You want my opinion? My opinion is that not one person on this thread has any idea of the complexity of the subject, not one of you could make the decision, not one of you could even get your head around the repercussions of any decision that is made, not one of you, and I include myself in that equation as well, but in an effort to make yourselves look better than the next or previous poster you pontificate and deliberate pointless potential scenarios and view it from a thoroughly Western narrow minded aspect, but hey, you carry on, its been fun to watch you all have a go at each other.... and at me....

I agree, we dont have a real idea what torture is, as you say we only have our own Western eyes, and we see things that way.

Surely torture is knowing that you have been sentenced to have your hand cut off for stealing, and knowing that you will have 100 lashes before being stoned to death., quite aceptable in some countries.

We would class those examples as toruture, well I would.

That is our Western view, I agree that if terrorists are tortured, there could be more attacks, by way of revenge for torturing terrorists, but I am asking the question, that if this is the case, it is the torturing they would find so offensive, or the fact the the torturers are from the West?

The problem is that the proposed hypothetical situations are all bollocks, because as I keep saying, in the real world, there is never a defined person whose torture would save the world. (as it were).

None of us are ever going to have to make that choice and to suggest it is the purest shite used by people who desperately want to justify torturing people.

The filth would love to revoke Habeas corpus, so that they could slam away terrorist suspects without ever having to justify their actions, or ever have to soil their hands with anything so mundane as proof.

They keep pushing for it, but so far so good, and they still actually have to justify why they want to keep some suspected terrorist banged up.

I simply refuse to trust government with torture.

Is there anyone on here so deranged that they will stand up and say that government can be trusted withe the right to torture whomsoever they see fit?

Or genital mutilation/circumcision? Just because they have practices that we see as disgusting and degrading, do we really have to try and keep up with them?

So do you think that is the "race" of the torturer that they would find more offensive than the methods used?

What is wrong with things like having your hand cut off for stealing? I'm serious, I'm not being facetious, why not? If you come from an opulent western world where everything is there for you and if someone cuts your benefits then you get all huffy then yeah, it must seem hard and bad and nasty, but if you live in a country that doesn't have a pot to piss in then that type of punishment is what saves lives, it stops people becoming selfish.

People focus on this sort of thing when they mention, for one, Islam, what they never mention is the benefits Islam gives to its people, the nourishment it encourages, the close ties it forms between people, they overlook how they look at money, something our own bankers and money men could do well to learn.

Like I said, none of us could even begin to contemplate having to make the decision, on the face of it you can easily say, "Don't stoop to their level", but personally I feel that an astonishingly arrogant attitude to carry in life, like WE are the moral compass of the world.... maybe, just maybe, we have got it wrong and thats why we are constantly getting it wrong.... who knows.

Where to start, punishment, shoud be given out, to make that person think about the whys and wherefores of their actions, and hope that it makes the reflect and hopefull they will change to be a better person.

Once their hand is cut off, there is no going back, you would have to carry your past crime around with you for the rest of your life for the world to see.

You would become an untouchable, imagine living until 85, having had your hand cut of at 18 for stealing, 67 years would be a hell a long time to be punished. Also the employment prospects are nil for them, so the punishment goes on and on, comdemed to a life of misery, for one criminal act.

Isalm I am sure can be a wonderful religion for some, there are some so devoted so there must be something in it for them, big time.
But I cannot believe how Islam can be see that way by all its "practicantes" (word in English not found)
For example the poor peasant woman that has been "given in marriage" to become a slave in her new household, and where terrible indignities and restrictions are placed on you just for being born female.

That is my western view because it is the only one I have.

I agree with that. Islam is no better or worse than Christianity.

If the Christian people in the world were as poor as the Muslims then it would be the Christians blowing up Muslim buildings, I'm pretty sure of that.

And most of bad stuff we see in Islam such as putting down women, stoning, capital punishment etc, is mentioned in the bible and practiced by Christians not so long ago (or still being practiced).

Re, torture, it shouldnt be necessary in any civilised society, but then as Ghandi said, we are still a long way from that.

bil - no-one is talking about saving the world - just using one evil to avert another. The discussion technique you have just used is called hyperbole I believe.

Are you suggesting that I am desperate to justify torture? I am not. All we are discussing is whether it can ever be justified. You have said that it can be - if your own family is involved. I agree with that but I would take it further and say that other families could also justify it and therefore, unfortunately it is justifiable.
Maybe but that is totally irrelevant - it is nothing to do with torture although I can see why some might have the two issues confused..

