Skip to main content

Terror, Torture and Control

There are a number of things I just don't understand. One of them is why so many of the anti-war crowd go thumbs down on torture. Our Radical Islamic enemy doesn't hesitate. In fact they often omit torture entirely, and simply lop off the heads of our soldiers.

War is a dirty, ugly, and deadly business to be sure, but if one person is known to have information that would lead to the certain murder of two or more innocent persons, it makes perfect sense to use every tool available to retrieve that information.  Remember, the end of torture is not automatically death. 

Interogation torture must end before death occurs. 

But this opinion is not widely shared. The anti-war crowd sees torture as medieval and inhuman. They forbid torture under any circumstances and at any time, war or no war. Their position is blurred by the many opinions as to what constitutes torture. The precise definition is not uniform.

When the hypothetical question is: "Should one terrorist member of the group that plans to fly airplanes into the twin towers be captured . . .and he is strongly suspected of knowing the details of the prospective attack which, if carried out, will kill and maim thousands of innocent, non-combatant, American citizens  . . . .should all means available (some degree of torture) be used to innterogate this terrorist in an effort to save them?"

To me, the answer is a crystal clear YES.

Comments

Greybeard said…
Agreed.
But...

For me you must first define "torture".
Most on the left would now include "Waterboarding" as torture...
Which, when done properly, does NO PHYSICAL DAMAGE WHATSOEVER to the recipient.
When I find that somone wants to include waterboarding in their definition of torture I realize debating them is a total waste of time.
And, unfortunately, that is true of a myriad of discussions we try to have with lefties these days, isn't it?
Is our relationship with them irreparable?
Is a Civil War inevitable?
I've made solid points in discussions with folks like rain, only to have them ignore those truths and move on to their next talking point.
Until we can have a true "Di" alogue and have logical points recognized, we're in trouble as a Nation.
What we are doing now is unsustainable.
June 9, 2010 at 3:03 PM
Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

Gloves Off

. OUR ELECTED OFFICIALS BETRAYED OUR TRUST AGAIN. Whether we are Democrat or Republican, Liberal or Conservative, makes no difference at all. Our legislators voted according to "what's best for them". It was clear that the people want to reduce the costs and improve access to our overall health care system. It was also VERY CLEAR that they did not want the 2000 page legislative monstrosity that was produced by a small number of far left liberal Democrats, who worked behind closed doors to fashion a pork filled blunderbuss that virtually no one has been able to read, or discuss, or debate, or offer alternatives to specific unreasoned clauses. It is (now) a BAD BILL , passed by BAD POLITICIANS, that compose a BAD MINORITY segment of America's out-of-control government. AND WE HAVE NO LOGICAL WAY TO PAY FOR IT EITHER. The far left liberals like to point at  SOCIAL SECURITY   as a text book success. They are wrong and will not admit it despite the concrete evide
20 comments
Read more

Why Blackwater Mercenaries

Over some years the name Blackwater shows  up in the news. It is, by their own estimation, the largest mercenary group in the world. I think I first noticed it when reports from Iraq mentioned they were employed (by whom?) to escort and protect members of the Iraqi government from place to place. Then I became aware that they had joined several of the firefights between our marines and Iraqi enemies. I wondered just how these mercenaries (that supposedly came from the United States) were  hired by someone (who?) to fight? That led to the question of just who would be responsible if a situation involved the accidental killing of an innocent bystander? It  might be a little sticky for an unauthorised mercenary contracted by the United States but not a member of our military forces.  Or suppose a Blackwater type killed a military Iraqi combatant and was then captured by the enemy. Would he be treated as a spy, or as a American combatant, or whatelse?  And would the Geneva Convention
18 comments
Read more

Sarah-palin-itus

. Am I the only one that watches the liberal roar caused by the soccer mom . . . and laughs?   I suspect Sarah is a nice and decent person who will eventually prove to be a better political critic than elected official. But who knows. She projects an effervescent personality, a better than average intelligence, and solid conservative values. Still,  as a political leader of consequence I suspect she is a female Peter. You do remember THE PETER PRINCIPLE don't you. Dixon
10 comments
Read more