Thread: Torture! Rounding Second & Heading to Your Home!

You need more scotch

Originally Posted by Witmaster

You need more scotch

Bad news my friend. I have to quit drinking for a while. My triglyceride level is through the roof. So give me a nod the next time you imbibe.

I'm very serious about this torture deal. I have a visceral reaction unlike those for unfair tax cuts, illegal spying or the like.

This topic means something.

I'm okay with that. So long as it's not a US citizen.

This isn't a school yard fight. This is an international war to the death. Or at least, that's the way the Muslims are playing it. So I say give what you get.

Originally Posted by DOMS

I'm okay with that. So long as it's not a US citizen.

This isn't a school yard fight. This is an international war to the death. Or at least, that's the way the Muslims are playing it. So I say give what you get.

I understand that. But I think something must be said for what is noble. This goes to the heart of what character and morality is all about.

It's what separates the good guys from the bad guys. Otherwise the whole of it devolves into nothing more than jungle/predatory existence.

And a US citizen has already been steamrolled by the Bush torture machine. It's irrefutable that his constitutional rights as an american have been violated. He claims he was tortured also.

I also think that this isn't an international war but a criminal conspiracy that should be treated as such.

Just b/c Bush has given the color of war to battling terrorists via illegal invasion, doesn't mean it is war.

Originally Posted by Decker

I understand that. But I think something must be said for what is noble. This goes to the heart of what character and morality is all about.

It's what separates the good guys from the bad guys. Otherwise the whole of it devolves into nothing more than jungle/predatory existence.

And a US citizen has already been steamrolled by the Bush torture machine. It's irrefutable that his constitutional rights as an american have been violated. He claims he was tortured also.

I also think that this isn't an international war but a criminal conspiracy that should be treated as such.

Just b/c Bush has given the color of war to battling terrorists via illegal invasion, doesn't mean it is war.

Give it a break already. We're in a fucking war! Whether you deem it right or wrong, we're in it. You're one of these people that would rather stand by principle knowing what your final outcome would be then to fight fire with fire, right? The morality may be wrong but if it's the only solution I'm OK with it.

PS. Please don't give me a long winded alternate solution. My brain can handle only so much.

Originally Posted by Decker

I understand that. But I think something must be said for what is noble. This goes to the heart of what character and morality is all about.

It's what separates the good guys from the bad guys. Otherwise the whole of it devolves into nothing more than jungle/predatory existence.

And a US citizen has already been steamrolled by the Bush torture machine. It's irrefutable that his constitutional rights as an american have been violated. He claims he was tortured also.

I also think that this isn't an international war but a criminal conspiracy that should be treated as such.

The way of things is a lot more simplistic (or should be) than your saying it is. Treat your people and your friends/allies well. Kill the enemy.

Just think, how much quicker would this war be over if we simply tortured all captured enemies to get the information we need to move on to the next target and reach our ultimate goal?

Originally Posted by Decker

Just b/c Bush has given the color of war to battling terrorists via illegal invasion, doesn't mean it is war.

I'm not listening to Bush's definitions, I'm listening to all the Muslims shouting "Death to America!" and saying that our death is the only workable solution.

Originally Posted by Decker

Bad news my friend. I have to quit drinking for a while. My triglyceride level is through the roof. So give me a nod the next time you imbibe.

I'm very serious about this torture deal. I have a visceral reaction unlike those for unfair tax cuts, illegal spying or the like.

This topic means something.

Oh I concur with your anti-torture sentiments. This sort of reprehensible conduct is in no way how God intended us to live.

Your sources site some very fascinating cases and examples. Strange that CNN isn't broadcasting this stuff in Hi-Def.

My main reservation about your source is the complete and unabashed anti-republican and (especially) anti-military message that is so prevalent throughout its content. Hell, they've even got an entire page (entitled:” Do Enlist") whose sole purpose is to portray all members of the military as a bunch of mindless child-molesting murderous thugs! (Great stuff!) Trust me... if you want to compel military servicemen and women to embrace your message you might consider recognizing the full scope of the military's role in the war on terrorists. Despite this websites best efforts to castigate the integrity of the Armed forces in a deluge of "shock stories" there is still the undeniable fact that somewhere in Iraq there are GI's feeding the hungry, treating the wounded, protecting the innocent and building schools and hospitals for the citizens of that nation.

