Justus For All

Wow - we are in agreement!

I stand vehemently opposed to any sort of torture - however, I do also think that the ‘bomb test’ should apply.

For example, A bad guy has hidden a big bomb (say, a nuke) some where in a big city. We catch him, he refuses to spill the beans. Is ‘rough treatment’ justified? Luckily I do no have to make that choice. I believe that the guy on the ground should be able to make that choice - and face the music if it is deemed as the wrong choice. As much transparency and accountability as possible should be built into what ever system we adopt.

I think that their is a legitimate question as to what is and is not torture. Torture is wrong of course in that it has come to intrinsically means something we shouldn’t do. Where the line between torture and ‘rough treatment’ should be is a good question.

I disagree with having ‘the guy on the ground’ make the choice and face the music. Sure, in rare circumstances where there was no time at all that would happen, but for the most part I think that the President should make this choice (and face the music.) And by President I don’t just mean Bush, but any President even if I personally disagree with their politics.