Author Topic: Trump's First 100 Days  (Read 35024 times)

0 Members and 2 Guests are viewing this topic.

Offline antigoon

  • Not Elvis
  • DT.net Veteran
  • ****
  • Posts: 10217
  • Gender: Male
  • This was a triumph.
Re: Trump's First 100 Days
« Reply #70 on: January 26, 2017, 09:25:09 AM »
https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/josh-rogin/wp/2017/01/26/the-state-departments-entire-senior-management-team-just-resigned/?postshare=9331485447307908&tid=ss_tw&utm_term=.64bf73500de2

"The State Department’s entire senior management team just resigned"

Quote
Secretary of State Rex Tillerson’s job running the State Department just got considerably more difficult. The entire senior level of management officials resigned Wednesday, part of an ongoing mass exodus of senior foreign service officers who don’t want to stick around for the Trump era.

Tillerson was actually inside the State Department’s headquarters in Foggy Bottom on Wednesday, taking meetings and getting the lay of the land. I reported Wednesday morning that the Trump team was narrowing its search for his No. 2, and that it was looking to replace the State Department’s long-serving undersecretary for management, Patrick Kennedy. Kennedy, who has been in that job for nine years, was actively involved in the transition and was angling to keep that job under Tillerson, three State Department officials told me.

Then suddenly on Wednesday afternoon, Kennedy and three of his top officials resigned unexpectedly, four State Department officials confirmed. Assistant Secretary of State for Administration Joyce Anne Barr, Assistant Secretary of State for Consular Affairs Michele Bond and Ambassador Gentry O. Smith, director of the Office of Foreign Missions, followed him out the door. All are career foreign service officers who have served under both Republican and Democratic administrations.

In addition, Assistant Secretary of State for Diplomatic Security Gregory Starr retired Jan. 20, and the director of the Bureau of Overseas Building Operations, Lydia Muniz, departed the same day. That amounts to a near-complete housecleaning of all the senior officials that deal with managing the State Department, its overseas posts and its people.

“It’s the single biggest simultaneous departure of institutional memory that anyone can remember, and that’s incredibly difficult to replicate,” said David Wade, who served as State Department chief of staff under Secretary of State John Kerry. “Department expertise in security, management, administrative and consular positions in particular are very difficult to replicate and particularly difficult to find in the private sector.”

Seems........not so great?


Offline Stadler

  • DTF.org Alumni
  • ****
  • Posts: 9081
  • Gender: Male
Re: Trump's First 100 Days
« Reply #71 on: January 26, 2017, 09:41:11 AM »
Sorry guys, as some of you know I'm Mexican and I've been very aware of the news with Donald Trump and everything that's been going on.

How the crap was this guy elected?

https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2017/jan/26/donald-trump-torture-absolutely-works-says-us-president-in-first-television-interview

He can't have an opinion that differs from yours?  He VERY CLEARLY said he would defer to his staff and that they would absolutely follow the law.  What's the problem?  How is this any different than a President that is pro-life himself, but respects the law of the land and upholds the current standard of "choice"?   

Personally, I'm not that far from Trump here.  I do believe that in certain cases, torture is effective at getting information that wouldn't ordinarily be gotten.  It's not universal, but it is case-by-case.  Having said that, just like I am for legalizing pot but do not smoke at all because it is currently illegal in my state, whether I felt it effective or not, I would follow the law.   

Add to that, I voted, though not for Trump, and I can honestly tell you, whether the candidate believed "torture was effective or not" was not even in the top 50 reasons why I voted the way I did.  Maybe not even Top 100.  In fact, I can't even tell you what the position is of the person I voted for.   

What's the problem here? 

Offline XJDenton

  • What a shame
  • Global Moderator
  • *****
  • Posts: 4399
Re: Trump's First 100 Days
« Reply #72 on: January 26, 2017, 09:45:53 AM »
He can't have an opinion that differs from yours?

Not when it comes to factual statements, no. Torture simply doesn't doesn't yield reliable information.
« Last Edit: January 26, 2017, 09:53:37 AM by XJDenton »

Online El Barto

  • DTF.org Alumni
  • ****
  • Posts: 18681
  • Bad Craziness
Re: Trump's First 100 Days
« Reply #73 on: January 26, 2017, 10:09:04 AM »
I can't speak for anyone else, but the point for me isn't to game the results.  It's to have a modicum of responsibility and accountability by ALL participants in the system.

Agreed.  And it should end doubts about some voter fraud.  I know it won't but it should help end some of this discussion.

