Torture
Comments
-
clanton wrote:dmclite wrote:clanton wrote:War is terrible. Good people do terrible things in extreme circumstances. I'm not so naive as not to believe that. I can understand that if not condone it - and I too am very pleased not to have ever been in that situation.
This discussion though extends to situations where the battelefield is thousands of miles away and some of the combatants have been out of that "theatre" for years and could not possibly have any knowledge of the current situation. How does anyone justify that?
So by your logic, how can anyone have justification ?
At least the "combatants" can have an understanding of combat situations, where your view is pure conjecture, Hollywood and selective media.
I can learn as much about the current situation as the next man, as can you. Only thing is I have experienced it, been on the ground and took part in operational duties. I have a better understanding. Like Teagar has quoted before, you can be naturally smart, but Knowledge is learned.
By "my logic" no-one can have justification. If you mean by selective media that I read things otgher than the Daily Mail and the Sun then yup - guilty as charged. As for "Hollywood" - it is the pro torture people who keep using this mythical time bomb scenario to justify extreme means - not me.
This discussion is about the use of torture. The "experience" that leads to better understanding would have to be of torture - either recieved or administered. Do you have such experience? Dennisn says he has direct experience of torture so he may well have
"better understanding" though I hardly think having direct experience is necessary to have a deep understand that it is a horrific and repellent thing.
You think I am going to admit to torturing someone on a net forum ? Should I also deny it ?
BTW I am not "Pro-Torture", just think it could be used at critical times. Re-read your last post, you have contradicted yourself, again with your last paragraph.
0 -
I don't see that I have contradicted myself at all. In my last post I said I could understand - but not condone - people acting in horrific ways in horrific circumstances. In no way do I think ANY circumstance excuses torture, just that it is hard to out and out condemn people in exceptional circumstances. That is quite different to saying it is an acceptable option.0
-
markwalker wrote:
Sorry Rolfe, that statement whilst laudable, belies a certain ignorance of the facts.nolf wrote:Committing evil to prevent evil is a logical paradox.
You cannot both expect others to act morally towards you, while acting perceptably immorally towards others.
Ignoring the more pragmatic issue of how useful/accurate it is, is a side issue, and to be honest, irrelevant.
.
The UK and every other sovereign state has always had a public persona and behind that is going like mad to find information or hide information to ensure whatever agenda they’re pursuing has more chance of success. We spy, manipulate and at times even torture in the pursuit of our defence and position, even against our “allies” and they do the same to us.
this isnt internet conjecture, its documented fact. there is never going to be a unilateral niceness.
Thats not disagreeing with what I said,
I wrote: "acting perceptably immoral towards others"
My point was that it is necessary to look as though we are moral.
Now that isn't a defence of secret torture, because I think secrets do out, as proven by every scandal or torture allegation over the past 7 years in the press (a fair few).
I think that it is necessary for the world to perceive us as a country and a people, that would never stand behind barbaric instruments such as torture in the face of terrorism or violence.
The last 8 years has done serious damage to the UK's reputation as a moral nation. Some countries put us in the same category as the great satan (the US), surely we should be going the otherway so as to appear better than the rest of the world?
A conscious effort needs to be made to fix that.
The government should never be able to overturn the rule of law when it finds it convenient to do so. I think we need it enshrined in law that torture is never a legal recourse or action for any criminal, war criminal, prisoner of war, or terrorist suspect.
Then to be seen to prosecuting those that break that law.
I think it is in our national self interest in the long run. And again, in the long run, will prevent more deaths and suffering among UK citizens.
As for people experiencing war having better moral judgement because they've seen how hellish it is. Again, I don't think people exposed to that kind of suffering and horror are the best people to make moral judgements, as I think they have been permanentely affected by them, and are incapable of making a dispassionate assessment.
Elected representatives who have a moral and electoral acountability should be responsible. And I think its in our own interest to make it illegal."I hold it true, what'er befall;
I feel it, when I sorrow most;
'Tis better to have loved and lost;
Than never to have loved at all."
Alfred Tennyson0 -
nolf wrote:markwalker wrote:
Sorry Rolfe, that statement whilst laudable, belies a certain ignorance of the facts.nolf wrote:Committing evil to prevent evil is a logical paradox.
You cannot both expect others to act morally towards you, while acting perceptably immorally towards others.
Ignoring the more pragmatic issue of how useful/accurate it is, is a side issue, and to be honest, irrelevant.
.
