Torture...Do you approve?

Do you approve of torture?

  • Yes

    Votes: 2 6.7%

  • No

    Votes: 20 66.7%

  • Yes, if it meets certain criteria.

    Votes: 7 23.3%

  • Other (explain)

    Votes: 1 3.3%
  • Total voters
    30
Sleep deprivation, drugs, psychological manipulation.
Click to expand...

I am gonna have to agree with Xez on this one. Physical torture has been out dated. There are some many was that are more effective ways to extract information then by physical torture. They have to have some kind of truth serum, or something along those lines. Physical toture is barbaric and obsolete.

It all really depends on how effective the current products are. You might have a Zealot who would blow himself up for a cause willing to indure a shit load of torture, but if he is druged into having a lose tounge. That seems to be allot quicker.


LMAO and they say drugs are never the awnser:m:
 
Last edited:
Drugs are physical torture imho. They use some pretty harsh stuff that often permanently alters reality for the subject.
Click to expand...

*Laughs*

Yeah, that's what they invented acid for.
 
pumkin where does it end?

1 man for 1000000?
1 man for 100?
1 man for 10?
1000000000000 for 1?

how man people dose it take BEFORE it becomes wrong?

as one of the people said the quote in the sige is SO acurate

after all how are you better than "them"?
 
Seems to me torture could be a lot more effective today, in combination with lie detectors. For some people, no matter how much you drug them, they still won't say a word, they'll just clamp up. Many drugs probably are torture, anyway....

Interragator, "Tell us."
Criminal, "...."
After cutting a finger off: Criminal, "Alright, my leader's name is Joe Blow!"
"This machine tells me you're lying. Gotta do better."
Next finger: "Ok, it's Hassid de ban." Or whatever.

I don't think the Islamic militants are going to stand up to that, but apparently they are standing up to our conventional interrogation.
 
Everyone seems to slip back to the old chop off a bit and he will talk philosophy.
The lie detector works on levels or adreneline in the blood, pulse and breaks in your voice, trying to use one on someone your sawing the balls off of is going to tell you he's lying out of his ass even if he spills everything he knows and you learn shit.

Especially as more often than not even if he doesn't know anything they will torture someone, possably an innocent btw as to apply the rules to one man is to apply them to everyone.
They will keep torturing him/her until they tell them something even if they have to lie to make it stop...then they torture them some more to make sure its the truth...being a lie concocted under pressure it will probably fall apart and now they think they DO know something and are trying to hide it, bring on more torture.

Its a flawed aproach, evidence just can't be relied upon using these techniques though yes it has gotten more advance....you have to worry about that fact...but still no better especially as like i say more often that not the "torture" and "threats" aren't always idle.
Especially in the frenzy of "All islam/arabic/foreigners with beards are evil trying to kill your familly" thing at the moment a lot of the "interegators" are going to quite enjoy causing them pain more than getting information, already the few reports into Afghanistan...and indeed the history of any government you look at really, will show you that.
So when does it become "right"?
Even if it works 1 in 100 times and saves 1 or 2 more people, how many times doesn't it work...how many does it kill...how many times does it lead to bad information and subsequent cock ups of imense propotions.

Not to mention it simply increases the hatred to to intergators and their country/cause.
Why would any force surrender or give information if they know they are going to be tortured/murdered.
They wont they will fight to the death and be more stubborn when caught, especially when they are fighting against what they see as an attack on their country, religion and famillies, and very much more so with the fanatics.

It's banned for a damn good reason.
 
Toture

Agreed that in most cases Torture is faulty and proves nothing other then cause to hurt and mam another.

But "WE" are still using and in some states honoring the Death penalty as a method of punishment. Is this not a form of torture? Is this a better method then chopping someone's pinky off? What about Caning? Is this acceptable?

Or is this conversation strictly based on the capture of this Al Queda fellow? If so I dont feel that anything we do to this jerk will ever give us resolve. He will or will not say anything and that is not going to prevent the hate that streams through this section of the Al quedas blood. To these guys I am sure hate is all they see. It is a sad thing.

Please someone clue me in if this is all that we are referring too. I tend to think in broader terms and to me Torture is anything from watching another "miller lights twins "commercial to a poor student who is ostracized from his/her classmates based on socio economics'.