I'm sorry my friend, but to paint me and my comrades-in-arms as a bunch of blood-thirsty murderous barbarians is simply not the way to compel me to embrace your interpretation of what's really happening over there. ESPECIALLY when it looks like I'll be seeing that region again next May.

Now... Putting aside my obvious military biases I will say that it does concern me to see a bill passing that gives us complete latitude to imprison suspects and then NOT allowing them Habeas Corpus. This particular focus can very well be applied against ANYONE whom the government feels may be a “suspect”. Even you and me. It kind of has the eerie feel of an old Orson Wells movie.

Sorry to hear about your triglyceride level being up so high. That's no way to be.

Originally Posted by largepkg

Give it a break already. We're in a fucking war! Whether you deem it right or wrong, we're in it. You're one of these people that would rather stand by principle knowing what your final outcome would be then to fight fire with fire, right? The morality may be wrong but if it's the only solution I'm OK with it.

PS. Please don't give me a long winded alternate solution. My brain can handle only so much.

True Story, we're in a war so that means we can give our liberty up and torture people.

Originally Posted by Witmaster

Oh I concur with your anti-torture sentiments. This sort of reprehensible conduct is in no way how God intended us to live.

Your sources site some very fascinating cases and examples. Strange that CNN isn't broadcasting this stuff in Hi-Def.

My main reservation about your source is the complete and unabashed anti-republican and (especially) anti-military message that is so prevalent throughout its content. Hell, they've even got an entire page (entitled:” Do Enlist") whose sole purpose is to portray all members of the military as a bunch of mindless child-molesting murderous thugs! (Great stuff!) Trust me... if you want to compel military servicemen and women to embrace your message you might consider recognizing the full scope of the military's role in the war on terrorists. Despite this websites best efforts to castigate the integrity of the Armed forces in a deluge of "shock stories" there is still the undeniable fact that somewhere in Iraq there are GI's feeding the hungry, treating the wounded, protecting the innocent and building schools and hospitals for the citizens of that nation.

I'm sorry my friend, but to paint me and my comrades-in-arms as a bunch of blood-thirsty murderous barbarians is simply not the way to compel me to embrace your interpretation of what's really happening over there. ESPECIALLY when it looks like I'll be seeing that region again next May.

Now... Putting aside my obvious military biases I will say that it does concern me to see a bill passing that gives us complete latitude to imprison suspects and then NOT allowing them Habeas Corpus. This particular focus can very well be applied against ANYONE whom the government feels may be a “suspect”. Even you and me. It kind of has the eerie feel of an old Orson Wells movie.

Sorry to hear about your triglyceride level being up so high. That's no way to be.

I'm not painting you as anything reprehensible. I think you are an honorable man. But that website is pointing to findings already exposed: Seymour Hersh has done some of the most penetrating work on torture done by or associated with the US including the murders by hypothermia, beatings, induced heart failures etc. Here's an MSNBC story on some of it: http://msnbc.msn.com/id/4989481/#storyContinued


We have statistics of dozens and dozens of deaths without official cause at these overseas American concentration camps. Hersh has been dead on with his other investigative work. Most of the links in the website cataloging the crimes still work for any further validation. http://www.newyorker.com/fact/content/?040510fa_fact

Do not forget the "ghost prisoners" which never officially enter or exit the prisons. http://www.guardian.co.uk/Iraq/Story...209681,00.html
WASHINGTON (CNN) -- An Iraqi prisoner who died in November while under interrogation by a CIA officer and contract translator arrived at Iraq's Abu Ghraib prison with broken ribs and breathing difficulties after his arrest by Navy SEALs, U.S. officials said Thursday.
http://edition.cnn.com/2004/WORLD/me...raq.abuse.cia/


Some pics from abu Grhaib: http://www.antiwar.com/news/?articleid=2444
http://www.antiwar.com/news/?articleid=8560

Much of the evidence is still being sat on but I agree with you about the basic tenor of the US becoming a torturing State.

Sorry for the disjointed response...these interruptions at work are insufferable.

Originally Posted by largepkg

Give it a break already. We're in a fucking war! Whether you deem it right or wrong, we're in it. You're one of these people that would rather stand by principle knowing what your final outcome would be then to fight fire with fire, right? The morality may be wrong but if it's the only solution I'm OK with it.

PS. Please don't give me a long winded alternate solution. My brain can handle only so much.

Technically no we are not at war. Congress never declared war.

