Jump to content
Eternal Lands Official Forums
Visvate

Bush to veto waterboarding ban

Recommended Posts

Personally, I wouldn't have a problem rapeing or torturing someone that knows where the bombs that would kill 50K people are. I think that some people deserve to be tortured, but like I said, I have a few problems with it:

1. If you sign an international convention/treaty that forbids torture, you should either abide by the terms of the treaty, or get out of the treaty.

2. If you torture people, you don't have the moral high ground to 'liberate' others.

3. You better make sure you torture the right person. How do you know if someone has the information for sure? What if you torture innocents? How would you feel if your daughter was raped in order to be coerced to give information she doesn't have?

 

ok sure in a perfect world i whould agree with this.

but first these are terrorist or peace fighter depending on your point of view not a country so there is a legit agument as too wether the treaty aply.

 

fine call it torture altho in a legal sence iam not sure this is the case and i will concide the moral high ground. its hard to ask for moral when the terrorist cut peoples heads off in my book wb dont compare to killing

 

yes shit happens and yes i whould have to kill you :P

 

we believe in "freedom" and "free will" do we alway get it right no way not even close but we do the best we can

 

if your fighting a man with a gun and choose to fight with a stick your a fool or brue lee lol

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

i would like to think people read my first post in this topic that torture does not work but i guess thats not true.

 

firstnite said "we believe in "freedom" and "free will" do we alway get it right no way not even close but we do the best we can"

 

thats fine if you dont get it right but can you please not impose your "freedom" and "free will" morals on other countrues until you do have them right.

 

and the US didn't single handedly win WW2 it was as much the british as the americans and neither could have won it alone.

 

off topic: the makers of the film U571 really angered me when they portrayed the people who captured the german naval enigma code as american, the actual british people who risked their lives in the dramas played out in that film simply asked for a mention at the end as a tribute to their extreme bravery and the film makers denied them this, i think this is terrible, anyone who has seen the film will surely agree those men deserve to be remembered.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
i would like to think people read my first post in this topic that torture does not work but i guess thats not true.

 

firstnite said "we believe in "freedom" and "free will" do we alway get it right no way not even close but we do the best we can"

 

thats fine if you dont get it right but can you please not impose your "freedom" and "free will" morals on other countrues until you do have them right.

 

and the US didn't single handedly win WW2 it was as much the british as the americans and neither could have won it alone.

 

 

i will leave this to the expert the fbi and scottland yard i have no idea what scottland yard think of WB i dont think it up to me or you to judge if torture works i will let the experts decide

it funny you say this altho we have been strong allies in modern times,The British Empire was for a time was the foremost global power. By 1921, the British Empire held sway over a population of about 458 million people, approximately one-quarter of the world's population.. whats that saying people in glass house sould not throw stones :-) so too say we are imposing seem a bit disingenious.

 

and yes it true amercian allyied with the brits in ww2 Though the United Kingdom and its empire emerged victorious from World War II, the effects of the conflict were profound, both at home and abroad. Much of Europe, a continent that had dominated the world for four hundred years, was now in ruins, and host to the armies of the United States and the Soviet Union, to whom the balance of global power had now shifted.[41] Britain itself was left virtually bankrupt, with insolvency only averted in 1946 after the negotiation of a $3.5 billion loan from the United States, copyied from wiki i dont write this well

 

a proud country for sure and maybe the usa is headed down the same road only time will tell. i guess i dont see thing so black and white as some of you here there alot of gray areas.

 

but i do know american will defend to the death the freedom our forefather won as iam sure most here whould do no less

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
and the US didn't single handedly win WW2 it was as much the british as the americans and neither could have won it alone.

 

You forgot the Soviets.

 

 

i quoted the soviets in my post above :-) i dont mean that it was the usa alone it took the allies to stop hitler

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
So even he teaches that there are consequences for bad things.
Absolutely true. But it's not our place to suggest what those consequences should be (as some in this thread have done).
In fact, the sin is the punishment according to the Bible.

