The frequency and duration of the waterboarding is a separate issue. The new policy set by Obama is that waterboarding will not be used by the US in the future, period. He's not questioning the specifics of the application but prohibiting the technique in all circumstances. He is basically disagreeing with Pali in me in the case of the choose your own adventure hypothetical. My justification in this case is not that the terrorists torture and therefore we should torture. I am saying that using waterboarding to save lives is something that should be an option, especially during extreme or urgent scenarios.

My argument about waterboarding is that it is safe, effective, and temporary. It is not a technique that relies so much on pain as it does psychological fear. Pulling someones nails off is intended to inflict maximum pain. It also scars the person for a long period of time, until their nails grow back.

I dont really see any legitimate argument that says waterboarding will make the US less safe. It has proven to provide valuable information. So if you are against waterboarding, then you are choosing principles and reputation over lives and safety.

 

Let's flip the coin here - and I know you've never served, but let's say you belong to a unit and is directly involved with another "surge" and on a recon mission you get caught. Your captors decide that they too want to know about the impending attack to save their buddies.

So with your reasoning, it's ok to f with your brain - make you lose bowel movement and or vomit - with the use of waterboarding?

 

I would prefer waterboarding over the prefered method of beheading.

But that doesnt really apply here since the US policies really have nothing to do with the terrorists policies dealing with prisoners. Also, you indentify the terrorists with uniformed soldiers which is debatable. But to your point, yes I would completely understand their motivation. If I had info that could be used to save lives, I would expect my enemies to do the best to pry it out of me.

The fact is that the world is often a dangerous and scary place. If you have the guts to risk your life and try to kill other people in the name of our country, then you have the guts to be waterboarded. Again, the frequency and duration are debatable.

Or we can agree with Obama and say that waterboarding is torture, equivalent to mutilation techniques, and should never be used for any reason on any person.

I wonder if our soldiers will still be subjected to waterboarding training? Good enough for them, but not good enough for the enemy is my guess.

 

Onto a separate issue - the willingness of the Obama administration to completely dismiss private contracts.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn...303014_pf.html

Obama enjoyed the support of the UAW during his presidential campaign, and he has not forgotten. His administration has now engaged in mafia style bullying. Chrysler's secured creditors have contracts that promise them nearly 100% return of their investment when things go bad, which they have. They are promised less risk and less reward than any other stakeholders. However, Obama has proposed that they receive only 28 cents/dollar on their investment. The UAW who has no guarantee of return, is promised 43 cents and 55% ownership. When the secured investors protested the arrangement they were threatened with IRS inquiries and public humiliation. The UAW enjoys enormous benefits and pay which account for $3,000 per car more than the Japanese automakers and has contributed greatly to the financial difficulty of the company.

 

still bearing with you