For hundreds of years we have had some sort of punishment that is social acceptable for that time. In each country we have our own socially acceptable methods. Some country's dont give a shit about smoking bans.....ours is tediously osterzing smokers as though they have an incurable diease. (I am glad I dont smoke. this punishment is gruel) There are some countries that dont allow chewing gum....it ruins the carpet:_)

Thoughts?
 
Malifics the reason that they are suggesting torture is to extract information from the subject. Not to injure them, that is an unfortunate side effect, off chopping of there pinky. It has been said before that physical torture has been out dated.

Why should there be a "us" and "them"?
Click to expand...
Satan is wearing a parka. Once again I think Xez made a good point. Many people seperate themselves because they are from a different country or region. But really what is the difference at all besides economics? That "terrorist" who is being tortured is little different then anyone you know. The sad part is that, allot of this is a result of enviroment and circumstance. Though allot of this is just a way to gain more power. How many of these terrorist leaders acctually give a rats ass about there people? How many of our leaders give a rats ass about us? It is all politics. There are many people in this world who will us the good intentins of honest men and lead them into hell. Like the saying goes "The road to hell is paved with good intentions". Like Xez mentioned before, there should be no us or them. After that all that is left is we. Because we all just want peace, though sometimes you may have to fight for it. The philosophy of war is a whole other thing.
 
Anything that wants to kill me must be killed. Simple as that.
Click to expand...
Flashpoint just a cheapshot but is it not natural to want revenge. America has screwed over many countries in its time. As a result many people have lost what they chereished most. So isn't it not understandable why they might want to kill you? But that is regardless of the point. Eye for an eye is stupid, is a childs mentality. I agree with defending yourself if attacked, and if the attacker is killed in the process. Then there is really little that can be done, but seriously that mentality would destroy the world. That is a cold war mentality that has far been out dated, why because it accomplishes nothing.

Why would you be so worried about people that want to kill you. I am sure there are many people that want to kill you but they won't. I do think that the ones who are planning to kill you should be addressed. But to me it seems that you motivation for such a statement is absolute terror.
 
Re: Toture

Originally posted by Malifics

Please someone clue me in if this is all that we are referring too.
Click to expand...

Torture in general is what I was refering to. There is torture for information, and there is torture for revenge and hate, and both of these aren't entirely seperate.

Originally posted by Empty Dragon
Satan is wearing a parka. Once again I think Xez made a good point. Many people seperate themselves because they are from a different country or region. But really what is the difference at all besides economics? That "terrorist" who is being tortured is little different then anyone you know. The sad part is that, allot of this is a result of enviroment and circumstance. Though allot of this is just a way to gain more power. How many of these terrorist leaders acctually give a rats ass about there people? How many of our leaders give a rats ass about us? It is all politics. There are many people in this world who will us the good intentins of honest men and lead them into hell. Like the saying goes "The road to hell is paved with good intentions". Like Xez mentioned before, there should be no us or them. After that all that is left is we. Because we all just want peace, though sometimes you may have to fight for it. The philosophy of war is a whole other thing.
Click to expand...
True. All that seperates "us" from "them" is the greed and powerhungryness(?) of the spheres of interest that control us (whether indivduals or organizations).
 
we are all sheep and we will all torture other people under the right (or should i say wrong) circumstances even when we don't actually want to.
 
pumkin where does it end?1 man for 1000000?
1 man for 100?
1 man for 10?
1000000000000 for 1?

how man people dose it take BEFORE it becomes wrong?
Click to expand...


Asguard...it'll only take that ONE man....after that...the other's are going to think twice. we might be making an example out of that man...but, maybe that's what it's going to take to make all the craziness stop.
 
"Asguard...it'll only take that ONE man....after that...the other's are going to think twice. we might be making an example out of that man...but, maybe that's what it's going to take to make all the craziness stop"

Have any evidence what so ever of that? Torture was used for many thousands of years before this - far worse torture than we could use today - and it never, ever, ever came close to stopping people from doing shit.
 
tyler:
do you yourself have any evidence, what so ever, that it wouldn't work? i am talking about in our current times...not thousands of years ago.(please don't take issues out of context in the history of time) i am talking about the USA of right now. we don't practice torture ...but, maybe we should under extreme circumstances. besides..as flippant as this may sound...don't other countries practice torture right now? they especially love to do so on American service men...

oh, btw..before you begin flinging your examples at me...i must remind you, i am talking about current American policy. .. we currectly don't abide torture here...but, as i pointed out...under extreme circumstances, maybe we should.
 
