Waterboarding
 

Take a look at this article. It would be too bad if the CIA isn't given the latitude to keep up these practices. I'm all for it!


http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/30302830/

I wouldnt worry about the CIA. But the authors of the legal rationalization- I would imagine they are sweating.

Why? Considering these people have broken our laws, why should we be bound by any laws in return?

Sometimes two wrongs do make a right, 9/11 changed everything :smokin:

-spence

I totally agree with this,,,,, This country better toughen up because the people who want to hurt us play on our softness,,,,

It is amazing to me how fast people have forgotten what terrorists and Islamic militants did to innocent Americans when they kidnapped them,,,,

They cut their heads off.

Makes me think we should just cut the detainees heads off in response. Now that would get them talking.

-spence

Damn.. I thought this was a surfing thread..

Its a dangerous precedent.

I only hope Obama is playing chess....

Have you taken a look at the Max security prison these guys go too? It's a 4 star hotel compared to where these terrorists live. A complete joke. I have trouble with this big time.

I dont know that western living standards are something terrorist are particularly concerned about. But 23.5 hrs in a cell for years on end is no weekend at Bernies.

It's great. Aside from the fact that past intelligence officers have declared that no credible or useful evidence has ever been acquired through the techniques.

So yeah, let's continue to torture people even though previous experiences have shown them as an ineffective and unneeded practice.

3 square meals a day, healthcare, religious time, etc. JOKE! No matress, pee in cup or on the floor, if you get sick then you die, no lights, etc. These guys should have nothing and should live as long and painfully as possible. Too many good people died because of these radicals. They need to pay.

I don't usually go off on these rants but being ex-military with a top level security clearance I had access to some sensitive stuff. It's too bad these documents got leaked out. I don't care if we got little or no information from these techniques. If it made them feel like they were going to die then good. They should suffer. Too many innocent hard working families are missing loved ones because of their jealousy of our freedoms and way of life.

After speaking about this with several Marine officers I know, about things like this, almost to a man they told me that this only proves the point that we shouldn't take prisoners. If they are caught in a combat zone, armed and have shot at US forces or their allies, they just get shot. Most of the ones I spoke too, said if they would have been the guy to find Saddam, they would have shot him and sworn it looked like he was going for a weapon. If there is a chance the guy will be released to harm their brother marines, they want to shoot first.

Yep, and they should realease the video so we can all enjoy the suffering.

-spence

Are you one of those people who think 9/11 happened over jealousy??

:rotf3::rotf3::rotf3::rotf3::rotf3:

Oil, religion, or whatever else caused 9/11, the fact is they committed an act that made an impact on many innocent people. I guess I'm not as smart as you to know the exact reasons why 9/11 happened. I don't know how you could laugh at any of this. All bets off with 9/11. I don't know why I got started on this thread. Too much coffee, pissed about the economy, and then I read that people who killed Americans and if they were free would kill more are being considered torture victims. Sore spot with me and it's personal. Think I'll leave this forum for awhile and cool down.

Too bad the documents got leaked out?

Because the US public shouldn't know that the government tortures people, in the name of saving lives. Yet, those who have been tortured never had any useful information. You're out of your mind.

If the torturing had yielded useful evidence, then you'd be cheering about the documents being released.

Also, the documents weren't "leaked out". They were released.

I don't think they're 'jealous of our freedoms'. I think they're pissed that we effed around in their own lands. Let's not forget that the United States used to have Bin Laden on their payroll during the 1980's Afghan wars.

Based on everything I've learned, in a nutshell...

Al Qaeda seeks to overthrow the Saudi government and establish what they feel is an Islamic government that's more true to the Koran instead of a corrput Saudi monarchy.

We're simply standing in their way, and they feel our economy is our underbelly. Hence the attack on the WTC 9/11.

The "they hate us for our freedoms" line is a bunch of crap.

Well, no. The biggest gift we could give to terrorists is to cast aside our core values in response to their threat. This, more than anything, proves to the Islamic world that our system is just as flawed as the European and Socialist systems and dictatorships that bin Laden argues have failed muslims around the world.

-spence

On this I'd tend to agree, to a point. It has to be very muddy in an urban combat zone against insurgents where the line between enemy and local is difficult to rapidly determine. In general we should give our troops freedom here and the benefit of doubt in the context of the situation.

That being said, they still have rules and must operate within appliable laws, as messy as the business of war is. To kill someone whom you believe to be unarmed for instance, just to make it easier, is ethically wrong IMHO and a very slippery slope.

-spence

The vast majority of those held at GTMO were never charged with being radicals. Hell, most were set free...

But for those that we thought had information, the memos describe what the Government could legally do to them. For instance, as David Corn commented...

This sure doesn't sound like a picnic to me.

Doesn't sound a lot like America either.

