User Tag List

View Poll Results: Who's your GOP pick for 2012?

Voters
30. You may not vote on this poll
  • Bachmann

    0 0%
  • Cain

    1 3.33%
  • Gingrich

    0 0%
  • Huntsman

    4 13.33%
  • Paul

    23 76.67%
  • Perry

    0 0%
  • Romney

    2 6.67%
  • Santorum

    0 0%
First 3111213141523 Last

Results 121 to 130 of 287

  1. #121
    Tempbanned
    Join Date
    Oct 2009
    MBTI
    INTJ
    Enneagram
    6w5 sx/so
    Posts
    8,161

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by giegs View Post
    [generic liberal positions]
    I wish you a lifetime of living with Rick Perry as your President.

  2. #122
    Senior Member Critical Hit's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2011
    MBTI
    ENTP
    Posts
    338

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Zarathustra View Post
    First off, it's spelled "whether", not "weather".

    I normally wouldn't point this out, but you committed this mistake 3 times, and I wouldn't want you to continue this in the future; people might think you're stupid.



    If by "most basic" and "best fell in line with", you're referring to those parameters that only support your simplistic arguments, then yes, you're absolutely correct.

    If you're referring to the obvious alternative parameters that would afford one a well-rounded, balanced, more objective, impartial, nuanced, accurate, proper, and appropriate view of the situation, then no, your choice of parameters didn't come anywhere close...
    Please point out these obvious alternative parameters that you have so skillfully avoided actually mentioning. I am a poor ignorant plebeian cowering before your mighty intellect on the matter.

    Hmm... still not sure... lack of intelligence, or lack of integrity?
    As I stated, I am a moron, clearly you know so much more than me. What with your ability to accuse me of not taking things in to consideration while never mentioning what those things are.

    The very obvious alternative parameters I speak of are not anything remotely similar to the ridiculous straw man you've proposed here.
    I imagine they are not. Mind sharing with the rest of the class?

    I'm starting to lean towards lack of intellectual integrity...

    He's been given the chance to recognize his obvious wrongness, but still hopes to get away with it; a more honest interlocutor would admit his obvious mistake.
    Ive asked you what you think those "obvious parameters" are that I am missing. Perhaps if you pointed them out I would admit my eternal wrongness in face of you.



    Pointing out how ridiculously inane your ideologically-driven arguments that you present as valuable, truthful, and/or meaningful positions really are?

    Yes.
    What ideology do you think I am representing? Just curious.

    You have some kind of proof for this conjecture?
    http://www.rte.ie/news/2011/0425/guantanamo.html

    You're about to mention the lack of empirical evidence for torture, so I'd like to see you have enough consistency to require the same of your own point of view.
    There have been no empirical studies done on the effectiveness of torture. However as many people have stated before the general consensus among interrogators is that the standard procedure works better than torture.

    If you really want some empirical evidence on torture I could tell you that only an estimated 5% percent of Vietnam POWs gave in to the brutal torture they received, while about 15% of Korean POWs gave in to the mostly non-violent brainwashing techniques they were subjected to.

    Well, first off, I already pointed out that you have no empirical evidence supporting the claim you made above, but, interestingly enough, you start requiring it here, of your opponents' point of view. Very interesting... but not very consistent.

    Second, you can't actually have empirical evidence on torture unless you actually have a significant history of having used torture, and, as such, there are so many flaws in this line of thinking, I'm not even gunna start down that path. It's like the Lernaean Hydra.

    Third, anecdotal evidence suggests that torture is a less effective means of getting information from suspects than more conventional means, in more normal circumstances (i.e., not those of a ticking time bomb scenario). But, as you have probably already realized, these anecdotes are more-or-less irrelevant to the parameter I laid out : a ticking time bomb scenario.
    Why do other means of getting information stop working in a ticking time bomb scenario? Why does torture suddenly become so effective?
    [/quote]

    The whole point of mentioning a ticking time bomb scenario is that it's an example wherein other forms of interrogation are almost certain to fail, so torture stands out as the only reasonably likely method of extracting the necessary information from the suspect in the necessary amount of time. As @Edgar just pointed out in the other thread on waterboarding: if interrogation professionals think that torture will be a less effective means of extracting information, then they will not use it; we should not, however, in the most exigent of circumstances, tie their hands behind their back and prevent them from using torture, as, in that moment, it may be the only effective means by which to save a large number of human lives. To think anything else, is, in my opinion, idiotic.
    I assume the reason you are saying other methods would not work is because of the time involved in using them. So quick and brutal coercion has a better chance of success. Correct?

    What in the world is quick about sleep deprivation? What is fast about stress positions? The torture undertaken by the US Government simply does not resemble the kind of under pressure coercion you are describing. It is drawn out methodical process of breaking someone down.

    Yes, in a sense it does.

    If other methods are more effective in all circumstances, then I would see no reason for torture.

    But there's no empirical reason to believe torture is never the more effective method, nor is there a purely rationalistic reason to believe so.

    There is, however, an ideological one.

