- This topic has 425 replies, 30 voices, and was last updated 15 years, 8 months ago by
Shadowfax.
-
AuthorPosts
-
April 22, 2009 at 10:47 AM #386278April 22, 2009 at 2:17 PM #385700
felix
Participant[quote=CONCHO]Nice straw man argument.
Actually it’s not a straw man argument. A straw man argument would be something akin to “You’re saying that we should be able to torture anyone anytime we like, but clearly if we do that then we’re completely evil!” A straw man involves taking someone’s position, distorting it, and then refuting it, which I did not do. Actually, I wasn’t even taking sides with my post.
I was merely pointing out that we really seem to enjoy discussing and thinking about torture based on how much TV and radio airtime is devoted to it, how many newspaper column inches are about it, how many blog posts are about it, and how many popular films have torture scenes. Even James Bond films have torture scenes now! It used to be that the villain would just set James up to snuff him on some elaborate device but now he must torture him first. On “24”, Jack Bauer is constantly having to torture people. Even on a great show like “Lost” we’ve got Sayid and his history as an Iraqi torturer.
And yes of course the “Saw” movies do well overseas, so people all around the world are just as sick as we are. Of course the movies themselves are actually made here. India has the biggest movie industry outside of the US (maybe even bigger), but their movies seem to be mostly love stories with lots of song and dance numbers and goofy moustachioed villains. Only the US, for some reason, seems to produce this disturbing torture pornography. What does this say about us?
[/quote]On the contrary, you were implying that our society was/is disproportionately interested in torture base upon the success of Saw movies and the fact that folks are discussing torture. You even went on to imply that French movies are in some regard morally superior because they deal with “cheating” and not torture.
Firstly, as I have written here earlier, one must define torture before you can reasonably have a discussion on the subject. I don’t think that has been done to the satisfaction of both sides. I have asserted that anything that doesn’t leave lasting physical or psychological problems isn’t torture. I don’t know if many folks agree on that or not. I suspect many don’t.
Next, it seems to me that some folks are only discussing torture because they have chosen to make how the Bush Administration interrogated terrorists a political issue. Torture as a political issue in my lifetime is relatively new. I can’t remember ever seeing torture as topic in politics.
That makes your assertions that we are obsessed with torture because of torture discussions on blogs and Saw movies non-persuasive. Commenting on what one side makes a political issue, like how some have made torture, doesn’t mean you are a “sick” torture obsessed society.
Anyway you can’t have it both ways. It’s unfair to say those who respond to a discussion of torture are an indication that we obsessed with it.
The success of the Saw movies here and world wide doesn’t indicate a “sick” society either. It only indicates to me that movie standards have grossly been slipping for decades. Perhaps, it may be fairer to say that our standards are lower than many other countries with regard to what we let be shown in movie theaters or on the air.
Next, your generalization with regard to the type of movies the French make is not only unsubstantiated but meaningless. It might be better to indicate what percentage of movie dollars here and abroad, like in France, were spent on the Saw movies.
Anyway, wasn’t it the French that that not so long ago ran the Devil’s Island penal colony and guillotined, in public, political opponents of the Republic?
I wouldn’t be looking at the French for guidance on many issues.
Lastly, you probably haven’t seen recent insight into how low in regard French President Sarkozy holds our dear President Obama or you wouldn’t be citing the French as ideals.
April 22, 2009 at 2:17 PM #385968Participant[quote=CONCHO]Nice straw man argument.
Actually it’s not a straw man argument. A straw man argument would be something akin to “You’re saying that we should be able to torture anyone anytime we like, but clearly if we do that then we’re completely evil!” A straw man involves taking someone’s position, distorting it, and then refuting it, which I did not do. Actually, I wasn’t even taking sides with my post.
I was merely pointing out that we really seem to enjoy discussing and thinking about torture based on how much TV and radio airtime is devoted to it, how many newspaper column inches are about it, how many blog posts are about it, and how many popular films have torture scenes. Even James Bond films have torture scenes now! It used to be that the villain would just set James up to snuff him on some elaborate device but now he must torture him first. On “24”, Jack Bauer is constantly having to torture people. Even on a great show like “Lost” we’ve got Sayid and his history as an Iraqi torturer.
And yes of course the “Saw” movies do well overseas, so people all around the world are just as sick as we are. Of course the movies themselves are actually made here. India has the biggest movie industry outside of the US (maybe even bigger), but their movies seem to be mostly love stories with lots of song and dance numbers and goofy moustachioed villains. Only the US, for some reason, seems to produce this disturbing torture pornography. What does this say about us?
[/quote]On the contrary, you were implying that our society was/is disproportionately interested in torture base upon the success of Saw movies and the fact that folks are discussing torture. You even went on to imply that French movies are in some regard morally superior because they deal with “cheating” and not torture.
