Quote from Albieg :

And by answering to your Nth, pathetic attempt of steering something you don't like into irrilevance I accept the responsibility of steering a thread that may interest someone else off-topic, thus breaking once again the rules of the forum.

I didn't think there was a rule against off-topic posts. Although, there is a rule against calling someone an idiot:

Quote :

1) When I post a message on this forum, I will do my very best to write in a polite manner and not use foul language and / or insult an individual or group of people.

I accept it. I already said it. I'm starting to think you have a certain inability in reading, although you can write.

Quote from Albieg :

I'm starting to think you have a certain inability in reading, although you can write.

At least I can do something correctly. Except form an opinion, of which is apparently incorrect.

Quote from wheel4hummer :

Well... what about Adolf Hitler? During the Holocaust, don't you think he would have deserved to be tortured?

Well, there isn't a way to answer that without coming across as an antisemitic bastard. People should let the past go, live in the presence.

I can't accept killing or harming other people or double standards. As punishment method its savage, and as interrogation it doesn't work, because you are forced with violence and if you don't want to end up dead, they can make you admit guilty to anything.

Quote from Blackout :

I can't accept killing or harming other people or double standards.

Do you disagree with a country having a military?

Quote from IReallyHateBureaucracy :

I've never really seen how torture works.

Torture doesn't work. Although the protocols for interrogations have been developed with the help of APA members they have discovered that those methods are counterproductive, and shaming their name. So they're trying to back off with the minimal damage possible.

This is, in no way, an ideal fight. This is about the practical implications of a method which is tremendously error prone, and at the same time morally reproachable.

It's my opinion, however, that this happens - also - because the ship is sinking, and anyone who was willing to have part in a victory is unwilling to share the burden of defeat. In other words, if things were perceived as good by the general public, the ethical problem would simply go away for the majority of people. After all, victory is the only reason for which you're willing to fight a war. If victory is impossible you surrender and try to negotiate the best possible conditions, or you seek a honourable death.

Quote from wheel4hummer :

Do you disagree with a country having a military?

Quote from wheel4hummer :

I'm not talking about the death penalty. I am talking about punishing people by killing them. That is what the military does, isn't it?

If this is your idea of military, I disagree because it's a stupid idea. Refer to the original thread for more information.

Edit: and by the way, changing or deleting your signature after my post has been a wise idea. Only time will tell if you did it because you want to delete your footsteps, because you want to do something nastier or, as I hope, because you understood what I wrote.

Don't hold your breath.

Quote from Hankstar :

Don't hold your breath.

As we say - a bit harshly - in Italy, Those who lived hoping died shitting. Luckily I'm practical enough to survive my deluded hopes, at least to this day

Quote from Blackout :

Well, there isn't a way to answer that without coming across as an antisemitic bastard.

Is it really antisemitic to not want to see Hitler tortured? Is it really antisemitic to not want to go down the road of "he tortured jews, so he deserved to be tortured himself"? I'm not willing to stoop to his level by playing his game.

Quote from wien :

Is it really antisemitic to not want to see Hitler tortured? Is it really antisemitic to not want to go down the road of "he tortured jews, so he deserved to be tortured himself"? I'm not willing to stoop to his level by playing his game.

Good. One of the things that separates a man from his enemy is his unwillingness to play by his enemy's rules. Unfortunately, by going down the torture/secret imprisonment/imprisonment without trial route (among many, many other things), the US is in danger of becoming its own worst enemy. It's decided, arbitrarily, that so-called "enemy combatants" aren't protected by the Geneva Conventions or the Magna Carta, so what's to stop America's enemies treating US captives just as harshly? Why can't other countries simply elect to opt out of long-standing international agreements on the treatment of POWs and start electrocuting & beating people?

Quote from Albieg :

As we say - a bit harshly - in Italy, Those who lived hoping died shitting.

That must be the famous Italian subtlety I've heard about

the obvious engineers answer to that is ... since when are psychologists considered to be intelligent ?

They're no damn fun either - when was the last time a bunch of psych students suspended a lecturer's Mini underneath a university footbridge?

This stuff curiously reminds me of a psychiatrist, a Colonel who was in charge of the psychiatric section of the military hospital in my town. He's a specialist in emergencies and he's extremely interested in deviant human behaviour. So - not so ironically - he chose the military (I guess his penchant for women didn't allow him to join the Church instead). He said this was a sort of mission, for him. He believed much more in psychotherapy than in psychiatry. He had a rather contorted sense of duty, however. A friend of mine told me something about him. He was told by his doctor, who was also in the military.

Eventually, when I met this psychiatrist again I asked him, almost abruptly: "Have you ever dressed like a priest?"
He was delighted to answer. "Of course! I really like it! Some nuns even wanted me to celebrate Mass, but I declined. I said I had to go."

One of the nicest persons I've met in my life. And an excellent officer too (no pun intended).