View Full Version : Torture
Is torture ever acceptable?
Imagine this scenario
A terrorist group states that it has concealed a nuclear bomb in London, the authorities have captured the leader of the group and he says that he knows where the bomb is but refuses to reveal the location
You are advised that torture is guaranteed to produce the information needed to ensure the authorities find and make the bomb safe
Do you authorise it?
Jake.
10-02-2014, 02:06 AM
Yes, he's endangering the lives of possibly thousands
Jack_
10-02-2014, 02:07 AM
Never ever ever ever ever
GypsyGoth
10-02-2014, 02:08 AM
Sure, I'd waterboard the **** out of him.
Jake.
10-02-2014, 02:09 AM
actually how much torture are we talking? I wouldn't stab him or anything, perhaps just pinch his nipples or something
GypsyGoth
10-02-2014, 02:11 AM
Never ever ever ever ever
I think you're just as bad as the terrorist then.
You could have stopped a bomb going off but chose not to.
GiRTh
10-02-2014, 02:12 AM
No never.
Loukas
10-02-2014, 02:15 AM
Yes, it is expectable. I would use Chinese water torture personally
GiRTh
10-02-2014, 02:18 AM
Do the forum member know how to water board? I know how to do it and frankly to put someone thru that would destroy me. I don't think I could do it.
EDIt: Thinking about it that would be a good question., Would you torture someone to get information out of them?
GypsyGoth
10-02-2014, 02:19 AM
Do the forum member know how to water board? I know how to do it and frankly to put someone thru that would destroy me. I don't think I could do it.
Even if it meant saving the lives of the people you love?
GypsyGoth
10-02-2014, 02:20 AM
And I've seen it in a couple of movies, I'm not sure how accurate it was. One of the films was Zero Dark Thirty, that changed my opinion on torture.
GiRTh
10-02-2014, 02:21 AM
Even if it meant saving the lives of the people you love?the most honest answer I can give you is - I dont know.
michael21
10-02-2014, 02:21 AM
Is torture ever acceptable?
Imagine this scenario
Do you authorise it?
no because that group don't seem that pro as the leader be got
GypsyGoth
10-02-2014, 02:23 AM
*waterboards michael21*
GiRTh
10-02-2014, 02:25 AM
*waterboards michael21*:joker:
michael21
10-02-2014, 02:30 AM
*waterboards michael21*
dye gg hair pink
know everyone going to called you green as i not good at dyeing :fist::fist::fist:
Scarlett.
10-02-2014, 02:32 AM
No, torture is never acceptable, once a country decides to torture someone, its set itself off on a dark path. See American and the UK post-9/11.
Do the forum member know how to water board? I know how to do it and frankly to put someone thru that would destroy me. I don't think I could do it.
EDIt: Thinking about it that would be a good question., Would you torture someone to get information out of them?
That is the question?
GiRTh
10-02-2014, 02:37 AM
That is the question?Again the most honest answer I can give you - I don't know. Water boarding can screw people up for 15 -20 years. It would depend on the situation.
Firewire
10-02-2014, 02:39 AM
No because if someone is tortured and they know nothing it's disgusting. If they are screaming for their life that they know nothing, so the torture gets worse, I think that's terrible.
Kizzy
10-02-2014, 03:18 AM
I might try sleep depravation before I pulled their nails out...
JTM45
10-02-2014, 07:08 AM
No, torture is never acceptable, once a country decides to torture someone, its set itself off on a dark path. See American and the UK post-9/11.
Spot on!:thumbs:
Us and very much more so the Americans don't have right on our side any more. Once you start coming up with ways to avoid having to uphold human rights treaties that you have clearly signed up to then you're *****ed and have no grounds to complain when someone wants to do appalling things to you.
The things that have been done by the US and to a lesser extent the British in Iraq and Afghanistan to people (very often completely innocent people) supposedly in the name of peace and freedom (as if!) are beyond disgusting and totally reprehensible.
What what goes around comes around. You can't do terrible things to people and not expect it to come back around to you!
