Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Rupert Pupkin
I rarely agree with articles that you provide but I actually agree with this article. Everything he's saying is right on. It doesn't mean that I think our guys shouldn't use the interrogation methods that they are using. Here is something to think about that is not far-fetched. Let's say that we capture one of these guys overseas and we treat him really badly. We do the things that this guy talks about in the article but it leads to an admission of a terrorist plan that we thwart because of the admission that was obtained due to the methods used. Let's say that 1,000 lives were saved as a result. Would you rather that we didn't do the harsh interrogation if it ended up saving 1,000 lives? That's a tough question.
|
Rupert,
I'm gratified that you and I are exchanging "meaningful questions".
I'm also thrilled that you and I agree on some issues.
In answer to your question, I'd be in support of one life being saved, let alone 1,000 if done within non-torturous techniques. That includes ALL humans, not only Americans.
The USA continues to set the model for the rest of the world.
I agree with Senator McCain regarding the preservation of "moral high ground".
DTS