Toturing Terror Suspects

Ex President George Bush admitted today that his administration did carry out acts of torture on terror suspects.

He admitted several suspects were "waterboarded", a practive that simulates drowning. He went on to defend his actions by saying that had it not been for these instances of torture vital intelligence would not have been gained which prevented several more terror sttacks.

IS there a place for torture in modrn day society? Do the ends justify the means? And is it simply a case of toture being the lesser of two evils?

Torture I think is the best way to extract information from the very evil FILTH who want to obviously live a life of treachery, in my view the evil should be treated exactly the way they treat others.

In one situation I saw on a documentary where this SAS soldier was kidknapped by IRAQI vermin was tortured and made to eat his own excrement, the SAS guy said that he wanted to put a bullet straight through his head, I would also want to do the same thing.

If this is one way to extract useful information to save many lives then I am all for it but, we all know what a muppet Bush was, perhaps this was the only sensible thing he had ever done during his presidency but then again if he hadn't gone to war then we wouldn't have the situation with the torturing of people.

Daz you silly sod! You're lucky I don't torture you! lol

Where you been?!

As unsavoury as it is...torture is a necessary evil in certain cases.

Many of those being tortured would slit your throat or chop orf your head without batting an eyelid. Torture has always been a method of gaining vital information, is it right to torture another human being? I don't think it is, but my opinion counts for nothing, humans are inherently violent, when we evolve some more maybe torture will be a thing of the past.

I'm not so sure torture is a good way to go. I mean, most people would tell you anything you wanted to hear if you had their nuts in a vice..... They would even probably make shit up just to get you to stop. I know I would.... The real threats wouldn't tell you a damn thing because they've been trained not too.

I totally understand wanting to torture someone who has put you or even others through pain, suffering & even death. But, plenty of British people have done the same thing. Should we all be tortured purely because we're British too?

On the subject this is a really good film with Samuel Jackson which explores just how far torturers should go. Worth watching if you're at a loose end, if only because it has Samuel L Jackson in it. That guy seems to be great in everything! lol

Times change and so does torture and methods of torture in gaining the advantage of war. If the war is just, torture itself is just, but if the war is unjust, then torture is unjust.

In centuries past even torture was not used and simple executions were practised. Tamburlaine would slaughter whole towns, raze them to the ground, killing every living soul, to not only wreak a violent vengeance, but also as a strategic necessity by allowing his forces to advance forward, without having the need to cover his route of retreat, were it to be needed.

You are right Shine, when we look at torture methods of times long past, it makes my teeth curl. At least water boarding isn't as painful as some of the old methods.

The Americans slaughtered whole villages and burned the village not so long ago. I know torture could be a necessity of war, but I don't agree with it. I don't agree with any form of cruelty, but I guess in a wartime situation one has to turn a blind eye or pay millions to terrorist who might, or might not have been tortured.

There are some Yobs and animal torturers I could quite easily hurt.......badly!

El Guapo wrote:Daz you silly sod! You're lucky I don't torture you! lol

Where you been?!

Hi mate!!
Sorry, I have been working my nut's off, how are you fella!!

EarthsAngel wrote:You are right Shine, when we look at torture methods of times long past, it makes my teeth curl. At least water boarding isn't as painful as some of the old methods.

The Americans slaughtered whole villages and burned the village not so long ago. I know torture could be a necessity of war, but I don't agree with it. I don't agree with any form of cruelty, but I guess in a wartime situation one has to turn a blind eye or pay millions to terrorist who might, or might not have been tortured.

There are some Yobs and animal torturers I could quite easily hurt.......badly!

One of the worst forms of torture was called the 'boat torture' in Persia. The man was stripped, and tied in between two small rowing boats with only his head sticking out. His body was smeared in honey to attract insects, and he was force fed to induce excrement inside the nut-shell of the boat, which in turn would attract more insects. He was kept alive by constant watering and feeding, and if he lost his mind too quickly, the torturers would be held accountable.

Talking of torturing, Earth, Dostoevsky once advocated that the best form of torture was pointless work. He stated a man wouldn't be able to hold on to his faculties and mind were he to move a pile of soil from A to B and back again. The process would be endless: from A to B and back again. No point whatsoever in the work. Dostoevsky wrote that in the 1960's but in the Second World War is was put to the test by the Nazis. The 'human guinea pigs' were given suicide as the only means of escape. 90% took their own lives, whilst the other 10% went mad. No physical torture was administered, only 'useless toil'.

OMG, what kind of human being thinks up these different torture methods? The boat torture sounds horrendous, I suppose the tortured wished for a a quick death.

I know torture is really common in SA cops shops, a guy who used to work for us was tortured for days, they put a sack over his head and electrocuted him for hours on end. He had scars all over his body, but the cops got away with it. He was never the same after that, poor man.

Lawrence of Arabia was tortured, but loved the pleasure of pain, which many do. Pain releases, for some, pleasure, and when Lawrence was tortured, he only felt rushes of adrenaline.

i find it strange that the finger is always pointed at us.i don't see the others keeping to the geneva convention.torture is barbaric,but if it made the difference as to whether your family or friends lived or died?...... i'd have my thigh boots and whips out in a flash

Shine wrote:Lawrence of Arabia was tortured, but loved the pleasure of pain, which many do. Pain releases, for some, pleasure, and when Lawrence was tortured, he only felt rushes of adrenaline.

They do say there is a fine line between pleasure and pain!

Probably why all those strange shops in Soho my mum told me never to go into seem to be so successful.

El Guapo wrote:

Shine wrote:Lawrence of Arabia was tortured, but loved the pleasure of pain, which many do. Pain releases, for some, pleasure, and when Lawrence was tortured, he only felt rushes of adrenaline.

They do say there is a fine line between pleasure and pain!

Probably why all those strange shops in Soho my mum told me never to go into seem to be so successful.

'Suffering' in many religions is necessary for enlightenment, and even passion through suffering, and not necessarily sexual passion, but the passion of Christ, the passion of belief in anything, helped to feed the soul of man and women. Greek orthodoxy demanded a believer to nurture and nourish his/her soul through the passion of suffering. In ancient Greek times the maxim, 'We suffer, therefore we learn', trickled down through their tragedies to Renaissance Art through to even modern drama.

i've always found a blindfold and a rubber glove round the the bollox works!