..I think there was once a thread about what makes us 'civilised'...for me, one of the /a huge thing would be that I wouldn't torture someone under any circumstances...that makes me responsible for the deaths of many..?...maybe and that would be something that I would have to live with..(or die with..)..but the responsibility or how I would rationalise it would be that of the person who had placed the bombs whose torture I was being asked to authorise...would it make me any better than him, if I authorised it and I would never authorise anything that I wouldn't or couldn't personally do myself, anyway...
joeysteele
10-02-2014, 07:27 AM
The question asks is torture acceptable in the instance where it is known the person captured 'knows' where the bomb is.
I'd normally say no to torture but if they were arrogant enough to state they knew where the bomb was then I would reluctantly support getting that vital info out of them with some torture if they were not cooperating without it.
thesheriff443
10-02-2014, 07:48 AM
has anyone read the op?
the facts are!, its a nuclear bomb!, not your every day bomb that only kills a few hundred.
the torture of this scum bag will produce the location of this bomb so it can be made safe.
in life we have to make difficult decisions, not many on here can see the big picture only focusing on them selves.
arista
10-02-2014, 08:34 AM
Is torture ever acceptable?
Imagine this scenario
Do you authorise it?
"You are advised that torture is guaranteed to
produce the information needed to
ensure the authorities find and make the bomb safe"
Yes
Jesus.
10-02-2014, 09:29 AM
The scenario is always flawed, because torture never actually works. So it's one thing to ask whether torturing someone could prevent the deaths of thousands, but it's not a reflection on how these things play out.
People who are being tortured will generally do and say anything to get the torture to stop, regardless of what they do or don't know, so what generally happens in cases of torture, is that the perpetrators end up with a load of false information, which, if you're on a tight deadline to prevent a bomb going off is the last thing you need.
It's just an impossible scenario that is always viewed over simplistically.
Kazanne
10-02-2014, 09:48 AM
actually how much torture are we talking? I wouldn't stab him or anything, perhaps just pinch his nipples or something
:hugesmile:he might like that though,Jake.
Niamh.
10-02-2014, 10:06 AM
If it was going to get information that would save thousands of lives then yes without a doubt
The scenario is always flawed, because torture never actually works. So it's one thing to ask whether torturing someone could prevent the deaths of thousands, but it's not a reflection on how these things play out.
People who are being tortured will generally do and say anything to get the torture to stop, regardless of what they do or don't know, so what generally happens in cases of torture, is that the perpetrators end up with a load of false information, which, if you're on a tight deadline to prevent a bomb going off is the last thing you need.
It's just an impossible scenario that is always viewed over simplistically.
Yeah I agree, if we were strictly talking about the OP where torturing is "guaranteed to produce the information needed" then I would say it was acceptable but the trouble with torture is that none of the information you get through it can be guaranteed
King Gizzard
10-02-2014, 10:35 AM
I'd much rather have highly skilled interrogators who are good with psychology and stuff
Benjamin
10-02-2014, 10:43 AM
perhaps just pinch his nipples or something
I think you're just as bad as the terrorist then.
Tom4784
10-02-2014, 11:38 AM
I don't think torture would be all that effective, if the leader is committed enough to such a cause that they'd nuke an entire city then torturing them won't produce results. You would have to get hold of one of their subordinates, they would be more likely to talk then the mastermind behind it all.
Like Nathan said, the psychological approach would be best.
user104658
10-02-2014, 11:54 AM
If it meant saving the lives of my loved ones, I'd do it myself. But then I'm a bit extremist like that: if given a choice between my family (direct, my partner and children, not parents or extended family) dying OR nuking the entire planet with us safe in a shielded self sufficient bubble, I'd hit the red button without a second thought.
As for it being a norm for the authorities - never. An individual case being justified is very different from making it an easy option. Basically I would say, never legalise it. Send the person authorising torture, and the torturer, to prison for 10 years after the event. That way, if they truly feel that its worth it, they'll sacrifice those 10 years for the greater good - but no one is going to start doing it as a matter of course.
So really the question isn't "does stopping a nuke justify the torture of one definitely guilty man" - which in my opinion, it does - it's "are the consequences of opening the flood gates of legalised torture worth it". They probably arent.
Ramsay
10-02-2014, 12:46 PM
Torture one fella to save the lives of thousands? Yes 100%
arista
10-02-2014, 12:56 PM
If it was going to get information that would save thousands of lives then yes without a doubt
You Are Most Wise
thesheriff443
10-02-2014, 01:38 PM
The scenario is always flawed, because torture never actually works. So it's one thing to ask whether torturing someone could prevent the deaths of thousands, but it's not a reflection on how these things play out.