It's rather hilarious you just posted in the "fallacies" thread - you should have read them. You can't prove a negative, pumpkins.

So the onus is on you to show that torture would work. Not on me to show that it wouldn't.

Here, I'll explain in case you don't understand.

Tyler -- Rubbing fluffy bunnies in their face for 4 minutes every day for a year would stop criminals

Pumpkins -- Do you have any proof this would work?

Tyler -- Do you have any proof it wouldn't?

You do notice the problem here, eh? You see how it wouldn't be, in the above example, your job to prove I'm wrong - it would be my job to prove I'm right? Please, god almighty, tell me you see this?


"i am talking about in our current times...not thousands of years ago."

You see, pumpkins, there is no current evidence of this as most first-world nations today are not barbairic enough to use physical torture. However - extreme torture is used on other criminals (most of which has been mentioned in this very thread), and it has never seemed to deteer criminals. Same within the former Soviet Union.


"as flippant as this may sound...don't other countries practice torture right now? they especially love to do so on American service men."

Where? When?
Regardless, I'm sure you're not as brain-dead as you're making yourself out to be. "They do it, so should we!" is, well, it sounds like a fight in the kindergarten sand box.


"but, as i pointed out...under extreme circumstances, maybe we should"

So explain your extreme circumstances. You mean saving thousands of lives? To begin with, it is extremely difficult to prove one man has knowledge that can save thousands of lives. Secondly, if I was that man, and subjected to torture, I would simply make up a believable lie. I get out of torture and my side still is saved. Wouldn't you do the same?


It's hilarious, as I said, that you were just at the fallacy page; there was a link to this there:
http://www.nizkor.org/features/fallacies/burden-of-proof.html
(emphasis mine)
Description of Burden of Proof
Burden of Proof is a fallacy in which the burden of proof is placed on the wrong side. Another version occurs when a lack of evidence for side A is taken to be evidence for side B in cases in which the burden of proof actually rests on side B. A common name for this is an Appeal to Ignorance. This sort of reasoning typically has the following form:


Claim X is presented by side A and the burden of proof actually rests on side B.
Side B claims that X is false because there is no proof for X.
In many situations, one side has the burden of proof resting on it. This side is obligated to provide evidence for its position. The claim of the other side, the one that does not bear the burden of proof, is assumed to be true unless proven otherwise. The difficulty in such cases is determining which side, if any, the burden of proof rests on. In many cases, settling this issue can be a matter of significant debate. In some cases the burden of proof is set by the situation. For example, in American law a person is assumed to be innocent until proven guilty (hence the burden of proof is on the prosecution). As another example, in debate the burden of proof is placed on the affirmative team. As a final example, in most cases the burden of proof rests on those who claim something exists (such as Bigfoot, psychic powers, universals, and sense data).
Click to expand...
(Sorry for posting so much of the quote, Anthony, I just wanted to highlight it all to make sure it was understood)
 
you'd make a damn fine lawyer...you ought to persue that profession in your future studies..

From reading Tylers posts over time, I would suspect he is the kind of person who would much rather improve himself.
 
"you'd make a damn fine lawyer...you ought to persue that profession in your future studies.."

My parents want me to go from philosophy HBA to a law degree. And when I say 'want' I mean pretty much expect.


"From reading Tylers posts over time, I would suspect he is the kind of person who would much rather improve himself"

Thanks, Q! At the moment, anyway, law is not much an option in my mind. Who knows what tiem will change, though.
 
it ok tyler, may actully steal ur quote for that idiotic thread about proving a neg

so pumkin, so how possably can you prove that your more intelegent than the people who wrote the geniva convention (stoping it againsted solders\POWs) and the decloration of human rights (stoping it on EVERYONE)

unfortunatly the human rights commision has no power but MAYBE the ICC will change that
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top