The Instigator
The_Serb
Con (against)
Losing
0 Points
The Contender
donald.keller
Pro (for)
Winning
7 Points

Should American soldiers, fighting in Iraq, be taught torture?

Do you like this debate?NoYes+1
Add this debate to Google Add this debate to Delicious Add this debate to FaceBook Add this debate to Digg  
Post Voting Period
The voting period for this debate has ended.
after 3 votes the winner is...
donald.keller
Voting Style: Open Point System: 7 Point
Started: 3/23/2014 Category: Politics
Updated: 2 years ago Status: Post Voting Period
Viewed: 1,821 times Debate No: 49725
Debate Rounds (4)
Comments (10)
Votes (3)

 

The_Serb

Con

I believe that we could have done better in Iraq, if we had taught our soldiers the best ways to torture the Iraqi insurgent?
will you take pro?
donald.keller

Pro

Argument I: On-Spot Intelligence.

The Army can not know everything on the spot. Often they require being able to access important information. The information can in times be as important as being needed to save lives.

While I don't believe in torture that leaves physical scars, psychological torture is very effective, a long side torture that does not leave scars. The ability to attract vital information on the spot can at times empirical to saving many lives and getting a mission done.

The alternative to the none-scarring torture is putting many lives at risk, be it the soldiers lives or another group. Sometimes a groups needs to go in to specifically get information. When given the chance, it'd often be better to extract the information then.

Argument II: Counter-Torture.

In teaching torture methods, they can be taught how to resist torture. This is vital to preventing important information that is dangerours to the Army if extracted from being taken from the soldiers.

Counter-Torture can not be taught without torture, as teaching counter-torture involves actually learning how they will torture someone... Therefore you must teach torture when teaching counter-torture. The benefits of counter-torture of empirical to an army's success against enemy inelegance gathering.
Debate Round No. 1
The_Serb

Con

The_Serb forfeited this round.
donald.keller

Pro

donald.keller forfeited this round.
Debate Round No. 2
The_Serb

Con

The_Serb forfeited this round.
donald.keller

Pro

donald.keller forfeited this round.
Debate Round No. 3
The_Serb

Con

The_Serb forfeited this round.
donald.keller

Pro

donald.keller forfeited this round.
Debate Round No. 4
10 comments have been posted on this debate. Showing 1 through 10 records.
Posted by Christian27 2 years ago
Christian27
I think that all Western males are already well informed about several way to torture a prisoner. It has simply become a prime time entertainment.
Posted by wrichcirw 2 years ago
wrichcirw
You should debate the_serb again...pause...not.
Posted by donald.keller 2 years ago
donald.keller
Also, sorry about all the FFs. It was okay to do 30 minute rounds when I accepted the debate (I should mention that he sent me the personal challenge, so it was only appropriate to accept.). However, the timer stayed on 00 00 00 00 for nearly a week (not sure if you guys remember that.) It resumed when me and him were asleep.
Posted by donald.keller 2 years ago
donald.keller
*Wrichcirw: I meant physical scars. Wounds and the such. Not emotional ones. Any form of torture will leave emotional scars, be them short-term or long-term.
Posted by wrichcirw 2 years ago
wrichcirw
PRO: "While I don't believe in torture that leaves physical scars, psychological torture is very effective, a long side torture that does not leave scars."

This totally ignores a phenomenon called PTSD...

---

As it is, pretty clear that PRO won, since CON actually took the PRO position. Conduct PRO because CON did not even proffer an argument for his case.
Posted by donald.keller 2 years ago
donald.keller
You've ignored the entirety of my argument. Your argument is based on only one form of torture. One that doesn't relate to anything I've said.
Posted by The_Serb 2 years ago
The_Serb
Can someone who has enjoyed beating another man's balls to a bloody pulp really be called a man?

http://youtu.be...
Posted by donald.keller 2 years ago
donald.keller
Your entire first argument is 1) Appeal to Emotion and 2) entirely circumstantial, and not likely.

Your second argument doesn't really answer what my case was about. It is also Appeal to Emotion and entirely circumstantial. You also argue using one example of a torture technique, out of the hundreds that a soldier can be taught.
Posted by The_Serb 2 years ago
The_Serb
This was what I would have posted as counter-arguments in round 2:

Argument I: On-Spot Intelligence.

The young Iraqi man is strapped down to a wooden bed, his arms and legs extended and securely fastened to the bed with leather straps. He was caught earlier today placing a roadside bomb, targeting passing US military vehicles. The American soldiers want to know where the bombs are made, and who makes them. To force him to confess they have unbuttoned his pants and exposed his sexual organs. They are now torturing him there with shock from an electric baton. It is designed for this very torture, and sends thousands of volts of pure pain into his testicles. He admits to being homosexual, much to the amusement of the American soldiers. The army sergeant tells his soldiers to get the information they want. One of them, takes hold of the Iraqi prisoners circumcised penis and rubs the sensitive tip in his own spit. This they tell the prisoner will enhance the pain. Scared , the prisoner tells them everything they want to know.

Yes, torture works.
There is no argument against that.
But it comes at a prize: The sexual perversion of your own soldiers.

Argument II: Counter-Torture
Yes you can learn your young army recruits about how to destroy a prisoner by attacking his masculinity through perverted forms of sexual torture. Almost all torture methods have an element of humiliation as well as pain. This example, a drowning torture becomes a opportunity for the soldiers to anally rape the prisoner speaks for it self.

http://1.bp.blogspot.com...
Posted by The_Serb 2 years ago
The_Serb
unfortunately I was offline a little while to long
3 votes have been placed for this debate. Showing 1 through 3 records.
Vote Placed by Actionsspeak 2 years ago
Actionsspeak
The_Serbdonald.kellerTied
Agreed with before the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Agreed with after the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Who had better conduct:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Made more convincing arguments:-Vote Checkmark-3 points
Used the most reliable sources:--Vote Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:03 
Reasons for voting decision: Con never made an argument (he had a great chance round 2, but let the time go to 0:00:00, then the time resumed when both users were asleep.)
Vote Placed by wrichcirw 2 years ago
wrichcirw
The_Serbdonald.kellerTied
Agreed with before the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Agreed with after the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Who had better conduct:-Vote Checkmark-1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Made more convincing arguments:--Vote Checkmark3 points
Used the most reliable sources:--Vote Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:01 
Reasons for voting decision: stupid debate. See comments. And CON, your fly is down.
Vote Placed by Mikal 2 years ago
Mikal
The_Serbdonald.kellerTied
Agreed with before the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Agreed with after the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Who had better conduct:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Made more convincing arguments:-Vote Checkmark-3 points
Used the most reliable sources:--Vote Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:03 
Reasons for voting decision: ff and con had no arguments