It does sound like the kind of behavior America has long stood against.

Now I have no love for those who have done us wrong, but I wish for swift justice, not sadistic suffering.

-spence

Like we sould care less what they think about our
core values, and i don't think they care either.

Does bin Laden argue we have failed the Muslim people or their relegion?

1993-WTC bombing- Yousef, Al Qaeda trained ,6 innocents killed over 1000 wounded. 17 kindergatners trapped 5 hours in an elevator.

2000- USS Cole 17 killed 40 injured. Al Queda took credit.

2001-9/11 3000 innocents killed over 6000 injured.

These were all pre-meditated attacks by ununiformed combatents by Al Queda.

While I'm against outright torture, to use the Geneva, name, rank and serial #
rules for un ununiformed combatents is ludicrous.

Like i should care what these killers think of our core values.

Ok, then what do you think about our core values? If you agree that torture is wrong, but we have tortured doesn't that bother you? Nobody is asking for a Hogan's Heros style of detainment. I think most rational folks understand the difference, and it's not black and white.

The primary reason al Qaeda seems to get so much support among moderates is because the arguement that the West is against Islam has been reinforced by our actions. Why else would we compramise the rule of law, something that we've held high for 200+ years?

-spence

what next? torturing murder and rape suspects?

The laws of war, those four words are probably the largest oxymoron of all time.

I am not finding fault with what you said Spence, and I did cut up your post somewhat. The only law in any war from my point of view is that american soldiers come home whole and unharmed. Sorry, but even unarmed civilians could be lookouts. If that civilian is going to give away a plan or position of troops, go, be with allah, Mr. Civilian. That being said, you can't kill everyone you see, while at war.

I think our core value of not inflicting excuciating pain to our combatant prisoners is good. Having said that, stress standing positions, exposing prisoners to cold or 100deg heat and sleep deprevation is not ,imo excruciating pain.
Our own Seals and Special Forces go through that as part of their training.
Personally i'm against waterboarding as i couldn't do that to someone myself.
Bring on the truth serum, long hours of interrigation, and sleep deprivation.

We need a new policy for ununiformed terrorists, whoops sorry-"man-caused disasters", somewhere between the Geneva Rules for uniformed comdbatents and those ununiformed who use terrorist tatctics to kill innocent citizens.

Btw, ya didn't answer my question - Does bin Laden argue we have failed the Muslim people or their relegion?

From what I've seen on special forces interrogation training makes it appear to be very intense and realistic, and I'd even bet that many people forget they are being trained.

But even that being said, it's not the same thing. Oh and I might add that our troops have volunteered for the training!

Terrorists are still terrorists, you're reading the talking points wrong :laugha:

But I'd agree and it's something I argued Bush should have done once we were in Afghanistan. If other countries didn't agree at least you made the effort and can claim more freedom to do what you think is right. Instead, Bush simply claimed that rules no longer applied to the USA while he demanded every other country followed the letter of the law.

Bin Laden is a master manipulator so I wouldn't put it past him to have argued just about every aspect of this issue. But generally speaking, his ilk say that the current and past systems have failed the people. Some certainly will argue that the systems are not compatible with the religion.

But it's important to note here that not all militant Muslims take to violence for the same reasons. Most of it traditionally has been political in nature. Religious violence is newer and is exacerbated by the political violence. Most importantly though is that it's not a unified threat against the West as portrayed by Bush, who has lumped Iran, al Qaeda and Hamas into the same bucket and pretended there's a one size fits all solution. In reality there are multiple facets to the overall threat and groups derive motivation from many, if not often local, inputs.

In the end we should stay true to our values, carry a big stick and see problems for what they really are. I think the American people are smart enough to comprehend a little nuance.

-spence

Amen Brother Amen!

__________________________________________________ __________

AND MAY I ADD THAT THE TERRORISTS,OR PC "MAN-MADE DISASTERS", VOLUNTEER FOR TRAINING TO KILL INNOCENT PEOPLE !

You prolly went through as much excruciating pain as a memeber of your college varsity karate team. ;)

I don't use "talking points", wouldn't know where to find them even if i wanted too. :doh:
Just use what i see, hear, read and when sorted out, what my common sense tells me.

Your answer to the question is interesting.

I think you're missing the point.

We're using these interrogation techniques on prisoners whom we simply believe might have information. You're presuming they're guilty or that everyone we've captured is a terrorist. This just isn't the case. There are credible examples of people being detained, shipped to rendition centers, tortured and then dropped on the street because they were found to have no informational value.

There is difference between someone who becomes a Jihadist because they think Islam is under attack, someone who shoots at Americans because we're driving down their street, and someone who's plotting to proactively kill Americans or attack our interests.

That's um, a different kind of pain :hihi:

It was a joke.

