I'm ashamed of my country
 

"Kevin Vang" wrote in message
t...
In article . com,
says...
An interesting effort to use pseudomath to dehumanize a decision. It
gives math a bad name.


I think you missed my point. The hypothetical example people always
offer to justify torture is: "There is a ticking timebomb somewhere.
We have a person in custody who knows about it. If we torture this
person, we can save hundreds of lives." Implied in the question,
but not stated, is that we are 100% certain that there is a ticking
bomb, we are 100% certain that this particular person has the
information that we need, we are 100% certain that we can get that
information from this person, and that we are 100% certain that we
can save 100 lives.

The reason all of this is implied but not stated, of course, is that
when you actually say it, you pretty much have to acknowledge that it
is absurd. In any kind of a real-world scenario, all of those
probabilities will be much closer to 0 than 100%. So, what I would
like to know, is how high a level of uncertainty are the defenders
of torture willing to live with? Or perhaps I should say, how low
can their level of uncertainty go, and they can still live with
themselves?

Yes, I see your point. Although we are in agreement about the wrongness of
torture, I say that support or opposition to torture can't be quantified, so
its a hopeless strategy to make a formula; its not really a mathematical
dilemma. Folks like rdean will say that 'we don't need 100%, we only need
..001%" and you can't disprove them. It will seem more absurd to you and I,
and sadistically gleeful to them.

I completely agree with your premise. However, watch how easily people play
the bullethead and insist that even a .0000000001% probability in any of
those categories to save even one life justifies performing torture.

Its just horrific to even be having this discussion in our lifetimes. It
won't be but a matter of time before people start justifying America
crashing planes into civilan targets.

--riverman

I'm ashamed of my country
 

riverman wrote:

Its just horrific to even be having this discussion in our lifetimes. It
won't be but a matter of time before people start justifying America
crashing planes into civilan targets.

At the very least, the well documented cases of torture by US forces in
Afghanistan and Iraq make US criticism of human rights abuses by other
countries hypocritical.

--
Cut "to the chase" for my email address.

I'm ashamed of my country
 

"rw" wrote in message
ink.net...
riverman wrote:

Its just horrific to even be having this discussion in our lifetimes. It
won't be but a matter of time before people start justifying America
crashing planes into civilan targets.

At the very least, the well documented cases of torture by US forces in
Afghanistan and Iraq make US criticism of human rights abuses by other
countries hypocritical.


At the least. At the worst, it inspires other countries to update their
methods.

--riverman
And thats just the stuff we KNOW about....

I'm ashamed of my country
 

i simply chose to end my part in this discussion. i have read too many of
these types of threads end in insults and no conclusion. i didn't feel the
need to carry on. i also had a hockey game to coach. its true frank that i
would have expected you to think differently on the subject, but the fact
that you don't is not that surprising. not everyone with military service
has the same beliefs, contrary to the brainwash and release theorists.

I'm ashamed of my country
 

"Benjamin Turek" wrote in message
news:vbAUf.15848$gD4.7152@trnddc05...
i simply chose to end my part in this discussion. i have read too many of
these types of threads end in insults and no conclusion. i didn't feel
the
need to carry on. i also had a hockey game to coach. its true frank that
i
would have expected you to think differently on the subject, but the fact
that you don't is not that surprising. not everyone with military service
has the same beliefs, contrary to the brainwash and release theorists.



Well yeah, any 'ol person with the requisite military background can promote
the act of torture, but it takes a real goober to speak out against torture.

Op --former Air Farce--

I'm ashamed of my country
 

I'm a goober, you're a goober, we are goobers all, and when we get
together, we give our goober call....
Frank Reid

I'm ashamed of my country
 

riverman wrote
And thats just the stuff we KNOW about....

Maybe it's better that we don't.
--

-dnc-

I'm ashamed of my country
 

murderous fisherman wrote:
you ashamed of your country? take your "math" and get the **** out. Canada
loves ****in wimps like you! I 'd give $100 for ever "Rag Head" sonofabitch
killed if I could. Men women and children. They grow up you know. If I ever
see a ragheaded ******* on the stream , I'll do my best to drown the ****er.
murderous fisherman



I'm ashamed of people like you, too. I'm ashamed that we inhabit the
same continent.

--
Cut "to the chase" for my email address.

I'm ashamed of my country
 

Frank Reid wrote in article
.com...
There are factors missing in this formula. X1 is the amount of torture
used and the Y1, along the opposite axis is the validity of the
information gleaned. With the increase in X1, there is a subsequent
decrease in Y1. You would have to find the valid info (V1) along an
ever expanding curve. Pretty much like eliptic curve cryptography.
How do you know when you have a valid prime and that valid prime is
equal to the key?

Clearly it's when the fat lady sings in tune ... unless she's singing the
blues in which case an asymtotic approach to the key is required to produce
continuity of character
--

-dnc-

I'm ashamed of my country
 

wrote in message
It absolutely is the question. It's very easy to mouth off about how
things
ought to be from a position of relative safety and comfort, and blame
political
"enemies" for the situation not being what one wishes it to be (or really,
what
one _thinks_ they wish it to be based on what little real-world info they
possess). It's another thing entirely to actually be in the middle of a
thing
and know there are certain things that simply must be done.

The question of how far one would go in a specific situation to protect
one's family is indeed a legitimate question; but it is a far cry from the
present debate of how barbaric we will allow our society to become. It is
the latter I thought we were discussing.

Non sequitur, as I didn't ask if he would "do anything." In fact, I
didn't
suggest or ask what _he_ would do, I asked what he would want done.

And in the context of the discussion at that point, I thought the
implication clear enough.

And as
such, any answer he gave would answer the question as posed: "What would
you
want done?" The fact that your mind went directly to torture might give
some
insight as to how men really feel and think about it.

Well inasmuch as the thread was generally about torture, it mostly gives me
insight as to my ability to follow a conversation.

Do we as a civilized society

And speaking of assuming facts not in evidence...

A question certainly worty of a longer thread and many tangents.


condone the torture of other human beings?
Of course you do, under what you perceive as the "right" circumstances.
You
just don't want to think about it, much less admit it.

I do think about it. The crimes and atrocities of this administration force
any thinking citizen to consider that question. What indeed would I want
done? I can't honestly conceive of such a specific situation. If my family
were in life-threatening harm and I knew with absolute certainty that
committing a grossly immoral and barbaric act could save them, might I
condone it? Because I cannot snap out an instant, unequivocal "no", I have
to concede the possibility of yes, as repugnent as that may be.

That said, that is not, as I first stated, the question before the American
public. We are not discussing a specific person, a specific situation or
specific knowledge; our government is condoning a general, immoral and
barbaric program of torture. They're not just torturing "terrorists" they
*know* have information, the system allows torture of every prisoner,
including innocents, to find out *if* they have information. That is not
making my family more safe. It is putting them in greater danger.

I am appalled at how many think otherwise.

No, you aren't, because deep down, you _know_ otherwise.

Yes, actually I am; and I don't.

Joe F.