Nah, I just enjoy arguing. You should try starting an argument when you're bored.

I rest my case

The liberal way to deal with terrorism: Ask them very nicely and if they say no than just let them go because doing anything else would be too cruel. Doesn't matter how many people they've murdered, we have to think about civil rights here.

Also in response to a comment a few posts up,It's sad when a good debate degrades into, "You're just a troll lol"

Edited 1/9/2015 15:06:20

It's not a good debate, he's literally just admitted to trolling for the sake of boredom. I would love to see Skourby's side of the torture argument after some mild torture. Anyone who goes through it knows that it's horrible, and you will admit to damn near anything just to make it stop.

>But muh confession

No, most of the information is useless if you get it by torturing. This isn't the movies, you're not Bryan Mills from Taken. I know that if someone tried to make me feel like I was drowning I would admit to being a f***ing child rapist to make it stop

I'll admit that torture does not always work 100%, but sometimes useful information is obtained. Plus, it sure as heck is better than doing nothing. If someone develops a better method of getting info out of terrorists I'm all for it.

But in the meantime I have no qualms if the C.I.A tortures some jihadist that was caught setting off a car bomb.

and what comes next, Eklipse? stone adulterers or cut off hands for stealing? Most of the time you cant even be sure that your accusations are accurate. At least there will be no difference between you and the terrorists, except that the US has provoked the conflict.

I have no qualms if the C.I.A tortures some jihadist

I have qualms with all the things this dilettantes club is doing.

Your comparison is flawed, Ranek. Adultery and stealing =/= Terrorism. The punishment for a crime should match severity. I think terrorism and murder is enough to justify torture if it's for the purpose of catching other terrorists and stopping further deaths. Nobody deserves to die in a terrorist attack because we were too nice to do what had to be done.

I like how you use the term "you" as if I'm a C.I.A agent or something. There's a huge difference between the U.S and terrorists, the U.S does not intentionally slaughter civilians to try and convert the world to another religion. The U.S didn't provoke anything, the entire war on terror would of never happened if the jihadists had kept their extremism to themselves.

Nice anti-U.S bias by the way. It's very subtle.

Your comparison is flawed

It hasnt been a comparison, rather than a possible causal connection. That should have illustrate how close YOUR thoughts are minded to terrorism, in my opinion! What else could torture be than terror? You think it is good for gathering informations? It's only good for terror and fear!

the U.S does not intentionally slaughter civilians to try and convert the world to another religion.

This statement is dumb for many reasons. First of all the conflict is not about religion. Second the US has slaughtered countless civilians and at this point there is no need for an explanation anymore.

Nice anti-U.S bias by the way.

Well deserved by the way.

See here's the thing. Terrorists target civilians, the U.S is targeting terrorists.

Also, to say that religion doesn't play a role with terrorism is ignorant in so many ways. Terrorists are extremist Muslims bent on using terror and force to convert the world to Islam. They do not care how many innocent people they slaughter. Yes, the U.S has killed some civilians by accident, but it's nothing compared to how many civilians terrorists have killed intentionally.

Perhaps your blind hate for the U.S is clouding your perception on this matter.

Blind hate has to come from somewhere.

Terrorists target anybody American they can find,
US targets anybody Middle Eastern they can find and get away with (That's why Saudi Arabia and Turkey is untouched).

Terrorists target civilians, the U.S is targeting terrorists.

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

---

Also, to say that religion doesn't play a role with terrorism is ignorant in so many ways.

It does play a part, but that's not what Ranek means. It's a war for oil and we'll use any excuse to keep drilling.

---

Yes, the U.S has killed some civilians by accident

See first comment

---

Perhaps your blind hate for the U.S is clouding your perception on this matter.

I am American, and I wholeheartedly agree with Ranek's point of view.

See here's the thing. Terrorists target civilians, the U.S is targeting terrorists.