As a matter of rational analysis we are not at war. Terrorism is a tactic and war cannot be declared on a tactic...unless one falls for the rhetorical nonsense of war on drugs, cancer, poverty, homelessness and terrorism.

Fine. Principles be damned as well as morality, ethics and any other indicia of civilization.

So your solution is to fight terrorism with terrorism. Your too late. In the Police Squad tv show, Frank Drebin is confronted w/ a crook holding a woman hostage, he says two can play at that game and he, the police man, grabs a hostage also.

That's a comedy. Much like your 'fight fire with fire' contention.

Look if you believe that this is a 'new war' requiring 'new tactics' like torture, rape, child molestation, necrophilia....hell, I don't know, where does your slippery slope end?

Originally Posted by DOMS

The way of things is a lot more simplistic (or should be) than your saying it is. Treat your people and your friends/allies well. Kill the enemy.

Just think, how much quicker would this war be over if we simply tortured all captured enemies to get the information we need to move on to the next target and reach our ultimate goal?....

Your arguments are predicated on the following (false) assumptions:

1. We know we are torturing only terrorists

2. Torture is a viable method for getting reliable information.

If anyone can prove true both of the above statements, then I will take your pro-torture arguments more seriously.

Until then, it sounds only like frightened macho posturing.

Originally Posted by Decker

Technically no we are not at war. Congress never declared war.

As a matter of rational analysis we are not at war. Terrorism is a tactic and war cannot be declared on a tactic...unless one falls for the rhetorical nonsense of war on drugs, cancer, poverty, homelessness and terrorism.

Fine. Principles be damned as well as morality, ethics and any other indicia of civilization.

So your solution is to fight terrorism with terrorism. Your too late. In the Police Squad, where Frank Drebin is confronted w/ a crook holding a woman hostage, he says two can play at that game and he, the police man, grabs a hostage also.

That's a comedy. Much like your 'fight fire with fire' contention.

Look if you believe that this is a 'new war' requiring 'new tactics' like torture, rape, child molestation, necrophilia....hell, I don't know, where does your slippery slope end?

Why you got to knock necrophilia?

Originally Posted by largepkg

Why you got to knock necrophilia?

Originally Posted by Decker

Your arguments are predicated on the following (false) assumptions:

1. We know we are torturing only terrorists

2. Torture is a viable method for getting reliable information.

If anyone can prove true both of the above statements, then I will take your pro-torture arguments more seriously.

Until then, it sounds only like frightened macho posturing.

1. Any endeavor involving a large number of people with have a accuracy rate of less than 100%. This doesn't mean that it shouldn't be done. If that were the case, then we should do away with prisons and laws, because I guarantee you, innocents are been prosecuted.

2. Torture is a reliable method for getting information. It's not 100%, but neither are wire taps or microphones.

There's nothing macho about it. They're trying to kill us by whatever means they can, and we should do the same.

Originally Posted by DOMS

1. Any endeavor involving a large number of people with have a accuracy rate of less than 100%. This doesn't mean that it shouldn't be done. If that were the case, then we should do away with prisons and laws, because I guarantee you, innocents are been prosecuted.

2. Torture is a reliable method for getting information. It's not 100%, but neither are wire taps or microphones.

There's nothing macho about it. They're trying to kill us by whatever means they can, and we should do the same.

My god man listen to yourself. The US constitution has an 8th Amendment prohibiting cruel and unusual punishment. Why? Why aren't criminals in this country tortured? It has nothing to do with 100% accuracy b/c as the cliche goes 'it's not a perfect system but it's the best we got.' Innocents go to jail for punishment as well as the guilty. It happens. They are not tortured b/c:
a. the golden rule (do unto others as you would have them do unto you)
b. torture puts too much power into governmental hands
c. torture dehumanizes the torturer--slippery slope, why not just rape the accused's children in front of them...I'm sure they'd talk then.
d. torture decimates national character. Like it or not the population as whole is a repository for commonly held morality. Torture by the government means torture in other places--the school, the workplace, the bedroom (Only not if one is into that sort of thing).

So for No. 1 you argue the benefit (information or revenge) outweighs the burden--see a-d. I disagree.

For No. 2...torture is nothing like wiretapping or eavesdropping--those are things are observational and glean facts from unwitting people. Torture is participatory. It elicits stories by use of pain, degradation etc. The standard objection to your assertion is, people will say anything when there's a redhot poker up their ass. We should get the definitive response from Topolo on that one.