People who are being tortured will generally do and say anything to get the torture to stop, regardless of what they do or don't know, so what generally happens in cases of torture, is that the perpetrators end up with a load of false information, which, if you're on a tight deadline to prevent a bomb going off is the last thing you need.
It's just an impossible scenario that is always viewed over simplistically.
the op situation is a no brainer.
torture does work, break a person and they will give you what you want, if you're torturing someone that has no regard for inocent life then you have the green light in my book.
some people have the courage to do what has to be done.
dying is easy, its living thats hard.
Jesus.
10-02-2014, 01:45 PM
the op situation is a no brainer.
torture does work, break a person and they will give you what you want, if you're torturing someone that has no regard for inocent life then you have the green light in my book.
some people have the courage to do what has to be done.
dying is easy, its living thats hard.
That's just cliche-laden wishful thinking. Torture doesn't work, and there is evidence to back that up. In fact, th evidence and data actually shows that you end up with loads of false information. Believe it or not, that's just the way it is.
It actually takes far more courage not to torture someone, than it would to torture them in that instance.
If the scenario in Josy's post is exact - we torture one person to save loads, then that's something I would probably agree with. But that isn't how these things work out at all, and that isn't how torture works either.
Nedusa
10-02-2014, 02:19 PM
NO....torture is never acceptable, for to do so lowers ourselves to the same level as the torturers or terrorists
It's a bit like the Death Penalty.....it can never be right because it lowers us to the same level as the murderers so NO
No way never..........under ANY circumstances !!!!!
Loukas
10-02-2014, 02:22 PM
I'd much rather have highly skilled interrogators who are good with psychology and stuff
I didn't think of that, that would be thee ideal option before torture imo
King Gizzard
10-02-2014, 03:31 PM
It's a bit like the Death Penalty.....it can never be right because it lowers us to the same level as the murderers so NO
Definitely this
NO....torture is never acceptable, for to do so lowers ourselves to the same level as the torturers or terrorist
It's a bit like the Death Penalty.....it can never be right because it lowers us to the same level as the murderers so NO
No way never..........under ANY circumstances !!!!!
Definitely this
Would refusing to authorise the torture, thus ending in millions of lives being lost not equate to the same thing though, since in the scenario of the OP the needed information is guaranteed?
Kizzy
10-02-2014, 04:07 PM
That's just cliche-laden wishful thinking. Torture doesn't work, and there is evidence to back that up. In fact, th evidence and data actually shows that you end up with loads of false information. Believe it or not, that's just the way it is.
It actually takes far more courage not to torture someone, than it would to torture them in that instance.
If the scenario in Josy's post is exact - we torture one person to save loads, then that's something I would probably agree with. But that isn't how these things work out at all, and that isn't how torture works either.
Where is this evidence? This isn't cliche-laden it's just pure supposition.
I find it hard to believe that anyone would make a list of who they tortured, when and why....
How does torture work?
smeagol
10-02-2014, 04:11 PM
has anyone here seen the recent movie prisoners which is a really good film. his daughter gets taken and he tortures the guy responsible to find out where she is. its a good dilemma to save your own kid what would you do.
the nuke things is a obvious yes torture the sucker. but it works on many other things as well.
those who say no would say yes in the right circumstance and in reality.
thesheriff443
10-02-2014, 04:36 PM
That's just cliche-laden wishful thinking. Torture doesn't work, and there is evidence to back that up. In fact, th evidence and data actually shows that you end up with loads of false information. Believe it or not, that's just the way it is.
It actually takes far more courage not to torture someone, than it would to torture them in that instance.
If the scenario in Josy's post is exact - we torture one person to save loads, then that's something I would probably agree with. But that isn't how these things work out at all, and that isn't how torture works either.
we are never going to agree, we as a whole let people die every single day by starving them to death, just be thankful we live in a civilised country becuse you would be worm food with the way you think.
when its kill or be killed i will always be the one doing the killing.
Glenn.
10-02-2014, 04:39 PM
I would do what was necessary so yes, I would torture.