I'm just baffled that people actually believe this is something other than an attempt to remove a tiny amount of likely democrat voters. Since when is anybody here this idealistic?

I think Stadler and I both agreed that some people will use this as attempt to do so, but that is far from the only logical reasoning for it.  To me, voting should be like any other form of communication we have with our government, it usually begins with proving who you are.

Yeah, this is not at all about minimizing the number of democrat voters, and I don't know that it's "idealistic", though I can't really answer that one.  It's like answering "do you think you're funny?" ;)

I think it's more about the integrity of the system.  Not whether "there is or is not voter fraud" per se (one could argue that there's not voter fraud BECAUSE of controls like these), but whether moving forward it becomes more prevalent.  I think there's a level of engagement as well.   We are ostensibly a government of the people for the people and by the people.  Doesn't it seem a little incongruous that someone might want to reap the benefits of government (here, by availing themselves of the right to vote) but are unwilling to offer any concession to that government? 

What say you about this:   no ID, just a machine on every streetcorner (or maybe we have ATMs serve multiple functions), and you put a thumb print down.  If that thumb isn't already in the system, you get a vote.   If the thumb has already voted, no dice.   (or retinal scan, or semen sample, whatever, I say to the smart ass that asks "what if you have no hands")?  Votes can be sent in in absentia, with a thumbprint and a check box.
I think semen samples would be ideal. After all, the whole thing's just a giant circle jerk anyway.

And I've yet to hear anybody respond to the point that the system's integrity remains sound, despite Grabby's fairy tales. Eligible voters are white-listed. When they invent a solution to a problem that doesn't exist, but does theoretically benefit the side that's proposing it, yes, I think it's highly idealistic to assume altruistic reasoning.
Argument, the presentation of reasonable views, never makes headway against conviction, and conviction takes no part in argument because it knows.
E.F. Benson

Online El Barto

  • DTF.org Alumni
  • ****
  • Posts: 18681
  • Bad Craziness
Re: Trump's First 100 Days
« Reply #74 on: January 26, 2017, 10:12:40 AM »
The torture thing follows the pattern I've been on about. Whether it's effective or not, and I'm not really sure one way or the other, you give away a ton of earned good will, which we're hemorrhaging pretty badly at the moment. The reason we get to go around fucking up governments that don't share our economic or sociopolitical system is because we're ostensibly the good guys. Announcing to the world that the Hague convention and Geneva accord can go fuck themselves blows a pretty big hole in that notion. It's middle school level thinking. "Sounds good. Feels good. Fuck, let's do it!"
Argument, the presentation of reasonable views, never makes headway against conviction, and conviction takes no part in argument because it knows.
E.F. Benson

Offline jsbru

  • Posts: 956
Re: Trump's First 100 Days
« Reply #75 on: January 26, 2017, 10:15:43 AM »
Priebus already wants to resign:

http://i.imgur.com/dXDl0I5.png

My question is why was he gullible enough to take the job in the first place?  Did he really think Trump is someone you can reason with and bring down to earth?
“The music business is a cruel and shallow money trench, a long plastic hallway where thieves and pimps run free, and good men die like dogs. There's also a negative side.”

― Hunter S. Thompson

Offline jsbru

  • Posts: 956
Re: Trump's First 100 Days
« Reply #76 on: January 26, 2017, 10:18:42 AM »
I've already said the answer.  I'm sorry it doesn't fit the narrative.  APATHY.   Put simply, a lot of people just can't be bothered.   They'll walk five blocks, and come up with ID of some sort to drink at their local, but they can't be arsed to go three block and come up with an ID to vote.   See Atlanta; do you think those pastors would put that effort in if it wasn't necessary (though there is a bit of political favor that comes of it as well).

It's not just apathy when the line to vote for people who already have ID is 2 hours long.  And that I've witnessed first-hand.
“The music business is a cruel and shallow money trench, a long plastic hallway where thieves and pimps run free, and good men die like dogs. There's also a negative side.”

― Hunter S. Thompson

Offline Implode

  • Lord of the Squids
  • DTF.org Alumni
  • ****
  • Posts: 5421
  • Gender: Male
Re: Trump's First 100 Days
« Reply #77 on: January 26, 2017, 10:20:20 AM »
Yeah, I waited in line for 90+ minutes to vote, and I don't even live in the city. Voting itself took all of 5 minutes. They didn't even ask me for my ID. I don't know why it was taking so long.

