~/Coolio Prime\~ Posted September 17, 2009 Report Share Posted September 17, 2009 You're still missing the fact that torture is an unreliable source of information. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lil Jevans Posted September 17, 2009 Report Share Posted September 17, 2009 Corporal Atlas has a point, torturing someone for info doesn't mean anything they tell you is the truth they may have just said it to get you to stop. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
raven5000 Posted September 18, 2009 Report Share Posted September 18, 2009 You're still missing the fact that torture is an unreliable source of information.hey if they dont tell the truth that just makes it worst on them, but it also depends on what type of torture it is, and how strongly willed the person that is being tortured is. eventauly everyone breaks. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
OMGAKITTY Posted September 18, 2009 Report Share Posted September 18, 2009 You're still missing the fact that torture is an unreliable source of information.hey if they dont tell the truth that just makes it worst on them' date=' but it also depends on what type of torture it is, and how strongly willed the person that is being tortured is. eventauly everyone breaks.[/quote'] BECAUSE WE AUTOMATICALLY KNOW WHEN YOU ARE LYING, SO DON'T TRY IT! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ihop Posted September 18, 2009 Report Share Posted September 18, 2009 Torture should only be used if necessary. Otherwise, it's inhumane. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
~/Coolio Prime\~ Posted September 18, 2009 Report Share Posted September 18, 2009 You're still missing the fact that torture is an unreliable source of information.hey if they dont tell the truth that just makes it worst on them' date=' but it also depends on what type of torture it is, and how strongly willed the person that is being tortured is. eventauly everyone breaks.[/quote']How can you tell if they're lying or not? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GraveHorizon Posted September 18, 2009 Report Share Posted September 18, 2009 Most people will break under torture. When the innocent people break and admit they know nothing, would the "interrogator" immediately stop realizing they were telling the truth? Most likely, they would keep going, thinking the torture victim was lying. Also, what kind of person would want to inflict that kind of pain on another human being? An inhumane/morally corrupt person. Like the Elite Hunting group in the movie Hostel (bad movie). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
~ P O L A R I S ~ Posted September 18, 2009 Report Share Posted September 18, 2009 Most people will break under torture. When the innocent people break and admit they know nothing' date=' would the "interrogator" immediately stop realizing they were telling the truth? Most likely, they would keep going, thinking the torture victim was lying. [/quote'] I'm pretty sure that in most cases, "I don't know anything" and true information aren't your only options. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dictator7 Posted September 18, 2009 Report Share Posted September 18, 2009 Most people will break under torture. When the innocent people break and admit they know nothing' date=' would the "interrogator" immediately stop realizing they were telling the truth? Most likely, they would keep going, thinking the torture victim was lying. Also, what kind of person would want to inflict that kind of pain on another human being? An inhumane/morally corrupt person. Like the Elite Hunting group in the movie Hostel (bad movie).[/quote'] That's why you only torture when you know the person knows something, like a military commander or something or someone who would know something. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dark Posted September 18, 2009 Report Share Posted September 18, 2009 This has already been stated, I'll assume, but let me either present this point or reiterate it. When one is being tortured, one will admit to anything. If I was a suspected terrorist, and the government came to my house and performed Chinese water torture on me, no matter how innocent I am, I will admit to being a terrorist as I want the torture to stop. Therefore the results won't be accurate and everyone will admit to being guilty. So it's basically speculation on who you think is a terrorist or not, and your thoughts better be right. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Luna Lovegood Posted September 19, 2009 Report Share Posted September 19, 2009 I take it you don't think it is horrible? Have you ever been tortured before? If you have' date=' I bet you would not have liked it.[/quote'] Fine. Let's say you were about to get bombed. But you can stop it by asking this terrorist, exactly, step by step. he won't answer. So, by the sound of what you're saying, you wouldn't do s*** and won't torture, to save lives of your people. That's Ok though, you can blow up, I can save the innocent. But what if they have no funking idea about? You'll keep torturing until you get the answer you funking want. Torturing is bullshit. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dark Posted September 19, 2009 Report Share Posted September 19, 2009 computerwhiz is making me lol so hard these days. Let me reiterate this point. When you torture someone, they will obviously admit to the crime, whether they are guilty or innocent. Therefore, your speculations about who to torture must be 100% accurate, or an innocent person will get the bad end of it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dictator7 Posted September 19, 2009 Report Share Posted September 19, 2009 Just as I have been stating. Dark is 100% right. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dark Posted September 19, 2009 Report Share Posted September 19, 2009 Torture should only be used if necessary. Otherwise' date=' it's inhumane.[/quote'] In what situation would it be both viable and needed? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
~/Coolio Prime\~ Posted September 19, 2009 Report Share Posted September 19, 2009 Torture is, in short, an acceptable modern day version of Witch Trials. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dark Posted September 19, 2009 Report Share Posted September 19, 2009 Torture is' date=' in short, an [b']acceptable[/b] modern day version of Witch Trials. When has torture become acceptable? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dictator7 Posted September 19, 2009 Report Share Posted September 19, 2009 Ya, pretty much. You are absolutley right. Not sarcasm! Some where fair, some weren't. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
~ P O L A R I S ~ Posted September 19, 2009 Report Share Posted September 19, 2009 computerwhiz is making me lol so hard these days. Let me reiterate this point. When you torture someone' date=' they will obviously admit to the crime, whether they are guilty or innocent. Therefore, your speculations about who to torture [b']must[/b] be 100% accurate, or an innocent person will get the bad end of it. Lol, people don't torture people to get them to confess to a crime, that's just stupid, and if anyone DOES do it, so are they and they should do the following. They'd just assume they did in the first place and punish them, possibly with torture. xD They don't need their consent. Torture is for information. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
~/Coolio Prime\~ Posted September 19, 2009 Report Share Posted September 19, 2009 Torture is' date=' in short, an [b']acceptable[/b] modern day version of Witch Trials. When has torture become acceptable? I'm sure many people were against the Witch Trials, but it was a common form of punishment. I meant acceptable in terms of usage, not from a viability and morality POV. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dark Posted September 19, 2009 Report Share Posted September 19, 2009 computerwhiz is making me lol so hard these days. Let me reiterate this point. When you torture someone' date=' they will obviously admit to the crime, whether they are guilty or innocent. Therefore, your speculations about who to torture [b']must[/b] be 100% accurate, or an innocent person will get the bad end of it. Lol, people don't torture people to get them to confess to a crime, that's just stupid, and if anyone DOES do it, so are they and they should do the following. They'd just assume they did in the first place and punish them, possibly with torture. xD They don't need their consent. Torture is for information. I know that. But you need to be dead-on about your speculation, otherwise you will get a random person killed (almost, or maybe even) for nothing. Torture is basically a way of giving punishment without any imperical evidence, therefore bypassing the law. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Dark One Posted September 19, 2009 Report Share Posted September 19, 2009 For reasons why torture is bad, go watch Battlestar Galactica. Humans have this tendency to reduce the world into "forces" or "groups." It's evolutionary, and there's really only so much that can be done about it. Unfortunately, however, we tend to reduce our enemies in the most reprehensible way. They become dehumanized in our eyes. No longer a unique individual with his own perspective, his own beliefs, his own fears. Your enemy is simply an obstacle to be destroyed. Battlestar shows this well with the human torture of Cylon sleeper agents. They're beat, raped, etc. But WAIT! IT ISNT RAELY RAEP BRECUZ THEYZ NOT BE HUMANZ! Obviously, Battlestar presents a rather extreme situation because the cylons aren't even of the same race as us. But the concept remains the same, and it does happen. During torture, we are stealing away an individual's human dignity. The idea isn' to gain information, it's to break the person, completely and totally. It's a life-scarring experience. You don't come out of