Should civilized nations use "Enhanced Interrogation" techni

[Kevin]

I was just pointing at torturing, not about the Iraq war. Liberal or conservative doesn't make a difference. Torturing does. If you fight against barbarism, don't use torture because nobody takes you serious.

I've also stated that I'm against torture in this thread. I've stated elsewhere that I don't think going into Iraq was the right call either. The focus should have stayed on Afghanistan and a few other places. I'm willing to admit that there is a possibility that going into Iraq may actually end up doing some good, but I didn't like that method either.

I'm not happy with how we treat the Saudi's because was want their oil so bad either. Dealing with the crap going on in that country would help stop terrorism better than a lot of other methods.

You should realize how big consequences such small things can have. So instead of torturing somebody hoping to find number 635 on the list of most wanted terrorists (or just for getting a nice picture) maybe they should have thought about all that was lost when they started doing it.

Do you think I don't? Everything the US does has huge consequences, that was part of my point. It's hard for this country to "win" in foreign opinion, because every thing we do is put under a microscope. Other countries don't get treated in the same way by the rest of the world. I also don't think we've created more terrorist by torturing. I'm with Kan on this one. Most of those people are being influenced by other arguments. The reputation hit with other countries is real, but I also believe that we would have gotten that hit for something else.

As mentioned we send aid somewhere we take a foreign relations hit for sending the wrong aid or not enough or because someone doesn't like that country.

And there is a lot of stuff that gets positive foreign support that we do too. But if I were in charge my version of correct would likely be as criticized as all our other leaders. And of course I understand that some leaders make us look better than others, but our leadership changes relatively frequently. Congress and the President are rarely the same party at the same time and we tend to flip them around a lot. Eh whatever.

And about your last remark? Well maybe you should try and look at things from different perspectives sometimes. Or do you also believe that now Obama is looking at getting better relations with Cuba the chances of Cuba (with their massive Army) invading Florida have increased dramatically?:)

I've said I was for the steps that have been taken to lift the embargo. Cuba has made changes in policies recently and we are responding to those changes. This is good.

I've never thought Cuba was going to invade the US. But you're joke about the army is also uninformed as Cuba had the 3rd largest army in the Western Hemisphere for quite some time behind only the US and Brazil and it was very well trained. All the funds that Castro got from other sources while the US and much of the rest of the Americas were enforcing the embargo was funneled to the military. Cuba was very active in conflicts in Africa and successful in many as well because the military wasn't a joke. But that's not really central to the argument.

Part of the tone of my post was to see what assumptions you would make about me as well and yep you assumed many things that were not right as well.