Hypothetical question about interrogation......

[Joanne98]

A terrorist is being interrogated to see what he knows about a ticking time bomb that intel has found out is buried somewhere in the Dallas Texas. They have only 12 hours to find out where it is..

The interrogators have tried everything...Waterboarding, sleep deprivation, beatings and even hanging him up by his arms for days. Nothing is working...

The terrorist finally gives them a deal.

He will tell them where the bomb is ONLY if he can have sex with one of the male interrogators.

He also wants the sex act filmed and put on Google.

What would the right say about this?

Would this be unethical? Would it be wrong? Would it be immoral? Would it violate the "Don't ask, don't tell" policy?

Let's make it even worse and say the interrogator he picked is a devout Christian.

What would the right say about this?

[FiveGoodMen]

1. That's a very interesting question!

[Joanne98]

2. I think it is. The right has no taboos on violence no matter how bad it is.

They are still defending the dropping of atom bombs on Japan. I think that's the worse act of violence ever. But when it comes to SEX,, well that's another story.

Violence is good, sex is bad according to them. And gay sex is even worse. Hell bound. So what would they do?

[Winterblues]

3. Isn't New York considered a Liberal bastion anyway?

Bye bye New York. I mean it is either that or heaven forbid gay sex...Is ther any doubt how the Right would go on this.. Now if that bomb was in Texas well what a dilema...:think:

[Joanne98]

5. You're right I'm changing it.

[Echo In Light]

4. I get what you're driving at, but NEVER give the "Ticking Time Bomb" mythos any credence

The reality is, that situation isn't likely to occur within any context, but the Right, and their M$M, love to parade it.

[Joanne98]

9. I agree. The ticking time bomb is stupid. All a terrorist has to do is wait out the clock.

But they keep using it for an excuse. I'm trying to get to something deeper. The right's idea of what is evil and what isn't.

Violence is good, sex is evil. Would they break their taboo to get the bomb?

[TahitiNut]

6. Further, should such sexual accommodation be made a national POLICY?

Let's be clear. The mythical "ticking time bomb" scenario cannot be validly posed as an argument for a POLICY of sanctioned torture. If such an improbable scenario were to occur, which is dubious at best, just WHAT "patriotic" interrogator would demand that his/her choice to inflict torture be sanctioned and they not be held liable for breaking the law?? After all, if some interrogator is THAT certain, just WHY would they quibble about what's "legal" and what isn't?? Wouldn't any "patriot" and "humanitarian" expose themselves to prosecution for the sake of saving hundreds of human lives??? Why MUST it be sanctioned??

I regard the claims of "ticking time bombs" to be an insane and irrational hypothetical and totally unpersuasive. After all, if it could be PROVEN that hundreds of lives were saved then what jury would convict and what judge would sentence such an individual??

When we examine this alternative, it becomes abundantly CLEAR that it's a hypothetical presented in a totally hypocritical way ... and the REAL motive is POWER and SADISM -- without any jeopardy to the SADIST. That's the basest form of COWARDICE -- a bully on steroids. People posing such insane rationales are craven cowards. Even playground bullies risk a blackened eye or a scratch. The craven cowards begging for the power to torture are the worst.

[Joanne98]

7. The ticking time bomb is an excuse they always use. Liz Cheney just used it

the other day. I personaly think it's stupid because if you had someone that determined all they would do is endure the torture till the bomb went off. But what I'm trying to point out is the disconnect between the right's idea of what is moral or immoral.

I think the arguments the media is having about torture is ridiculous. OR COURSE it's evil.

But because the right doesn't think violence is evil we are being forced to debate it.

If we change the torture to sex I think it would horrify them.

[TahitiNut]

10. I understand that. But to make it truly parallel, it'd have to be a matter of POLICY ...

... and not just a "sacrifice" by the interrogator.

[Joanne98]

12. There's no time for policy in a ticking time bomb situation. They have to

make a call.

[BoneDaddy]

8. Wouldn't it be funnier if the terrorist

mandated (no pun intended)that it be Dick Cheney as his choice of interrogaters.

[Joanne98]

11. Or some other bigtime conservative's son. Like Pat Robertson.

[BoneDaddy]

14. hehe Sean Hannity

would be brilliant

[Towlie]

13. That's a good counter-argument! I like it.

[Joanne98]

15. Thanks. I don't think some people are getting it.

It's a GREAT argument.

[Joanne98]

16. I know one thing they'd say, "We don't pay blackmail"

But it wouldn't be blackmail. Blackmail is only a moral hazard when you are giving someone what they want.

But that doesn't apply in this case because the terrorist is a Taliban and he believes that if he has sex with the interrogator he will be going to Hell. But he hates the interrogators so much that he is willing to do that if he can take them too. That's why he's picked the devout Christian. He thinks the others are already going.

Now the right could say that this doesn't make sense because WHY would the terrorist settle for sending just one infidel to Hell when he could send a whole city. Good point.

He does it because it's personal.

This is what you would call a tortured argument.

I still want to know what they would say because I KNOW that they don't consider torture immoral and that's what I want them to admit.

They are acting like they are sacrificing by torturing the terrorists. "This will hurt me more than it does you" BUT that's not true.

They LIKE torturing people because they are conservatives and that's how they are. It's their nature. They never miss an opportunity to torture people terrorist or anybody else for that matter.

I would like to know what they would do if they have to do something they really didn't like. And I would like to know how the conservative base would react to the news that "I saved the city from an attack by having sex with the detainee." LOL

I can hear them now. The base would demand the interrogator be brought up on charges of violating the military ethics code. "What about moral"

My point is proven. The right doesn't think torture is wrong or immoral or unethical and they don't think it should be illegal. At times of war or any other time. Torture, violence, war it's all moral to them. SEX is all that's immoral.

[Joanne98]

17. kick