17 replies to this topic

[volycz]

This is a 2 question poll.

1> If a terrorist organization attacks somewhere and kills several innocents, should the government respond by
a) petition the government where the terrorists originated from to launch an investigation and arrest the terrorists?

b) send in special elite troops (Such as the British SAS, Israeli Sayeret Matkal, US Delta Force, German GSG9) secretly and brutaly using what ever means necessary assassinate the terrorists and their leaders?


2> If a terrorist was captured alive, should the government use any means necessary to interrogate the terrorist because the information he has in his head could lead to the elimination of the terrorist organization and save lives in the future. (interrogation techniques include physical torture such as crushing the knuckles with pliers, ducking his head under water, use of chemicals and electro shock therepy, etc till the terrorist talks)

Or should they let the terrorist have his 'god given' rights?

[Shin]

We can only vote for one option in the poll.

But I chose "Send in special operation troops and kill the terrorists" and "Use whatever means necessary to get the information from the terrorist's head." Now that I look at what I chose, I seem like a cold person, but I think it's the most effective way to eliminate the threat. And it's most likely what a country (especially the US) will do if something like that actually happened.

[Hydrogen]

Your poll seems slightly one sided and biased. Id work on the options a bit to make it a bit more fair to correct data collection processes

[Cript]

In a case where evidence of involvement can not be denied, I definitely vote that information should be obtained by any means necessary. Any individual who has denied the rights of othes to live does not have or deserve "god-given rights," especially those who terrorize and kill innocents and their families.

[Hydrogen]

In a case where evidence of involvement can not be denied, I definitely vote that information should be obtained by any means necessary. Any individual who has denied the rights of othes to live does not have or deserve "god-given rights," especially those who terrorize and kill innocents and their families.

If we torture, we are just like them. Often times, we may be wrong that they were involved. People make stuff up to get the torture to stop. It defeats the purpose in the end and just causes unecessary harm to humans.

[Cript]

If we torture, we are just like them. Often times, we may be wrong that they were involved. People make stuff up to get the torture to stop. It defeats the purpose in the end and just causes unecessary harm to humans.

I don't think we're just like them at all. They killed innocents. We are avenging the loss of lives. The innocents did nothing to them so the claim that we're stooping to their level is inaccurate.

[Hydrogen]

I don't think we're just like them at all. They killed innocents. We are avenging the loss of lives. The innocents did nothing to them so the claim that we're stooping to their level is inaccurate.

What if they are innocent. The path America is taking reminds me of the Red scare and Macarthyism. We dont seem to learn from our mistakes.

[Cript]

What if they are innocent. The path America is taking reminds me of the Red scare and Macarthyism. We dont seem to learn from our mistakes.

That's why in my original reply, I said if the evidence is undeniable. For instance, if we find a top al-queda figure that has appeared on TV claiming responsibility.

[Hydrogen]

That's why in my original reply, I said if the evidence is undeniable. For instance, if we find a top al-queda figure that has appeared on TV claiming responsibility.

I still dont agree that torturing them is acceptable.

[Cript]

I still dont agree that torturing them is acceptable.

I can't understand that logic. If torturing Osama, who has confessed to the direct involvement of killing at least ten thousand innocents, would lead to the prevention of more innocent deaths...How could you not agree with it? Are we to give due process to someone who has denied the most basic of human rights, the right to live?

Seems awfully silly to me my good man.

[Hydrogen]

I can't understand that logic. If torturing Osama, who has confessed to the direct involvement of killing at least ten thousand innocents, would lead to the prevention of more innocent deaths...How could you not agree with it? Are we to give due process to someone who has denied the most basic of human rights, the right to live?

Seems awfully silly to me my good man.

Torture is just wrong regardless of who you do it to. I think Islamic Ideology states that the one who tortures another has earned the anger of God to the point that he will never have the chance to enter paradise. But I'm not sure. I just know that torture is highly looked down upon and is a major sin in Islam.

[Cript]

Torture is just wrong regardless of who you do it to. I think Islamic Ideology states that the one who tortures another has earned the anger of God to the point that he will never have the chance to enter paradise. But I'm not sure. I just know that torture is highly looked down upon and is a major sin in Islam.

And killing 5,000 innocent people at once isn't? I know this isn't what you're trying to say...but their interpretation is so perverted that who cares.

[Hydrogen]

And killing 5,000 innocent people at once isn't? I know this isn't what you're trying to say...but their interpretation is so perverted that who cares.

Just because they dont follow the religion correctly doesnt mean that I have to compromise on how I follow it..

So to answer your question, I care.

[Bão]

Ah, I choose the first choice. I'm going to have to agree with Hydro on this subject. It's just wrong to get down to their level by torturing them.

[Cript]

Ah, I choose the first choice. I'm going to have to agree with Hydro on this subject. It's just wrong to get down to their level by torturing them.

So,

If we know for a 100% certain chance that a plane, in the air is going to be hijacked at any given time, and we know exactly who has ordered it and we have them in our custody...we know that they will crack through torture and give up the necessary info to save, say, 5,000 people's lives...you guys would definitely not torture the individual? You would prefer they just be given the death penalty a year later?

Also, how the hell does torturing a criminal constitute us stooping to their level. In order to stoop to their level, we would send a christian extremist into a crowded mosque full of innocents and blow the shit out of all them. Now...you tell me which sounds worse, killing a self-admitted murderer or letting 5,000 innocent people die?

Edited by Cript, 18 August 2006 - 07:22 PM.

[Funnlecake]

well i choose the second but i dont agree with the second part of a statement becuase the special forces arnt ment to go in and kill them, therer ment to capture the enemy. so process them, find them guilty and show them the life they gave away.

[Sean]

If we torture, we are just like them. Often times, we may be wrong that they were involved. People make stuff up to get the torture to stop. It defeats the purpose in the end and just causes unecessary harm to humans.

... But aren't you for captial punishment? The eye-for-an-eye thing? Well, I think they should be arrested ad interrogated, but I went null in the poll.

We need to keep them in the governments hands until we have absolute proof they are a terrorist. Then they should either be executed or just left to rot in a cell.

[volycz]

I think torturing the bastard Bin Laden would be doing justice for all the people hes killed.
Its like one death is a tragedy while a million is only a statistic.
But then again torturing the guy would only make him suffer before inevitable death, and fuel more terroristic anger.