Classic Amanpour

[exUte]

Originally Posted by Jeff Lebowski

Help me out here. What is the dishonesty? Where in the article did she equate the two?

Are you really that naive?

[Cali Coug]

Originally Posted by exUte

American's, do you favor?

Because that is exactly what happened. Remember the interview of the FBI agent who either did or witnessed waterboarding on high level terrorists (I believe it was done to 3........yes three)? He said he disapproved of the tactics but in the end, it saved the lives of Americans and US soldiers.

To that I say ....... booyah!

Why do you act like anything that saves the lives of Americans must be good?

Would you favor the killing of a little baby to save American lives (and no, I am not equating that to waterboarding)? If not, you too have limits on what you would accept.

[Cali Coug]

Originally Posted by exUte

innocent Americans to be slaughtered as a result of not waterboarding. Did any of the terrorists (a total of 3) die. But it certainly scared the crap .... err.... plans out of them.

Like I said...........booyah!

We're in a friggin war. And you think the terrorists who capture our soldiers give a rats 'a' what we do to them? They will continue to behead, shove hot pokers up the rectums of their victims, etc regardless of whether we waterboard some of them.

C'mon. Get a grip on reality. This is not an academic exercise we are involved in.

What would you have said to the people of Anti-Nephi-Lehi? Were they immoral?

[JohnnyLingo]

Originally Posted by Cali Coug

What would you have said to the people of Anti-Nephi-Lehi? Were they immoral?

I love how every anti-war-at-all-costs hippie uses the ONE example of people laying down their arms and getting slaughtered, while ignoring the many many other times the people of God have gone to war righteously.

The people of Anti-Nephi-Lehi had very sinful pasts. They felt that making their covenant was the only way to save their souls. The Lord accepted this. It is a great example of repentance.

But you can't extrapolate it to every situation where there is conflict.

[Tex]

Originally Posted by JohnnyLingo

I love how every anti-war-at-all-costs hippie uses the ONE example of people laying down their arms and getting slaughtered, while ignoring the many many other times the people of God have gone to war righteously.

The people of Anti-Nephi-Lehi had very sinful pasts. They felt that making their covenant was the only way to save their souls. The Lord accepted this. It is a great example of repentance.

But you can't extrapolate it to every situation where there is conflict.

Indeed. In fact, what Cali is arguing is a corrollary of what I am arguing. He says the protection of American lives does not grant de facto moral authority to commit any given act of torture. Well enough. In like manner, Pol Pot's use of any given technique does not de facto make us morally equivalent to him (which is Amanpour's unspoken--or spoken--intent with this piece).

Each technique must be evaluated--and permitted or disallowed--on its own merits, or lack thereof. I refuse to accept the canard that the use of waterboarding puts us on the fast track to Cambodian-style genocide.

[Frank Ryan]

Originally Posted by Tex

Indeed. In fact, what Cali is arguing is a corrollary of what I am arguing. He says the protection of American lives does not grant de facto moral authority to commit any given act of torture. Well enough. In like manner, Pol Pot's use of any given technique does not de facto make us morally equivalent to him (which is Amanpour's unspoken--or spoken--intent with this piece).

Each technique must be evaluated--and permitted or disallowed--on its own merits, or lack thereof. I refuse to accept the canard that the use of waterboarding puts us on the fast track to Cambodian-style genocide.

tex, do you find amanour attractive?

[JohnnyLingo]

Originally Posted by Frank Ryan

tex, do you find amanour attractive?

Wow, that's relevant.

[Frank Ryan]

it's a fair question

[tooblue]

Originally Posted by Tex

Indeed. In fact, what Cali is arguing is a corrollary of what I am arguing. He says the protection of American lives does not grant de facto moral authority to commit any given act of torture. Well enough. In like manner, Pol Pot's use of any given technique does not de facto make us morally equivalent to him (which is Amanpour's unspoken--or spoken--intent with this piece).

Each technique must be evaluated--and permitted or disallowed--on its own merits, or lack thereof. I refuse to accept the canard that the use of waterboarding puts us on the fast track to Cambodian-style genocide.

Tex 1
Cali and everyone else 0

[il Padrino Ute]

Originally Posted by Frank Ryan

tex, do you find amanour attractive?

Do I see an Adam's apple?