Dave wrote:

Calling waterboarding "torture" is definitely not an adequate substitute for
reasoned discussion.

OK, solet me make sure I've got your point straight...

Forcefully holding a person's head under water until they believe they
are going to die... and in some cases, actually die... does not fall
within the definition of "torture." Is that it?

Now, what about other things, like giving prisoners electric shocks,
having them attacked by killer dogs, or using "pressure positions" (a
widely used one is to hang them from their arms, remarkably like Roman
crucifixion)... again, many times "interrogators" using these methods
have killed prisoners in US custody... documented by the US military
who had custody of the prisoners but did not carry out the
interrogations.


It's simply trying to attach a label in the hope that
substantive discussion will be foreclosed.

Why do you find this concept so hard to grasp?

Saying that I don'tgrasp your concept is a simple way to divert
attention with a little insult.... while totally failing to answer any
of the points I have made about the serious flaws in your logic... not
to mention your moral position.

Just to make it clear, you are in favor of inflicting pain, fear, and
bodily harm, on US prisoners... to the point of death in many cases...
for the sake of almost-certanly-useless information. To you, the
slight possibility of gaining useful info is worth BOTH the risk of
losing any chance of gaining further info from that prisoner, and
sacrificing the moral position of the whole country. That's it in a
nutshel, right?

DSK