 

“He who strikes a man so that he dies shall surely be put to death. -- You shall give life for life, eye for eye, tooth for tooth, hand for hand, foot for foot, burn for burn, wound for wound, stripe for stripe." -- Exodus 21

 

The christians of the earlier times have read their bibles, I have read it a couple of times too so I could better argue with religious people. I'd recommend you to read La Divina Commedia of Dante (at least the Inferno part) to know something of the sins and punishment. It has been claimed by the Holy Father that it does surely tell the truth about the afterlife.

Edited by ville-v

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

yea soviets played a big role too but i was just talking about the western front.

 

the british empire was not because we wanted to impose freedom and free will on people, we didn't really even want them to take up our morals and beliefs, it was purely a money making exercise and it worked fantastically, for hundreds of years britain was rich beyond its wildest dreams coming to a point in 1900 at the end of Victoria's reign.

 

i think bush is invading countries for the same reason, but he uses 'morals' to convince everyone else the war is needed.

 

it may not have been a nice thing to do but once it started it was hard to stop, i dont think britain is the cause of all the worlds problems like that crazy aerican guy thinks, we were kicked out of countries who thought that they could manage on their own, whilst we where busy fighting major wars, if those countries then couldn't manage thats not our fault. i think a lot of countries benefitted from it aswell, like india.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I don't have details on the exact waterboarding procedure they're using, if there even is one. But anyway, imagine being a "wrong place at wrong time" person getting waterboarded for hours, days, weeks genuinely not knowing anything about the matter. And anyway it's against the Genova Convention as Entropy pointed out earlier. The "what it takes" argument just doesn't work. Like, one way to get rid of religious terrorism would indeed be to eliminate all religious people - that's what it takes? :D

FYI, from page 1, this is waterboarding:

 

And for those who don't know, waterboarding is not the mythical "water torture" of slow drips. It involves tying the victim down, blindfolding him so he can't see what you are doing, stuffing a cloth into his mouth so he can't breathe freely, and then pouring large amounts of water over the cloth and his face (including nose). If you did it without the cloth, he would drown and die in minutes. The cloth slows down the water, but it becomes quickly soaked, and the water still drips into the victim's throat, as well as pouring freely up his nose. The victim cannot breathe because he is being slowly drowned. They call it "simulated drowning" but it's really just slow drowning, which the torturers can interrupt and restart as they please. There is a video of it (I think it's a military training video but I'm not sure who released it - the military or a watchdog group; it's been in the media about this issue for several years; it is very upsetting to watch). Also one of the head officials of the US Justice Department volunteered to undergo it, under US military supervision, to see for himself whether it is torture or not. He came back and said yes, absolutely, no question or doubt, it is torture. He said it was the most horrible and terrifying experience of his life, that his body reacted as if he was dying (with total panic) even though he knew for a fact the people doing it would not let him die. He also said there is no way it is not torture and no way it could be legal. Bush fired him.

 

The video I mentioned is in the media. Every time this issue comes up, news channels show a few seconds of it. I can't look at it anymore. A few times, news channels have shown all of it. I've never been able to make it through the whole thing. It is that bad, and that's why I will not look up a link for it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
In fact, the sin is the punishment according to the Bible.

“He who strikes a man so that he dies shall surely be put to death. -- You shall give life for life, eye for eye, tooth for tooth, hand for hand, foot for foot, burn for burn, wound for wound, stripe for stripe." -- Exodus 21

Old Testament law, superseded by the New Testament (specifically the new covenant created by Jesus' death/resurrection). No longer directly applicable. Certainly not practiced by most modern judicial systems.

 

(This thread shouldn't get hijacked into a Biblical debate, but if someone is going to quote scripture, you need to keep both local and global Biblical context as well as historical context in-mind. Even if you don't believe a word of it, that doesn't allow using things out of context.)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
FYI, from page 1, this is waterboarding:

 

...snip...

 

The video I mentioned is in the media. Every time this issue comes up, news channels show a few seconds of it. I can't look at it anymore. A few times, news channels have shown all of it. I've never been able to make it through the whole thing. It is that bad, and that's why I will not look up a link for it.

 

Yeah, I read that. I was looking for the procedure on amount of torture, as in, do they do this for hours non-stop, or what? Or are there even such regulations published, or is it just "as much as the interrogator feels it takes", or even "no one knows"? Even worse then. Not that it would have affected my original point in any way, now that I think of it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
In fact, the sin is the punishment according to the Bible.

