A Conservative's view on waterboarding

[M14 Shooter]

I always wonder why people are so scared to answer that question.
If it works on terror suspects, why wouldn't you want it done to rape or murder suspects?

To what end?
You cannot gain useable evidence thru coercion of any kind.
Actional information is another story.

Uh, yes you can use actionable information.

Not without spoiling the related prosecution.
:shrug:

The problem here is that you're trying to relate limitations on law-enforcement related criminal procedure to national-security related intel and operational actions.

Apples/oranges - and, non-sequitur.

If you're so right, why do you find it so necessary to use such fallacies?

 

[Samson]

you wouldn't know a conservative if one bit you.

Hey deldo, if you think that's a conservative POV then you're as stupid as your avatar suggest.

You are obviously a person who knows nothing about being a genius. Del's avatar is the best on the board cause it radiates "wisdom, truth and sincerity" - along with paying homage to critters with long necks and the appearance of compassion.

Really?



I've always wondered why I become mysteriously aroused by Del's avatar.....

 

[Dr.Drock]

To what end?
You cannot gain useable evidence thru coercion of any kind.
Actional information is another story.

Uh, yes you can use actionable information.

Not without spoiling the related prosecution.
:shrug:

The problem here is that you're trying to relate limitations on law-enforcement related criminal procedure to national-security related intel and operational actions.

Apples/oranges - and, non-sequitur.

If you're so right, why do you find it so necessary to use such fallacies?

For the love of god, I didn't know there were so many astericks created for a basic question.

Let me try again, though I'm sure you'll just pick at the wording again.

Do you want the limitations removed so that law enforcement is able to use waterboarding on american suspects?

 

[uscitizen]

We should perhaps water board all political candidates to get their true intents and views.
After all who more impacts our national security than our leaders?

 

[M14 Shooter]

Uh, yes you can use actionable information.

Not without spoiling the related prosecution.
:shrug:

The problem here is that you're trying to relate limitations on law-enforcement related criminal procedure to national-security related intel and operational actions.

Apples/oranges - and, non-sequitur.

If you're so right, why do you find it so necessary to use such fallacies?

For the love of god, I didn't know there were so many astericks created for a basic question.

You refusing to believe that you'vre presented an apples/oranges non-sequitur doesn't change the fact that you are doing just that.

Let me try again, though I'm sure you'll just pick at the wording again.
Do you want the limitations removed so that law enforcement is able to use waterboarding on american suspects?

Supporting the use of waterboarding for national-security related iltelligence/operational purposes in no way necessiates support for its use in criminal procedure.
Apples/oranges.
:shrug:

 

[M14 Shooter]

We should perhaps water board all political candidates to get their true intents and views.
After all who more impacts our national security than our leaders?

 

[del]

Not without spoiling the related prosecution.
:shrug:

The problem here is that you're trying to relate limitations on law-enforcement related criminal procedure to national-security related intel and operational actions.

Apples/oranges - and, non-sequitur.

If you're so right, why do you find it so necessary to use such fallacies?

For the love of god, I didn't know there were so many astericks created for a basic question.

You refusing to believe that you'vre presented an apples/oranges non-sequitur doesn't change the fact that you are doing just that.

Let me try again, though I'm sure you'll just pick at the wording again.
Do you want the limitations removed so that law enforcement is able to use waterboarding on american suspects?

Supporting the use of waterboarding for national-security related iltelligence/operational purposes in no way necessiates support for its use in criminal procedure.
Apples/oranges.
:shrug:

so you're a situational ethics kinda guy

 

[DiamondDave]

Uh, yes you can use actionable information.

Not without spoiling the related prosecution.
:shrug:

The problem here is that you're trying to relate limitations on law-enforcement related criminal procedure to national-security related intel and operational actions.

Apples/oranges - and, non-sequitur.

If you're so right, why do you find it so necessary to use such fallacies?

For the love of god, I didn't know there were so many astericks created for a basic question.

Let me try again, though I'm sure you'll just pick at the wording again.

Do you want the limitations removed so that law enforcement is able to use waterboarding on american suspects?

That's like asking him if he wants the limitations on the death penalty removed so we can sentence jaywalkers to death

He is correct that this is an apples to oranges comparison....

 

[M14 Shooter]

For the love of god, I didn't know there were so many astericks created for a basic question.

You refusing to believe that you'vre presented an apples/oranges non-sequitur doesn't change the fact that you are doing just that.

Let me try again, though I'm sure you'll just pick at the wording again.
Do you want the limitations removed so that law enforcement is able to use waterboarding on american suspects?

Supporting the use of waterboarding for national-security related iltelligence/operational purposes in no way necessiates support for its use in criminal procedure.
Apples/oranges.
:shrug:

so you're a situational ethics kinda guy

Red herring.
Did you have something to counter what I said?

 

[Samson]

We should perhaps water board all political candidates to get their true intents and views.
After all who more impacts our national security than our leaders?

 

[uscitizen]

We should perhaps water board all political candidates to get their true intents and views.
After all who more impacts our national security than our leaders?

Why is that screwy?

Is it wrong to hold our leaders to the highest standards of honesty and integrity?

