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: d[-_-]b who wrote (441449)	12/19/2008 1:17:13 PM
From: i-node	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 1577566

I'm not sure I really care if it's torture or not - as long as it's used sparingly and only in the most dire of circumstances. I cannot buy into the argument that one persons life used to take others is somehow of equal value to the multiple lives at risk. I believe essentially the same way, and pretty much everybody I know seems to feel the same way, even liberals when presented with the facts. However, calling it "torture" is a problem because it serves as a rallying cry for enemy forces. In effect, calling it torture is aiding the enemy (i.e., treason). This is why Abu Ghraib was so appalling to me, that Americans would actually allow the word "torture" to be used in connection with it. The media's, and the liberals, decision to call this mistreatment "torture" resulted in American deaths that should never have occurred and the blame is square on the backs of the media and Western liberals.