Nedusa
10-02-2014, 05:09 PM
Would refusing to authorise the torture, thus ending in millions of lives being lost not equate to the same thing though, since in the scenario of the OP the needed information is guaranteed?
This is a well described scenario whereby torturing someone ends up in receiving information that can save lives.
But to inflict pain,torture,dismemberment and eventual death to save lives defeats the point.
Evil is Evil and committing an evil act to engineer a happy outcome does not make the act any LESS EVIL
So I say again No........there are other ways we can elicit this info without inflicting torture...!!!!!
..I agree with Nedusa that not authorising the torture wouldn't be the same as being responsible for the deaths of the people because I didn't actually authorise those deaths and am not responsible for any of the situation..that to me would be a bit like someone saying, if you don't do this, then I'll kill your family and maybe asking me to torture and kill someone else..and if I refused and they killed my family, then saying oh you did that/not me..it was your fault, when it wouldn't be my fault at all/the responsibility for all of it would be with the perpetrators/terrorists/murderer etc...
..yeah, I could say that I would do it and torture that person but there will still be no guarantee of an outcome that the people wouldn't be killed anyway because that's one thing that I could absolutely not guarantee in that situation because I don't have foresight, I would be putting my trust in someone who was asking me to kill someone and become what they were/barbaric and evil ...kind of the last people in the world you can trust...
..I think I would have to be true to myself and if people died, then it wouldn't have been me that had killed them or any of the responsibility mine....
..I agree with Nedusa that not authorising the torture wouldn't be the same as being responsible for the deaths of the people because I didn't actually authorise those deaths and am not responsible for any of the situation..that to me would be a bit like someone saying, if you don't do this, then I'll kill your family and maybe asking me to torture and kill someone else..and if I refused and they killed my family, then saying oh you did that/not me..it was your fault, when it wouldn't be my fault at all/the responsibility for all of it would be with the perpetrators/terrorists/murderer etc...
..yeah, I could say that I would do it and torture that person but there will still be no guarantee of an outcome that the people wouldn't be killed anyway because that's one thing that I could absolutely not guarantee in that situation because I don't have foresight, I would be putting my trust in someone who was asking me to kill someone and become what they were/barbaric and evil ...kind of the last people in the world you can trust...
..I think I would have to be true to myself and if people died, then it wouldn't have been me that had killed them or any of the responsibility mine....
You are though..in the scenario that the OP describes..
Torture's always a last ditch attempt used to break someone who won't be broken and doesn't really achieve much IMO because people will say anything to end their suffering.
arista
10-02-2014, 06:15 PM
Its like in a episode of 24
years ago.
A nuke bomb was ready
so the man that knew about it was wounded
and Jack B. Attacked the wound
to give him Extreme Pain.
On person Torture to save millions
Of course you would
Talk Sense you lot
Jesus.
10-02-2014, 06:22 PM
we are never going to agree, we as a whole let people die every single day by starving them to death, just be thankful we live in a civilised country becuse you would be worm food with the way you think.
when its kill or be killed i will always be the one doing the killing.
Why do you have to reduce everything to a soundbyte that would fit on the front of a stallone movie DVD case?
Stallone is back in Rambo X, and this time he's really pissed.
"They drew first blood, but when it's kill or be killed, I will always be the one doing the killing"
It's not about disagreeing, because torture as a way of extracting information doesn't work. It's as simple as that.
When it comes to using evidence or opinion to back myself up, I will always be the one using evidence.
Jesus.
10-02-2014, 06:23 PM
Its like in a episode of 24
years ago.
A nuke bomb was ready
so the man that knew about it was wounded
and Jack B. Attacked the wound
to give him Extreme Pain.
On person Torture to save millions
Of course you would
Talk Sense you lot
24 isn't a documentary. Thought I should probably clarify that for you.
smeagol
10-02-2014, 06:35 PM
people are funny
some wont use torture to save lives. thats shocking. but if the life was someone they loved i bet you any money they would be sharpening knifes and preparing the nut clamps lol
and some say torture doesn't work. well thats like saying its always sunny.
come here i can make you tell me where your porn stashes are lol
You are though..in the scenario that the OP describes..