 

[del]

You refusing to believe that you'vre presented an apples/oranges non-sequitur doesn't change the fact that you are doing just that.


Supporting the use of waterboarding for national-security related iltelligence/operational purposes in no way necessiates support for its use in criminal procedure.
Apples/oranges.
:shrug:

so you're a situational ethics kinda guy

Red herring.
Did you have something to counter what I said?

no, just a belief that if something is wrong, it's wrong.

you obviously feel differently and believe that ethics are elastic.

 

[Robert]

We should perhaps water board all political candidates to get their true intents and views.
After all who more impacts our national security than our leaders?

Why is that screwy?

Is it wrong to hold our leaders to the highest standards of honesty and integrity?

Hasn't happened yet why break the record?

 

[konradv]

oye, what a joke. Waterboarding is not torture. It is uncomfortable. It's scary, but it's still not torture. If we start lopping off fingers and crushing testicles- that is torture.

Been waterboarded, have you? If not, your opinion doesn't mean much. I'll take the word of that conservative talkshow host who said the same thing, until he tried it himself.

by the same logic, have you been waterboarded? No? then your opinion doesn't mean much either.

Our special forces are waterboarded as part of their training. Are you suggesting that we are "torturing" our own men?

A lot of special forces training borders on torture, so they know how much the man can take and whether he's up to their standards. Waterboarding IS torture, IMO. Whether it's useful or effective is a totally different question.

True, never been waterboarded. Closest thing to it would be eating pussy in the shower, I guess.

 

[uscitizen]

Why is that screwy?

Is it wrong to hold our leaders to the highest standards of honesty and integrity?

Hasn't happened yet why break the record?

Yeah the current system is working out so well after all

 

[M14 Shooter]

You refusing to believe that you'vre presented an apples/oranges non-sequitur doesn't change the fact that you are doing just that.

Supporting the use of waterboarding for national-security related iltelligence/operational purposes in no way necessiates support for its use in criminal procedure.
Apples/oranges.
:shrug:

so you're a situational ethics kinda guy

Red herring.
Did you have something to counter what I said?

no, just a belief that if something is wrong, it's wrong.
you obviously feel differently and believe that ethics are elastic.

I'll take your lack of counter-argument as your acceptance of my point.
Thank you.

 

[Barb]

I've always wondered why people who think waterboarding is great don't want it done in prisons or in trials.

If waterboarding has a magical way of getting even scumbag terrorists to become genuine, honest people instantly, why not do it to scumbag rapists, murderers etc?

Who said it was great? its a tool being used against animals who have utterly no hesitation in slaughtering innocent people for no other reason than they don't worship the same religion.

I'm having an extremely hard time coming up with any compassion for the tools of Islam had I my choice they would suffer very long and horrible deaths. We expect our Government to use everything within its power to fulfill the one role where it might do some good that being protect our nation and people how they do it is up to them.

"Suspected" "animals." Not every suspect is guilty. Many of the people we initially "rounded up" in Afghanistan were sold out by their neighbors, often people with grudges, some who just needed some money, for the "bounty" we offered per head. Done here, you could finger your paper-boy and collect, and then he would face torture so you could pay your national grid bill that month. It happened, and it really was that simple.

 

[Lonestar_logic]

I've always wondered why people who think waterboarding is great don't want it done in prisons or in trials.

If waterboarding has a magical way of getting even scumbag terrorists to become genuine, honest people instantly, why not do it to scumbag rapists, murderers etc?

Who said it was great? its a tool being used against animals who have utterly no hesitation in slaughtering innocent people for no other reason than they don't worship the same religion.

I'm having an extremely hard time coming up with any compassion for the tools of Islam had I my choice they would suffer very long and horrible deaths. We expect our Government to use everything within its power to fulfill the one role where it might do some good that being protect our nation and people how they do it is up to them.

"Suspected" "animals." Not every suspect is guilty. Many of the people we initially "rounded up" in Afghanistan were sold out by their neighbors, often people with grudges, some who just needed some money, for the "bounty" we offered per head. Done here, you could finger your paper-boy and collect, and then he would face torture so you could pay your national grid bill that month. It happened, and it really was that simple.

Source?

 

[del]

You refusing to believe that you'vre presented an apples/oranges non-sequitur doesn't change the fact that you are doing just that.

Supporting the use of waterboarding for national-security related iltelligence/operational purposes in no way necessiates support for its use in criminal procedure.
Apples/oranges.
:shrug:

Red herring.
Did you have something to counter what I said?

no, just a belief that if something is wrong, it's wrong.
you obviously feel differently and believe that ethics are elastic.

I'll take your lack of counter-argument as your acceptance of my point.
Thank you.

you're free to delude yourself in whatever way brings you comfort.

 

[The Rabbi]

You refusing to believe that you'vre presented an apples/oranges non-sequitur doesn't change the fact that you are doing just that.


Supporting the use of waterboarding for national-security related iltelligence/operational purposes in no way necessiates support for its use in criminal procedure.
Apples/oranges.
:shrug:

so you're a situational ethics kinda guy

Red herring.
Did you have something to counter what I said?

No. Why should your post be different from any of the others on this thread?