Congressmen Tour Gitmo

[OCC]

Yeah, if anything I think a little bit of humiliation is ok (seein as how they treat their women) but extreme physical or psychological torture I would be against. That is unthinkable for a "Christian" nation and I believe you would agree with me.

No, I definitely don't think their soldiers are nice to American P.O.W.'s. But then...a Christian country has to act like a Christian country. I see allowance for killing during war in the Bible but nothing about torture, no matter what is done to you. Besides, if you do treat them better than "they deserve" that will say much for your country.

 

[hillclimber]

Originally posted by King James:
Yeah, if anything I think a little bit of humiliation is ok (seein as how they treat their women) but extreme physical or psychological torture I would be against. That is unthinkable for a "Christian" nation and I believe you would agree with me.

No, I definitely don't think their soldiers are nice to American P.O.W.'s. But then...a Christian country has to act like a Christian country. I see allowance for killing during war in the Bible but nothing about torture, no matter what is done to you. Besides, if you do treat them better than "they deserve" that will say much for your country.

While we may have found some common ground KJ, I wouldn't necessarily characterize my limitations to where your Christian-Canadians sensibilities are. Perhaps if you were to substitute the word interrogation for torture, it would change things.

If a perp were to have my child or wife hostage and death was a very real possibility, I'm not sure I can think of anything in the way of intense interrogation I would not employ for the info I desired. What should the difference be for one of our soldiers in harms way? Sorry but the liberals in their attempt to "level the playing field", continue to try to disarm, talk down, humiliate troops, and generally try to destroy America's war making ability.

 

[OCC]

So let me try to understand. If we were to use the word interrogation we would agree? That makes sense to me. I don't think either of us supports torture, and I don't believe the Bible does either. For me, it's got nothing to do with liberalism. (Would you believe that in my own country I'm not even a liberal? I just get called one a lot by Americans).

Interrogation is fine, but I don't support torture.

 

[LadyEagle]

I do. Here's the kind of torture they need: Reading to them the Left Behind series over the loudspeaker every day in Arabic.

 

[Joseph_Botwinick]

Now, that would truly be torture, and not just for the terrorists.

Joseph Botwinick

 

[OCC]

LOL that is funny.

 

[hillclimber]

Originally posted by King James:
So let me try to understand. If we were to use the word interrogation we would agree? That makes sense to me. I don't think either of us supports torture, and I don't believe the Bible does either. For me, it's got nothing to do with liberalism. (Would you believe that in my own country I'm not even a liberal? I just get called one a lot by Americans).

Interrogation is fine, but I don't support torture.

I am being misunderstood. I believe in torture. I just think that in order to stroke your sensibilities, I would instead use the word interrogate. Now, I would not advocate the maiming, killing, sadistic kind of things these militants do, but I would certainly employ all available tools at my disposal to save American lives.

I just get called one a lot by Americans).

Does that not tell you something? It speaks volumes to me.

 

[hillclimber]

I believe in pretty much anything that will save one or more American/allied soldiers. To disallow any of these interrogation methods is to our disadvantage. That is one reason these things absolutely should not be discussed in the public arena. Women especially, and many men, would be repulsed at many aspects of war, and this, extraction of information, is only one.