..I wouldn't be responsible for the deaths of people though because only the terrorists are responsible for laying the bomb and no one could absolutely guarantee that a torture of someone would prevent it going off and save lives, that would be totally impossible to predict...it would only ever be a possibility...
Jesus.
10-02-2014, 06:41 PM
people are funny
some wont use torture to save lives. thats shocking. but if the life was someone they loved i bet you any money they would be sharpening knifes and preparing the nut clamps lol
and some say torture doesn't work. well thats like saying its always sunny.
come here i can make you tell me where your porn stashes are lol
http://i.imgur.com/L4zWVGT.gif
GypsyGoth
10-02-2014, 06:42 PM
I think saving millions, regardless of your point of view on torture, should be the main focus. Think of it as sacrificing your morals for this one good deed.
What good is having a righteous point of view on torture when your inaction causes all those deaths, I think that's a far greater evil than committing torture.
Jack_
10-02-2014, 06:46 PM
I think you're just as bad as the terrorist then.
You could have stopped a bomb going off but chose not to.
Torture isn't guaranteed to produce any kind of result and they could always lie about the location to make it end anyway and by the time they realise it's false information it will have inevitably gone off so...
Perhaps anyone that advocates, signs off or carries out acts of torture should be tortured themselves, maybe then they'll change their perspective
I would actually rather kill someone than torture them, it is barbaric, sadistic and disgusting and never justifiable
This is one of those topics that I could really get angry over so maybe it's best I leave this thread...
arista
10-02-2014, 06:52 PM
24 isn't a documentary. Thought I should probably clarify that for you.
Yes Everyone knows
Its a Action Thriller
That makes sense
GypsyGoth
10-02-2014, 06:53 PM
Torture isn't guaranteed to produce any kind of result and they could always lie about the location to make it end anyway and by the time they realise it's false information it will have inevitably gone off so...
Perhaps anyone that advocates, signs off or carries out acts of torture should be tortured themselves, maybe then they'll change their perspective
I would actually rather kill someone than torture them, it is barbaric, sadistic and disgusting and never justifiable
This is one of those topics that I could really get angry over so maybe it's best I leave this thread...
Ok I'm going to reply but I don't want you to get angry at me.
In the case that Josy put forward, a nuclear bomb is going to go off, you can torture the terrorist and find out the information you need, it's location and how to make it safe.
So in this scenario, torture works, and all you have to do is allow the torture to go ahead and you save millions. The alternative is, like what you want to do, is don't torture him and let millions of innocent people die. All so you will have an unsullied conscience.
arista
10-02-2014, 06:53 PM
Torture isn't guaranteed to produce any kind of result and they could always lie about the location to make it end anyway and by the time they realise it's false information it will have inevitably gone off so...
Perhaps anyone that advocates, signs off or carries out acts of torture should be tortured themselves, maybe then they'll change their perspective
I would actually rather kill someone than torture them, it is barbaric, sadistic and disgusting and never justifiable
This is one of those topics that I could really get angry over so maybe it's best I leave this thread...
Feck Me Jack
a Nuke is going to off
So give the Fecker Hell
arista
10-02-2014, 06:55 PM
Ok I'm going to reply but I don't want you to get angry at me.
In the case that Josy put forward, a nuclear bomb is going to go off, you can torture the terrorist and find out the information you need, it's location and how to make it safe.
So in this scenario, torture works, and all you have to do is allow the torture to go ahead and you save millions. The alternative is, like what you want to do, is don't torture him and let millions of innocent people die. All so you will have an unsullied conscience.
Yes GyspyGoth
You Are Most Wise
I want waterboarding, sounds kinky as ****.
arista
10-02-2014, 07:27 PM
I want waterboarding, sounds kinky as ****.
No its Choking as Water is forced down your throat FAST
Near Death
No its Choking as Water is forced down you throat FAST
Near Death
A liquid forced down throat is torture? :idc:
:hehe:
thesheriff443
10-02-2014, 08:20 PM
Why do you have to reduce everything to a soundbyte that would fit on the front of a stallone movie DVD case?
Stallone is back in Rambo X, and this time he's really pissed.
"They drew first blood, but when it's kill or be killed, I will always be the one doing the killing"
It's not about disagreeing, because torture as a way of extracting information doesn't work. It's as simple as that.