Firstly, as I have written here earlier, one must define torture before you can reasonably have a discussion on the subject. I don’t think that has been done to the satisfaction of both sides. I have asserted that anything that doesn’t leave lasting physical or psychological problems isn’t torture. I don’t know if many folks agree on that or not. I suspect many don’t.
Next, it seems to me that some folks are only discussing torture because they have chosen to make how the Bush Administration interrogated terrorists a political issue. Torture as a political issue in my lifetime is relatively new. I can’t remember ever seeing torture as topic in politics.
That makes your assertions that we are obsessed with torture because of torture discussions on blogs and Saw movies non-persuasive. Commenting on what one side makes a political issue, like how some have made torture, doesn’t mean you are a “sick” torture obsessed society.
Anyway you can’t have it both ways. It’s unfair to say those who respond to a discussion of torture are an indication that we obsessed with it.
The success of the Saw movies here and world wide doesn’t indicate a “sick” society either. It only indicates to me that movie standards have grossly been slipping for decades. Perhaps, it may be fairer to say that our standards are lower than many other countries with regard to what we let be shown in movie theaters or on the air.
Next, your generalization with regard to the type of movies the French make is not only unsubstantiated but meaningless. It might be better to indicate what percentage of movie dollars here and abroad, like in France, were spent on the Saw movies.
Anyway, wasn’t it the French that that not so long ago ran the Devil’s Island penal colony and guillotined, in public, political opponents of the Republic?
I wouldn’t be looking at the French for guidance on many issues.
Lastly, you probably haven’t seen recent insight into how low in regard French President Sarkozy holds our dear President Obama or you wouldn’t be citing the French as ideals.
April 22, 2009 at 2:17 PM #386166Participant[quote=CONCHO]Nice straw man argument.
Actually it’s not a straw man argument. A straw man argument would be something akin to “You’re saying that we should be able to torture anyone anytime we like, but clearly if we do that then we’re completely evil!” A straw man involves taking someone’s position, distorting it, and then refuting it, which I did not do. Actually, I wasn’t even taking sides with my post.
I was merely pointing out that we really seem to enjoy discussing and thinking about torture based on how much TV and radio airtime is devoted to it, how many newspaper column inches are about it, how many blog posts are about it, and how many popular films have torture scenes. Even James Bond films have torture scenes now! It used to be that the villain would just set James up to snuff him on some elaborate device but now he must torture him first. On “24”, Jack Bauer is constantly having to torture people. Even on a great show like “Lost” we’ve got Sayid and his history as an Iraqi torturer.
And yes of course the “Saw” movies do well overseas, so people all around the world are just as sick as we are. Of course the movies themselves are actually made here. India has the biggest movie industry outside of the US (maybe even bigger), but their movies seem to be mostly love stories with lots of song and dance numbers and goofy moustachioed villains. Only the US, for some reason, seems to produce this disturbing torture pornography. What does this say about us?
[/quote]On the contrary, you were implying that our society was/is disproportionately interested in torture base upon the success of Saw movies and the fact that folks are discussing torture. You even went on to imply that French movies are in some regard morally superior because they deal with “cheating” and not torture.
Firstly, as I have written here earlier, one must define torture before you can reasonably have a discussion on the subject. I don’t think that has been done to the satisfaction of both sides. I have asserted that anything that doesn’t leave lasting physical or psychological problems isn’t torture. I don’t know if many folks agree on that or not. I suspect many don’t.
Next, it seems to me that some folks are only discussing torture because they have chosen to make how the Bush Administration interrogated terrorists a political issue. Torture as a political issue in my lifetime is relatively new. I can’t remember ever seeing torture as topic in politics.
That makes your assertions that we are obsessed with torture because of torture discussions on blogs and Saw movies non-persuasive. Commenting on what one side makes a political issue, like how some have made torture, doesn’t mean you are a “sick” torture obsessed society.
Anyway you can’t have it both ways. It’s unfair to say those who respond to a discussion of torture are an indication that we obsessed with it.
The success of the Saw movies here and world wide doesn’t indicate a “sick” society either. It only indicates to me that movie standards have grossly been slipping for decades. Perhaps, it may be fairer to say that our standards are lower than many other countries with regard to what we let be shown in movie theaters or on the air.
Next, your generalization with regard to the type of movies the French make is not only unsubstantiated but meaningless. It might be better to indicate what percentage of movie dollars here and abroad, like in France, were spent on the Saw movies.
Anyway, wasn’t it the French that that not so long ago ran the Devil’s Island penal colony and guillotined, in public, political opponents of the Republic?
I wouldn’t be looking at the French for guidance on many issues.
Lastly, you probably haven’t seen recent insight into how low in regard French President Sarkozy holds our dear President Obama or you wouldn’t be citing the French as ideals.
