Donald Trump supports torture
- Thread starter Padawanbater2
- Start date
nomofatum
Well-Known Member
That is a crock of shit. It's not always wrong to harm an innocent person. That is a BS supposition.
If that were true you couldn't harm an innocent person to help or save them. You have to run as fast as you can to tackle and save the kid about to be hit by a car, well I know i'm going to harm him, but I know damn well it's the correct and most moral act to harm and save him...
If I have the choice between shooting one innocent person between the eyes to save 50, I would have no moral difficulty, bang. The correct moral choice is clear to me.
Now things get much more confusing if your source of morals is less logical than mine. I'm not a believer, so I make my own morals and they tend to be based on logic. Good luck believers, your morals are a cluster fuck.
UncleBuck
Well-Known Member
how is it harming someone to prevent them from being hit by a car?
Padawanbater2
Well-Known Member
Thank you!
nomofatum
Well-Known Member
A full speed tackle is going to harm the child, especially if you are a 250lb guy. But it's lesser harm than the car would cause...
Padawanbater2
Well-Known Member
It is always wrong to intentionally harm an innocent person
That better, sweetheart?
When is it ever wrong to intentionally harm an innocent person?
UncleBuck
Well-Known Member
by your logic, it harms my feet every time i walk on them, versus not walking on them.
but then again, if i take that to the extreme and never walk on them, that will harm them through atrophy.
to reduce harm to someone is not the same as harming them. it's pretty much the opposite.
nomofatum
Well-Known Member
Um, no, unless something is wrong with your feet.
If your feet were just operated on, and the hospital is on fire, I'm sure you will choose to harm your feet by walking instead of burn alive. If it causes damage, it's harm. Reducing harm and trading one harm for another are two different things. Sounds like your brain is trying to twist things to fit your world view puzzle.
Padawanbater2
Well-Known Member
When is it ever right to intentionally harm an innocent person?
NLXSK1
Well-Known Member
You might want to ask Obama that. It seems he has killed many innocent people that happened to be standing next to a terrorist when the drone strike hit.
But hey, pouring water in their faces... THAT IS OUT OF LINE!!!
Padawanbater2
Well-Known Member
Waterboarding is simulated drowning. Interesting that you would need to downplay its significance just to try to make this point. If it wasn't torture, it wouldn't be banned by both US and international courts. We don't torture people to quell your sick need for revenge, go to Pakistan or Saudi Arabia if you want to live in a society like that.
pnwmystery
Well-Known Member
Tokyo War Crimes Trials by the International Military Tribunal for the Far East, report of a "war crime" commited by a Japanese on a Dutch Prisoner: A towel was fixed under the chin and down over the face. Then many buckets of water were poured into the towel so that the water gradually reached the mouth and rising further eventually also the nostrils, which resulted in his becoming unconscious and collapsing like a person drowned. This procedure was sometimes repeated 5-6 times in succession. This was a convictable war crime: water torture.
In 1947 during the Yokohama War Crimes Trials Yukio Asano was charged with Violation of the Laws and Customs of War (war crimes), these charges included mistreatment of war prisoners, "beating using hands, fists, club; kicking; water torture; burning using cigarettes; strapping on a stretcher head downward." The water torture consisted of "pouring water up a prisoner's nostrils," "forcing water into [the] mouths and noses of prisoners." He was tried, convicted, and sentenced to 15 years of labor.
Waterboarding is furthermore a violation of Common Article 3 of the Geneva Convention, and the United Nations Convention against Torture. So, yes, it's out of line numbnuts. It could also be considered a form of mock execution which is also a war crime/crime against humanity.
ThaMagnificent
Well-Known Member
how did you arrive at the conclusion they're innocent?
UncleBuck
Well-Known Member
can you really not understand the point pada is trying to make? are you really that dense?
ThaMagnificent
Well-Known Member
personal attacks trying to derail the conversation. Nice try
UncleBuck
Well-Known Member
i did not attack you, i asked you a question.
you are too dense to realize that padawan was making a philosophical point.
by being too stupid to realize that, you derailed the conversation.
that is nto a personal attack on you, that is just an observation about your own crippling stupidity.
ThaMagnificent
Well-Known Member
more personal attacks and name calling. Classic response. your philosophy means nothing when you claim a terrorist as innocent
UncleBuck
Well-Known Member
you clearly are not smart enough to get what's going on here, and that's saying something. even a child with basic comprehension could get what is going on here. but you can't.
let me guess, trump supporter?