During the last 10 years, US killed 710 civillians in Pakistan with drone strikes, including 175 children. In Pakistan, an allied nation ...

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=K4NRJoCNHIs

http://drones.pitchinteractive.com/

How many american children have been killed by pakistan during the last ten years?
And to be fair; when Terrorists target civilians, the US are leaded by a bunch of terrorists as well!

Also, to say that religion doesn't play a role with terrorism is ignorant in so many ways.

Indeed, I havent mentioned something like that! Although, I would rather say that terrorism arises from despair, disequilibrium in forces, political propaganda and lack of humanity, which could easily be a result from a psychic trauma. But if you want to argue that religion is related to politics, I would agree.

Perhaps your blind hate for the U.S is clouding your perception on this matter.

Im sorry mate, but your polemics just proof your inferior argumentation!

Im sorry mate, but your polemics just proof your inferior argumentation!

Heh

I am no a troll. You are the troll here Lawlz. I am defending an opinion, and all of us are enjoying this argument and you ruin it for everybody.

Edited 1/9/2015 21:51:29

And good job Ranek. You almost got it

I am no troll

I enjoy arguing because I'm bored

You also give arguments with no facts, putting them on par with an opinion, whereas I have given multiple sources proving bigger parts of my defenses. You are either a troll or very stupid.

I edited out my comment, because I said the same thing as you, basically.

Utterly pointless comment, why don't you actually do some research and pick a side on torture instead of this 6th grade humor you seem to love so much.

Lawlz posts stuff.
Lawlz makes comments.
Trolls make comments.
The fact that Lawlz makes comments and trolls make comments show a similarity between the two, although the simularity has a weak link and is very much circumstantial.
To troll is to upset other people.
Lawlz upsets other people.
A lot of people hate trolls.
A lot of people hate lawlz.
Trolling causes arguments.
Arguements sometimes cause excessive arguments, usually further pushed to activation by extensive trolling.
I like pie and so should you.
Lawlz causes arguments.
Proof of this is that Lawlz started a brief argument about who the troll is: SKOURBSTER OR HIM???
Trolls have a bad reputation.
-No Comment here-
SKOURBY LIKES PIES TOO
Lawlz acts like a troll so therefore there is a great amount of reason that Lawlz is a troll.
A person who acts like a troll is generally referred to as a troll by the general community.
Lawlz is referred to as a troll.
If variables xyz subtracted by the ninth power of negative five thousand is divided by the ninty first power of zero, the calculator will crash.
Lawlz is a troll.
TROLL CONFIRMED.
YOU HAVE BEEN WARNED.
CONSIDER YOURSELF BLESSED AND GO BUY YOURSELF AN ICE CREAM... XD

+1. First time I enjoyed a comment from Semicedevine. :)

instead of this 6th grade humor you seem to love so much

@Lawlz: Hypocrite much?

Edited 1/10/2015 09:36:34

"At least this cartoonist doesn't have to worry about Americans breaking in and murdering him/her for the criticism." The gunmen werent killing because they were scared of criticism. Drawing mohammed is like taking a dump on a grave, its not critical. They felt bullied and victimised, they felt like their cultral heritage had been deeply disrespected for decades, and they were very bitter about it. Then the cartoonists did something offensive and unwarranted (in the gunmens eyes) and they lashed out. Do you understand why they did what they did?

There is no american charlie hebdo. American culture is so oppressive and controlling that something as anti-authoritarian as charlie hebdo couldnt exist there. almost all american satirists are lobotomised way before there is any risk of them doing something genuinely conscientious or revolutionary. American culture may judge islamic states for being less free and tolerant but theyre both way way behind the french. It was the french cultures' attitude of freedom of thought that allowed the gunmen to consider doing what they did. It is ridiculous for american culture to criticise the muslim gunmen for being oppressive. They were free and were permitted the privacy to come to an unorthodox conclusion that they genuinely believed was right.

Edited 1/10/2015 10:20:49