How so?

Rereading my post I'd not that when I say religious violence being newer, I'm speaking in the context of modern Jihad this century rather than historic Jihad's since the Crusades. To some (like Bin Laden) they are the same, but in practical terms they can be thought of quite differently.

-spence

Spence, there's a lot that we see eye-to-eye on. However, I don't think you could be more inaccurate with that statement.

In general, the American people are idiots. People in this country lack any sense of foresight or critical thinking skills. There is very much a mentality of "the news said it, so it must be true."

People splinter into their cliques, watch one station for news, don't research issues further and then complain about what's happening right this minute. There is no sense of yesterday or tomorrow, only this minute.

Unfortunately, those of us that occupy this forum are not an accurate representation of the American public in whole. The people that post in here (well most, there are some here that *are* representative of the ignorant American public) are intelligent people, capable of forming their own opinions. While some of what's posted here may sometimes be regurgitation of what was read on the internet or heard on the morning talk-radio show, there is almost always critical thinking behind it.

Spence is opposed to waterboarding because it brings back bad memories of getting swirlies from the tough guys in the math club back in high school. To this day, he still can't go into public restrooms unless they have locking doors.

Had you been in math club you'd know there were no tough guys :musc:

-spence

I was implying that they were tough compared to you, Spence. Of course, if you got your entire home economics club together to take them on it would have been a real donnybrook. Is it true that you used to keep a rolling pin in your bookbag for protection?

I really didn't have much need for protection. The thugs knew if they took me out they wouldn't have a bookie.

You see, we practiced applied mathmatics :lama:

-spence

__________________________________________________ ___________

Hmm no, i didn't miss the point, just filling in all the blanks. :hihi:

In answer to your question,what i found interesting was your quote above..

If my memory serves me right, and it hasn't always at times lately :),
I remember Busch after 9/11 declaring war on terror wherever it was, where terrorists were killing innocents.

It was to be a new kind of war,
taking decades to fight using intelligence, disruption of terror $ and communication, and taking pre-emptive strikes where needed with new as well as old tactics.

Doesn't seem to me like he lumped or used one size fits all tactics in dealing with the three you mentioned.

War is hell , I think the american people get to much info for there own good , this country has done fine in the past so dont knock it know . I have faith in our military and armed forces more than I have in the lieing back stabing polititians that bull .... there way into office. This country needs to be ruthless if its going to survive this war ....The first bomb they blow up over here youll see these bleeding heart libs begging someone to help them ...Thats a fact jack

Bush certainly took the position that the post 9/11 world required a new approach to security. But think about how he decided to apply this new approach. Saddam and Bin Laden were treated as the same regardless of the reality. Iran and Bin Laden were treated as the same regardless of the reality. Political terrorism like in Chechnya or Palestine was mixed with Religious extremism like in Pakistan as if they all had the same root causes.

The only common factor is Islam, yet Bush insists we're not at war with Islam. This is the contradiction that's been exploited to gain sympathy for those who do mean to do us harm. People (on the Right) are always trying to knock this, who cares what they think etc..., but the reality is that without mainstream sympathy the real terror organizations have little leverage.

The big problem with the Bush approach is that he had an opportunity to divide these challenges and deal with them as more fragmented issues. Instead they largely used the rhetoric around terrorism to win domestic elections, and in the process have driven our enemies closer together.

-spence

Obama won...he has apologized for US and we no longer have any enemies...didn't you get the memo..? it's just a matter of time......

The rest of the story is that we actually obtained some high value information using these techniques, unfortunately I didn't notice the article on the front page of the Providence Urinal today like the initial article. In fact we thwarted a 9/11 style attack on LA. In the end no one was killed by being waterboarded and no Americans died in a terror attack. Was it worth it, ask your aquaintences who live in LA.

Did we now? And that was as a result of torturing 2 prisoners that didn't give up any useful information, according to a Bush security adviser. It has been brought up more than a few times by past security officials that little, if any, useful information was acquired.

Between the two of them, the prisoners were waterboarded 266 times. Can you somehow explain to me what they could get out of the 266th waterboarding that they couldn't get from the 200th?

While torturing at all is illegal and the appropriate people should be prosecuted, people overlook the excessive use of those actions that took place as well.

One last thing, there is no clear information that any attack on LA was thwarted. Cheney *hinted* that a 9/11 attack on LA *might* have been thwarted. But because the idea was *hinted* at, supporters of the previous administration are spinning the hell out of it and stating it as fact.

After the numerous infringements on the privacy of average American citizens, I refuse to believe the Bush administration would not be extremely public about preventing a 9/11 sized attack. They had lost all credibility and fought an uphill battle for the last 3 years he was in office. This would have given Bush the much needed boost to push through more of the Big Brother policies that he wanted enacted.