“He who strikes a man so that he dies shall surely be put to death. -- You shall give life for life, eye for eye, tooth for tooth, hand for hand, foot for foot, burn for burn, wound for wound, stripe for stripe." -- Exodus 21

Old Testament law, superseded by the New Testament (specifically the new covenant created by Jesus' death/resurrection). No longer directly applicable. Certainly not practiced by most modern judicial systems.

One more quote taken out of context just for you, this time from the New Testament: "For assuredly, I say to you, till heaven and earth pass away, one jot or one tittle will by no means pass from the law till all is fulfilled. Whoever therefore breaks one of the least of these commandments, and teaches men so, shall be called least in the kingdom of heaven; but whoever does and teaches them, he shall be called great in the kingdom of heaven."

 

As you can see, Jesus claims everything in the Old Testament law is to be followed. But surely we can continue this discussion if we happen to meet while in Hell. I could wait you in the sixth circle if you want :)

 

If needed, moderator(s) can split some of the messages to a new topic.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
One more quote taken out of context just for you, this time from the New Testament: (quoted Mathew 5:18-19) As you can see, Jesus claims everything in the Old Testament law is to be followed.
Yes, but by taking it out of context (specifically verse 17) you've changed the intent.

 

But surely we can continue this discussion if we happen to meet while in Hell.
No need. I'm not a Bible scholar nor that good at apologetics. There's no way I could keep up with people quoting things out-of-context, I just don't have the ability/time to research/comment on everything (not that people would accept my interpretations anyway).

 

Just a few verses down from the one you quoted are some really hard ones to deal with (turn the other cheek, love your enemies) in the context of this thread (torture). Gonna have to find someone else to reconcile those for you. It's to hard for me.

Edited by bkc56

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I couldn't keep from posting on this subject no matter how hard I tried! Anyway, I'll be quick and polite about it:

~ George Gets the Dunking Stool ~

 

ducking_stool.jpg

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
yea soviets played a big role too but i was just talking about the western front.

 

the british empire was not because we wanted to impose freedom and free will on people, we didn't really even want them to take up our morals and beliefs, it was purely a money making exercise and it worked fantastically, for hundreds of years britain was rich beyond its wildest dreams coming to a point in 1900 at the end of Victoria's reign.

 

i think bush is invading countries for the same reason, but he uses 'morals' to convince everyone else the war is needed.

 

it may not have been a nice thing to do but once it started it was hard to stop, i dont think britain is the cause of all the worlds problems like that crazy aerican guy thinks, we were kicked out of countries who thought that they could manage on their own, whilst we where busy fighting major wars, if those countries then couldn't manage thats not our fault. i think a lot of countries benefitted from it aswell, like india.

 

ok maybe iam crasy but your clueless if you think i blamed it on england, my only point was you replyed "stay away until you get it right" or some thing close and mine was england is the last to talk becasue england did it for greedy as you admit. were atlest we pay own own way last i knew it was costing the us 100 billion a year to free the people. and if it take a bit of WB so be it.

 

now if i was asked is torure right my reply is of course its not.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
One more quote taken out of context just for you, this time from the New Testament: (quoted Mathew 5:18-19) As you can see, Jesus claims everything in the Old Testament law is to be followed.
Yes, but by taking it out of context (specifically verse 17) you've changed the intent.

 

No, Ville is actually right, Jesus made it clear that he did not come to invalidate the Old Testament teachings.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
One more quote taken out of context just for you, this time from the New Testament: (quoted Mathew 5:18-19) As you can see, Jesus claims everything in the Old Testament law is to be followed.
Yes, but by taking it out of context (specifically verse 17) you've changed the intent.

No, Ville is actually right, Jesus made it clear that he did not come to invalidate the Old Testament teachings.
Well duh, I know that. :icon13: But you've both missed the POINT of his statement by taking it out of context (ignoring verse 17). Of course his point only makes sense if you believe Jesus is who he said he was, otherwise most any interpretation you want to use is fine.

 

But no matter, this has nothing to do with the purpose of this thread, and I'm sure people are tired of it. Perhaps we should get back to the subject of torture.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×