Where do you stand on waterboarding?

Status
Not open for further replies.

It should only be used in the face or threat of imminent attack.

i.e. nuclear, biological or chemical device.

It should also not be relied upon as a matter of course. Used only upon full agreement of "national security committee".
 
fine, if it did indeed save lives then i am more than happy it helped extract information from terrorists.
 

This film was good on the subject:

[video=youtube;vLufgELgjhk]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vLufgELgjhk[/video]
 
Fine with it if it did the job of getting information etc...

How to prove that it did is another matter however, a tricky one this is.
 
Is it fashionable to question the methods jut because the media is informed?
 
In this case we believe it saved lives, if that is the case I am all for a bit of discomfort to a bloody murderous terrorist to save lives. remember these people want to kill indisciminately and are toally indifferent to the out of their actions. What should chill everyone is their idea of a world ruled under Islam, no matter what or how long it takes.
 
Can't believe people are actually condoning barbarism. I know people are going to come back with, ''It saved innocent lives'' or ''they are murderers', but I feel once you cross a line there's no coming back and crossing that line makes people barbarians. I really don't want my life and ly loved ones lives in the hands of barbarians. As my mum used to say, two wrongs don't make a right
 

I'm all for waterboarding as long as I'm not being waterboarded.

It doesn't seem right, but they're not waterboarding innocent people. Unfortunately, sometimes you need to stoop to your enemy's level to win the fight.
 
James Martin said:
Can't believe people are actually condoning barbarism. I know people are going to come back with, ''It saved innocent lives'' or ''they are murderers', but I feel once you cross a line there's no coming back and crossing that line makes people barbarians. I really don't want my life and ly loved ones lives in the hands of barbarians. As my mum used to say, two wrongs don't make a right
Click to expand...

This is it entirely. There's Dubya talking about not finding WMD but the invasion was ok, because a tyrant who tortured people was toppled...then he says it's ok to torture, because...erm...it's not really torture, it's...erm...procedure. :unsure:
 
Robert Jarvis said:
Brilliant so at what point do you make a choice of turning the cheek or protecting your family?
Click to expand...
I'd feel my family was safe enough if my and some other countries stopped interfering in other land's sovereign rights and helping to instigate military and economic coups, and supporting diabolical governments just to favour the multinationals.
That may help a little in preventing the flow of new recruits to these terrorist organisations. Terrorist organisations which, lest those of us with short memories forget, were initially recruited, funded and trained by western governments and there friends
 
Fine James but you cannot rewrite history, avoided the question though. Lets say your family was threatened by muggers, what then? just hand over all your valuables.

There comes a time James when you have to stand up. You are also missing the point that essentially this all started with Israel but not wholly. The likes of Afghanistan was in response to 9/11 so I take it you would have just mourned the dead and left it at that!
 

Status
Not open for further replies.

Welcome

Join Grand Old Team to get involved in the Everton discussion. Signing up is quick, easy, and completely free.

Register

Shop

Back
Top