Well, I was going to thank you for a civil dialog involving a controversial topic. You were accommodating, and I do thank you for reserving any ad hominems until that last post. Your comments/questions were informative and I appreciate it.
I entered the discussion knowing that I’d be criticized and slandered for my opinions.
As I stated earlier, I don’t believe this issue is an easy one to tackle. Although, I will say this. There are some on this thread who have made the mistake of assuming that I would somehow resort to interrogating a suspect using a wet noodle or something. That would be an inaccurate assumption.
I was civil to you. Just stating the obvious. You have a distorted perception of waterboarding , and to most, perception is reality.
You will not accept any contrary argument, even from people experienced in it.
In response to my hypothetical scenario, you stated what if the accomplice was the wrong person, it frightens me. Yet I explained what waterboarding was, and its temporary effects. Residual effects of waterboarding are benign, yet your reasoning is skewed by your misperception.
At worst the “wrong person” would be pissed off,with no injuries or lingering psychological issues. How then could you justify not using the method if a loved ones life is on the line?
You know what real torture is? Being forced to listen to the song “muscrat love” over and over again while locked in your cell.