When it comes to using evidence or opinion to back myself up, I will always be the one using evidence.
if torture did not work, government's would not use it. simple as that.
Livia
10-02-2014, 08:42 PM
Torture doesn't always work, but sometimes it does. But there's more than one way to skin a cat. I'm not a fan of torture but I am a fan of chemicals and that'd be the first tool in my bag. As far as physical torture itself goes I think it would be far more effective to torture someone they loved. If it meant saving thousands of lives from terrorist scum, get in there with the pliers, that's what I say.
Apple202
10-02-2014, 08:51 PM
A liquid forced down throat is torture? :idc:
:hehe:
:umm2:
Torture doesn't always work, but sometimes it does. But there's more than one way to skin a cat. I'm not a fan of torture but I am a fan of chemicals and that'd be the first tool in my bag. As far as physical torture itself goes I think it would be far more effective to torture someone they loved. If it meant saving thousands of lives from terrorist scum, get in there with the pliers, that's what I say.
So you'd torture innocent people to protect innocent people? :huh:
Livia
10-02-2014, 09:13 PM
So you'd torture innocent people to protect innocent people? :huh:
No, I'd torture an innocent person who was close to a guilty person to save thousands of people.
Nedusa
10-02-2014, 09:37 PM
No, I'd torture an innocent person who was close to a guilty person to save thousands of people.
I don't often quote you nowadays because you tend to take my comments too personally but I couldn't let this go...
You would torture innocent people to save innocent people !!!
Really ....??? So it's a numbers game save more than you kill and it's OK ??
Really..... Words fail me ....
Livia
10-02-2014, 11:14 PM
If the alternatives are, let a terrorist and his loved one live in comfort... and let thousands of people die... or get information from the terrorist and his loved one in anyway I could and save thousands... it's a no brainer. It's all about the greater good.
This is a thread for people's opinions. No one's really going to die and no one's really going to torture anyone, so there's no need for the outrage and the exclamation marks.
Nedusa
10-02-2014, 11:33 PM
If the alternatives are, let a terrorist and his loved one live in comfort... and let thousands of people die... or get information from the terrorist and his loved one in anyway I could and save thousands... it's a no brainer. It's all about the greater good.
This is a thread for people's opinions. No one's really going to die and no one's really going to torture anyone, so there's no need for the outrage and the exclamation marks.
There you go again... Taking my comments too personally
Btw I always use exclamation marks pretty much on all my posts !!
Kizzy
10-02-2014, 11:57 PM
Why do you have to reduce everything to a soundbyte that would fit on the front of a stallone movie DVD case?
Stallone is back in Rambo X, and this time he's really pissed.
"They drew first blood, but when it's kill or be killed, I will always be the one doing the killing"
It's not about disagreeing, because torture as a way of extracting information doesn't work. It's as simple as that.
When it comes to using evidence or opinion to back myself up, I will always be the one using evidence.
If you remove the gaps there's not that much content here either to be fair. And we are still waiting for this evidence.
..just to pick up on Livia's post..although I know that I personally couldn't authorise the torture of someone, I do think that what she says is very logical and ,ay be the most effective thing to try to prevent the loss of lives...in reality, although (as in most hypothetical dilemmas..)..this is an extreme, there are relatively few people who could make this decision and also relatively few who could implement it and I thank goodness that we have people like that...there is no 'morals' here or any lack of morals because either decision is a fairly awful one to have to make and if the situation did happen, I think we really would all want and hope that the 'right people/person' was there to make it because if they weren't then we would probably all be dead anyway...
..so although I could not personally do this because I know my own personal limitations, I would definitely want someone of Livia's mind-set 'on the job'...but that's also not to say that anyone like myself who couldn't do this or do 'what was needed' is in any way weaker or selfish either because that just isn't so...in certain crisis and certainly in one's of my own life and my friends/family etc..I have my own 'specific skills' in which I have definitely been the right person for that 'problem solving'..these are things that make us all different and why we do all need to be different and in a family situation for instance...there are things/dilemmas where my OH is just that right person and there are dilemmas and crisis where I am the right person and that kind of makes it all work out quite well because our children kind of know which parent would be the best one to ask advice on a specific thing..although we do both have 'little consultations' as well lol....
