NationStates Jolt Archive

This is the pivotal issue that destroyed Mitt Romney. John McCain handed him his ass when this topic came up in the CNN youtube debate a while back. Romney refused to comment and said "it's not right as a Presidential candidate to comment on this..." My question was, "why the F not?" McCain shot back and blasted him out of the water. He told Romney it was basically morally wrong to support torture. That is when Romney lost to McCain. What do you think of this vote?

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2008/02/13/AR2008021302888.html?hpid=topnews

Im really glad to hear it. The question is, will Bush veto it? Probably, but it will just make him look more like an ass and hurt Republicans even more in the upcoming elections.

Im really glad to hear it. The question is, will Bush veto it? Probably, but it will just make him look more like an ass and hurt Republicans even more in the upcoming elections.

And if you don't think this was on the minds of every democrat who voted for this, I have some beachfront property in Kansas to sell you.

And if you don't think this was on the minds of every democrat who voted for this, I have some beachfront property in Kansas to sell you.

That actually made me chuckle.

And if you don't think this was on the minds of every democrat who voted for this, I have some beachfront property in Kansas to sell you.

It's a win-win, when you think about it. Either it passes, and the Dems gain support for successful legislation against torture, or it fails, and the Dems get to blame Bush and the Republican Party at large for supporting torture.

is a good thing. bit of a no-brainer though. what kind of fuck would openly support torture? i mean, outside of NS/stormfront/the internet. real people don't support that shite.

Giuliani on weather waterboarding is torture or not:
It depends on how it’s done. It depends on the circumstances. It depends on who does it.

Waterboarding is the worst name for a torture method ever. It makes me think of this. http://www.travelizmo.com/archives/epic-elite-camera-housing-wakeboarding.jpg

Guys, we're forgetting one thing...

"America. Does. Not. Torture.":headbang:

bit of a no-brainer though. what kind of fuck would openly support torture? i mean, outside of NS/stormfront/the internet. real people don't support that shite.
Outside of the President of the United States, you mean? He a "bit of a no-brainer" himself....

Outside of the President of the United States, you mean? He a "bit of a no-brainer" himself....
Oh, I know quite a few real-life people apart from the PotUS who think torturing people is a good idea.

Any number of prison guards in Africa, the Middle East, Central Asia and North Korea come to mind, plus their bosses.

Anyways, let's hope this actually has some sort of impact. Considering that many of the senators might not even know the locations of some of those secret prisons, I think enforcement is going to be an issue.

you dumdnuts. there are cases were torturing someone gets information that saves lives. if you dont support it then, well then you are a retard and an accsessory to a murder.



You fail. Not only are you incorrect, your also just gave off the impression of being a sociopath.


7 posts in and your already discredited.


EDIT: Prove your claim. When has torture saved lives? Because those that have been tortured and those that have done torturing will say that they dont produce reliable results.

Ill take the experts' words over yours.

What was that sound? Was that the democrats starting to grow a bit of a spine? This has been a long time coming, and honestly we should have seen it a year ago.

you dumdnuts. there are cases were torturing someone gets information that saves lives. if you dont support it then, well then you are a retard and an accsessory to a murder.

Would you mind sourcing that claim? For the sake of us dumdnuts.

Anyway, torture may work on occasion. It is not, however, reliable. Nor is it morally defendable. I would like to quote Nietzsche:

"He who fights with monsters should look to it that he himself does not become a monster. And when you gaze long into an abyss, the abyss gazes also into you."

When I was a kid, it was always called "the Chinese water torture", although stories about it always involved the Japanese or the North Koreans (I'm not sure if the Chinese invented it-- do they still hold the patent?) It was used, when a mom or a wife was asking all kinds of questions about where you'd been or what you'd been doing, in phrases like "I didn't expect to get the Chinese water torture", analogous to the British "I didn't expect the Spanish Inquisition".I've heard of the chinese water torture. I thought it was when they tie you down and drops of water slowly drip on your forehead until you go crazy. I never heard of waterboarding until recently.

bush isn't a real person, he's a puppet.

"He who fights with monsters should look to it that he himself does not become a monster. And when you gaze long into an abyss, the abyss gazes also into you."Haven't you ever watched 24? Torture always works!

Waterboarding is the worst name for a torture method ever.
When I was a kid, it was always called "the Chinese water torture", although stories about it always involved the Japanese or the North Koreans (I'm not sure if the Chinese invented it-- do they still hold the patent?) It was used, when a mom or a wife was asking all kinds of questions about where you'd been or what you'd been doing, in phrases like "I didn't expect to get the Chinese water torture", analogous to the British "I didn't expect the Spanish Inquisition".

you dumdnuts. there are cases were torturing someone gets information that saves lives. if you dont support it then, well then you are a retard and an accsessory to a murder.

We got some real timewarping going on in this thread. I ended up five posts back!

There is only one good argument I have heard for torture. Someone wrote an essay where he argued that torture happens a lot weather it is legal or not. Legalizing torture simply means it will become more regulated and easier to keep track of.

when torturing ten, twenty or a hundred people might save a few lives it's not excusable. the only time it is excusable is when the result is definite. but then there is no need for torture. plus torture has been demonstrated to provide false confessions/testimonies time and again so where's the need. just fucking hawkish bloodlust. supporters of this shit are truly sickening and utterly inhuman.

This.

Im really glad to hear it. The question is, will Bush veto it? Probably, but it will just make him look more like an ass and hurt Republicans even more in the upcoming elections.

It wouldn't look great for Bush, would it? The president of the USA, the "leader of the free world", refusing to outlaw torture practices.

when torturing ten, twenty or a hundred people might save a few lives it's not excusable. the only time it is excusable is when the result is definite. but then there is no need for torture. plus torture has been demonstrated to provide false confessions/testimonies time and again so where's the need. just fucking hawkish bloodlust. supporters of this shit are truly sickening and utterly inhuman.

Quote:
Originally Posted by VietnamSounds
Waterboarding is the worst name for a torture method ever.

When I was a kid, it was always called "the Chinese water torture",

Not that this is actually relevant, but I think they're different. Waterboarding is simulated drowning by pouring water over someone's head while they have a plastic bag on.
Chinese Water Torture is leaving someone tied to a chair and blindfolded, and dropping one drop of water on their head at random intervals. They're supposed to go mad with the anticipation.

