appropriately adapt to Ghandi's civil disobedience approach. When Ghandi went that route it turned what could have been a military conflict into a political battle for public opinion. Britain failed to meet the challenge.

[saden1]

Originally Posted by steveo395

What are your alternatives to torture? What would you have done with KSM instead of waterboarding him to get information?

Befriend him.

[CRedskinsRule]

Take him to a nice BBQ joint.

[Trample the Elderly]

The question was asked, I think by Dmek, that would you be for torturing people if they were Americans. I said yes, and I'm sure most of you were not surprised.

I thought about who would be the perfect candidate to torture. And then it clicked!

For the first American traitor to be tortured I nominate Adam Gadahn, aka the American Al Qaida. If anyone with the authority to put me in the postion to take care of this guy, all I ask is 24hrs, a pair of pliers, a blow torch, and a table saw. You'll not have to pay me. It would be an honor.

[MTK]

Is there any evidence that suggests torture leads to information being obtained and the correct info at that? If no, why is torture ok with people? I'm not saying it is or isn't the answer, I'm just asking if it's not leading to the desired result shouldn't other methods be considered?

[Daseal]

Trample, perhaps Im wrong here -- but I believe the question was are you okay with Americans being tortured by terrorists, rather than American traitors.

[CRedskinsRule]

Originally Posted by Trample the Elderly

The question was asked, I think by Dmek, that would you be for torturing people if they were Americans. I said yes, and I'm sure most of you were not surprised.

I thought about who would be the perfect candidate to torture. And then it clicked!

For the first American traitor to be tortured I nominate Adam Gadahn, aka the American Al Qaida. If anyone with the authority to put me in the postion to take care of this guy, all I ask is 24hrs, a pair of pliers, a blow torch, and a table saw. You'll not have to pay me. It would be an honor.

It'd be my honor Mr. Bauer

[GhettoDogAllStars]

Originally Posted by Missin21

Sometimes violence ENDS violence. If someone is standing there hitting you KNOWING you won't hit back, diplomacy won't end it. But if you suddenly stand up & punch the guy in the face a few times, he'll stop.

Diplomacy can go only so far. With some people & certain TYPES of people, violence is the only thing that works.

Violence will never end violence. You claim it is ended in the situation you posed, but it is only temporarily gone. Awareness and Consciousness are the only ways to bring peace to this world.

[GhettoDogAllStars]

Originally Posted by Duffman003

Would you say that Gandhi was too proud to pick up a gun and kill the British?

I wouldn't say we are being too "proud" to change our morals standards. The people who flew the planes into the World Trade Center are probably happy about our reactions and how we are changing our moral standards to try and stop them. We shouldn't be stooping to their level.

Also, I hope most of you people realize that we are not at war with Islam, there are plenty of people who are Muslim or from the Middle East who are not terrorists and are good people just like you think you are.

Excellent.

[MTK]

Originally Posted by Missin21

Sometimes violence ENDS violence. If someone is standing there hitting you KNOWING you won't hit back, diplomacy won't end it. But if you suddenly stand up & punch the guy in the face a few times, he'll stop.

Diplomacy can go only so far. With some people & certain TYPES of people, violence is the only thing that works.

Meanwhile the guy you punched just slinks away and plots his revenge. Violence doesn't end violence, it's an endless cycle. Especially when dealing with extremists. I'm not saying diplomacy is the answer either, but let's not pretend like hitting back solves everything in the end.