Did it work or didn't it?

I think all terrorists should be treated equally. Therefore they all should take a bullet in the eye from SEAL Team VI.

 

Now stop hating on the Night Stalkers. LOL.

 

Whatever the cost -- in "face," world-wide status, ethics, morality, or whatever, and, yes, even lives -- our government, and country, decided that it would be paid, and that it would be worth it, if it meant getting Osama Bin Laden.

That decision was made, pretty much en masse, if we'll all recall, on Sept. 11, 2001.

And, except for the lives-lost part, I agree with it.

 

I think it works and I think it's something that in extreme cases needs to be used in the interest of protecting this country. That's the only reason to use it.

It has nothing to do with wanting terrorists to get theirs, and the suggestion of such is ignorant, but what I have grown to expect from you.

 

Why would you say that? Examples?

I wasn't suggesting anything. I was asking a sincere question because your posting history indicates that you get a certain amount of satisfaction when the so-called villains of society are punished, whether that be terrorists, murderers, sex offenders, adulterers, etc., etc., that goes well beyond the utility of the punitive measure. You tend to moralize a bit. And that's fine. I'm not making a value judgment. But I think it opens you up to the kind of question I asked. Again, not to judge, because I am curious to have you lay out your entire line of thinking on the matter, because you have a habit of hinting that you are just posting the tip of the iceberg re: your thoughts on a given topic.

I take your response at face value, though. I always do.

But anyway: I'm "ignorant"? Do explain.

 

And we know how much to take John McCain's word as bible on things.

 

Yes. Because what could John McCain possibly know of war or torture?

 

A lot more than any of us. But also on many other subjects, where you and dave ignore what he has to say.

 

Taken to its logical extreme, I hate this reasoning.

I think that McCain's personal experience should give his opinion on the topic some weight, no question. But his personal experience does not make his opinion on the matter determinative.

 

Gotta side with Tony here.

The rush by liberals to embrace McCain's torture stance can be downright embarrassing. Reminds me somewhat of the way racists love when Whitlock "tells it like it is" when he criticizes the black community.

 

So because John McCain knows a great deal about torture from hard-won personal experience, I have to accept his reasoning on debt reduction? On abortion? On prayer in schools? On how to boil an egg?

I'm not allowed to value his opinion on one thing without valuing his opinion on all things?

 

Amen, the McCain torture card has been way overplayed in this debate.