Offline Sir GuitarCozmo

  • Official Forum Sous Chef and broler5
  • DTF.org Alumni
  • ****
  • Posts: 13773
  • Gender: Male
  • whahibrido pickingant in action...
Re: Trump's First 100 Days
« Reply #78 on: January 26, 2017, 10:23:10 AM »
I find it funny that on the main page it shows "Implode" right above "Trump's First 100 Days".  How fitting.  :lol

Offline jsbru

  • Posts: 956
“The music business is a cruel and shallow money trench, a long plastic hallway where thieves and pimps run free, and good men die like dogs. There's also a negative side.”

― Hunter S. Thompson

Offline jsbru

  • Posts: 956
Re: Trump's First 100 Days
« Reply #80 on: January 26, 2017, 11:20:13 AM »
This presidency so far is like a cross between an Orwell novel and a Naked Gun sequel.
“The music business is a cruel and shallow money trench, a long plastic hallway where thieves and pimps run free, and good men die like dogs. There's also a negative side.”

― Hunter S. Thompson

Online cramx3

  • Chillest of the chill
  • DTF.org Alumni
  • ****
  • Posts: 15646
  • Gender: Male
    • The Home of cramx3
Re: Trump's First 100 Days
« Reply #81 on: January 26, 2017, 11:28:26 AM »
When your sources are twitter and imgur  ??? (I'm sure there's a meme for that)

This presidency so far is like a cross between an Orwell novel and a Naked Gun sequel.

Well luckily both were good  :lol

Offline Sir GuitarCozmo

  • Official Forum Sous Chef and broler5
  • DTF.org Alumni
  • ****
  • Posts: 13773
  • Gender: Male
  • whahibrido pickingant in action...
Re: Trump's First 100 Days
« Reply #82 on: January 26, 2017, 12:17:36 PM »
So who's gonna be Trump's Nordberg?

Offline jsbru

  • Posts: 956
Re: Trump's First 100 Days
« Reply #83 on: January 26, 2017, 12:19:25 PM »
So who's gonna be Trump's Nordberg?

At this point, I wouldn't be surprised if OJ himself was appointed to some post in the administration.
“The music business is a cruel and shallow money trench, a long plastic hallway where thieves and pimps run free, and good men die like dogs. There's also a negative side.”

― Hunter S. Thompson

Offline XeRocks81

  • Posts: 277
  • Gender: Male
Re: Trump's First 100 Days
« Reply #84 on: January 26, 2017, 12:26:47 PM »
So who's gonna be Trump's Nordberg?

At this point, I wouldn't be surprised if OJ himself was appointed to some post in the administration.

Secretary of "you're not fooling anybody" hypotheticals.  Like, muslim ban: If I did it   :lol

Offline hefdaddy42

  • Whiskey Bent and Hell Bound
  • Global Moderator
  • *****
  • Posts: 40263
  • Gender: Male
  • RIP Dad 1943-2010
Re: Trump's First 100 Days
« Reply #85 on: January 26, 2017, 12:39:58 PM »
Evidence of Russian tampering in election given by FBI, CIA, NSA, etc.

Evidence of voter fraud given by no-fucking-body.


Trump announces investigation into voter fraud.
Hef is right on all things. Except for when I disagree with him. In which case he's probably still right.

Offline Stadler

  • DTF.org Alumni
  • ****
  • Posts: 9081
  • Gender: Male
Re: Trump's First 100 Days
« Reply #86 on: January 26, 2017, 12:48:53 PM »
Sigh:

https://twitter.com/bobcesca_go/status/824349898417975296?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw

This reflects FAR more on the idiot tweeter who can't at all see the difference - and wouldn't have enough characters to explain it even if he did - between a blanket freeze across the board, THEN spot reversals to target pressure points.  Anyone who has EVER managed even a half-assed budget knows this happens in business every single day.

I suppose we're going to call all the corporate managers that "put a freeze on all travel" (targeting primarily inter-office and non-essential travel) and then said "we are going to double down on being present with our customers" (thus requiring travel to be at customer locations).

It's this kind of "analysis" (I say in quotes) that makes me think that Trump might actually be on to something.    This is just snarky, tissue-thin criticism in order to seem like you're paying attention when you're not.   

Offline Stadler

  • DTF.org Alumni
  • ****
  • Posts: 9081
  • Gender: Male
Re: Trump's First 100 Days
« Reply #87 on: January 26, 2017, 01:00:33 PM »
I've already said the answer.  I'm sorry it doesn't fit the narrative.  APATHY.   Put simply, a lot of people just can't be bothered.   They'll walk five blocks, and come up with ID of some sort to drink at their local, but they can't be arsed to go three block and come up with an ID to vote.   See Atlanta; do you think those pastors would put that effort in if it wasn't necessary (though there is a bit of political favor that comes of it as well).

