question them check all your facts , warn authorities that u are suspecting some attacks but not torture them. I am sure police have alots of ways of getting information out without being inhuman.
So if the same situation what would u do? torture them to get information and then what u create 1000 more of these terrorist who are more than happy to sacrifice their life for a one way ticket to heaven
"You do not use torture. If he is innocent then the state is just as bad as the terrorists. What do terrorists do? They kill and terrorise innocent people hence their name"
I just have to disagree. Your argument assumes that intelligence is wrong and this far from often the case. I will back my country to torture someone suspected of being involved in a terrorist attack if it saves lives. Being suspected of something, to me means having some sort of evidence, not just that the person smells bad or looks bad. I don't really see the difference between a group of people employed by a government agency judging someone on the evidence in front of them and deciding on a course of action and letting a panel of often uneducated people deciding the fate of someone in a court of law. The former is often better as it can help prevent a crime whereas the latter is about meting out a punishment.
I don't like even having these thoughts but I believe I am a realist living in an imperfect and oftentimes dangerous world.
Agree and in this case we should try Bush, Blair...
It is not being Bobo or leftist to be against violence....
I am for free markets, capitalism and all but I just can't see what killing terrorists would do except giving the next generation of Terrorists even more reasons to blow us up...
i see that no-one cares for the innocent indians that died yesterday, but are more worried about how the USA is perceived.
But to get to your post, well, it looks like not too much information is available yet regarding who might have done it. Possibly, as in quite a few other cases, muslim extremists, which might as well be from inside India. It also appears that the targets where somewhat associated with western patrons. But do you really think any terrorist attack needs to be called for? why did they bomb Kuta on Bali (which has a Hindu majority!)? Because they dislike this way of living, they have some weirdo theory that tells them it is justified to kill whomever they like, and they found out how to build bombs. I doubt it is about the target - it is about bombing _something_. I think it might be viable to look for a reason when it comes to conflicts like Kashmir or Northern Ireland. In the current case, today's terrorists, looks like they just bomb whomever they can hit.
Innocent people are innocent people, whereever they are killed.
I share the view on the UN, but still, I HOPE it can work someday because it seems to me the only solution to make things better and to prevent any nation to be "cow boys" in the far west.
My last words before going back to work will be for all the families and victims in Mumbaï. (geoexpat you're killing my productivity!!)
I am not saying only torture creates terrorist. There are many other factors