Originally Posted by DOMS

1. Any endeavor involving a large number of people with have a accuracy rate of less than 100%. This doesn't mean that it shouldn't be done. If that were the case, then we should do away with prisons and laws, because I guarantee you, innocents are been prosecuted.

2. Torture is a reliable method for getting information. It's not 100%, but neither are wire taps or microphones.

There's nothing macho about it. They're trying to kill us by whatever means they can, and we should do the same.

I think we should assemble an army of demonstrators to go over there with "free hugs" signs. That should solve our problems.

Originally Posted by Witmaster

I think we should assemble an army of demonstrators to go over there with "free hugs" signs. That should solve our problems.

Maybe. I bet that's what a liberal would say.

But I do know that superior police work in foiling terror conspiracies is the best way to proceed. The use of military power is not applicable and not effective for battling terrorism. Military might used to battle terrorism just ends up exacerbating the problem--just look at Iraq. We seemed to have learned shit from Viet Nam too.

Originally Posted by Witmaster

I think we should assemble an army of demonstrators to go over there with "free hugs" signs. That should solve our problems.

Originally Posted by Decker

My god man listen to yourself.

Apparently, I was unclear on a point: I don't advocate torturing of US citizens.

Originally Posted by Decker

a. the golden rule (do unto others as you would have them do unto you)
b. torture puts too much power into governmental hands
c. torture dehumanizes the torturer--slippery slope, why not just rape the accused's children in front of them...I'm sure they'd talk then.
d. torture decimates national character. Like it or not the population as whole is a repository for commonly held morality. Torture by the government means torture in other places--the school, the workplace, the bedroom (Only not if one is into that sort of thing).

a. Yes, the Golden Rule. Correct me if I'm wrong, but they have tortured our people. No?
b. So long as it can't be used on American citizens, no.
c. So make it a voluntary position. Oh, and the same argument can be made for soldiers. So then, we'll get ride of that position too.
d. Again, I only advocate torture on non-US citizens.

Originally Posted by Decker

So for No. 1 you argue the benefit (information or revenge) outweighs the burden--see a-d. I disagree.

You can disagree, but that makes my position no less right.

Originally Posted by Decker

For No. 2...torture is nothing like wiretapping or eavesdropping-

I was referring to accuracy. Just because someone says it, doesn't mean it's a fact. Whether said under duress or not.

Originally Posted by Witmaster

I think we should assemble an army of demonstrators to go over there with "free hugs" signs. That should solve our problems.

I'm not a linguist, but I'm pretty sure that the English phrase "Free hug" translates into Arabic "Convenient hostage."

Originally Posted by DOMS

Apparently, I was unclear on a point: I don't advocate torturing of US citizens.
a. Yes, the Golden Rule. Correct me if I'm wrong, but they have tortured our people. No?
b. So long as it can't be used on American citizens, no.
c. So make it a voluntary position. Oh, and the same argument can be made for soldiers. So then, we'll get ride of that position too.
d. Again, I only advocate torture on non-US citizens.

I use the US constitution as an example b/c it articulates rights common not to american citizens but to all men depending on the provsion you read. Just look at the Declaration of Independence:

"We hold these Truths to be self-evident, that all Men are created equal, that they are endowed, by their Creator, with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty, and the Pursuit of Happiness...."

You have answered the question of Human Rights in the negative. There are none.
a.You've turned the Golden Rule on its head--he did it first now I'm going to do it as well.
b. You have voiced your opinion as to the legitimacy of human rights
c. Make the dehumanization of torturing voluntary so no one gets hurt? After all there are all sorts of despicable men looking for outlets of aggression. Why not? It worked for the Nazis and Japanese in WWII. You can tell a lot by the company one keeps.
d. See b.

Originally Posted by DOMS

You can disagree, but that makes my position no less right.

It does in my books when I look at the total balance ledger. All morality is based on values. All values come from...well we don't know. There are rational and irrational sources. The totality of one's values is one's morality which speaks volumes of that person. It's really rather complex when it's all mapped out. That's why I look at the simple facts that the bad guys torture, in my gut I feel it's wrong and I would not want to torture someone or be tortured. I also don't like green peppers (cooked).

I have to go pick up a book or two now. Those bookstore people are reliable. I'll continue tomorrow.

But I implore you, my fellow IM'ers, look upon this day of the House's passage of a torture bill w/ a pit in your stomach and keep it burned in memory. Remember what is being done in to this country and to people in your name.