The UK and every other sovereign state has always had a public persona and behind that is going like mad to find information or hide information to ensure whatever agenda they’re pursuing has more chance of success. We spy, manipulate and at times even torture in the pursuit of our defence and position, even against our “allies” and they do the same to us.
this isnt internet conjecture, its documented fact. there is never going to be a unilateral niceness.
Thats not disagreeing with what I said,
I wrote: "acting perceptably immoral towards others"
My point was that it is necessary to look as though we are moral.
Now that isn't a defence of secret torture, because I think secrets do out, as proven by every scandal or torture allegation over the past 7 years in the press (a fair few).
I think that it is necessary for the world to perceive us as a country and a people, that would never stand behind barbaric instruments such as torture in the face of terrorism or violence.
The last 8 years has done serious damage to the UK's reputation as a moral nation. Some countries put us in the same category as the great satan (the US), surely we should be going the otherway so as to appear better than the rest of the world?
A conscious effort needs to be made to fix that.
The government should never be able to overturn the rule of law when it finds it convenient to do so. I think we need it enshrined in law that torture is never a legal recourse or action for any criminal, war criminal, prisoner of war, or terrorist suspect.
Then to be seen to prosecuting those that break that law.
I think it is in our national self interest in the long run. And again, in the long run, will prevent more deaths and suffering among UK citizens.
As for people experiencing war having better moral judgement because they've seen how hellish it is. Again, I don't think people exposed to that kind of suffering and horror are the best people to make moral judgements, as I think they have been permanentely affected by them, and are incapable of making a dispassionate assessment.
Elected representatives who have a moral and electoral acountability should be responsible. And I think its in our own interest to make it illegal.
I disagree. Experience shapes you and makes you think in different ways. "Incapable of making a dispassionate assessment". That is such a naive and ill thought out statement. Ex soldiers from countless conflicts have gone on to many exalted positions, political power, doctors, etc, dig a little deeper and your pat little schoolboy diatribe falls apart.0 -
Ex soliders also have very high suicide rates and levels of alcohol and drug abuse. Their experiences can harm them irreparably.0
-
Who's contradicting himself now? ;-)0
-
clanton wrote:Who's contradicting himself now? ;-)
You are soooooooooo, serious, bet you are a laff-riot. Lighten up, if you can't see a wind up like yesterdays debate that MW kicked off, you are not as clever as you think you are. You've been forum sucker-bunched and bit like a biatch.
0 -
The problem with communicating via the internet is that so much of the message is lost. They reckon communciation is 90% non verbal - which is why misunderstandings arise so easily on a forum like this. My post was in fact tongue in cheek and an attempt at humour which has clearly fallen flat.
Anyhow - the weather is great - why aren't you out on your bike rather tha having a pointless and circuitous discussion on the net? I'm at work and wishing I wasn't!0 -
clanton wrote:The problem with communicating via the internet is that so much of the message is lost. They reckon communciation is 90% non verbal - which is why misunderstandings arise so easily on a forum like this. My post was in fact tongue in cheek and an attempt at humour which has clearly fallen flat.
Anyhow - the weather is great - why aren't you out on your bike rather tha having a pointless and circuitous discussion on the net? I'm at work and wishing I wasn't!
Fair enough matey, I am guilty of biting as well. I am not out as:
A, I am working a 12 hour shift tonight and need a small nap in the afternoon.
B, I have 3 kids, 6 yr old girl and 2 boys 9 and 11, both of whom are Aspergers ( a form of autism) and I like to spend time with them all, haven't seen them all week due to work/school clashes.
C, I pulled a hamstring through the week cos I overtrained after racing last Sunday.
Wish I was out riding, but I will get a small fix from cleaning my commuter hack with the kids. 0 -
dmclite wrote:nolf wrote:markwalker wrote:
Sorry Rolfe, that statement whilst laudable, belies a certain ignorance of the facts.nolf wrote:Committing evil to prevent evil is a logical paradox.
You cannot both expect others to act morally towards you, while acting perceptably immorally towards others.
Ignoring the more pragmatic issue of how useful/accurate it is, is a side issue, and to be honest, irrelevant.
.
The UK and every other sovereign state has always had a public persona and behind that is going like mad to find information or hide information to ensure whatever agenda they’re pursuing has more chance of success. We spy, manipulate and at times even torture in the pursuit of our defence and position, even against our “allies” and they do the same to us.
this isnt internet conjecture, its documented fact. there is never going to be a unilateral niceness.
Thats not disagreeing with what I said,
I wrote: "acting perceptably immoral towards others"
My point was that it is necessary to look as though we are moral.
