So what do you do? Do you torture the child or not? What forms of “enhanced interrogation” are acceptable?

But you still haven’t explain why we can’t torture him.

Sitting around singing “Where Have All The Flowers Gone” isn’t going to save us you know.

So it’s OK to hurt or kill this innocent 6 year old, correct?

Or catching them, killing them, or stopping them. You are aware that Iraq wasn’t responsible for 9/11 right? And after the initial strike against Afghanistan and the Taleban which shielded al Qaeda, why were so many terrorists let go?

Republicans and Democrats must work together to find the middle ground between holding tea parties for terrorists and becoming terrorists ourselves

Dr why is half of this dichotomy entirely appropriate (pro torture White House,) and the other half a ridiculous exaggeration (anti torture decent people)?

Moreover had you bothered reading any of the sources linked by tigrismus and Timmah you’d know full well that existing, non torture interrogation techniques which were more effective already exist. You’re setting up an unbelievable number of straw men and setting them up against real White House strategies as if the comparison were reasonable, and you know full well that you’re doing it.

-The Reverend Schmitt.

Jimbo, I’d recommend beginning with the least intrusive measures and gradually working your way up, stopping just short of torture. I’d begin with a time out. Then I would work up to forbiding the child from watching any Sponge Bob Squarepants for 3 weeks.

Should we torture him?

Where do you keep getting so much straw for all these strawmen you’re tossing around?

I don’t think anybody believes “all Republicans are inherently evil and all Democrats are inherently good.” I think many people, here for sure and in the U.S. populace at large, believe that a policy, crafted and implemented by Republicans, that not only condones but relies on torture and abuse of prisoners of war, is evil. And those Republicans who created the policy, who ought to be aware of the unsuitability of torture for the purported task — extracting useful information — fall within a reasonable definition of “evil.” Others who support those Republicans, by looking the other way or slicing and dicing the meanings of words to avoid admitting that the Administration has implemented torture as a policy, are either willfully ignorant, bone stupid or evil themselves. I’m willing to agree that the vast majority of rank and file Republicans (or conservatives, if you want to call them that) fall into the willfully ignorant or “too stupid to notice” categories. That doesn’t make the policy or the policymakers any less evil.

Now, where do you fit in the picture?

First: the “drinking tea with terrorists” strawman. We are not arguing we should drink tea with terrorists, merely we wish to go back to the way the interrogation methods had been practiced for decades, under both Democratic and Republican presidents, until this cabal took over.
As for your second claim, that this was going on under Clinton, it is rather missing the point that even had this behaviour gone on under Clinton’s watch, it would have been ILLEGAL and could have been prosecuted to the full extent of the law.
Not so after 5 years of Republican leadership, which has taken great pains to ensure that actions which consist of torture are not only legal, but a matter of foreign policy.

President: We do not torture.
White House correction: We torture.

Lock the terrorists up in a small room with big speakers and play this song over and over again for 24 hours at top volume: One-song soundtrack to the above blog entry:

I’ve Never bin Laden
words and music by Dr. BLT (c) 2005
http://www.drblt.com/music/BinLaden.mp3

In this debate, one side can legitimately claim moral outrage, don’t you think?

I seriously wonder if that’s how the first war in humanity’s history got started.

Keep on using that Reptilian Brain, Dr. BLT! “You’re doing a heckuva job!”