It's not just apathy when the line to vote for people who already have ID is 2 hours long.  And that I've witnessed first-hand.

I waited about an hour to vote.  So?  It's not as if I'm* any less likely to be shitcanned.  What does a wait have to do with being poor or minority?   Is there a right not to have a line that I missed somewhere?  Because someone ought to tell CT's DMV (it was in the papers).   


* someone who's not considered under the poverty line.

Offline Stadler

  • DTF.org Alumni
  • ****
  • Posts: 9081
  • Gender: Male
Re: Trump's First 100 Days
« Reply #88 on: January 26, 2017, 01:19:29 PM »
He can't have an opinion that differs from yours?

Not when it comes to factual statements, no. Torture simply doesn't doesn't yield reliable information.

That's not a "fact".  That might be a widely held opinion, but it is not an undisputable FACT.  You cannot say that at no time ever in the history of man has torture not at least once yielded "reliable information".    I get it, life isn't like "The Blacklist", but there are too many levels here for you to pontificate that "THIS IS FACT" and deem him wrong.  I just did a quick Google, and after you weed out the "TORTURE DOESN'T WORK", backed up with "proof" of the form of "if we do that, we're no better than them!", which isn't proof but rather a policy argument, the evidence is at best inconclusive.  Is it "efficient"?  No, probably not, since there is no singular way of ascertaining what info is accurate and what is not, but it's not as if this is a settled issue. 

Offline XJDenton

  • What a shame
  • Global Moderator
  • *****
  • Posts: 4399
Re: Trump's First 100 Days
« Reply #89 on: January 26, 2017, 01:24:10 PM »
If the evidence is inconclusive as to whether the information yielded by torture is accurate, then by definition it has failed to produce reliable intel.

Offline XeRocks81

  • Posts: 277
  • Gender: Male
Re: Trump's First 100 Days
« Reply #90 on: January 26, 2017, 01:29:06 PM »
He can't have an opinion that differs from yours?

Not when it comes to factual statements, no. Torture simply doesn't doesn't yield reliable information.

That's not a "fact".  That might be a widely held opinion, but it is not an undisputable FACT.  You cannot say that at no time ever in the history of man has torture not at least once yielded "reliable information".    I get it, life isn't like "The Blacklist", but there are too many levels here for you to pontificate that "THIS IS FACT" and deem him wrong.  I just did a quick Google, and after you weed out the "TORTURE DOESN'T WORK", backed up with "proof" of the form of "if we do that, we're no better than them!", which isn't proof but rather a policy argument, the evidence is at best inconclusive.  Is it "efficient"?  No, probably not, since there is no singular way of ascertaining what info is accurate and what is not, but it's not as if this is a settled issue.

It almost seems as if you're getting into "alternative fact" territory there  ;)

Online cramx3

  • Chillest of the chill
  • DTF.org Alumni
  • ****
  • Posts: 15646
  • Gender: Male
    • The Home of cramx3
Re: Trump's First 100 Days
« Reply #91 on: January 26, 2017, 01:36:26 PM »
I fully believe torture works.... on some people.  Just like everything else in this world.  Somethings work for certain people and some don't.  Some people you can convince by sitting down and talking, some people you can convince by standing and yelling at them.  Different strokes for different folks.  My personal belief is that we should be allowed to torture but only in the most extreme cases and in a case where we believe the tortured will actually give up intel (and not as a punishment).  Now maybe that scenario means it will never happen, then so be it, but I don't think we should have a firm policy of no torture.

Offline XJDenton

  • What a shame
  • Global Moderator
  • *****
  • Posts: 4399
Re: Trump's First 100 Days
« Reply #92 on: January 26, 2017, 01:38:46 PM »
What other war crimes do you not think we should have a firm policy against?

