Click HERE to see this thread with all of the graphics, features, and links.

http://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/2014_Peshawar_school_attack

145 people, predominantly school children, were slaughtered in a terrorist attack on a Pakistani school last Tuesday. What are your thoughts on this horrific attack and the response?

Act of desperation by the Medieval Obsolete.

On the side: I always wondered what happened to the pawn who shot Malala, who is now celebrated worldwide. What was the price of his truly epic and utterly humiliating failure?

Those responsible need Guantanamo treatment. Nothing wrong with torturing terrorists.

Originally posted by Tattoos N Scars
Those responsible need Guantanamo treatment. Nothing wrong with torturing terrorists.

True that brother.

Originally posted by Tattoos N Scars
Those responsible need Guantanamo treatment. Nothing wrong with torturing terrorists. Yeah, f*ck human rights. Raw emotion is the only judgement needed.

Originally posted by Tattoos N Scars
Those responsible need Guantanamo treatment. Nothing wrong with torturing terrorists.
http://i199.photobucket.com/albums/aa158/Bardock42/Screenshot2014-12-21115927_zps682cb5a0.png

Originally posted by Lord Lucien
Yeah, f*ck human rights. Raw emotion is the only judgement needed.

If the world cared about human rights, the world would be a much different place.

Originally posted by Time Immemorial
If the world cared about human rights, the world would be a much different place. Given that there was a time very recently when no one did care, and it was a time that would suck balls to live in, then yeah, I agree; having so many people in the world today who care about fundamental human rights has made the world a very different place. For the better. That there's still a bunch who don't agree or care doesn't negate the achievements of those that do, nor the importance of having them around. They're the kind of people we need more, not radical executioners of blind hate.

Originally posted by Lord Lucien
Yeah, f*ck human rights. Raw emotion is the only judgement needed.

As far as I'm concerned, they gave up their human rights after targeting and killing children.

Originally posted by Tattoos N Scars
As far as I'm concerned, they gave up their human rights after targeting and killing children.

As far as you, me or Joe Shmoe are concerned is not the be-all and end-all of these matters. I'm pretty sure that as far as the Taliban is concerned, you have given up your right to life the moment you chose not to embrace Islam.

Originally posted by Tattoos N Scars
As far as I'm concerned, they gave up their human rights after targeting and killing children.
I mean, even if you take this position (and there's something to be said for it, for sure), it still leads to the question of who is in a moral position to do the torturing.

I think the only way you could have ethically consistent torture is if someone became a torturer with the understanding that they would be held accountable for what they do.

There's something to be said about torturing for a reason, eg gaining info that will save lives (though this has severe known flaws)

Torturing for punishment though, that arguably makes you the monster

Anyone who dares to be in disagreement with anything needs to be tortured.

This is a fecking horrible situation.

Originally posted by Bardock42
http://i199.photobucket.com/albums/aa158/Bardock42/Screenshot2014-12-21115927_zps682cb5a0.png

IDK about that. You can't equate American pragmatism with people who intend to commit mass murder of innocents.

Originally posted by Lestov16
IDK about that. You can't equate American pragmatism with people who intend to commit mass murder of innocents. That "pragmatism" is the ends justifying the means. It's still torture, just torture that you agree with.

Instead of waterboarding we should institute tickling as torture. It can break anyone.

Originally posted by Lord Lucien
That "pragmatism" is the ends justifying the means. It's still torture, just torture that you agree with.

Sorry that my sympathy doesn't lie with those who wish to commit mass murder of innocents and install an extremely repressive theocracy.

Originally posted by Time Immemorial
Anyone who dares to be in disagreement with anything needs to be tortured.


I think that's the first time I've seen you make a joke about a subject you cared about.

Would anyone here fantasize about torture if someone brutally killed your family?
It's easy to preach about following the moral high ground until terrorism actually hits close to home with your own family.

http://media.giphy.com/media/ZgjCn4ZfpekWA/giphy.gif

Originally posted by Lestov16
Sorry that my sympathy doesn't lie with those who wish to commit mass murder of innocents and install an extremely repressive theocracy. You don't need sympathy for people to respect human rights. That's why they're called human rights: you extend them to all, even the ones you hate most. Once we start picking and choosing which people deserve rights over others, we've joined the scum of the earth we purport to be better than. Cherry picking which humans deserve to live more, or which ones deserve more protection, or which ones get to be subject to these laws, is exactly what Taliban and ISIS c*nts do. They put people they dislike or disagree with beneath them on the roster of human worth, and treat them accordingly. And they call it just and right.

If we're to be better than these groups and ideologies, than we have to uphold our superior values no matter what. Emotions can't be involved. Human rights for all humans, no matter what we think of them.

Originally posted by Tattoos N Scars
Would anyone here fantasize about torture if someone brutally killed your family?
It's easy to preach about following the moral high ground until terrorism actually hits close to home with your own family.

You can't let personal feelings set the rule for the masses. Sure, if someone raped and murdered someone close to me (say my mother), I'd be emotional and I'd personally want to choke the life out of them with my bare-hands; most people probably would if that happened to them.

But thinking sensibly, that's not good practice for a society.

Originally posted by Lord Lucien
You don't need sympathy for people to respect human rights. That's why they're called human rights: you extend them to all, even the ones you hate most. Once we start picking and choosing which people deserve rights over others, we've joined the scum of the earth we purport to be better than. Cherry picking which humans deserve to live more, or which ones deserve more protection, or which ones get to be subject to these laws, is exactly what Taliban and ISIS c*nts do. They put people they dislike or disagree with beneath them on the roster of human worth, and treat them accordingly. And they call it just and right.

If we're to be better than these groups and ideologies, than we have to uphold our superior values no matter what. Emotions can't be involved. Human rights for all humans, no matter what we think of them.

http://www.gifbin.com/bin/1233928590_citizen%20kane%20clapping.gif

whimper That was beautiful, man

Originally posted by Quincy
whimper That was beautiful, man

It was a simple matter of finding the gif, copy/pasting the URL and using the proper img tags. But thanks!

smurph

Originally posted by Tattoos N Scars
Would anyone here fantasize about torture if someone brutally killed your family?
It's easy to preach about following the moral high ground until terrorism actually hits close to home with your own family.

Why fantasize about torture? Honestly, if I lived in that area and I was invaded and survived, while my family was killed, I dont think I'd care enough about torture and only make it a life mission to sow what was reaped. But that's the whole downward spiral there. I'd likely be a statistic. We can be dumb violent monkeys. We should try and just bring each other up but still be able to defend ourselves and other good people. Torture isn't necessary.

These terrorists should be stoned to death like they do for people having commited no real crime.