Beargryllz
New member
- Joined
- Jun 7, 2010
- Messages
- 2,719
- MBTI Type
- INTP
No, they're actually not.
Is a terrorist not a criminal?
Is a terrorist an enemy combatant (soldier) or a criminal?
Is a terrorist both?
No, they're actually not.
Is a terrorist not a criminal?
The point is that a criminal is not, by definition, a terrorist.
Figure out the distinction between trying to prevent an act of war and trying to resolve a crime.
As much difficulty as you seem to be having with the idea, it's really not that tough to figure out.
Aren't resolving crimes and preventing acts of war both just actions?
If you lack the intellectual capacity to make a distinction between various kinds of actions, then yes.
What would a person of excellent intellectual capacity determine the distinction to be?
We also could belt spank the shit out of them.![]()
An act of war takes place in the context of war; a crime does not.
As I said: simple.
If you're going to (continue to) make retarded arguments, I have no more to say to you here.
You are interpreting too narrowly. The fact we don't allow torture to some animals means we atribute value to their lives and general well-being.Even if we assume parameter 1 (arguable by any stretch of the imagination, since we don't live in a simplistic eye-for-an-eye world), parameter 2 does not logically follow, because torture is not the same thing as killing. If it were, there wouldn't be animal cruelty laws, since animals can legally be killed humanely (either for food, because they're hurt, or because they're unwanted, or really just because). You'll have to do better than that.
I don't have answers to all these questions. This is the kind of thread where the fact you don't state an opinion gives you a great edge. Ti-doms and Enneagrams 5 tend to have this vice I'm trying to avoid. Dissecting ideas and finding flaws is quite easy when dealing with sensitive matters. I'm offering a solution. It's better than ignoring there's a problem that requires one. There are gonna be innocents suffering and dying no matter what, but there are viable ways to make the number as acceptable as possible.Well, how are we defining terrorist? Does someone have to kill innocent people before they're considered a terrorist? Just one person or many? Do they have to torture others before being considered a terrorist? How badly? What if they were brainwashed as a child, a la child soldier horror? What if they were ordered to kill others under threat that their family would be killed? What if the government thinks they're a terrorist, but the guy in charge of torturing disagrees? What about the opposite scenario? What if they're kinda sorta a terrorist, but not really a bad one, and besides you kinda understand their motivations, they're just misguided, and...?
You are interpreting too narrowly. The fact we don't allow torture to some animals means we atribute value to their lives and general well-being.
I don't have answers to all these questions. This is the kind of thread where the fact you don't state an opinion gives you a great edge. Ti-doms and Enneagrams 5 tend to have this vice I'm trying to avoid. Dissecting ideas and finding flaws is quite easy when dealing with sensitive matters. I'm offering a solution. It's better than ignoring there's a problem that requires one. There are gonna be innocents suffering and dying no matter what, but there are viable ways to make the number as acceptable as possible.
Torture is never ethical, but sometimes you just need to do unethical things to achieve what you believe is the "greater good". Humans are tragically fallible in that way.
What do you think of the effectiveness of Waterboarding? Do you think it is a viable means of obtaining information?
I'm for not being a hypocritical dick of a country.
Who's with me?
How the hell would I know? I'm not a professional interrogator. And I'm guessing neither is anybody here.
As far as I am concerned, whatever works, they should use it. And if waterboarding isn't effective in obtaining accurate information, then the interrogators will rely on other, more effective methods. I see no need for anybody else to put their 2 cents into it. Let the professionals do their job.
I'm for not being a hypocritical dick of a country.
Who's with me?