Originally Posted by Decker

I use the US constitution as an example b/c it articulates rights common not to american citizens but to all men depending on the provsion you read. Just look at the Declaration of Independence:

"We hold these Truths to be self-evident, that all Men are created equal, that they are endowed, by their Creator, with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty, and the Pursuit of Happiness...."

You have answered the question of Human Rights in the negative. There are none.

These same people treated blacks as property and women as non-citizens (legally).

Originally Posted by Decker

a.You've turned the Golden Rule on its head--he did it first now I'm going to do it as well.
b. You have voiced your opinion as to the legitimacy of human rights
c. Make the dehumanization of torturing voluntary so no one gets hurt? After all there are all sorts of despicable men looking for outlets of aggression. Why not? It worked for the Nazis and Japanese in WWII. You can tell a lot by the company one keeps.
d. See b.

a. So, no matter what, you treat the same way you wanted to be treated? No matter what? Then we should never try to kill anyone, because...well, we don't want to be killed. Do we? Nice selective application of The Rule. This rule cannot be applied unilaterally and unconditionally for the same reason that no mentally healthy person can be an absolute pacifist.
b. The fact that they are not citizens of the United States of American, isn't an opinion.
c. So again, let's fire all the soldiers.
d. See item b.

Originally Posted by Decker

It does in my books when I look at the total balance ledger. All morality is based on values. All values come from...well we don't know. There are rational and irrational sources. The totality of one's values is one's morality which speaks volumes of that person. It's really rather complex when it's all mapped out. That's why I look at the simple facts that the bad guys torture, in my gut I feel it's wrong and I would not want to torture someone or be tortured. I also don't like green peppers (cooked).

And you can feel that way. You can be as touchy-feeling, love your enemy as you want. I, however, am of a more practical mindset and see removing the enemy as expediently as possible and treating them as they treat us (The Golden Rule) as the appropriate way to go.

Oh, and you should pick up the Herb Butter recipe from my journal.

Originally Posted by DOMS

These same people treated blacks as property and women as non-citizens (legally).

No system is perfect. The genius of our constitution is in redressing past injustices. If you check the current form of that living document, you will find that those inequities have been 'fixed.'

Originally Posted by DOMS

a. So, no matter what, you treat the same way you wanted to be treated? No matter what? Then we should never try to kill anyone, because...well, we don't want to be killed. Do we? Nice selective application of The Rule. This rule cannot be applied unilaterally and unconditionally for the same reason that no mentally healthy person can be an absolute pacifist.
b. The fact that they are not citizens of the United States of American, isn't an opinion.
c. So again, let's fire all the soldiers.
d. See item b.

The golden rule is simple in form but complex in application. It's a grave oversimplification to say "never & no matter what" in application. Morality is not a matter of absolute "thou shalts". It is situational in relation to one's values. I don't want to kill anyone, but if I'm attacked I will defend myself. So I won't attack (I wouldn't want to be attacked) but I will defend (b/c some people don't know the Golden Rule).
The Constitution lays out rights that exist apart from those it grants. Reread the Declaration: they are God-given, inalienable rights inherent in all people--that sounds like an acknowledgement of Human Rights to me irrespective of citizenship.
Hiring goons to do one's dirty work is still the hallmark of the enemy--not the good guy. So we'd have an official division of leg-breakers and torturers.
You either accept Human Rights and all the civilizing connotations or you don't and you become what you are fighting against. Think of the reverberation that creates in trying to win allies to your cause. Either join us, the shining city on the hill with the promise of a better life, or become another competitor to be destroyed.

Originally Posted by DOMS

And you can feel that way. You can be as touchy-feeling, love your enemy as you want. I, however, am of a more practical mindset and see removing the enemy as expediently as possible and treating them as they treat us (The Golden Rule) as the appropriate way to go.

Oh, and you should pick up the Herb Butter recipe from my journal.

There's nothing remotely masculine about torturing prone handcuffed prisoners. That is, ironically, the province of cowards and thugs--"You hold 'em Vinny, while I work him over." Our dignity and humanity and better way of life is what we are and what separates us from the enemy. It is why we fight--not mere survival but something more (even assuming torture works which most experts dispute).

That being said and speaking of masculinity, is there any leeway on the amount of basil in the Herb Butter recipe? I have tons of it from our herb garden.

Originally Posted by Decker

No system is perfect. The genius of our constitution is in redressing past injustices. If you check the current form of that living document, you will find that those inequities have been 'fixed.'

