Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Politics : Foreign Affairs Discussion Group -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: michael97123 who wrote (248608)	11/16/2007 11:16:28 AM
From: one_less	Respond to of 281500

Sorry but I think you contaminate your scenario in the same way politicians do, with too much fog, grey definition, smoke and mirror. You have confusing or even conflicting ideas about what you think is deserving of interrogation bordering on torture. The terrorist in your scenario is not subdued and so by my definition would still qualify as a combatant posing a threat to me and mine, and is thus subject to any level of animus I can throw at him. He has not surrendered so he gets no quarter from me... go ahead and give him a butt whoop'n. You are not, after all, talking about a group of captives who've surrendered and upon which you will venture a fishing trip of coercive inquiry with every hook and lure at your disposal. Your train jumped the track (train of thought analogy). Lumping all into one is the problem, so lets distinguish and then simplify, simplify, simplify. Did I say simplify? well simplify some more then. ... and once you've made the distinctions, don't go back and lump them into all being one and the same again.