I doubt it - but no-one is saying it because that, too, is totally irrelevant.

The latest comments have renewed my faith in human nature, well, maybe not entirely, but it seems to disprove an earlier theory that we are all muppets – funnily enough by a muppet coming in from the cold.

Terrorism, torture, Islam; it seems a natural progression in any such discussion, and I agree that it’s the biggest subject in our current lives – the conflict between Christianity and Islam. You can try and dress it up in any number of ways, usually by prattling on about irrelevances, but the core problem remains.

The chattering classes on both sides twitter away in different languages, following their different Gods, but eventually it comes down to the reality – hate-filled faces confronting each other on the ground, either in Manhattan or a sun scorched desert.

And torture? The majority of the people on both sides seem to agree that it is necessary for their respective greater good. Isn’t it in their bibles somewhere?

Wow I don't know whet to start to comment on that comment but here goes...

I'm a bit hazy as to when the last time Christian terrorists blew up hundreds of people.

Equally I'm a bit hazy on just where in the developed world we are still stoning people or killing them for apostasy.

The people who blew up the twin towers came from one of the richest countries in the world and most of them were from nice middle class backgrounds.

The major difference between Christianity and Islam is very simple, Islam is still in the 6th century whereas Christianity (well at least the majority of Christians) has moved into the 21st century.

Oh and BTW I'm an atheist and I dislike Christianity as much as I dislike Islam
but to equate the two is just plainly ridiculous and far too simplistic IMO

To return to the topic, what some commentators are saying about being able to contemplate doing it if it was personal as opposed to generic, well it seems to me that is just a variation on the NIMBY attitude a lot of people have nowadays.

Very good post, Michael 123 and I am in agreement, although I would not class myself as a religeous person, I do belive that we should live iwth the christian value of "love thy neighbour", in the broad sence.

Islam may be calimed to be a peacefull religion, by some, I have yet to see this. In my opinion is is based on the premise that all females are evil, they must be modest and covered, because if they dare show themselves, men will not be able to control their desires, but if that happens the men would not be at fault, that lies with the women.

When a woman is raped, she is the one who is punished, usually for bringing dishonour on the family.

The Christian religion was very barbaric, and may still be in some isolated places, but that argument is not really relevant today, it is like continually bringing up Hitler when talking about Germans today.

But we have moved on, and ,the west has its faults, crime rates, drugs etc, but still I would not like to live in a place where there is state sponsored brutality for falling in love with the wrong person, and a host of other minor infringements of a twisted version of law.

Very good post, Michael 123 and I am in agreement, although I would not class myself as a religeous person, I do belive that we should live iwth the christian value of "love thy neighbour", in the broad sence.

Islam may be calimed to be a peacefull religion, by some, I have yet to see this. In my opinion is is based on the premise that all females are evil, they must be modest and covered, because if they dare show themselves, men will not be able to control their desires, but if that happens the men would not be at fault, that lies with the women.

When a woman is raped, she is the one who is punished, usually for bringing dishonour on the family.

The Christian religion was very barbaric, and may still be in some isolated places, but that argument is not really relevant today, it is like continually bringing up Hitler when talking about Germans today.

But we have moved on, and ,the west has its faults, crime rates, drugs etc, but still I would not like to live in a place where there is state sponsored brutality for falling in love with the wrong person, and a host of other minor infringements of a twisted version of law.

Very good post, Michael 123 and I am in agreement, although I would not class myself as a religeous person, I do belive that we should live iwth the christian value of "love thy neighbour", in the broad sence.

Islam may be calimed to be a peacefull religion, by some, I have yet to see this. In my opinion is is based on the premise that all females are evil, they must be modest and covered, because if they dare show themselves, men will not be able to control their desires, but if that happens the men would not be at fault, that lies with the women.

When a woman is raped, she is the one who is punished, usually for bringing dishonour on the family.

The Christian religion was very barbaric, and may still be in some isolated places, but that argument is not really relevant today, it is like continually bringing up Hitler when talking about Germans today.

But we have moved on, and ,the west has its faults, crime rates, drugs etc, but still I would not like to live in a place where there is state sponsored brutality for falling in love with the wrong person, and a host of other minor infringements of a twisted version of law.

@ JLFS An equally good post on your part :-) you covered the nearly all the points I would have made if I had been asked to explain further