Forum Replies Created
-
AuthorPosts
-
felix
Participant[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.
Participant[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.
Participant[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.
Participant[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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
Participant[quote=CONCHO]It says something about our society that we enjoy discussing torture techniques so much. What is torture, what isn’t torture, when you should torture, why you should torture, what sort of techniques are most effective, etc… It’s all over the TV, on talk radio, and even on a freaking housing bubble blog. There are unbelievably popular movies like the Saw and Hostel series that are nothing but a bunch of torture scenes stitched together. The French make movies about people cheating on their wives and we make movies about pulling each other’s eyes out. Let’s just come right out and say it:
We’re Americans and we love torture. We love thinking about it, we love talking about it, and we even occasionally enjoy doing it (but only when it’s really necessary. It isn’t a black&white world, you know!)[/quote]
Nice straw man argument.
I suspect most Americans neither enjoy torture nor talking about it, despite the success of Saw movies. I might add that the Saw movies also make a lot of $ overseas, perhaps, those folks in France love seeing limbs amputated as much as some do here.
Much of this commotion is being raised to vilify the Bush administration without regard to the truth or how it may affect our ability to gather information. And I also suspect most folks can’t even agree on what is or isn’t torture.
As I said before, a strict definition would include only those techniques that leave lasting physical or psychological effects. I have yet to hear of anything we used fit into that category.
Participant[quote=CONCHO]It says something about our society that we enjoy discussing torture techniques so much. What is torture, what isn’t torture, when you should torture, why you should torture, what sort of techniques are most effective, etc… It’s all over the TV, on talk radio, and even on a freaking housing bubble blog. There are unbelievably popular movies like the Saw and Hostel series that are nothing but a bunch of torture scenes stitched together. The French make movies about people cheating on their wives and we make movies about pulling each other’s eyes out. Let’s just come right out and say it:
We’re Americans and we love torture. We love thinking about it, we love talking about it, and we even occasionally enjoy doing it (but only when it’s really necessary. It isn’t a black&white world, you know!)[/quote]
Nice straw man argument.
I suspect most Americans neither enjoy torture nor talking about it, despite the success of Saw movies. I might add that the Saw movies also make a lot of $ overseas, perhaps, those folks in France love seeing limbs amputated as much as some do here.
Much of this commotion is being raised to vilify the Bush administration without regard to the truth or how it may affect our ability to gather information. And I also suspect most folks can’t even agree on what is or isn’t torture.
As I said before, a strict definition would include only those techniques that leave lasting physical or psychological effects. I have yet to hear of anything we used fit into that category.
Participant[quote=CONCHO]It says something about our society that we enjoy discussing torture techniques so much. What is torture, what isn’t torture, when you should torture, why you should torture, what sort of techniques are most effective, etc… It’s all over the TV, on talk radio, and even on a freaking housing bubble blog. There are unbelievably popular movies like the Saw and Hostel series that are nothing but a bunch of torture scenes stitched together. The French make movies about people cheating on their wives and we make movies about pulling each other’s eyes out. Let’s just come right out and say it:
We’re Americans and we love torture. We love thinking about it, we love talking about it, and we even occasionally enjoy doing it (but only when it’s really necessary. It isn’t a black&white world, you know!)[/quote]
Nice straw man argument.
I suspect most Americans neither enjoy torture nor talking about it, despite the success of Saw movies. I might add that the Saw movies also make a lot of $ overseas, perhaps, those folks in France love seeing limbs amputated as much as some do here.
Much of this commotion is being raised to vilify the Bush administration without regard to the truth or how it may affect our ability to gather information. And I also suspect most folks can’t even agree on what is or isn’t torture.
As I said before, a strict definition would include only those techniques that leave lasting physical or psychological effects. I have yet to hear of anything we used fit into that category.
Participant[quote=CONCHO]It says something about our society that we enjoy discussing torture techniques so much. What is torture, what isn’t torture, when you should torture, why you should torture, what sort of techniques are most effective, etc… It’s all over the TV, on talk radio, and even on a freaking housing bubble blog. There are unbelievably popular movies like the Saw and Hostel series that are nothing but a bunch of torture scenes stitched together. The French make movies about people cheating on their wives and we make movies about pulling each other’s eyes out. Let’s just come right out and say it:
We’re Americans and we love torture. We love thinking about it, we love talking about it, and we even occasionally enjoy doing it (but only when it’s really necessary. It isn’t a black&white world, you know!)[/quote]
Nice straw man argument.
I suspect most Americans neither enjoy torture nor talking about it, despite the success of Saw movies. I might add that the Saw movies also make a lot of $ overseas, perhaps, those folks in France love seeing limbs amputated as much as some do here.
Much of this commotion is being raised to vilify the Bush administration without regard to the truth or how it may affect our ability to gather information. And I also suspect most folks can’t even agree on what is or isn’t torture.
As I said before, a strict definition would include only those techniques that leave lasting physical or psychological effects. I have yet to hear of anything we used fit into that category.
Participant[quote=CONCHO]It says something about our society that we enjoy discussing torture techniques so much. What is torture, what isn’t torture, when you should torture, why you should torture, what sort of techniques are most effective, etc… It’s all over the TV, on talk radio, and even on a freaking housing bubble blog. There are unbelievably popular movies like the Saw and Hostel series that are nothing but a bunch of torture scenes stitched together. The French make movies about people cheating on their wives and we make movies about pulling each other’s eyes out. Let’s just come right out and say it:
We’re Americans and we love torture. We love thinking about it, we love talking about it, and we even occasionally enjoy doing it (but only when it’s really necessary. It isn’t a black&white world, you know!)[/quote]
Nice straw man argument.
I suspect most Americans neither enjoy torture nor talking about it, despite the success of Saw movies. I might add that the Saw movies also make a lot of $ overseas, perhaps, those folks in France love seeing limbs amputated as much as some do here.
Much of this commotion is being raised to vilify the Bush administration without regard to the truth or how it may affect our ability to gather information. And I also suspect most folks can’t even agree on what is or isn’t torture.
As I said before, a strict definition would include only those techniques that leave lasting physical or psychological effects. I have yet to hear of anything we used fit into that category.
-
AuthorPosts
