US petition

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by hobbes

What could possibly be woefully and obviously lacking in a hypothetical scenario? It is a mental excercise to test a point. Got it?

---

Realism is lacking. You talk as though its a trade off between one persons pain and the lives of your friends which is a simple trade off for anyone to make, whereas in actual fact its much more likely that your friends are toast either way.
If it was guaranteed to work then yes, if its reality then i think i'd try and disarm without the intel as its just as likely to work.
Say it works and you save the lives of your friends, i still say you should face prosecution.

And if we just beat the crap out of him (as i said, i probably would)... we should also face prosecution, and hope the extenuating cirumstances defence holds up. :ph34r:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by ilw

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by hobbes

What could possibly be woefully and obviously lacking in a hypothetical scenario? It is a mental excercise to test a point. Got it?

---

Realism is lacking. You talk as though its a trade off between one persons pain and the lives of your friends which is a simple trade off for anyone to make, whereas in actual fact its much more likely that your friends are toast either way.
If it was guaranteed to work then yes, if its reality then i think i'd try and disarm without the intel as its just as likely to work.
Say it works and you save the lives of your friends, i still say you should face prosecution.

---

ILW,

I apologise for my hypothetical situation lacking reality.:dry: At least I did not require alien intervention.:ph34r:

The purpose of the excercise is to reduce your variables to this simplest possible scenario and determine what you would do.


To me, the fact that the "no exception rule" exists wouldn't slow my decision to act one bit. I would do it everytime.

As with Abu Garab, we already have enough laws in place to find those people guilty of war crimes.

So this petition is just a political game to me, it won't change how people act and that was my point.

Rat,

I think we are in agreement for the most part. I have taken the tack that a society must come up with a set of rules that it can live by in good conscience. Don't starve, don't shackle, don't injure out of spite or hatred. you took more of the tack, that it doesn't work anyway.

I just think that in special circumstances I may very see it as a defensible option and give it a try. I created one scenario, but I am sure there are many others. It is a case by case thing. Judgement (the ability to defend ones act) by those in charge dictate what is done.

Incidentally, what is the difference between beating crap out of someone and torture (read this as an honest interest as to why you would make the distinction, not a jab). Now in our case, I want to be clear that I'm not doing this to let of steam or out of hate or spite, but on the off chance his human frailty will allow me to save my men.

Rat, another question for you, just to enter the gray zone a bit.

If you go missing, and as your best mate, I capture an enemy soldier who has your wallet and dog tags in his pockets. On interrogation he has no information, but I notice that he is wearing your socks. What should I do, what would you like me to do.

There is a difference between torture and beating the crap out of someone on the spur of the moment in my opinion... although i know its not legally.

Torture is the planned and/or sustained infliction of pain, mental torment or deprivation on someone.

Beating the shit can happen unplanned and because of a momentary loss of control.

Like i said, i do not condone either... i'd be guilty of the 2nd in certain circumstances myself, and would expect to be prosecuted if caught.


In the circumstances you outline, i could totally understand the latter course of action... id do the same. The former however, would make you sub-human in my eyes. I would class you as the same type of bastard.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Rat Faced

There is a difference between torture and beating the crap out of someone on the spur of the moment in my opinion... although i know its not legally.

Torture is the planned and/or sustained infliction of pain, mental torment or deprivation on someone.

Beating the shit can happen unplanned and because of a momentary loss of control.

Like i said, i do not condone either... i'd be guilty of the 2nd in certain circumstances myself, and would expect to be prosecuted if caught.


In the circumstances you outline, i could totally understand the latter course of action... id do the same. The former however, would make you sub-human in my eyes. I would class you as the same type of bastard.

---

fair enough.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by hobbes

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Rat Faced

There is a difference between torture and beating the crap out of someone on the spur of the moment in my opinion... although i know its not legally.

Torture is the planned and/or sustained infliction of pain, mental torment or deprivation on someone.

Beating the shit can happen unplanned and because of a momentary loss of control.

Like i said, i do not condone either... i'd be guilty of the 2nd in certain circumstances myself, and would expect to be prosecuted if caught.


In the circumstances you outline, i could totally understand the latter course of action... id do the same. The former however, would make you sub-human in my eyes. I would class you as the same type of bastard.

---

fair enough.

---

On further consideration...

As id probably be dead, i wouldnt think the worse of you :P

Ok, here's the rub.

You've caught the wrong guy, and to stop the pain of the torture he'll tell you anything. Of course, it isn't true so when you act on his information you blow up your kids.

Alternatively, you've caught the right guy. If he gives you the right information under torture, he can expect more of the same since the same justification about saving lives will be used to get the info on his accomplices. The only way he can be certain of stopping the torture is to give you wrong information. But you assume it is correct so when you act on his information you blow up your kids.

Apart from any moral and legal considerations anyone may have, torture does not work. The sooner you dimwits realise that the safer we'll all be.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by lynx

Ok, here's the rub.

You've caught the wrong guy, and to stop the pain of the torture he'll tell you anything. Of course, it isn't true so when you act on his information you blow up your kids.

Alternatively, you've caught the right guy. If he gives you the right information under torture, he can expect more of the same since the same justification about saving lives will be used to get the info on his accomplices. The only way he can be certain of stopping the torture is to give you wrong information. But you assume it is correct so when you act on his information you blow up your kids.

Apart from any moral and legal considerations anyone may have, torture does not work. The sooner you dimwits realise that the safer we'll all be.

---

Torture would work on me, I will admit to that straight up.
The flaw in your rub is that I specifically stated that I caught him planting the bomb and I specifically counselled him that if his bomb goes off, he will be tortured for the weeks and months to come.
Defusing his bomb is the ONLY way his torture will stop.

In addition, what have you got to lose, particularly in the case of the decapitating insurgents. You treat him nice, they cut your head off, you torture his ass, they cut your head off.

Those trapped people are dead, torture is their only possible salvation.

As for this calculated logic about what he will or will not do, that is the whole point of excruciating pain. It makes logic seem irrelevant.

You people can't handle the truth.:ph34r:

Torture can work.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by lynx

Ok, here's the rub.

You've caught the wrong guy, and to stop the pain of the torture he'll tell you anything. Of course, it isn't true so when you act on his information you blow up your kids.

Alternatively, you've caught the right guy. If he gives you the right information under torture, he can expect more of the same since the same justification about saving lives will be used to get the info on his accomplices. The only way he can be certain of stopping the torture is to give you wrong information. But you assume it is correct so when you act on his information you blow up your kids.

Apart from any moral and legal considerations anyone may have, torture does not work. The sooner you dimwits realise that the safer we'll all be.

---

Well guess what, you are a dipshit to say torture NEVER works.

When I was younger, I personally knocked a fella around until he gave up what he took out of my house.

I understand the morality bit regarding torture. It denotes a certain vigilantism and lawlessness that no one wants to condone and see run rampant.

However, dipshit, to say torture NEVER works is like saying threats NEVER work and the moral high ground you currently take is separating you from reality.:dry:
==========

I like what Rat says where a person may save his crewmen but still be subject to prosecution.

The circumstances should be left to courts and not an automatic Get Out Of Jail Free card. I believe that many governments torture unnecessarily in MOST cases. I will never say that it's never necessary, however.

"I believe that many governments torture unnecessarily in MOST cases."

Who decides when it's necessary tho'.

You decide when it's necessary for you, do other people decide when it's necessary for them.