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 : Formerly About Advanced Micro Devices -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: RetiredNow who wrote (382477)	5/4/2008 8:10:24 PM
From: i-node	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 1574265

>> So the ends justify the means. Hmm. My position on waterboarding is pretty simple. a) Many people, including me, do not consider it to be torture. b) It should NOT be the policy of our government to torture, OR waterboard anyone. c) If the CIA determines it is necessary to waterboard someone to get critical information, as it has in the three instances they claim they've used it, then they should just do it. We don't need a public debate about it. We don't need to demand that CIA officials remark publicly about it. A nice, generic answer such as, "We don't comment on interrogation techniques, ever", would be adequate. But we don't need to tie the CIA's hands. If they believe it is necessary to get important information, they should be able to use it without fear of retribution by liberals within government. If it becomes a problem (i.e., it is determined that the technique has been used inappropriately), then an administration can easily tighten down on its use. There is really no nead for a naive debate that makes Obama and Clinton look like damned fools (McCain is excepted because he has an obvious and understandable bias against it).