Online El Barto

  • DTF.org Alumni
  • ****
  • Posts: 18681
  • Bad Craziness
Re: Trump's First 100 Days
« Reply #93 on: January 26, 2017, 01:42:59 PM »
I fully believe torture works.... on some people.  Just like everything else in this world.  Somethings work for certain people and some don't.  Some people you can convince by sitting down and talking, some people you can convince by standing and yelling at them.  Different strokes for different folks.  My personal belief is that we should be allowed to torture but only in the most extreme cases and in a case where we believe the tortured will actually give up intel (and not as a punishment).  Now maybe that scenario means it will never happen, then so be it, but I don't think we should have a firm policy of no torture.
And taking a tangential course from XJ, even if it might be effective, which is certainly debatable, you still have to measure the overall cost in appearance and forfeiture of values. There's really no paradigm where it turns out to be a good move, particularly when you announce to the world that we think it's just swell. The ter'ists didn't give a shit anyway, and our allies now find us even more risky.
Argument, the presentation of reasonable views, never makes headway against conviction, and conviction takes no part in argument because it knows.
E.F. Benson

Offline Adami

  • DTF.org Alumni
  • ****
  • Posts: 24834
Re: Trump's First 100 Days
« Reply #94 on: January 26, 2017, 01:46:19 PM »
I fully believe torture works.... on some people.  Just like everything else in this world.  Somethings work for certain people and some don't.  Some people you can convince by sitting down and talking, some people you can convince by standing and yelling at them.  Different strokes for different folks.  My personal belief is that we should be allowed to torture but only in the most extreme cases and in a case where we believe the tortured will actually give up intel (and not as a punishment).  Now maybe that scenario means it will never happen, then so be it, but I don't think we should have a firm policy of no torture.
And taking a tangential course from XJ, even if it might be effective, which is certainly debatable, you still have to measure the overall cost in appearance and forfeiture of values. There's really no paradigm where it turns out to be a good move, particularly when you announce to the world that we think it's just swell. The ter'ists didn't give a shit anyway, and our allies now find us even more risky.

Trump's message in the interview regarding torture seemed to be "Well...they can do horrible things, but we can't?"
fanticide.bandcamp.com

Online cramx3

  • Chillest of the chill
  • DTF.org Alumni
  • ****
  • Posts: 15646
  • Gender: Male
    • The Home of cramx3
Re: Trump's First 100 Days
« Reply #95 on: January 26, 2017, 01:46:30 PM »
What other war crimes do you not think we should have a firm policy against?

I'm only for torture against convicted terrorists, not war criminals.  I didn't mention that. 

I fully believe torture works.... on some people.  Just like everything else in this world.  Somethings work for certain people and some don't.  Some people you can convince by sitting down and talking, some people you can convince by standing and yelling at them.  Different strokes for different folks.  My personal belief is that we should be allowed to torture but only in the most extreme cases and in a case where we believe the tortured will actually give up intel (and not as a punishment).  Now maybe that scenario means it will never happen, then so be it, but I don't think we should have a firm policy of no torture.
And taking a tangential course from XJ, even if it might be effective, which is certainly debatable, you still have to measure the overall cost in appearance and forfeiture of values. There's really no paradigm where it turns out to be a good move, particularly when you announce to the world that we think it's just swell. The ter'ists didn't give a shit anyway, and our allies now find us even more risky.

Maybe so.  I certainly don't think we should be saying proudly that we torture.  Nothing to be proud about that.  However, we do plenty of other terrible things that our allies seem OK with.  If we start seeing our allies back away from us because we torture (and they don't?) then I may change my opinion.

Offline XJDenton

  • What a shame
  • Global Moderator
  • *****
  • Posts: 4399
Re: Trump's First 100 Days
« Reply #96 on: January 26, 2017, 01:48:28 PM »
I'm only for torture against convicted terrorists

Which is a war-crime. Hence, what other crimes are you okay with your country committing given the right circumstances?

Offline Stadler

  • DTF.org Alumni
  • ****
  • Posts: 9081
  • Gender: Male
Re: Trump's First 100 Days
« Reply #97 on: January 26, 2017, 01:50:21 PM »
If the evidence is inconclusive as to whether the information yielded by torture is accurate, then by definition it has failed to produce reliable intel.

Huh?  That makes no sense.  No one piece of information is taken in a vacuum.  Almost all intel requires some corroboration.  My point isn't that it's useless, it's that the cost of having SOME information be useless could outweigh the benefit of the good information.  That's an entirely different argument than "TORTURE DOESN'T WORK".   Solar energy works fantastically well to power things, just as good as energy taken from fossil fuels.  But it costs something like 50% as much.  But no one says "solar doesn't work!".

Offline Adami

  • DTF.org Alumni
  • ****
  • Posts: 24834
Re: Trump's First 100 Days
« Reply #98 on: January 26, 2017, 01:53:36 PM »
If the evidence is inconclusive as to whether the information yielded by torture is accurate, then by definition it has failed to produce reliable intel.

