At least one Canadian get it.

[Heywood]

Do you see that he closed the list with "Nothing to celebrate here."

In retrospect, my initial reply was unwarrantedly snarky. My apologies. It's really impossible to be sure what HW meant until he clarifies.

I don't not want to turn this thread into a thread about torture....we've been there and done that already. However to understand my position here...you need to understand my position about torture. So I will go into that a little bit now...but don't expect me to defend it vigorously as this isn't a thread about torture.

First, Torture is causing mental of physical pain for the purpose of punishment or to extract information. A child in a martial arts class might be required to stand in the "horse stance" for a specified amount of time as punishment for disrupting the class. This disciplinary action is torture because it satisfies the definition of torture. My position is that we use torture all the time in society often to great benefit. The problem with torture is when the severity of it is not justified. Horse stance for disrupting the class is okay...waterboarding for disrupting the class is not okay.

Second, I do not agree with the claim that torture does not work. Its not 100% effective but it is not 0% effective either. Its effectiveness and appropriateness is dependent on the situation. Horse stance and water boarding would both be effective in enforcing discipline in a martial arts class. However one is more appropriate than the other.

Third, sometimes the need for information is extremely urgent and torture might be the most effective means to obtain it. Or this situation might be that the need for information might be so great, that every possible means to obtain should be employed.

Now my position on torturing the gitmo prisoners is this. Incarceration is torture...so the question of whether or not we should torture is not relevant. We are already torturing them and continue to torture them. How much or what severity of torture should we employ is the question. The answer to that question depends on the situation. If the Russian's tell us some RA-115s were stolen and sold to Al Qaeda...I'd be okay with water boarding certain prisoners because that is a situation in which every possible avenue to obtain information should be used.....in my opinion.

Was it a good thing or bad thing that Obama lessened the amount of torture the detainees were subject too? I don't know. I don't have enough information to make a solid judgement. If they were water boarding for shits and giggles then yes...it is a good thing Obama ceased the practice. If they were waterboarding because they know Al Qaeda is in possession of an RA-115 and they are trying to locate it....then stopping selective use of water boarding is/was a mistake.

My gut tells me it was probably a good thing Obama stopped the practice of water boarding.....but really I don't know.

When I say "there is nothing to celebrate"....I say that because I don't see that the world has been made a better place because Obama is in office. If anything it is worse.