..anyway, I know I couldn't do this/wouldn't be the person to make this decision..but to be forced to authorise a barbaric act like torture would not be easy for anyone, neither would be having to implement it...whether someone could do it or couldn't do it, there is no higher or lower ground here..it's all to do with knowing yourself and knowing what your own capabilities/skills/strengths/weaknesses etc are ..knowing that you could be effective here but not in another crisis situation or that you wouldn't be effective here but would be in something else etc....in this specific thing, I would probably want Livia on my side or someone very much like her making that decision...which says nothing at all about her character or my character..other than we both have strengths and weaknesses in different things etc...as all people do..
Kizzy
11-02-2014, 06:51 AM
So personally you couldn't do it, so you would order livia to do it because you know she could... Thanks for clearing that up ammi :laugh:
..that's not what I said at all but work awaits me...in the fighting forces and people who make those decisions, we are ever grateful to them and would not be what we are without them but that doesn't mean that we could all do the same/be the same otherwise we all would and would all be fairly much the same...
thesheriff443
11-02-2014, 07:51 AM
..just to pick up on Livia's post..although I know that I personally couldn't authorise the torture of someone, I do think that what she says is very logical and ,ay be the most effective thing to try to prevent the loss of lives...in reality, although (as in most hypothetical dilemmas..)..this is an extreme, there are relatively few people who could make this decision and also relatively few who could implement it and I thank goodness that we have people like that...there is no 'morals' here or any lack of morals because either decision is a fairly awful one to have to make and if the situation did happen, I think we really would all want and hope that the 'right people/person' was there to make it because if they weren't then we would probably all be dead anyway...
..so although I could not personally do this because I know my own personal limitations, I would definitely want someone of Livia's mind-set 'on the job'...but that's also not to say that anyone like myself who couldn't do this or do 'what was needed' is in any way weaker or selfish either because that just isn't so...in certain crisis and certainly in one's of my own life and my friends/family etc..I have my own 'specific skills' in which I have definitely been the right person for that 'problem solving'..these are things that make us all different and why we do all need to be different and in a family situation for instance...there are things/dilemmas where my OH is just that right person and there are dilemmas and crisis where I am the right person and that kind of makes it all work out quite well because our children kind of know which parent would be the best one to ask advice on a specific thing..although we do both have 'little consultations' as well lol....
..anyway, I know I couldn't do this/wouldn't be the person to make this decision..but to be forced to authorise a barbaric act like torture would not be easy for anyone, neither would be having to implement it...whether someone could do it or couldn't do it, there is no higher or lower ground here..it's all to do with knowing yourself and knowing what your own capabilities/skills/strengths/weaknesses etc are ..knowing that you could be effective here but not in another crisis situation or that you wouldn't be effective here but would be in something else etc....in this specific thing, I would probably want Livia on my side or someone very much like her making that decision...which says nothing at all about her character or my character..other than we both have strengths and weaknesses in different things etc...as all people do..
ammi, you have gone all around the houses!
put simply you could not make this decision!, but are happy if someone like myself or livia would.
let me put it to you in these terms, if it was you and you alone that had to make that decision, would you sleep better at night knowing you did not torture an evil man or that you let thousands of good people die?
Livia
11-02-2014, 10:45 AM
I totally get what Ammi's saying. As a tenuous analogy... I'm glad there are people in the world who can look after physically and mentally disabled people, but I myself couldn't be a carer. I'm not the right type, I don't have the right stuff. Luckily, the human race is rich and varied and we all rely on each other for different things.
So... if you want someone tortured, PM thesheriff or me and we'll come to some kind of arrangement.
arista
11-02-2014, 11:00 AM
A liquid forced down throat is torture? :idc:
:hehe:
yes as you can not breath
so you choke - some die
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Waterboarding
yes as you can not breath
so you choke - some die
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Waterboarding
http://pinkie.ponychan.net/chan/files/src/137955279559.jpg
Scarlett.
11-02-2014, 11:10 AM
I think in the case of stopping a nuclear bomb going off is the only time that torture would be understandable, I mean, I'm totally against torture, but a nuclear bomb would be absolutely devastating, on a very large scale.
vBulletin® v3.8.11, Copyright ©2000-2025, vBulletin Solutions Inc.