Huh?  That makes no sense.  No one piece of information is taken in a vacuum.  Almost all intel requires some corroboration.  My point isn't that it's useless, it's that the cost of having SOME information be useless could outweigh the benefit of the good information.  That's an entirely different argument than "TORTURE DOESN'T WORK".   Solar energy works fantastically well to power things, just as good as energy taken from fossil fuels.  But it costs something like 50% as much.  But no one says "solar doesn't work!".

But people do say that torture doesn't work enough to justify its use. Generally, people under such duress falsely confess or give bad information just to make the torture end. We don't need more bad information.

Murdering the person's family in front of them would also probably get information on occasion. I'm curious where the line is drawn since I'm assuming most of you would say that murdering the person's family is off limits, no matter what the information is. (Well, except Trump who advocated for murdering their families too).
fanticide.bandcamp.com

Online cramx3

  • Chillest of the chill
  • DTF.org Alumni
  • ****
  • Posts: 15646
  • Gender: Male
    • The Home of cramx3
Re: Trump's First 100 Days
« Reply #99 on: January 26, 2017, 01:54:55 PM »
I'm only for torture against convicted terrorists

Which is a war-crime. Hence, what other crimes are you okay with your country committing given the right circumstances?

OK, then that is all of the war crimes I am OK with committing given the circumstance.  I am also OK with breaking the law regarding speeding given the correct circumstances in which one could speed.

Offline XJDenton

  • What a shame
  • Global Moderator
  • *****
  • Posts: 4399
Re: Trump's First 100 Days
« Reply #100 on: January 26, 2017, 02:08:17 PM »
But no one says "solar doesn't work!".

I have a new model of solar cell. It may, on ocassion, generate power. More often it will explode and kill the user. You have no idea which until you switch it on.

Does this model of solar cell, in your view, work?

Offline Podaar

  • DTF.org Alumni
  • ****
  • Posts: 5100
  • Gender: Male
  • Looks like Fish, tastes like chicken
Re: Trump's First 100 Days
« Reply #101 on: January 26, 2017, 02:12:49 PM »
Murdering the person's family in front of them would also probably get information on occasion. I'm curious where the line is drawn since I'm assuming most of you would say that murdering the person's family is off limits, no matter what the information is. (Well, except Trump who advocated for murdering their families too).

Don't forget their oil. We mustn't leave the oil behind this time.

Offline antigoon

  • Not Elvis
  • DT.net Veteran
  • ****
  • Posts: 10217
  • Gender: Male
  • This was a triumph.
Re: Trump's First 100 Days
« Reply #102 on: January 26, 2017, 02:13:54 PM »
#taketheoil
#maga

Offline Podaar

  • DTF.org Alumni
  • ****
  • Posts: 5100
  • Gender: Male
  • Looks like Fish, tastes like chicken
Re: Trump's First 100 Days
« Reply #103 on: January 26, 2017, 02:19:19 PM »
Okay, that was pretty snide. I apologize.

Seriously though, I've been wondering about the "to the victor goes the spoils" speech. Frankly I'm concerned that such talk will put our currently deployed warriors in more danger than usual. Is that reactionary? Not likely? Would the Iraq warriors that our folks are assisting recognize it as bluster?

Offline Stadler

  • DTF.org Alumni
  • ****
  • Posts: 9081
  • Gender: Male
Re: Trump's First 100 Days
« Reply #104 on: January 26, 2017, 02:32:35 PM »
I fully believe torture works.... on some people.  Just like everything else in this world.  Somethings work for certain people and some don't.  Some people you can convince by sitting down and talking, some people you can convince by standing and yelling at them.  Different strokes for different folks.  My personal belief is that we should be allowed to torture but only in the most extreme cases and in a case where we believe the tortured will actually give up intel (and not as a punishment).  Now maybe that scenario means it will never happen, then so be it, but I don't think we should have a firm policy of no torture.
And taking a tangential course from XJ, even if it might be effective, which is certainly debatable, you still have to measure the overall cost in appearance and forfeiture of values. There's really no paradigm where it turns out to be a good move, particularly when you announce to the world that we think it's just swell. The ter'ists didn't give a shit anyway, and our allies now find us even more risky.

Perfectly valid, and likely right argument.  NOT the same as "TORTURE DOESN'T WORK". 

Personally?   If I was President?  I'd likely say that "everything is on the table, we're going to do whatever it takes to stop terrorism" then shut the fuck up about it.  Let those for whom it works wonder if they're going to be subject to it, and be done with it.  We would NOT, however, actually use it.  I think we're smarter than that.  We can figure it out other ways.