    And you've got that one down pat.
    The amount we know, compared to the amount we don't know, is so vast, that I really don't think either one of us is in a place to accurately make that assessment.
    No we know enough. There hasnt been a single terror attack stopped because of torture. And the military doesnt even use the "ticking time-bomb" as a justification for torture.

    http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2011...salahi-torture

    Note how they dont say that "we found out about an attack", they say "we got valuable leads." If there really was a ticking time bomb that torture stopped then the military would scream about it from the rooftops. It just has not happened.

    Regardless, the issue is about whether torture should ever be allowed, and, the fact of the matter is, if there is an exigent circumstance concerning a potential act of war, the Constitution authorizes the Commander in Chief to utilize enhanced interrogation techniques and/or torture to try and prevent that act from occurring.
    Why does the military retain the sole right to torture? Why was torture not used on the Oklahoma City bomber? Why was torture not used on the Unabomber? If there really is a ticking time bomb situation and an interrogator uses torture, I think that people will understand. But to openly condone it, especially in the form it is being used is unjustifiable.

    This is not Platonic fantasy land; it's Constitutional interpretation.

    Accurate Constitutional interpretation.
    Jack Goldsmith would disagree. Im sure you would just accuse him of being an ideologically driven idiot however.

    No, actually, it does not.

    And the fact that you think you somehow proved that it does is laughable.
    No, as I did actually demonstrate above, in exigent circumstances of war, torture is justifiable.

    The justification is in the United States Constitution.
    This argument is all based on the memos written up by John Yoo correct? The same John Yoo memos that claim that military intelligence isnt subject to the 4th amendment. I might also add that Goldsmith, Yoo's successor, disagreed with him greatly on these matters and eventually resigned over it. So dont act like there isnt any kind of debate, or that a bunch of legalese drafted up by someone, who I consider to be an ideologically driven idiot without a shred of integrity in him, somehow settles the matter.
    +10% Crit Chance

  3. #123
    Senior Member Beargryllz's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2010
    MBTI
    INTP
    Posts
    2,739

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Critical Hit View Post
    This argument is all based on the memos written up by John Yoo correct? The same John Yoo memos that claim that military intelligence isnt subject to the 4th amendment. I might also add that Goldsmith, Yoo's successor, disagreed with him greatly on these matters and eventually resigned over it. So dont act like there isnt any kind of debate, or that a bunch of legalese drafted up by someone, who I consider to be an ideologically driven idiot without a shred of integrity in him, somehow settles the matter.
    Why do you hate America so much?

    John Yoo is an American hero and the protector of our great nation

    It is torture that keeps us prosperous and safe

  4. #124
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Nov 2009
    MBTI
    INFP
    Posts
    470

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Nerd Girl View Post
    Hmmm, okay guys, maybe you're right. Are these amenities suitable enough for our terrorists?

    If we kill them with kindness, maybe they'll talk.
    Ironically, I remember reading about a guy breaking down when he was offered a bar of chocolate.

  5. #125
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Nov 2009
    MBTI
    INFP
    Posts
    470

    Default

    [YOUTUBE="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QqFO6velBOM"]Countdown: "Matthew Alexander" on Torture[/YOUTUBE]

  6. #126
    Sniffles
    Guest

    Default

    Maybe the Republicans could learn a thing from Mr. Putin's campaign ads:
    [youtube="dK-nnASP7OY"]Voting is sexy![/youtube]

    ^^^This would do well with the whole "Rock the Vote" spiel.

  7. #127
    Senior Member Survive & Stay Free's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2009
    MBTI
    ESTJ
    Enneagram
    9 so/sx
    Posts
    21,661

    Default

    Where's a spree killer when you need one?

  8. #128
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Nov 2009
    MBTI
    INFP
    Posts
    470

    Default

    [YOUTUBE="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZD_VAzvPr3Y"]Mathew Alexander[/YOUTUBE]

  9. #129
    A window to the soul
    Guest

    Default

    FYI, I added a poll to this thread.

  10. #130
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Nov 2009
    MBTI
    INFP
    Posts
    470

    Default

    [YOUTUBE="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JBtXmN2ZoEw"]Plugging some foreign policy experts[/YOUTUBE]
    [YOUTUBE="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cLjZoA3GaVE"]Ex-CIA Agent: America creates its own enemies[/YOUTUBE]

Similar Threads

  1. Republican debate
    By jixmixfix in forum Politics, History, and Current Events
    Replies: 22
    Last Post: 12-18-2015, 07:42 PM
  2. The Middle East dreamed up at the Republican debate doesn’t really exist
    By Olm the Water King in forum Politics, History, and Current Events
    Replies: 4
    Last Post: 12-17-2015, 07:44 PM
  3. 2012 Presidential Debates: Round 1
    By Beorn in forum Politics, History, and Current Events
    Replies: 158
    Last Post: 10-27-2012, 10:59 AM
  4. Your Most Anticipated Movies of 2011/2012
    By Crescent Fresh in forum Arts & Entertainment
    Replies: 44
    Last Post: 02-08-2012, 04:01 AM
  5. Debating styles
    By labyrinthine in forum The NT Rationale (ENTP, INTP, ENTJ, INTJ)
    Replies: 38
    Last Post: 08-11-2007, 08:10 PM

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
Single Sign On provided by vBSSO