You were the one extolling the virtues of the those that drafted the Constitution, I simply pointed out that it was baseless. All that you've done here is try to dodge that fact.

Originally Posted by Decker

The golden rule is simple in form but complex in application....

What your saying is that the Golden Rule needs to be selectively applied. Not only selectively applied, but applied by your criteria. Why yours and not mine, or someone else's? The Rule is nice in principle, but not application. It cannot be applied without thought to the situation.

Also, if you think that torturing "makes us like the enemy", you really don't know the enemy.

Originally Posted by Decker

There's nothing remotely masculine about torturing prone handcuffed prisoners. That is, ironically, the province of cowards and thugs--"You hold 'em Vinny, while I work him over." Our dignity and humanity and better way of life is what we are and what separates us from the enemy. It is why we fight--not mere survival but something more (even assuming torture works which most experts dispute).

Who said anything about masculinity? It's simply a matter of practicality.

Originally Posted by Decker

That being said and speaking of masculinity, is there any leeway on the amount of basil in the Herb Butter recipe? I have tons of it from our herb garden.

Like any recipe (or technique) start with the base recipe, try it and then tweak it to your tastes.

Edit: I just realized that you're not a man.

Originally Posted by DOMS

You were the one extolling the virtues of the those that drafted the Constitution, I simply pointed out that it was baseless. All that you've done here is try to dodge that fact.

No. I was trying to illustrate that Human Rights have an historical context and do, in fact, exist in our traditions and should be acknowledged by all americans and not ignored.

Originally Posted by DOMS

What your saying is that the Golden Rule needs to be selectively applied. Not only selectively applied, but applied by your criteria. Why yours and not mine, or someone else's? The Rule is nice in principle, but not application. It cannot be applied without thought to the situation.

Also, if you think that torturing "makes us like the enemy", you really don't know the enemy.

Yes, I am saying that the Golden Rule is contextual in nature. And yes, I am saying that my, and all humans', morality is founded upon individual values. It just so happens that many values are shared by many people creating consensus and giving the appearance of a monolithic and shared morality. I don't want to kill, but under circumstances like self-defense, I will. Is that always the case? no. But generally it is.

What is your justification for torture? It's a negligible method of gathering information. It is a fine system of revenge though and sadism.

Originally Posted by DOMS

Who said anything about masculinity? It's simply a matter of practicality.

I concluded from your "touchy feely" comment that my position is somehow soft or something less than what a man should do or think, hence the "masculine" comment.

Will do on the herb butter recipe.

Originally Posted by Decker

No. I was trying to illustrate that Human Rights have an historical context and do, in fact, exist in our traditions and should be acknowledged by all americans and not ignored.

Who's history and for how long? Up until 150 years ago, public hangings and beheadings were common the world over.

Originally Posted by Decker

What is your justification for torture? It's a negligible method of gathering information. It is a fine system of revenge though and sadism.
I concluded from your "touchy feely" comment that my position is somehow soft or something less than what a man should do or think, hence the "masculine" comment.

It's not just for information, but it's also not for revenge, it's simply tit-for-tat. They torture and behead our people, but we give them three meals, a cot, and all the Islamic wailing music they want. This isn't right. They should receive the same treatment that they give us.

"touchy-feely" had nothing to do with masculinity, and everything to do with inappropriate idealism.

Originally Posted by Decker

Will do on the herb butter recipe.

Try to pick up a butter mold before you do. Otherwise you'll have to use plastic wrap. Unless you're good at rolling it, it'll end up looking like a yellow, bespeckled, turd.

Originally Posted by DOMS

Who's history and for how long? Up until 150 years ago, public hangings and beheadings were common the world over.

Our US history. It is the trademark of humanity to fall woefully short of acknowledged ideals. Life is that struggle. Hell, even the Bible is nothing but a catalog of stories of man's failure to live up to God's covenants and demands. That doesn't mean we do not fight the good fight and continue the tragic struggle.

Originally Posted by DOMS

It's not just for information, but it's also not for revenge, it's simply tit-for-tat. They torture and behead our people, but we give them three meals, a cot, and all the Islamic wailing music they want. This isn't right. They should receive the same treatment that they give us.

The proper response is we try them, find them guilty, and execute them and bury them as we see fit instead of according to Muslim law.

Thanks for the butter turd advice...I will take it under advisement.