torture as a well-functioning human-being. This is all why torture is bad. Even then, you could make the argument that is was worth it. That the torture, and therefore the complete destruction of a person's will, was justified. That the innocents destroyed by the system were a necessary cost. You could make these arguments IF TORTURE EVEN funking WORKED. Guess what, it doesn't. I'm not a member of the FBI or CIA. There's really only so much I can criticize. Sometimes they know that a little discomfort (music torture, etc.) can help things out, while not causing too much permanent damage to the individual. But torture as a practice. That's an entirely different matter. Frankly computerwhiz, I know you're just an ignorant little child, but it's sheet like this that sometimes makes me wonder if the terrorists had a point. Don't get me wrong, those sons of bastards that flew planes into the towers are reprehensible beings. Al-Qaeda performs tortures of its own. They execute POWs, etc. They're no better. But with people like cw here in America, well, I can see why we'd be called 'devils.' Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lil Jevans Posted September 19, 2009 Report Share Posted September 19, 2009 Torture is' date=' in short, an [b']acceptable[/b] modern day version of Witch Trials. When has torture become acceptable? It hasn't. It is actually considered a war crime but, as I said before, some soldiers who perform torture call it 'Advanced Interrogation' which, for some reason, some people believed to be alright. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
OMGAKITTY Posted September 19, 2009 Report Share Posted September 19, 2009 For reasons why torture is bad' date=' go watch Battlestar Galactica. Humans have this tendency to reduce the world into "forces" or "groups." It's evolutionary, and there's really only so much that can be done about it. Unfortunately, however, we tend to reduce our enemies in the most reprehensible way. They become dehumanized in our eyes. No longer a unique individual with his own perspective, his own beliefs, his own fears. Your enemy is simply an obstacle to be destroyed. Battlestar shows this well with the human torture of Cylon sleeper agents. They're beat, raped, etc. But WAIT! IT ISNT RAELY RAEP BRECUZ THEYZ NOT BE HUMANZ! Obviously, Battlestar presents a rather extreme situation because the cylons aren't even of the same race as us. But the concept remains the same, and it does happen. During torture, we are stealing away an individual's human dignity. The idea isn' to gain information, it's to break the person, completely and totally. It's a life-scarring experience. You don't come out of torture as a well-functioning human-being. This is all why torture is bad. Even then, you could make the argument that is was worth it. That the torture, and therefore the complete destruction of a person's will, was justified. That the innocents destroyed by the system were a necessary cost. You could make these arguments IF TORTURE EVEN f***ing WORKED. Guess what, it doesn't. I'm not a member of the FBI or CIA. There's really only so much I can criticize. Sometimes they know that a little discomfort (music torture, etc.) can help things out, while not causing too much permanent damage to the individual. But torture as a practice. That's an entirely different matter. Frankly computerwhiz, I know you're just an ignorant little child, but it's s*** like this that sometimes makes me wonder if the terrorists had a point. Don't get me wrong, those sons of b****es that flew planes into the towers are reprehensible beings. Al-Qaeda performs tortures of its own. They execute POWs, etc. They're no better. But with people like cw here in America, well, I can see why we'd be called 'devils.'[/quote'] I love you for making your point via Battlestar Galatica. Also, terrorists tend to work in cells, so capturing one and torturing him/her wouldn't get you much information anyway. It just makes everything the terrorist believe in actually valid. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dark Posted September 19, 2009 Report Share Posted September 19, 2009 You are blatantly assuming Al Queda planned 9/11. Whatever. :/ My point is that torture won't reveal much information, and you'd have to be 100% sure that the person you are torturing is guilty. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Dark One Posted September 20, 2009 Report Share Posted September 20, 2009 [quote='Dªrĸ' pid='2996341' dateline='1253386161'] You are blatantly assuming Al Queda planned 9/11. Whatever. :/ My point is that torture won't reveal much information, and you'd have to be 100% sure that the person you are torturing is guilty. [/quote] Are you serious? http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Q_OIXfkXEj0 Watch this, it's pretty funny. Really though, there's not a good reason to question Al'Qaeda's planning and involvement in 9/11. That's conspiracy bullshit. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.