Haven't you ever watched 24? Torture always works!

ftw

Not that this is actually relevant, but I think they're different. Waterboarding is simulated drowning by pouring water over someone's head while they have a plastic bag on.
Chinese Water Torture is leaving someone tied to a chair and blindfolded, and dropping one drop of water on their head at random intervals. They're supposed to go mad with the anticipation.
My education was so sadly deprived... thanks for teaching me how to do the torture right :p

Ironically, there seems to be something more twisted and cruel with the Water torture. It seems more sophisticated in a way, letting their own mental faculties drive them into the depths of depravity instead of brute-forcing a drowning response.

My education was so sadly deprived... thanks for teaching me how to do the torture right

Of course. I also have some shining Cutco knives available to sell if you need anything else. :sniper:

<trolly snip>
Looks like Infinite Rev’s point was made for him!

:p

is a good thing. bit of a no-brainer though. what kind of fuck would openly support torture? i mean, outside of NS/stormfront/the internet. real people don't support that shite.

I'm in the Army and I've been to Iraq and Afghanistan and I've seen the shit that terrorists do on a daily basis and I for one am a whole hearted supporter of torture. The only way to get both timely and accurate information from a "terrorist leader" or any "terrorist supporter" is through methods of torture... I am not saying these methods are being used but I believe they should be. If you only know the policy for captured insurgents/terrorists and the waste of time and money it costs us... and its all because of liberalist statements such as this. The democratic party/liberalists are the reason why we are having such a prolonged war because you protest the methods of how a war should be fought and you people haven't the faintest idea of how to fight one. And because of such a strong liberal support politicians have to listen and do something about the complaints of the populace. So laws are instated on how we can and can not fight. So in summary I thank the liberals for unneeded deaths and a prolonged war.

I'm in the Army

suuuuuuure you are.


and I've been to Iraq and Afghanistan

suuuuuuure you have.

I'm in the Army and I've been to Iraq and Afghanistan and I've seen the shit that terrorists do on a daily basis and I for one am a whole hearted supporter of torture. The only way to get both timely and accurate information from a "terrorist leader" or any "terrorist supporter" is through methods of torture... I am not saying these methods are being used but I believe they should be. If you only know the policy for captured insurgents/terrorists and the waste of time and money it costs us... and its all because of liberalist statements such as this. The democratic party/liberalists are the reason why we are having such a prolonged war because you protest the methods of how a war should be fought and you people haven't the faintest idea of how to fight one. And because of such a strong liberal support politicians have to listen and do something about the complaints of the populace. So laws are instated on how we can and can not fight. So in summary I thank the liberals for unneeded deaths and a prolonged war.

http://www.boomspeed.com/looonatic/screamnow.gif

You're not the only soldier or former soldier here. As a soldier and apparently, a Conservative, I'd expect you to have more respect for the Constitution and the Framers who wrote it. Afterall, you risked your life defending it. But then again, it seems that lately, everybody picks and chooses which part of the Constitution to wipe their asses with; Liberalsand Conservatives alike. :(

Torture only "works" to spread terror and intimidate a population.

If that's what you want, well....

It won't hurt McCain in any way.

sure it will. Despite how we might like to think about our society, a lot of voters don't vote the person, they vote the party, and a lot of voters "republic president tortures, republicans bad". Either they do it subconciously, or through being uninformed, or just because they create the impressions that republicans are evil and McCain isn't to be trusted.

It's how politics work, there will always be people who associate the person with the party, and sentiments of the party will affect how people vote for the perosn. And considering how close the polls are right now, even a slight swing one way o rthe other can change the outcome.

suuuuuuure you are.




suuuuuuure you have.

It's the Internet. He also has a black belt, a law degree and a successful business. ;)

And if you don't think this was on the minds of every democrat who voted for this, I have some beachfront property in Kansas to sell you.

It won't hurt McCain in any way.

It's the Internet. He also has a black belt, a law degree and a successful business. ;)

hey, I have two of those!

Can I be a soldier too?

hey, I have two of those!

Can I be a soldier too?

No, that's only for people with low post counts. Sorry. Guess you'll have to make a new account if you want to be a five star general.

No, that's only for people with low post counts. Sorry. Guess you'll have to make a new account if you want to be a five star general.

Wait til you get really high and you become a clown, broke college student or schoolteacher. :(

No, that's only for people with low post counts. Sorry. Guess you'll have to make a new account if you want to be a five star general.

Damnit, these kids are making me look bad.

I'm in the Army and I've been to Iraq and Afghanistan and I've seen the shit that terrorists do on a daily basis and I for one am a whole hearted supporter of torture. The only way to get both timely and accurate information from a "terrorist leader" or any "terrorist supporter" is through methods of torture... I am not saying these methods are being used but I believe they should be. If you only know the policy for captured insurgents/terrorists and the waste of time and money it costs us... and its all because of liberalist statements such as this. The democratic party/liberalists are the reason why we are having such a prolonged war because you protest the methods of how a war should be fought and you people haven't the faintest idea of how to fight one. And because of such a strong liberal support politicians have to listen and do something about the complaints of the populace. So laws are instated on how we can and can not fight. So in summary I thank the liberals for unneeded deaths and a prolonged war.



I dont buy a word you say. Sorry.

suuuuuuure you are.

This reminds me of the Kimchi Collective and his time in the 101st fighting keyboards.

Wait til you get really high and you become a clown, broke college student or schoolteacher. :(

You know, being a broke college isn't always bad.

Them clowns, though. Especially them clowns with physics degrees...

You know, being a broke college isn't always bad.

Them clowns, though. Especially them clowns with physics degrees...

<.<

>.>

It's not THAT much of a stretch. ;)

I'm in the Army and I've been to Iraq and Afghanistan and I've seen the shit that terrorists do on a daily basis and I for one am a whole hearted supporter of torture. The only way to get both timely and accurate information from a "terrorist leader" or any "terrorist supporter" is through methods of torture... I am not saying these methods are being used but I believe they should be. If you only know the policy for captured insurgents/terrorists and the waste of time and money it costs us... and its all because of liberalist statements such as this. The democratic party/liberalists are the reason why we are having such a prolonged war because you protest the methods of how a war should be fought and you people haven't the faintest idea of how to fight one. And because of such a strong liberal support politicians have to listen and do something about the complaints of the populace. So laws are instated on how we can and can not fight. So in summary I thank the liberals for unneeded deaths and a prolonged war.


Ah, to hear the ideals of a red-blooded American patriot. Isn't it grand? Just beat them to within an inch of their life and make them experience mental trauma, that's what a true American would do. The Founding Fathers would be so proud. Y'know, not having anything like an anti-torture stance or anything..*cough*Constitution*cough*

And if you don't think this was on the minds of every democrat who voted for this, I have some beachfront property in Kansas to sell you.

Kansas does have beaches (freshwater). Therefore, there does exist the possibility of beachfront property in Kansas. :p

<.<

>.>

It's not THAT much of a stretch. ;)

Given some of the physics profs I know, you've got a point there. May I ask where you received your degree from, incidentally?

Given some of the physics profs I know, you've got a point there. May I ask where you received your degree from, incidentally?

University of Connecticut. Uconn Huskies!!!

edit: Physics is a lot easier to understand when you're nuts. *nod*

I'm in the Army and I've been to Iraq and Afghanistan and I've seen the shit that terrorists do on a daily basis and I for one am a whole hearted supporter of torture. The only way to get both timely and accurate information from a "terrorist leader" or any "terrorist supporter" is through methods of torture... I am not saying these methods are being used but I believe they should be. If you only know the policy for captured insurgents/terrorists and the waste of time and money it costs us... and its all because of liberalist statements such as this. The democratic party/liberalists are the reason why we are having such a prolonged war because you protest the methods of how a war should be fought and you people haven't the faintest idea of how to fight one. And because of such a strong liberal support politicians have to listen and do something about the complaints of the populace. So laws are instated on how we can and can not fight. So in summary I thank the liberals for unneeded deaths and a prolonged war.

My spidey senses say troll/puppet. I'm a Marine Res officer and I disagree with you wholeheartedly. John McCain and I both disagree with you actually. Ask any intelligence officer if they think torture is the best way to secure information and they will tell you no. Another thing, you don't have to say they that have been used because the military and CIA have already admitted these practices do occur. Which to me makes me question your authenticity. Torture usually gives you nothing but false leads and cannot be endured by humane nations. Your "look what the terrorists are doing" argument is crap as well. Finally, your willingness to scapegoat liberals when very many conservative Republicans voted for this issue as well means you are not very well versed in the political climate in this matter. In essence, you fail in an epic way. If you love torturing so much then maybe if you are a POW you'll get to test the resolve of your statements. Let's see what happens when YOU are on the other side of the Geneva Convention.

Ah the long forgotten, suddenly famous Bush veto threat http://www.chicagotribune.com/news/nationworld/sns-ap-intelligence-bill,0,4133898.story

It's the Internet. He also has a black belt, a law degree and a successful business. ;)

I'll call your successful business and raise you a godhood.

I am Haruhi Suzumiya!

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Haruhi_Suzumiya

University of Connecticut. Uconn Huskies!!!

edit: Physics is a lot easier to understand when you're nuts. *nod*

Nifty.

And yes, it sure is. Something I'm steadily discovering as I slip closer and closer to full-blown-crazy.

Nifty.

And yes, it sure is. Something I'm steadily discovering as I slip closer and closer to full-blown-crazy.

When you get here, we'll enjoy a Klein Bottle of beer together. :)

http://www.math.ou.edu/~gerard/ou%20images/klein%20bottle%20copy%201.jpg

I'm in the Army and I've been to Iraq and Afghanistan and I've seen the shit that terrorists do on a daily basis and I for one am a whole hearted supporter of torture.

Now, let's twist that around shall we?

Before doing so, let me say I condone neither what was said neither what I am about to say. Let me quite clear about that.

"I'm in Iraq and Afghanistan and have seen the shit that the US Army does on a daily basis and I for one am a whole hearted supporter of terrorism."

torture is wrong mmmkay

you dumdnuts. there are cases were torturing someone gets information that saves lives. if you dont support it then, well then you are a retard and an accsessory to a murder.

Someone with the screen name "Anarchy works" sanctioning government torture. Anyone else see the irony?

Waterboarding is the worst name for a torture method ever. It makes me think of this. http://www.travelizmo.com/archives/epic-elite-camera-housing-wakeboarding.jpg

Glad I'm not the only one who makes that mistake :p

It's the Internet. He also has a black belt, a law degree and a successful business. ;)

... yet he still can't spell "rogue"!

... yet he still can't spell "rogue"!

Which shows 3 things:

1- He's not well-written.

2- He's not a D&D player.

3- He's not an X-Men fan.

... yet he still can't spell "rogue"!

You hath confused me good sir!

I cannot find the post to which you reference a person who cannot spell "rogue"... Where might it be such that you could give me directions to it? Because, you know, the princess is in another castle and I need the key.

Lets waterboard those who voted for it. Not to interrogate them, mind you. but for sheer torture.

I'm just disgusted by the Senate and McCain can forget about me even considering going to the polls.

Waterboarding is common sense. Truth is that torture should be used in any situation they feel necessary. And I mean real torture. You get an Al-Qaeda operative in the field and need to gouge his eyes out to get information, you do it.

I'm just disgusted by the Senate and McCain can forget about me even considering going to the polls.

Waterboarding is common sense. Truth is that torture should be used in any situation they feel necessary. And I mean real torture. You get an Al-Qaeda operative in the field and need to gouge his eyes out to get information, you do it.

There's a funny thing though. First of all, the United States executed Japanese officers at the end of World War 2 for using waterboarding on American prisoners. The very same technique that Busheviks like you keep bleating is vital to winning "The War on Terror." Why were the Japanese officers specifically executed for the waterboardings if it's defined as "Not Torture"?

Good on the Senate.

So I'm a Bush supporter again huh? This is just the standard response to every single opinion that doesn't subscribe to the weak Western leftist policy on foreign terrorists. I disagree with Bush on virtually issue. It never ceases to amaze me.

And the trials and executions of German and Japanese prisoners for a variety of different things was all about the victors writing history. The Nuremberg Trials were a farce. Truth is that there is no such thing as war crimes, but I don't disagree that the winning side is fully capable of killing anyone they want as part of the spoils of war.

So I'm a Bush supporter again huh? This is just the standard response to every single opinion that doesn't subscribe to the weak Western leftist policy on foreign terrorists. I disagree with Bush on virtually issue. It never ceases to amaze me.

And the trials and executions of German and Japanese prisoners for a variety of different things was all about the victors writing history. The Nuremberg Trials were a farce. Truth is that there is no such thing as war crimes, but I don't disagree that the winning side is fully capable of killing anyone they want as part of the spoils of war.

So what you're saying is you have no problem with the use of torture, mass killings, or rape camps, because you are a douchebag? It sounds like that's essentially what this comes down to.

I'm betting you were for Romney.

That's an interesting interpretation. Believing that using torture on terrorists to save innocent lives is the equivalent to supporting random mass killings and the operation of rape camps?

Is it any wonder that all of the people who won't even go so far as to condemn Al-Qaeda are supporters of Obama? Is that you too?

And no, I wouldn't vote for any of the Republican candidates. I am a realist.

That's an interesting interpretation. Believing that using torture on terrorists to save innocent lives is the equivalent to supporting random mass killings and the operation of rape camps?

Considering that the authorization of power to conduct the first inevitably leads to the second...yes, yes they are equivalent.

That's an interesting interpretation. Believing that using torture on terrorists to save innocent lives is the equivalent to supporting random mass killings and the operation of rape camps?

Is it any wonder that all of the people who won't even go so far as to condemn Al-Qaeda are supporters of Obama? Is that you too?

And no, I wouldn't vote for any of the Republican candidates. I am a realist.

WHo doesn't condemn Al-Quaeda? I just want to know. Because some people are under the mistaken impression that being against war, torture and killing means that you're on the enemies' side. Nothing could be further from the Truth. If I see someone waving a 'GO AL-QUAEDA!!!' sign on a street corner, I'll kick him in the nuts. But part of living in a country founded in an ideal of Freedom that didn't even exist yet when that freedom was envisioned is that you have to sacrifice to achieve it. I'd rather die an American than live and act in as vile a manner as they do.

I'm in the Army and I've been to Iraq and Afghanistan and I've seen the shit that terrorists do on a daily basis and I for one am a whole hearted supporter of torture. The only way to get both timely and accurate information from a "terrorist leader" or any "terrorist supporter" is through methods of torture... I am not saying these methods are being used but I believe they should be. If you only know the policy for captured insurgents/terrorists and the waste of time and money it costs us... and its all because of liberalist statements such as this. The democratic party/liberalists are the reason why we are having such a prolonged war because you protest the methods of how a war should be fought and you people haven't the faintest idea of how to fight one. And because of such a strong liberal support politicians have to listen and do something about the complaints of the populace. So laws are instated on how we can and can not fight. So in summary I thank the liberals for unneeded deaths and a prolonged war.

There is no reason for us to stoop to the level of terrorists. We should be above that.

LG, did you not see the poll where they asked people their opinion of Al-Qaeda?

Last time I checked, there was something like 1/3 of the NS forum population would not even go so far as to condemn them. It was pretty telling.

WHo doesn't condemn Al-Quaeda? I just want to know. Because some people are under the mistaken impression that being against war, torture and killing means that you're on the enemies' side. Nothing could be further from the Truth. If I see someone waving a 'GO AL-QUAEDA!!!' sign on a street corner, I'll kick him in the nuts. But part of living in a country founded in an ideal of Freedom that didn't even exist yet when that freedom was envisioned is that you have to sacrifice to achieve it. I'd rather die an American than live and act in as vile a manner as they do.

Well said, LG. :)

That's an interesting interpretation. Believing that using torture on terrorists to save innocent lives is the equivalent to supporting random mass killings and the operation of rape camps?


You said this:

Truth is that there is no such thing as war crimes, but I don't disagree that the winning side is fully capable of killing anyone they want as part of the spoils of war.

Was there some other way in which you meant that?

LG, did you not see the poll where they asked people their opinion of Al-Qaeda?

Last time I checked, there was something like 1/3 of the NS forum population would not even go so far as to condemn them. It was pretty telling.

That thread was real? :eek: I thought it was some sort of parody thread. :p

Oh sure. The comments pretty much proved what a lot of accusations were saying about people simply being against the U.S. and/or the West.

I don't believe it was a parody at all. I think it revealed the true beliefs of a lot of people here. No surprise that Obama is so popular here.

Oh sure. The comments pretty much proved what a lot of accusations were saying about people simply being against the U.S. and/or the West.

I don't believe it was a parody at all. I think it revealed the true beliefs of a lot of people here. No surprise that Obama is so popular here.

:confused:

Oh sure. The comments pretty much proved what a lot of accusations were saying about people simply being against the U.S. and/or the West.

I don't believe it was a parody at all. I think it revealed the true beliefs of a lot of people here. No surprise that Obama is so popular here.

Popular? Hah! I'll show you popular: *hops off to make a new poll*

Edit: http://forums.jolt.co.uk/showthread.php?t=549696

:D

:confused:

He's another brilliant Bushevik subscriber to the "0b@m@ iz t3h 3b1l m05l3m" myth.

He's another brilliant Bushevik subscriber to the "0b@m@ iz t3h 3b1l m05l3m" myth.

:rolleyes:

There are still people who believe that?

:rolleyes:

There are still people who believe that?

The power of some people's delusions are strong.

The power of some people's delusions are strong.

lol

I've never understood torture and its supporters. Why should we lower our selves to their level? And torture has been proven to be ineffective anyway. And HSH you are a moron. Please die.

Still it looks like the American Waterboarding Team are on for a gold medal at the Beijing Olympics.

Well, they will probably boycott the Olympics because of China's human rights abuses. ;)

Still it looks like the American Waterboarding Team are on for a gold medal at the Beijing Olympics.

He's another brilliant Bushevik subscriber to the "0b@m@ iz t3h 3b1l m05l3m" myth.Actually, Eric appears to be a tad further right than that crowd...

Realism recognizes that you have to take aspects from all political systems, including the far-right and far-left to run a strong state.

You just see things as right and left, not realistic.

And the whole torture is ineffective is complete nonsense. Those are based on stats from prisoners who lied, who lied without torture too. Anyone that's ever seen anyone beaten up at school to find out who did something can just look at a minor form of how effective torture is. Even if it didn't work, which is does, they should still be allowed to use it.

Realism recognizes that you have to take aspects from all political systems, including the far-right and far-left to run a strong state.

You just see things as right and left, not realistic.

And the whole torture is ineffective is complete nonsense. Those are based on stats from prisoners who lied, who lied without torture too. Anyone that's ever seen anyone beaten up at school to find out who did something can just look at a minor form of how effective torture is. Even if it didn't work, which is does, they should still be allowed to use it.

Goodness, where to start with the fallacies in this...

Realism recognizes that you have to take aspects from all political systems, including the far-right and far-left to run a strong state.
One would have thought that realism has more to do with reality than being some kind of mix of the left and the right.

You just see things as right and left, not realistic.
Does this mean that seeing things as left and right is not being realistic, or that we see things as left and right, but don't see them as realistic?

And the whole torture is ineffective is complete nonsense. Those are based on stats from prisoners who lied, who lied without torture too.
Prove it.
Anyone that's ever seen anyone beaten up at school to find out who did something can just look at a minor form of how effective torture is.
Anecdotal evidence doesn't exactly go a long way towards proving that torture is effective.
Even if it didn't work, which is does, they should still be allowed to use it.

Why?

Even if it didn't work, which is does, they should still be allowed to use it.
Oh, you were kidding.

Realism recognizes that you have to take aspects from all political systems, including the far-right and far-left to run a strong state.

You just see things as right and left, not realistic.

And the whole torture is ineffective is complete nonsense. Those are based on stats from prisoners who lied, who lied without torture too. Anyone that's ever seen anyone beaten up at school to find out who did something can just look at a minor form of how effective torture is. Even if it didn't work, which is does, they should still be allowed to use it.

Man Im glad you know more than experts, people who have been tortured and people who have tortured people. Because, you know, I was about to believe them.


I have to ask, are you for real? Because I have a really hard time believing anyone short of a fundie/radical terrorist is this crazy.

<snip>.

Vaklavia, since you seem to be constitutionally unable to resist flaming despite several short bans, let's try a longer one.

3 week ban, effective immediately.

Man Im glad you know more than experts, people who have been tortured and people who have tortured people. Because, you know, I was about to believe them.


I have to ask, are you for real? Because I have a really hard time believing anyone short of a fundie/radical terrorist is this crazy.

You are talking about the so-called "experts" who the press and leftist websites give attention to. If you really look into the matter, you'd know that there are plenty of people, usually who have served in the field that acknowledge the need and use. Can anyone really argue that waterboarding for example hasn't worked extremely well? They've broken everyone from the top down. And the politicians want to risk all our lives because we have to pretend to be morally superior on this issue.

And yes, I am a realist. You know what most people use to say about Galileo for example? That he was a moron and an idiot for refusing to stop telling the truth about things because others were too blind to accept reality. I can understand him a lot.

You are talking about the so-called "experts" who the press and leftist websites give attention to. If you really look into the matter, you'd know that there are plenty of people, usually who have served in the field that acknowledge the need and use. Can anyone really argue that waterboarding for example hasn't worked extremely well? They've broken everyone from the top down. And the politicians want to risk all our lives because we have to pretend to be morally superior on this issue.


Proof?

And yes, I am a realist. You know what most people use to say about Galileo for example? That he was a moron and an idiot for refusing to stop telling the truth about things because others were too blind to accept reality. I can understand him a lot.

Indeed, you ar just like Galileo, you poor persecuted man you.

You are talking about the so-called "experts" who the press and leftist websites give attention to. If you really look into the matter, you'd know that there are plenty of people, usually who have served in the field that acknowledge the need and use. So the difference between your experts and the "experts of the press" is that no one but you gives them credibility?
Can anyone really argue that waterboarding for example hasn't worked extremely well? They've broken everyone from the top down. And the politicians want to risk all our lives because we have to pretend to be morally superior on this issue. Thank goodness no lives have been lost due to people being pissed off about waterboarding or similar "harsh interrogation methods", particularly not in Madrid or London.
And yes, I am a realist. Source please.
You know what most people use to say about Galileo for example? That he was a moron and an idiot for refusing to stop telling the truth about things because others were too blind to accept reality. I can understand him a lot.I doubt you can understand someone that had to undergo the threat of torture...

That's basic knowledge on the issue.

I'm setting a new signature to answer all these proof claims. I cite proof when I need to, not when I'm giving basic information on something.

And you disagree that Galileo was called an idiot by everyone for refusing to just accept what everyone else thought about things? Sounds like it.

That's basic knowledge on the issue.

I'm setting a new signature to answer all these proof claims. I cite proof when I need to, not when I'm giving basic information on something.

This is your default tactic for when you have no proof. Saying "I have it but I shouldnt have to provide it" is foolish, and I would ike to think you know better. It clearly isnt "basic knowledge".

John McCain sacrifices babies in nightly pagen rituals.
Proof?
Its common sense.

See how foolish that sounds?

And you disagree that Galileo was called an idiot by everyone for refusing to just accept what everyone else thought about things? Sounds like it.


No, Im not refusing to acknowledge that. Im saying no one is putting you under house arrest and threatening to torture or kill you for stating scientific facts. We're demanding proof for your outragous clams, and at least Galileo could provide proof.

See below. A good example.

That's basic knowledge on the issue.

I'm setting a new signature to answer all these proof claims. I cite proof when I need to, not when I'm giving basic information on something.

Wouldn't it be easier to just skip the charade and source it the first time so that no one has to call you for sources?

And you disagree that Galileo was called an idiot by everyone for refusing to just accept what everyone else thought about things? Sounds like it.

No, we disagree that the two of you have anything in common.

You know what most people use to say about Galileo for example?
:D

*waves red-hot poker infront of Eric*

That's basic knowledge on the issue. Dang, you got me there. Can't argue against basic knowldedge, now can I? :rolleyes:
I'm setting a new signature to answer all these proof claims. I cite proof when I need to, not when I'm giving basic information on something.I've got sigs turned off.
And you disagree that Galileo was called an idiot by everyone for refusing to just accept what everyone else thought about things? Sounds like it.Getting called an idiot is hardly a redeeming quality. It occasionally happens to people who don't deserve it, but usually it's the idiots that get called idiots.

You notice how I'm not asking you to provide a bunch of websites and articles to prove that some experts claim waterboarding is ineffective?

Because I've already looked into it and know that they exist and what their argument is.

I expect the same from anyone I have a discussion with. If you don't have the basic willingness to admit that other "experts" disagree and have given evidence that torture works, then there is no reason to debate.

You notice how I'm not asking you to provide a bunch of websites and articles to prove that some experts claim waterboarding is ineffective?

Because I've already looked into it and know that they exist and what their argument is.
If, however, you HADN'T known that already, the perfectly appropriate thing for you to do would have been to ask to be pointed to a source.

I expect the same from anyone I have a discussion with.
Expect that everyone has already heard of your favorite experts? That is not a reasonable assumption.

If you don't have the basic willingness to admit that other "experts" disagree and have given evidence that torture works, then there is no reason to debate.
We would be perfectly to believe that such people exist, if you show us.

Ok, here's one good example:

http://abcnews.go.com/Blotter/story?id=3978231&page=1

And it will likely be the last time I bother.

"From that day on, he answered every question," Kiriakou said. "The threat information he provided disrupted a number of attacks, maybe dozens of attacks."

Yeah, this Senate ban is great for America.

So Dalaam because he says they are doing well, waterboarding should be off the options? Don't think so.

And I have read past page 1 and this isn't where I get my information from, I just needed an example quickly.

I guess I was wrong, I just assumed a lot of my critics here were informed, but it seems most are just ignorant. Well, not that I'm surprised. I guess I need to stop giving people the benefit of the doubt. This shouldn't be the first time they are reading the other side. I just assume people have knowledge about something before they join a discussion. Well I guess it's my fault really for assuming that.

Ok, here's one good example:

http://abcnews.go.com/Blotter/story?id=3978231&page=1

And it will likely be the last time I bother.

"From that day on, he answered every question," Kiriakou said. "The threat information he provided disrupted a number of attacks, maybe dozens of attacks."

Yeah, this Senate ban is great for America.

Maybe you should read past page 1.

"At the time, I felt that waterboarding was something that we needed to do. And as time has passed, and as September 11th has, you know, has moved farther and farther back into history, I think I've changed my mind," he told ABC News.

Part of his decision appears to be an ethical one; another part, perhaps, simply pragmatic.

"I think we're chasing them all over the world. I think we've had a great deal of success chasing them...and, as a result, waterboarding, at least right now, is unnecessary," Kirikou said.

Or:
" "That's why so few people were waterboarded. I think the agency has said that two people were waterboarded, Abu Zubaydah being one, and it's because you really wanted it to be a last resort because we didn't want these false confessions. We didn't want wild goose chases," Kiriakou said. "
He recognizes that torture usually produces just false confessions, but does not say why he thinks the info Zubaydah gave wasn't false also (to be fair, he may easily be privy to info we are not).

So what I'm wondering is: how come we've gone on for pages already, and nobody has made a lame joke about the thread title's reference to "warterboarding"? Is that hitting you with a stick that makes you break out into warts, or what?

That stinks. I support waterboarding. It was the only way to get information out of these blood-thirsty terrorist who just want to kill us. When we tortured the master-mind of 9/11 we got cruicial information that saved America from another attack. Do not say there is any other way to deal with these people. Not in the world we live in today. People need to be realistic about these things. These people want to KILL US. They want to kill YOU AND YOUR FAMILY. They do not care who the hell you are.

For thosee saying you get misinformation from torture: The people who do the waterboarding are experts. They know if the person being tortured is lieing, just so they can stop.

I hope bush vetos it.
I'm sure he will :)
Too bad Congress won't get the mojority they need to override =D

That stinks. I support waterboarding. It was the only way to get information out of these blood-thirsty terrorist who just want to kill us. When we tortured the master-mind of 9/11 we got cruicial information that saved America from another attack. Do not say there is any other way to deal with these people. Not in the world we live in today. People need to be realistic about these things. These people want to KILL US. They want to kill YOU AND YOUR FAMILY. They do not care who the hell you are.

For thosee saying you get misinformation from torture: The people who do the waterboarding are experts. They know if the person being tortured is lieing, just so they can stop.

I hope bush vetos it.
I'm sure he will :)
Too bad Congress won't get the mojority they need to override =D

You're wrong.

You're wrong.

You can't just say I'm wrong without proof.

Am I wrong that Terrorists want to kill you and your family? Definantly not.
Am I wrong that the Master-Mind of 9/11 gave crucial info to the U.S? No. Look it up if you want.
Am I wrong that experts are the ones that torture these people? No because only experts get information out of Terrorists in Guantanomo.
Am I wrong that Bush's veto will not be overturned? None of his other vetos have, thank god.

When we tortured the master-mind of 9/11 we got cruicial information that saved America from another attack. Do not say there is any other way to deal with these people. Not in the world we live in today. People need to be realistic about these things. These people want to KILL US. They want to kill YOU AND YOUR FAMILY. They do not care who the hell you are.

For thosee saying you get misinformation from torture: The people who do the waterboarding are experts. They know if the person being tortured is lieing, just so they can stop.





Prove anything you just said, because facts disagree.

EDIT: So, the guy says it worked once, but he also said it usually doesnt. Everything that shouldnt work woks every once in a while.

Prove anything you just said, because facts disagree.

EDIT: So, the guy says it worked once, but he also said it usually doesnt. Everything that shouldnt work woks every once in a while.

I really do not need to prove that terrorist want to kill us....

Here's proof that he confessed:

WASHINGTON (AP) - Khalid Sheikh Mohammed, the suspected mastermind of the Sept. 11 attacks, confessed to that attack and a chilling string of other terror plots during a military hearing at Guantanamo Bay, Cuba, according to a transcript released Wednesday by the Pentagon.

^^That was copied from an article from the AP. The article explains that he was tortured...

Okay. I'm going to advance an argument against torture on two fronts. One philosophical or moral, and one practical. Hopefully at least one of these will make you think.

First off, let us examine the practical aspects of torture. We capture somebody, who may or may not be a terrorist. They are then interrogated. They refuse to give information, or possibly deny any guilt. As a result, we then torture them. Now, what happens if they were actually innocent? We have now needlessly harmed an innocent person, who was in no way able to provide us with the information we sought. That in itself is a major argument against torture, and is much the same as a common argument against the death penalty.

However, the point doesn't stop there. Presuming we do in fact have a terrorist captured, we cannot guarantee that information provided under torture is accurate. The reason is fairly simple - those who are being tortured want to stop being tortured. Co-operating with your torturers and saying what they want is an excellent way to do this. Therefore, we must find other sources of information to corroborate this information. However, if we can do this, why have we not been focusing on this so far, instead of wasting time and resources getting unreliable information? It follows that torture is not an effective method of gathering information, and more traditional intelligence work is superior.

