Thread: We can't afford moral certainty about torture.

Page 2 of 4 FirstFirst 1234 LastLast
Results 11 to 20 of 31
  1. #11  
    NeunElfer SuperMod hampshirebrit's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2008
    Location
    TehYuk
    Posts
    3,727
    Quote Originally Posted by megimoo View Post
    ...
    The sentiments are sound, while at the same time the means of expressing them are somewhat lurid. There is little for one to take exception to from a UK perspective.

    I'll just say, if I may, that the non-Muslim public of the UK and of the EU are edging ahead on this issue, certainly ahead of their elected representatives.
    20010911
    nie vergessen, nie verzeihen.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  2. #12  
    An Adversary of Linda #'s
    Join Date
    Aug 2005
    Posts
    22,891
    Quote Originally Posted by hampshirebrit View Post
    The sentiments are sound, while at the same time the means of expressing them are somewhat lurid. There is little for one to take exception to from a UK perspective.

    I'll just say, if I may, that the non-Muslim public of the UK and of the EU are edging ahead on this issue, certainly ahead of their elected representatives.
    Are you being diplomatic in your language being aware of your position .From my point of view if Europe,that is the old Europe, had better stiffen its spine quickly or it will be too late.Islam is moving more quickly than Hitler in taking over the continent.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  3. #13  
    Senior Member Madisonian's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2010
    Location
    Peoples Democratic Socialist Republic of Michiganistanovia
    Posts
    2,410
    Quote Originally Posted by hampshirebrit View Post
    This is part of a thought-provoking op-ed piece by the Telegraph's Janet Daley. Full article here.
    Yeah, Brits don't believe in torture. Tell that to the Irish with a straight face.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  4. #14  
    NeunElfer SuperMod hampshirebrit's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2008
    Location
    TehYuk
    Posts
    3,727
    Looks like I may have unintentionally touched a raw nerve here, with both one of our newer and one of our more august posters.

    Madisonian, I will be the first to admit to British wrongdoing in Belfast. In return, I do not require anyone to apologise for Warrington or Omagh, although such apology is surely due.

    Megi, I'm not being diplomatic, or even trying to. I think you're right. Europe needs to stiffen its spine, as you put it. I think in this instance, the people of Europe are well ahead of the politicians of Europe.
    20010911
    nie vergessen, nie verzeihen.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  5. #15  
    PORCUS MAXIMUS Rockntractor's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2009
    Location
    oklahoma
    Posts
    41,095
    Quote Originally Posted by hampshirebrit View Post
    the people of Europe are well ahead of the politicians of Europe.
    We are in the same boat Hamps!
    Reply With Quote  
     

  6. #16  
    Senior Ape Articulate_Ape's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Location
    NJ, Exit Only
    Posts
    7,948
    I think the bottom line here is that the academic approach to this subject in based upon, and defended by the pronoun "we". I would submit that the people who cry loudly about torture and the nature of same do so under the false aegis of that very pronoun. "We don't/won't torture and won't stand for it!" they proclaim from their library armchairs.

    Put those same moralists in an empty room with a guy who knows where one of their loved ones is buried alive and hand them a hatchet. Then turn of the video camera.

    When you turn the "W" in "We" over it becomes "Me". And that makes all the difference in the world.
    Last edited by Articulate_Ape; 11-14-2010 at 07:05 PM.
    "Reality is merely an illusion, albeit a very persistent one." ~ Albert Einstein
    Reply With Quote  
     

  7. #17  
    NeunElfer SuperMod hampshirebrit's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2008
    Location
    TehYuk
    Posts
    3,727
    Quote Originally Posted by Articulate_Ape View Post
    I think the bottom line here is that the academic approach to this subject in based upon, and defended by the pronoun "we". I would submit that the people who cry loudly about torture and the nature of same do so under the false aegis of that very pronoun. "We don't/won't torture and won't stand for it!" they proclaim from their library armchairs.

    Put those same moralists in an empty room with a guy who knows where one of their loved ones is buried alive and hand them a hatchet. Then turn of the video camera.