April 22, 2009 at 2:17 PM #386214Participant[quote=CONCHO]Nice straw man argument.
Actually it’s not a straw man argument. A straw man argument would be something akin to “You’re saying that we should be able to torture anyone anytime we like, but clearly if we do that then we’re completely evil!” A straw man involves taking someone’s position, distorting it, and then refuting it, which I did not do. Actually, I wasn’t even taking sides with my post.
I was merely pointing out that we really seem to enjoy discussing and thinking about torture based on how much TV and radio airtime is devoted to it, how many newspaper column inches are about it, how many blog posts are about it, and how many popular films have torture scenes. Even James Bond films have torture scenes now! It used to be that the villain would just set James up to snuff him on some elaborate device but now he must torture him first. On “24”, Jack Bauer is constantly having to torture people. Even on a great show like “Lost” we’ve got Sayid and his history as an Iraqi torturer.
And yes of course the “Saw” movies do well overseas, so people all around the world are just as sick as we are. Of course the movies themselves are actually made here. India has the biggest movie industry outside of the US (maybe even bigger), but their movies seem to be mostly love stories with lots of song and dance numbers and goofy moustachioed villains. Only the US, for some reason, seems to produce this disturbing torture pornography. What does this say about us?
[/quote]On the contrary, you were implying that our society was/is disproportionately interested in torture base upon the success of Saw movies and the fact that folks are discussing torture. You even went on to imply that French movies are in some regard morally superior because they deal with “cheating” and not torture.
Firstly, as I have written here earlier, one must define torture before you can reasonably have a discussion on the subject. I don’t think that has been done to the satisfaction of both sides. I have asserted that anything that doesn’t leave lasting physical or psychological problems isn’t torture. I don’t know if many folks agree on that or not. I suspect many don’t.
Next, it seems to me that some folks are only discussing torture because they have chosen to make how the Bush Administration interrogated terrorists a political issue. Torture as a political issue in my lifetime is relatively new. I can’t remember ever seeing torture as topic in politics.
That makes your assertions that we are obsessed with torture because of torture discussions on blogs and Saw movies non-persuasive. Commenting on what one side makes a political issue, like how some have made torture, doesn’t mean you are a “sick” torture obsessed society.
Anyway you can’t have it both ways. It’s unfair to say those who respond to a discussion of torture are an indication that we obsessed with it.
The success of the Saw movies here and world wide doesn’t indicate a “sick” society either. It only indicates to me that movie standards have grossly been slipping for decades. Perhaps, it may be fairer to say that our standards are lower than many other countries with regard to what we let be shown in movie theaters or on the air.
Next, your generalization with regard to the type of movies the French make is not only unsubstantiated but meaningless. It might be better to indicate what percentage of movie dollars here and abroad, like in France, were spent on the Saw movies.
Anyway, wasn’t it the French that that not so long ago ran the Devil’s Island penal colony and guillotined, in public, political opponents of the Republic?
I wouldn’t be looking at the French for guidance on many issues.
Lastly, you probably haven’t seen recent insight into how low in regard French President Sarkozy holds our dear President Obama or you wouldn’t be citing the French as ideals.
April 22, 2009 at 2:17 PM #386352Participant[quote=CONCHO]Nice straw man argument.
Actually it’s not a straw man argument. A straw man argument would be something akin to “You’re saying that we should be able to torture anyone anytime we like, but clearly if we do that then we’re completely evil!” A straw man involves taking someone’s position, distorting it, and then refuting it, which I did not do. Actually, I wasn’t even taking sides with my post.
I was merely pointing out that we really seem to enjoy discussing and thinking about torture based on how much TV and radio airtime is devoted to it, how many newspaper column inches are about it, how many blog posts are about it, and how many popular films have torture scenes. Even James Bond films have torture scenes now! It used to be that the villain would just set James up to snuff him on some elaborate device but now he must torture him first. On “24”, Jack Bauer is constantly having to torture people. Even on a great show like “Lost” we’ve got Sayid and his history as an Iraqi torturer.
And yes of course the “Saw” movies do well overseas, so people all around the world are just as sick as we are. Of course the movies themselves are actually made here. India has the biggest movie industry outside of the US (maybe even bigger), but their movies seem to be mostly love stories with lots of song and dance numbers and goofy moustachioed villains. Only the US, for some reason, seems to produce this disturbing torture pornography. What does this say about us?
[/quote]On the contrary, you were implying that our society was/is disproportionately interested in torture base upon the success of Saw movies and the fact that folks are discussing torture. You even went on to imply that French movies are in some regard morally superior because they deal with “cheating” and not torture.
Firstly, as I have written here earlier, one must define torture before you can reasonably have a discussion on the subject. I don’t think that has been done to the satisfaction of both sides. I have asserted that anything that doesn’t leave lasting physical or psychological problems isn’t torture. I don’t know if many folks agree on that or not. I suspect many don’t.
Next, it seems to me that some folks are only discussing torture because they have chosen to make how the Bush Administration interrogated terrorists a political issue. Torture as a political issue in my lifetime is relatively new. I can’t remember ever seeing torture as topic in politics.
That makes your assertions that we are obsessed with torture because of torture discussions on blogs and Saw movies non-persuasive. Commenting on what one side makes a political issue, like how some have made torture, doesn’t mean you are a “sick” torture obsessed society.
Anyway you can’t have it both ways. It’s unfair to say those who respond to a discussion of torture are an indication that we obsessed with it.
The success of the Saw movies here and world wide doesn’t indicate a “sick” society either. It only indicates to me that movie standards have grossly been slipping for decades. Perhaps, it may be fairer to say that our standards are lower than many other countries with regard to what we let be shown in movie theaters or on the air.
Next, your generalization with regard to the type of movies the French make is not only unsubstantiated but meaningless. It might be better to indicate what percentage of movie dollars here and abroad, like in France, were spent on the Saw movies.
Anyway, wasn’t it the French that that not so long ago ran the Devil’s Island penal colony and guillotined, in public, political opponents of the Republic?
I wouldn’t be looking at the French for guidance on many issues.
Lastly, you probably haven’t seen recent insight into how low in regard French President Sarkozy holds our dear President Obama or you wouldn’t be citing the French as ideals.
April 22, 2009 at 2:29 PM #385711Participant[quote=patb]
If torture was effective,
it would be used all the time.[/quote]You can say the opposite also.
If torture wasn’t effective it would not be utilized at all. However, we all know it has been around a very long time. Why? The answer is because it is effective in certain circumstances.
April 22, 2009 at 2:29 PM #385978Participant[quote=patb]
If torture was effective,
it would be used all the time.[/quote]You can say the opposite also.
If torture wasn’t effective it would not be utilized at all. However, we all know it has been around a very long time. Why? The answer is because it is effective in certain circumstances.
April 22, 2009 at 2:29 PM #386176Participant[quote=patb]
If torture was effective,
it would be used all the time.[/quote]You can say the opposite also.
If torture wasn’t effective it would not be utilized at all. However, we all know it has been around a very long time. Why? The answer is because it is effective in certain circumstances.
April 22, 2009 at 2:29 PM #386224Participant[quote=patb]
If torture was effective,
it would be used all the time.[/quote]You can say the opposite also.
If torture wasn’t effective it would not be utilized at all. However, we all know it has been around a very long time. Why? The answer is because it is effective in certain circumstances.
April 22, 2009 at 2:29 PM #386362Participant[quote=patb]
If torture was effective,
it would be used all the time.[/quote]You can say the opposite also.
If torture wasn’t effective it would not be utilized at all. However, we all know it has been around a very long time. Why? The answer is because it is effective in certain circumstances.
April 22, 2009 at 2:42 PM #385716Allan from Fallbrook
ParticipantFelix: You might also point out French conduct in the war in Indochina (Vietnam) and Algeria. Hard to argue the superiority of French “civilization” when you get a look at their tactics and the brutality of their methods.
Apropos of nothing, but on the topic of hypocrisy: Belgium also comes to mind. They screamed incessantly about German behavior during WWI (and WWII), but look at what they did in the Congo. Unbelievably horrific, and this was a “civilized” European nation.
April 22, 2009 at 2:42 PM #385983ParticipantFelix: You might also point out French conduct in the war in Indochina (Vietnam) and Algeria. Hard to argue the superiority of French “civilization” when you get a look at their tactics and the brutality of their methods.
Apropos of nothing, but on the topic of hypocrisy: Belgium also comes to mind. They screamed incessantly about German behavior during WWI (and WWII), but look at what they did in the Congo. Unbelievably horrific, and this was a “civilized” European nation.
April 22, 2009 at 2:42 PM #386180ParticipantFelix: You might also point out French conduct in the war in Indochina (Vietnam) and Algeria. Hard to argue the superiority of French “civilization” when you get a look at their tactics and the brutality of their methods.
Apropos of nothing, but on the topic of hypocrisy: Belgium also comes to mind. They screamed incessantly about German behavior during WWI (and WWII), but look at what they did in the Congo. Unbelievably horrific, and this was a “civilized” European nation.
April 22, 2009 at 2:42 PM #386229ParticipantFelix: You might also point out French conduct in the war in Indochina (Vietnam) and Algeria. Hard to argue the superiority of French “civilization” when you get a look at their tactics and the brutality of their methods.
Apropos of nothing, but on the topic of hypocrisy: Belgium also comes to mind. They screamed incessantly about German behavior during WWI (and WWII), but look at what they did in the Congo. Unbelievably horrific, and this was a “civilized” European nation.
-
AuthorPosts
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.