Now that isn't a defence of secret torture, because I think secrets do out, as proven by every scandal or torture allegation over the past 7 years in the press (a fair few).
I think that it is necessary for the world to perceive us as a country and a people, that would never stand behind barbaric instruments such as torture in the face of terrorism or violence.
The last 8 years has done serious damage to the UK's reputation as a moral nation. Some countries put us in the same category as the great satan (the US), surely we should be going the otherway so as to appear better than the rest of the world?
A conscious effort needs to be made to fix that.
The government should never be able to overturn the rule of law when it finds it convenient to do so. I think we need it enshrined in law that torture is never a legal recourse or action for any criminal, war criminal, prisoner of war, or terrorist suspect.
Then to be seen to prosecuting those that break that law.
I think it is in our national self interest in the long run. And again, in the long run, will prevent more deaths and suffering among UK citizens.
As for people experiencing war having better moral judgement because they've seen how hellish it is. Again, I don't think people exposed to that kind of suffering and horror are the best people to make moral judgements, as I think they have been permanentely affected by them, and are incapable of making a dispassionate assessment.
Elected representatives who have a moral and electoral acountability should be responsible. And I think its in our own interest to make it illegal.
I disagree. Experience shapes you and makes you think in different ways. "Incapable of making a dispassionate assessment". That is such a naive and ill thought out statement. Ex soldiers from countless conflicts have gone on to many exalted positions, political power, doctors, etc, dig a little deeper and your pat little schoolboy diatribe falls apart.
I would make a response to this, but seeing as it's obviously an attempt at ironic humour, (oh you guys!) I won't bother.
Similarly I won't be take offence at being called a naive schoolboy.
"I hold it true, what'er befall;
I feel it, when I sorrow most;
'Tis better to have loved and lost;
Than never to have loved at all."
Alfred Tennyson0 -
nolf wrote:dmclite wrote:nolf wrote:markwalker wrote:
Sorry Rolfe, that statement whilst laudable, belies a certain ignorance of the facts.nolf wrote:Committing evil to prevent evil is a logical paradox.
You cannot both expect others to act morally towards you, while acting perceptably immorally towards others.
Ignoring the more pragmatic issue of how useful/accurate it is, is a side issue, and to be honest, irrelevant.
.
The UK and every other sovereign state has always had a public persona and behind that is going like mad to find information or hide information to ensure whatever agenda they’re pursuing has more chance of success. We spy, manipulate and at times even torture in the pursuit of our defence and position, even against our “allies” and they do the same to us.
this isnt internet conjecture, its documented fact. there is never going to be a unilateral niceness.
Thats not disagreeing with what I said,
I wrote: "acting perceptably immoral towards others"
My point was that it is necessary to look as though we are moral.
Now that isn't a defence of secret torture, because I think secrets do out, as proven by every scandal or torture allegation over the past 7 years in the press (a fair few).
I think that it is necessary for the world to perceive us as a country and a people, that would never stand behind barbaric instruments such as torture in the face of terrorism or violence.
The last 8 years has done serious damage to the UK's reputation as a moral nation. Some countries put us in the same category as the great satan (the US), surely we should be going the otherway so as to appear better than the rest of the world?
A conscious effort needs to be made to fix that.
The government should never be able to overturn the rule of law when it finds it convenient to do so. I think we need it enshrined in law that torture is never a legal recourse or action for any criminal, war criminal, prisoner of war, or terrorist suspect.
Then to be seen to prosecuting those that break that law.
I think it is in our national self interest in the long run. And again, in the long run, will prevent more deaths and suffering among UK citizens.
As for people experiencing war having better moral judgement because they've seen how hellish it is. Again, I don't think people exposed to that kind of suffering and horror are the best people to make moral judgements, as I think they have been permanentely affected by them, and are incapable of making a dispassionate assessment.
Elected representatives who have a moral and electoral acountability should be responsible. And I think its in our own interest to make it illegal.
I disagree. Experience shapes you and makes you think in different ways. "Incapable of making a dispassionate assessment". That is such a naive and ill thought out statement. Ex soldiers from countless conflicts have gone on to many exalted positions, political power, doctors, etc, dig a little deeper and your pat little schoolboy diatribe falls apart.
I would make a response to this, but seeing as it's obviously an attempt at ironic humour, (oh you guys!) I won't bother.
Similarly I won't be take offence at being called a naive schoolboy.
Outed, so I am.
Touche'0