    When you turn the "W" in "We" over it becomes "Me". And that makes all the difference in the world.
    I think this is far too easy and glib a dismissal, as perhaps my own earlier post was.

    I think that use of so-called enhanced interrogation methods opens a moral can of worms, one that must be debated and constantly re-evaluated.

    To me, the content of Janet Daley's DT piece does not rule out such debate. Rather, it seeks, quite rightly in my view, to encourage it.

    We need to consider if it is justifiable, and if so, when, where, how and by who, and to what limits.

    Personally, I think that decision should be driven by the urgency and severity of the threat, those factors being allowed to take precedence over other factors.

    The real question is, who does it, and under what authority and circumstance.
    20010911
    nie vergessen, nie verzeihen.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  8. #18  
    Bleda
    Guest
    Quote Originally Posted by megimoo View Post
    It's more a question of common sense to me .If some Islamic critter is willing to blow himself and a bunch of civilian people to kingdom come then I'm fine with water boarding captured terror suspects,Israeli style profiling, searching all Arabic looking critters and full body searches for any who refuse scanning.They, the TSA searchers, should be fully screened to cull out any Queers or ' free feel' Critters,The alternative is to shut down all air travel.

    As far as I can tell the only critters who are blowing up other people are Arab Terrorists and they are all Muslims so whats the problem with profiling all Arab looking critters?
    Not all terrorists (or even the terrorists who've attacked or attempted to attack us) are Arabs or Arab-looking. Take the Underwear Bomber, for instance. Perhaps “Muslims” would've been more accurate than “Arabs”, megimoo, but I'd venture a guess and say if a terrorist was planning on doing something naughty these days they wouldn't try to look like a devout Muslim. Why would they draw so much attention to themselves?
    Reply With Quote  
     

  9. #19  
    Senior Member Madisonian's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2010
    Location
    Peoples Democratic Socialist Republic of Michiganistanovia
    Posts
    2,410
    Quote Originally Posted by hampshirebrit View Post
    Looks like I may have unintentionally touched a raw nerve here, with both one of our newer and one of our more august posters.

    Madisonian, I will be the first to admit to British wrongdoing in Belfast. In return, I do not require anyone to apologise for Warrington or Omagh, although such apology is surely due.

    Megi, I'm not being diplomatic, or even trying to. I think you're right. Europe needs to stiffen its spine, as you put it. I think in this instance, the people of Europe are well ahead of the politicians of Europe.
    Don't get me wrong. It is not that I am 100% opposed to the use of alternative information gathering techniques. It is, as you said a matter of justification, authority and circumstance.

    I do not think there is a government now or in the past that has not employed torture for some means to some end. The hypocrisy of any one calling nation out another for it would be more to my point, our own government included.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  10. #20  
    Senior Ape Articulate_Ape's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Location
    NJ, Exit Only
    Posts
    7,948
    Quote Originally Posted by hampshirebrit View Post
    I think this is far too easy and glib a dismissal, as perhaps my own earlier post was.

    I think that use of so-called enhanced interrogation methods opens a moral can of worms, one that must be debated and constantly re-evaluated.

    To me, the content of Janet Daley's DT piece does not rule out such debate. Rather, it seeks, quite rightly in my view, to encourage it.

    We need to consider if it is justifiable, and if so, when, where, how and by who, and to what limits.

    Personally, I think that decision should be driven by the urgency and severity of the threat, those factors being allowed to take precedence over other factors.

    The real question is, who does it, and under what authority and circumstance.

    "Opens a moral can of worms"?

    Does any mature and rational human being honestly believe that these measures have not been employed by all governments/groups during war (most sans war) since pain was invented; or that they are not still employed by all governments/groups during war (most sans war) and will be until we achieve the myth of world peace?
    "Reality is merely an illusion, albeit a very persistent one." ~ Albert Einstein
    Reply With Quote  
     

Bookmarks
Bookmarks
Posting Permissions
  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •