Oh Hamburgers! Posted November 5, 2007 Group: Diamond Member Followers: 1 Topic Count: 10 Topics Per Day: 0.00 Content Count: 2,144 Content Per Day: 0.34 Reputation: 163 Days Won: 1 Joined: 02/02/2007 Status: Offline Birthday: 11/05/1985 Share Posted November 5, 2007 Either they serve The True God, or they serve a false god. The truth is, they serve a false god. They are trying to murder us and Israel without justification. Therefore we should take defensive action against them. In this case, the best defense is a good offense. The truth may be that they serve a false god, but they don't know that. Suppose that we hypothetically were the ones following a false god. If that were the case (again, hypothetically), they would probably have justification to destroy Israel, and we could be seen as the ones serving a false god and trying to protect something that shouldn't be protected. That's why I at least have empathy for these people. Again, it's all about misguidance and a clash of what is believed to be truth. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
hr.jr. Posted November 5, 2007 Group: Senior Member Followers: 0 Topic Count: 1 Topics Per Day: 0.00 Content Count: 615 Content Per Day: 0.09 Reputation: 12 Days Won: 1 Joined: 05/21/2006 Status: Offline Share Posted November 5, 2007 Either they serve The True God, or they serve a false god. The truth is, they serve a false god. They are trying to murder us and Israel without justification. Therefore we should take defensive action against them. In this case, the best defense is a good offense. The truth may be that they serve a false god, but they don't know that. Suppose that we hypothetically were the ones following a false god. If that were the case (again, hypothetically), they would probably have justification to destroy Israel, and we could be seen as the ones serving a false god and trying to protect something that shouldn't be protected. That's why I at least have empathy for these people. Again, it's all about misguidance and a clash of what is believed to be truth. If they chose to exist in a vacuum, and not effect other people with their misguided idealology; I would have no problem with them believing whatever they chose. The problem is that they are not attempting to remain isolated. They are attempting to commit acts of mass murder on The United States and her ally Israel. A man can be as misguided as he chooses to be, but when his misguided ambitions threaten my existence; they must be stopped by whatever means it takes. To roughly quote Newt Gingerich, "We are fighting World War III, the sooner we wake up to the fact the better." These "misguided individuals" will come to the knowledge of the falseness of their god when we unleash fury on them. When their land is reduced to a nuclear waste land, the question can be asked of the few survivors, "Where is your Mahdi now?" Just as Elijah did, we can educate them to the fact that they serve a false, powerless god. That is assuming they survive the education process. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JustinM Posted November 5, 2007 Group: Royal Member Followers: 4 Topic Count: 144 Topics Per Day: 0.02 Content Count: 4,512 Content Per Day: 0.68 Reputation: 625 Days Won: 10 Joined: 04/11/2006 Status: Offline Birthday: 10/07/1979 Share Posted November 5, 2007 quote hamburgers: "But I wonder why you don't consider water-boarding torture. On the one hand, if you've ever experienced a near-drowning, you would know that it creates a sensation of panic and terror. Personally I would consider drowning up there in the top 10 or so worst ways to die." I get a sensation of panic and terror when a police officer stops me for speeding, does that mean he is torturing me? Now, I'm just terrified of getting a ticket and panic that I got caught and have to come up with an excuse to justify my infraction. "Second, how do these prisoners know that they are going to survive the waterboarding? Do you think they are sure that we are going to let them live? Considering the reputation some of our prisons have gotten, I wouldn't be 100% sure I would be coming back, if I were one of these prisoners." Despite how you may feel about Abu Ghraib or Guantanamo Bay, not 1 terrorist has been executed, the prisoners know this as well. If any of them managed to survive "waterboarding" they aren't permanently scarred or maimed from it, so the other prisoners know, the worst thing that could happen to them is to either be embarassed or fake drowned. "Third, I disagree with you when you say that the distress goes away when you are no longer drowning. Small intense moments can shape people for the rest of their lives. I think that being threatened with drowning would be a pretty memorable experience, not one that I could easily brush aside. " When I used to swim with my twin brother in our swimming pool, he would "torture" me by continuously dunking me under water. The only thing I learned to fear, was that he would harass me if it were just the two of us swimming in our pool. To this day, I enjoy watersports, swimming and going to the ocean. My life was not permanently altered to my disadvantage. A terrorist lives in terror every day, but not from PTSD. Terrorists all know they are living on borrowed time, which is why they go to such great lengths to protect their worthless lives, even to the point of using innocent human beings as shields. I would say a terrorist is the most selfish, fearful and terrified person on the planet. They torture themselves far worse than anything the U.S. has ever done. I want a terrorist to be scared and terrified, if he believes he is going to be drowned, fine by me. He is fearing for his life and trying to survive, he isn't thinking of a way to kill me or anyone else. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JB Horn Posted November 5, 2007 Group: Advanced Member Followers: 0 Topic Count: 0 Topics Per Day: 0 Content Count: 178 Content Per Day: 0.03 Reputation: 1 Days Won: 0 Joined: 12/29/2006 Status: Offline Share Posted November 5, 2007 Put it another way, if I had the option of spending a year in prison or get punched in the stomach, I would choose the punch. I think most people would choose the punch. How does that invalidate punching as a form of torture? It doesn't, just like your example doesn't invalidate water-boarding as a form of torture. So you are saying that prison incarceration is worst than water boarding. Good I'm glad you agree. Do you justify incarceration because it may save lives or is it a punishment as defined in torture? Or do you disagree with the use of prisons in modern society? Ah, so now we are back to subjective morality. At what point does a sin stop being a sin when it is done to do good? Can I shoot someone to save 10 people and be justified in my actions by God? Why or why not, would you say? Sin never stops being sin. Now what is your definition of sin? It depends on the circumstances doesn't it? What are the circumstances of your shooting? JB Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JustinM Posted November 5, 2007 Group: Royal Member Followers: 4 Topic Count: 144 Topics Per Day: 0.02 Content Count: 4,512 Content Per Day: 0.68 Reputation: 625 Days Won: 10 Joined: 04/11/2006 Status: Offline Birthday: 10/07/1979 Share Posted November 5, 2007 I get sick and tired of the philosophical and theoretical debates, we could go on perpetually and come up with decriptions of anguish and agony, it ain't gonna change anyone's mind. How about we have a debate on something more founded, such as a physiological debate? Hmh? You are being willfully obstructive to this debate. We all know what pain is excruciating and what causes anguish. A broken arm is torture, if done so in a manner to coerce information from someone. That is a major injury and could be disabling. Scaring someone, regardless of method is not torture. No harm, no foul. Mental harm, is not torture. Unless you are actually using objects to tamper with the physiological function of the brain. That could be permanent and disabling. Your word games are childish at best. I don't believe in the freudian, mavlov type of theories on mental processes. Besides, do I really care if a terrorist has nightmares of drowning every night for the rest of his life? No, I consider it preparation for eternity in Hell. How many nightmares have our children had since 9-11? Let's talk about their torture and the fear they now live with, that we never experienced growing up. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Oh Hamburgers! Posted November 5, 2007 Group: Diamond Member Followers: 1 Topic Count: 10 Topics Per Day: 0.00 Content Count: 2,144 Content Per Day: 0.34 Reputation: 163 Days Won: 1 Joined: 02/02/2007 Status: Offline Birthday: 11/05/1985 Share Posted November 5, 2007 quote hamburgers: "But I wonder why you don't consider water-boarding torture. On the one hand, if you've ever experienced a near-drowning, you would know that it creates a sensation of panic and terror. Personally I would consider drowning up there in the top 10 or so worst ways to die." I get a sensation of panic and terror when a police officer stops me for speeding, does that mean he is torturing me? Now, I'm just terrified of getting a ticket and panic that I got caught and have to come up with an excuse to justify my infraction. "Second, how do these prisoners know that they are going to survive the waterboarding? Do you think they are sure that we are going to let them live? Considering the reputation some of our prisons have gotten, I wouldn't be 100% sure I would be coming back, if I were one of these prisoners." Despite how you may feel about Abu Ghraib or Guantanamo Bay, not 1 terrorist has been executed, the prisoners know this as well. If any of them managed to survive "waterboarding" they aren't permanently scarred or maimed from it, so the other prisoners know, the worst thing that could happen to them is to either be embarassed or fake drowned. "Third, I disagree with you when you say that the distress goes away when you are no longer drowning. Small intense moments can shape people for the rest of their lives. I think that being threatened with drowning would be a pretty memorable experience, not one that I could easily brush aside. " When I used to swim with my twin brother in our swimming pool, he would "torture" me by continuously dunking me under water. The only thing I learned to fear, was that he would harass me if it were just the two of us swimming in our pool. To this day, I enjoy watersports, swimming and going to the ocean. My life was not permanently altered to my disadvantage. A terrorist lives in terror every day, but not from PTSD. Terrorists all know they are living on borrowed time, which is why they go to such great lengths to protect their worthless lives, even to the point of using innocent human beings as shields. I would say a terrorist is the most selfish, fearful and terrified person on the planet. They torture themselves far worse than anything the U.S. has ever done. I want a terrorist to be scared and terrified, if he believes he is going to be drowned, fine by me. He is fearing for his life and trying to survive, he isn't thinking of a way to kill me or anyone else. As I said earlier, there is not a precise line that defines what is torture and what isn't. Now with that said I do not consider those things to be torture, and I am assuming you don't either. Refer to my post on page 8 when I try to break down what I define torture as being if you want a bit more of my viewpoint. (its the one that is labeled 1,2,3 in response to Hr.Jr.) As a spark notes version, the main difference between the police example and torture is that the police are trying to provide a safety to other citizens by enforcing laws in place. You violate the law, and they will most likely pull you over, and probably ticket you. But their intention is not to torture, nor is it to make you emotionally or physically distressed. That is a side effect that you experience. They do not pull you over to cause distress. When you water-board someone, that is your main goal: cause them enough distress to make them divulge information to you. So police example: indirect distress. Water-boarding: direct distress. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JB Horn Posted November 5, 2007 Group: Advanced Member Followers: 0 Topic Count: 0 Topics Per Day: 0 Content Count: 178 Content Per Day: 0.03 Reputation: 1 Days Won: 0 Joined: 12/29/2006 Status: Offline Share Posted November 5, 2007 Oh Hamburgers! the thing I take away from this discussion with you is that you are incapable of distinguishing good from evil. After all you are a man and not a god. Hope you never see it up close. I'm gone His Grace JB Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JustinM Posted November 5, 2007 Group: Royal Member Followers: 4 Topic Count: 144 Topics Per Day: 0.02 Content Count: 4,512 Content Per Day: 0.68 Reputation: 625 Days Won: 10 Joined: 04/11/2006 Status: Offline Birthday: 10/07/1979 Share Posted November 5, 2007 Physiologically speaking, define torture. We've played your theoretical and philosophical game for far too long. Play ours now. Physiologically speaking what would you consider torture? At least show us you have a solid belief system, instead of hiding in the la la land of relativism. By the way, I think relativism is the most idiotic concept man has ever come up with to "strengthen" his argument. It is not productive, nor realistic in most cases and has no suitable purpose, it is only used to delay a truthful and substantiated answer to a tough question. Relativism, philosophy and theory are all unrealistic and inifinite concepts. Cowards use them when they don't have the backbone to give a good, realistic answer to a tough question. Humans cannot grasp infinity, so I guess the ones that try to perpetuate arguments to infinitum cannot grasp truth. So, what are the physiological do's and don'ts of coercive interrogation? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Oh Hamburgers! Posted November 5, 2007 Group: Diamond Member Followers: 1 Topic Count: 10 Topics Per Day: 0.00 Content Count: 2,144 Content Per Day: 0.34 Reputation: 163 Days Won: 1 Joined: 02/02/2007 Status: Offline Birthday: 11/05/1985 Share Posted November 5, 2007 Put it another way, if I had the option of spending a year in prison or get punched in the stomach, I would choose the punch. I think most people would choose the punch. How does that invalidate punching as a form of torture? It doesn't, just like your example doesn't invalidate water-boarding as a form of torture. So you are saying that prison incarceration is worst than water boarding. Good I'm glad you agree. Do you justify incarceration because it may save lives or is it a punishment as defined in torture? Or do you disagree with the use of prisons in modern society? Ah, so now we are back to subjective morality. At what point does a sin stop being a sin when it is done to do good? Can I shoot someone to save 10 people and be justified in my actions by God? Why or why not, would you say? Sin never stops being sin. Now what is your definition of sin? It depends on the circumstances doesn't it? What are the circumstances of your shooting? JB I agree with you that sin never stops being sin. But isn't murder, by it's nature, a sin? So how can murder to save 100 people not be a sin? As to prison being considered torture, I already addressed that in a similar response on page 8 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Oh Hamburgers! Posted November 5, 2007 Group: Diamond Member Followers: 1 Topic Count: 10 Topics Per Day: 0.00 Content Count: 2,144 Content Per Day: 0.34 Reputation: 163 Days Won: 1 Joined: 02/02/2007 Status: Offline Birthday: 11/05/1985 Share Posted November 5, 2007 I get sick and tired of the philosophical and theoretical debates, we could go on perpetually and come up with decriptions of anguish and agony, it ain't gonna change anyone's mind. How about we have a debate on something more founded, such as a physiological debate? Hmh? You are being willfully obstructive to this debate. We all know what pain is excruciating and what causes anguish. A broken arm is torture, if done so in a manner to coerce information from someone. That is a major injury and could be disabling. Scaring someone, regardless of method is not torture. No harm, no foul. Mental harm, is not torture. Unless you are actually using objects to tamper with the physiological function of the brain. That could be permanent and disabling. Your word games are childish at best. I don't believe in the freudian, mavlov type of theories on mental processes. Besides, do I really care if a terrorist has nightmares of drowning every night for the rest of his life? No, I consider it preparation for eternity in Hell. How many nightmares have our children had since 9-11? Let's talk about their torture and the fear they now live with, that we never experienced growing up. No where does it state that torture must be physical. I would argue that some of the most terrible forms of torture are ones that exist in our minds. And no, I am not being willfully obstructive. It's easy to define the worst version of something that is excruciating (for example; torture racks from the dark ages), but it becomes impossible to define where the line ends between something excruciating and something "not-so excruciating". I'm sorry if my philosophical debate style frustrates you, but when dealing with things like this, I really don't see a way around it to get my point across. EDIT: That's it for now; I have class to get to. I'll try to follow-up with my interpretation of physiological torture etc sometime tonight or tomorrow. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts