Good news

Originally posted by SMSBear716
Which ever means are required. Since if the roles were reversed, I'm sure Islamic extremists would use whatever worked to extract information.

In advance, forgive me for steering off topic.

This seems to remind me a great deal of the debates on the death penalty...

If we use the same torture methods used by said extremists, what separates us from them?

Originally posted by Alcibiades
But is that not the way the poor deluded fool in question wanted to go?

Yes indeed it is! So the moron got what he asked for. That sounds like a 'win win' situation to me! Excellent result all round.

Originally posted by treetalk
If Allah is a 'bogyman', is the christian God a 'bogyman', also? The carpenter Jesus?

Nope. Jesus was a carpenter, whereas that other geezer was a caravan robber, paedophile, murderer and all-round terrorist. Quite a difference wouldn't you say?

Originally posted by SpastiGov
Nope. Jesus was a carpenter, whereas that other geezer was a caravan robber, paedophile, murderer and all-round terrorist. Quite a difference wouldn't you say?

Have you tried getting a quote for a loft conversion lately ??

Originally posted by huckleberryhound
Have you tried getting a quote for a loft conversion lately ??

Nope. Should I? I'm pointing out the difference between the two you wally.

What's a loft conversion anyway?

Originally posted by wittywonka
In advance, forgive me for steering off topic.

This seems to remind me a great deal of the debates on the death penalty...

If we use the same torture methods used by said extremists, what separates us from them?

Thats a good question, but in war, and this is a war. Actually some have described it as a clash of cultures for supremacy ... I tend to agree with that somewhat. If my enemy is going to use all tactics to carry forth his beliefs, aren't I a fool to say to say we won't do this and we won't do that. Its not gentleman's thing to do. A prime example from the past would be that the politicians never let American troops enter North Vietnam in force to defeat the enemy. How do you win a struggle by tying your hands behind your back?

Originally posted by SMSBear716
That's a good question, but...this is a war...politicians never let American troops enter North Vietnam in force to defeat the enemy. How do you win a struggle by tying your hands behind your back?

I understand your logic about "fighting a war without a weapon," so to speak, but there is a stark difference in an actual military battle (or war) and legalized torture of an unarmed person.

When only looking at said torture methods to obtain intel, I still cannot support "torture by any means necessary" because, again, the defining line between us and the enemy fades deeply.

Originally posted by wittywonka
I understand your logic about "fighting a war without a weapon," so to speak, but there is a stark difference in an actual military battle (or war) and legalized torture of an unarmed person.

When only looking at said torture methods to obtain intel, I still cannot support "torture by any means necessary" because, again, the defining line between us and the enemy fades deeply.

You're absolutely right. We should be better than the enemy. We should not torture just because they do, and therefore we should not shoot back when they shoot at us. You should wake up and realize what an arm pit this world really is.

Originally posted by smw6869
You're absolutely right. We should be better than the enemy. We should not torture just because they do, and therefore we should not shoot back when they shoot at us. You should wake up and realize what an arm pit this world really is.

Did you actually comprehend the intent of my post?

"...there is a stark difference in an actual military battle (or war) and legalized torture of an unarmed person."

Originally posted by wittywonka
Did you actually comprehend the intent of my post?

[b]"...there is a stark difference in an actual military battle (or war) and legalized torture of an unarmed person."[/b]

You can actually make that distinction?

Originally posted by treetalk
If Allah is a 'bogyman', is the christian God a 'bogyman', also? The carpenter Jesus?

The Hebrew god of the OT is the paradigm on which Mohammed based his bogeyman, Allah, with enhanced nasty vindictive ways.
Jesus preached an entirely different message but unfortunately only the early Christian gnostics separated it out from the fire and brimstone of the OT; accepting the former and repudiating the latter.

Originally posted by Alcibiades
The Hebrew god of the OT is the paradigm on which Mohammed based his bogeyman, Allah, with enhanced nasty vindictive ways.
Jesus preached an entirely different message but unfortunately only the early Christian gnostics separated it out from the fire and brimstone of the OT; accepting the former and repudiating the latter.

Which version is the rabid pursuit of money, greed, indifference to the poor and suffering, etc etc that typifies so many people in America (and other 'christian' nations) based on?

Originally posted by Alcibiades
It is reported that Kaleef Ahmed, who had hoped to kill a great number of UK citizens by blowing himself up to the even greater glory of 'Allah', has died of the burns he received in his abortive attempt at Glasgow airport , thus relieving us of the expense of keeping him in custody for umpteen years.

Good!

Originally posted by Alcibiades
Really? But that is the way the poor deluded fool wanted to go except that he did not succeed in killing any others in the process.
What does that tell you about 'Islam'?

This is true, except that maybe he was tricked into doing the bombing. Search for Ahmed Abdullah.