Morally speaking, of course, torture is also exceedingly dubious. What right do any group of humans have to inflict physical or psychological damage on a possibly innocent other human, for the sole purpose of gaining information? Also, what authority can claim the legitimacy and moral standing necessary to authorise the use of torture on its opponents, and how can they retain that moral standing after descending to the level of torture? Of course, we must also think what message the use of torture will send. It dehumanises our society, and tells our opponents that we will stoop to any means to take them out. Therefore, it helps recruit more to the cause of the enemy, and helps legitimise their campaign in the eyes of their warriors.

If we profess to believe in the fundamental rights of man, then we cannot take such a callous, cruel position. It has no direct practical benefits that cannot be achieved through other methods, and brings us down to the level of our adversaries or even below. Its employment is a moral nightmare, a destruction of the standing and claims to legitimacy of our government, and a powerful recruiting tool for our enemies. Hence, it should not be employed.

(Note. I'm an anarchist, and therefore believe that no government has any sort of moral legitimacy anyway. But that's an argument for another day.)

"So, the guy says it worked once, but he also said it usually doesnt. Everything that shouldnt work woks every once in a while."

=================================

Actually, yes, it does work. If it didnt we wouldn't be using it, now would we :)? Do you see any 9/11 repeats yet? I don't, maybe because we get crucial information from these sick people?


Anyway, I gotta go. I hope people realize the need for waterboarding because without it, they might very well be dead right now...

Okay. I'm going to advance an argument against torture on two fronts. One philosophical or moral, and one practical. Hopefully at least one of these will make you think.

First off, let us examine the practical aspects of torture. We capture somebody, who may or may not be a terrorist. They are then interrogated. They refuse to give information, or possibly deny any guilt. As a result, we then torture them. Now, what happens if they were actually innocent? We have now needlessly harmed an innocent person, who was in no way able to provide us with the information we sought. That in itself is a major argument against torture, and is much the same as a common argument against the death penalty.

However, the point doesn't stop there. Presuming we do in fact have a terrorist captured, we cannot guarantee that information provided under torture is accurate. The reason is fairly simple - those who are being tortured want to stop being tortured. Co-operating with your torturers and saying what they want is an excellent way to do this. Therefore, we must find other sources of information to corroborate this information. However, if we can do this, why have we not been focusing on this so far, instead of wasting time and resources getting unreliable information? It follows that torture is not an effective method of gathering information, and more traditional intelligence work is superior.

Morally speaking, of course, torture is also exceedingly dubious. What right do any group of humans have to inflict physical or psychological damage on a possibly innocent other human, for the sole purpose of gaining information? Also, what authority can claim the legitimacy and moral standing necessary to authorise the use of torture on its opponents, and how can they retain that moral standing after descending to the level of torture? Of course, we must also think what message the use of torture will send. It dehumanises our society, and tells our opponents that we will stoop to any means to take them out. Therefore, it helps recruit more to the cause of the enemy, and helps legitimise their campaign in the eyes of their warriors.

If we profess to believe in the fundamental rights of man, then we cannot take such a callous, cruel position. It has no direct practical benefits that cannot be achieved through other methods, and brings us down to the level of our adversaries or even below. Its employment is a moral nightmare, a destruction of the standing and claims to legitimacy of our government, and a powerful recruiting tool for our enemies. Hence, it should not be employed.

(Note. I'm an anarchist, and therefore believe that no government has any sort of moral legitimacy anyway. But that's an argument for another day.)

This.

You can't just say I'm wrong without proof.

Am I wrong that Terrorists want to kill you and your family? Definantly not.
Am I wrong that the Master-Mind of 9/11 gave crucial info to the U.S? No. Look it up if you want.
Am I wrong that experts are the ones that torture these people? No because only experts get information out of Terrorists in Guantanomo.
Am I wrong that Bush's veto will not be overturned? None of his other vetos have, thank god.

You're wrong that torture works. It doesn't. And it's YOU the one who has to prove it works.

"So, the guy says it worked once, but he also said it usually doesnt. Everything that shouldnt work woks every once in a while."

=================================

Actually, yes, it does work. If it didnt we wouldn't be using it, now would we :)? Do you see any 9/11 repeats yet? I don't, maybe because we get crucial information from these sick people?


Anyway, I gotta go. I hope people realize the need for waterboarding because without it, they might very well be dead right now...

Look, let's just have a look at the facts, shall we?

FACT: The last major terrorist attack on US soil was 9/11

There seem to be two possible reasons for this:

EXPLANATION ONE: The US security measures, including torture, have been effective.
EXPLANATION TWO: There is no serious terrorist threat to the US.

Are we agreed here? If you want, you can, of course, suggest a new explanation, and I'll consider it. However, proceeding from these for now.

FACT: The US security measures are a demonstratable farce.

For instance, see Schneier on security, and his comments on the TSA and similar. Therefore, we cannot reasonably conclude that the security measures have been effective. Following from this, we can deduce that

THEORY: There is no major terrorist threat to the US.

Now, you obviously disagree with me, so if you could please point out the errors in my logic, I'd be quite happy to correct it.

Edit: Incidentally, I forgot to mention your wonderful circular logic. It works, because we wouldn't be using it otherwise! And we're using it because it works! Good grief people, learn some basic methods of arguing a point non-recursively.

Look, let's just have a look at the facts, shall we?

FACT: The last major terrorist attack on US soil was 9/11

And first.







Yes I know there have been terrorist attacks prior to 9/11, however none of them that I am aware of were of similar magnitude.

Look, let's just have a look at the facts, shall we?

FACT: The last major terrorist attack on US soil was 9/11

There seem to be two possible reasons for this:

EXPLANATION ONE: The US security measures, including torture, have been effective.
EXPLANATION TWO: There is no serious terrorist threat to the US.

Are we agreed here? If you want, you can, of course, suggest a new explanation, and I'll consider it. However, proceeding from these for now.

FACT: The US security measures are a demonstratable farce.

For instance, see Schneier on security, and his comments on the TSA and similar. Therefore, we cannot reasonably conclude that the security measures have been effective. Following from this, we can deduce that

THEORY: There is no major terrorist threat to the US.

Now, you obviously disagree with me, so if you could please point out the errors in my logic, I'd be quite happy to correct it.


New reason:

The terrorists have already accomplished all they needed to.

Our sheep like populace live in fear, we actually pay attention to Christian fundies, and our reputation has been utterly destroyed world wide.

"So, the guy says it worked once, but he also said it usually doesnt. Everything that shouldnt work woks every once in a while."

=================================

Actually, yes, it does work. If it didnt we wouldn't be using it, now would we :)? Do you see any 9/11 repeats yet? I don't, maybe because we get crucial information from these sick people?


Anyway, I gotta go. I hope people realize the need for waterboarding because without it, they might very well be dead right now...

Or maybe because the terrorists dont need to come over here to kill us, and theyve already won since we've abandoned our morals and integruity? Our constitution is consitantly violeted by our idiot president, and the world hates us.


Id say they already accomplished their goals.

An aside:


Anyone who supports torture forfits the right to be angry when we see terrorist beheading or brutalizing Americans they capture.

This.

Why thank you.

And first.

Yes I know there have been terrorist attacks prior to 9/11, however none of them that I am aware of were of similar magnitude.

Very good point. One piece of data does not give us any information about possible future trends.

New reason:

The terrorists have already accomplished all they needed to.

Our sheep like populace live in fear, we actually pay attention to Christian fundies, and our reputation has been utterly destroyed world wide.

Hm, yes. In which case, I feel, we could hypothesise that there is no major threat, as the main aims which were being sought are already finished.

An aside:

Anyone who supports torture forfits the right to be angry when we see terrorist beheading or brutalizing Americans they capture.

But of course.

I really do not need to prove that terrorist want to kill us....

Here's proof that he confessed:

WASHINGTON (AP) - Khalid Sheikh Mohammed, the suspected mastermind of the Sept. 11 attacks, confessed to that attack and a chilling string of other terror plots during a military hearing at Guantanamo Bay, Cuba, according to a transcript released Wednesday by the Pentagon.

^^That was copied from an article from the AP. The article explains that he was tortured...
That is not actually proof that anything he "confessed" to was true. We all know that torturing people can make them "confess" to things: numerous women confessed to flying on broomsticks, back in the day. The government does not, apparently, have any evidence that it sees fit to make public, for which there could be various good reasons, or not.

I really do not need to prove that terrorist want to kill us....

Here's proof that he confessed:

WASHINGTON (AP) - Khalid Sheikh Mohammed, the suspected mastermind of the Sept. 11 attacks, confessed to that attack and a chilling string of other terror plots during a military hearing at Guantanamo Bay, Cuba, according to a transcript released Wednesday by the Pentagon.

^^That was copied from an article from the AP. The article explains that he was tortured...

Torture someone for long enough and they'll confess to having murdered the crew of the Marie Celeste, given Hitler the idea for the Final Solution and stolen fire from the gods if they think it'll make you stop...

Ah yes, the Democratic Senate continues a tradition of Democratic Senates of reducing the effectiveness of the CIA... I doubt any of you remember the Frank Church committee or the awful results of his reforms. Those 'reforms' stripped the CIA of its ability to use 'unscrupulous' sources, among other things.
Congress doesn't need to meddle in the business of intelligence agencies.

That being said, torture rarely gets the desired results. At least that was the opinion of most Marine Intelligence officers I knew. I suspect the CIA knows that, too.

Plus waterboarding sucks. I experienced it during SERE school, when I was sure they wouldn't kill me. At least until that point...

An aside:


Anyone who supports torture forfits the right to be angry when we see terrorist beheading or brutalizing Americans they capture.

Correct. The US government executed Japanese officers who'd used waterboarding as war-criminals after World War 2.

An aside:


Anyone who supports torture forfits the right to be angry when we see terrorist beheading or brutalizing Americans they capture.

No! It's not OK if they do it, they're the bad guys remember?

That stinks. I support waterboarding. It was the only way to get information out of these blood-thirsty terrorist who just want to kill us. When we tortured the master-mind of 9/11 we got cruicial information that saved America from another attack. Do not say there is any other way to deal with these people. Not in the world we live in today. People need to be realistic about these things. These people want to KILL US. They want to kill YOU AND YOUR FAMILY. They do not care who the hell you are.

1) "A man who has nothing which he is willing to fight for, nothing which he cares more about than he does about his personal safety, is a miserable creature who has no chance of being free, unless made and kept so by the exertions of better men than himself."
--John Stuart Mill, "The Contest in America"

There is a greater principle at stake than whether or not you are killed by terrorists, and that is whether or not the system by which we all agree to live, the Constitution of the United States, is upheld. I do not see any way to reconcile your statement with this statement:

"No person shall be held to answer for a capital, or otherwise infamous crime, unless on a presentment or indictment of a grand jury, except in cases arising in the land or naval forces, or in the militia, when in actual service in time of war or public danger; nor shall any person be subject for the same offense to be twice put in jeopardy of life or limb; nor shall be compelled in any criminal case to be a witness against himself, nor be deprived of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law. . ."

which serves as the bulk of Amendment V to the Constitution. Insofar as your statement and the Fifth Amendment are incompatible, your statement is incompatible with the greater principle of protecting and defending the Constitution, which is our greatest civic responsibility. It matters more than your life. It matters more than my life. If it is abridged, then though you retain your life you lose your freedom; which ought to be of more value to you?

2) How do you know we got valuable information from the terrorists? Because the guys who tortured them said so? This administration was also the one that said we do not torture. They said that they do not wiretap. They said that they protect and defend the Constitution. All of which are demonstrably untrue. I'd say that if you are going to appeal to an authority, it works better if the authority is recognized as such by all sane persons.


For thosee saying you get misinformation from torture: The people who do the waterboarding are experts. They know if the person being tortured is lieing, just so they can stop.


Wait a minute. This goes squarely against what we actually saw and heard from the administration about Abu Ghraib; you know, the bad apples like Lynndie England (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lynndie_England) are the ones doing the torturing. If "trailer trash" like Lynndie are the people who are being convicted of torture, and Lynndie clearly has no training to carefully determine truth from falsehood, then again, how can you make an appeal to expertise that these people somehow "know" which statements are lies and which are truths? Put simply, you can't.

Ah yes, the Democratic Senate continues a tradition of Democratic Senates of reducing the effectiveness of the CIA... I doubt any of you remember the Frank Church committee or the awful results of his reforms. Those 'reforms' stripped the CIA of its ability to use 'unscrupulous' sources, among other things.
Congress doesn't need to meddle in the business of intelligence agencies.

Someone's got to.

Realism recognizes that you have to take aspects from all political systems, including the far-right and far-left to run a strong state.
No, that's fascism.