|
 |
|
|
|
 |
|
 |
|
Political Threads This section is for Political Threads - Enter at your own risk. If you say you don't want to see what someone posts - don't read it :hihi: |
05-03-2011, 06:45 PM
|
#2
|
Registered User
Join Date: Nov 2007
Posts: 12,632
|
"Panetta acknowledges information from waterboarded detainees was used to help plan mission at bin Laden's compound - NBC News"
|
|
|
|
05-04-2011, 01:44 AM
|
#3
|
Registered User
Join Date: Nov 2003
Location: RI
Posts: 21,483
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by buckman
|
This article doesn't prove that waterboarding "works", in fact it doesn't even says that the name of the courier was obtained using harsh interrogation techniques. Reality seems to be that information was used from a variety of sources, one having been a person that had previously been waterboarded. This is no way implies that the waterboarding was the reason he gave up the information...
You seem to want to think that because waterboarding was present in the system at some time it must be the reason we were successful. This doesn't pass a basic smell test. Sure, it's possible, but if you don't know, and we do know there are numerous other legal interrogation techniques that could produce the same intel, you really can't say.
If you read my old posts I believe I've said that I'm not against waterboarding as much as I'm against us using it while saying we don't torture. Let's not use bad logic to justify behavior we can't reconcile with our own stated values.
-spence
|
|
|
|
05-04-2011, 05:02 AM
|
#4
|
Registered User
Join Date: Nov 2007
Posts: 12,632
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by spence
If you read my old posts I believe I've said that I'm not against waterboarding.
-spence
|
  
you should be waterboarded for some of the things that you try to run up the flag pole
|
|
|
|
05-04-2011, 09:17 AM
|
#5
|
Registered User
Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: Mansfield
Posts: 4,834
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by spence
This article doesn't prove that waterboarding "works", in fact it doesn't even says that the name of the courier was obtained using harsh interrogation techniques. Reality seems to be that information was used from a variety of sources, one having been a person that had previously been waterboarded. This is no way implies that the waterboarding was the reason he gave up the information...
You seem to want to think that because waterboarding was present in the system at some time it must be the reason we were successful. This doesn't pass a basic smell test. Sure, it's possible, but if you don't know, and we do know there are numerous other legal interrogation techniques that could produce the same intel, you really can't say.
If you read my old posts I believe I've said that I'm not against waterboarding as much as I'm against us using it while saying we don't torture. Let's not use bad logic to justify behavior we can't reconcile with our own stated values.
-spence
|
I'm sure Eric Holder could have got the information from them. 
|
|
|
|
05-04-2011, 11:35 AM
|
#6
|
Registered User
Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: Mansfield
Posts: 4,834
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by spence
This article doesn't prove that waterboarding "works", in fact it doesn't even says that the name of the courier was obtained using harsh interrogation techniques. Reality seems to be that information was used from a variety of sources, one having been a person that had previously been waterboarded. This is no way implies that the waterboarding was the reason he gave up the information...
You seem to want to think that because waterboarding was present in the system at some time it must be the reason we were successful. This doesn't pass a basic smell test. Sure, it's possible, but if you don't know, and we do know there are numerous other legal interrogation techniques that could produce the same intel, you really can't say.
If you read my old posts I believe I've said that I'm not against waterboarding as much as I'm against us using it while saying we don't torture. Let's not use bad logic to justify behavior we can't reconcile with our own stated values.
-spence
|
Google "Leon Penata interview" and try to spin what he said. 
|
|
|
|
05-04-2011, 05:45 PM
|
#7
|
Registered User
Join Date: Nov 2003
Location: RI
Posts: 21,483
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by buckman
Google "Leon Penata interview" and try to spin what he said. 
|
There's no spin, read my post above again.
Interestingly the report is now that KSM didn't even give any information up while being waterboarded, but that he actually lied about the link and threw us off the track. In other words, the waterboarding led to bad information.
Paneta's comment seems to be on track. Intel came from a variety of sources. Some sources had been subjected to enhanced techniques at some time, but he makes no connection between waterboarding and specific intel.
If waterboarding is ethical or legal is one argument, but the idea that it directly led (or even had a significant impact) to Bin Laden's capture doesn't seem to be based on any facts.
Because it's not possible to discount 100%, the issue is being used for political reasons.
-spence
|
|
|
|
05-05-2011, 06:47 AM
|
#8
|
Registered User
Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: Mansfield
Posts: 4,834
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by spence
There's no spin, read my post above again.
Interestingly the report is now that KSM didn't even give any information up while being waterboarded, but that he actually lied about the link and threw us off the track. In other words, the waterboarding led to bad information.
Paneta's comment seems to be on track. Intel came from a variety of sources. Some sources had been subjected to enhanced techniques at some time, but he makes no connection between waterboarding and specific intel.
If waterboarding is ethical or legal is one argument, but the idea that it directly led (or even had a significant impact) to Bin Laden's capture doesn't seem to be based on any facts.
Because it's not possible to discount 100%, the issue is being used for political reasons.
-spence
|
You are the Master Spinster Spence. Well done...
In a world that Obama preached of before becoming President, Gitmo would be closed, trials would be in NY and UBL would be free.
I heard a great analogy to this. Obama is like a teenage kid who thought he knew everything, then grew up and realized Dad (GWB) was right all along.
|
|
|
|
05-05-2011, 06:51 AM
|
#9
|
Also known as OAK
Join Date: Apr 2003
Location: Westlery, RI
Posts: 10,413
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by buckman
then grew up and realized Dad (GWB) was right all along.
|
Except of course about that damn Iraq mess....
|
Bryan
Originally Posted by #^^^^^^^^^^^&
"For once I agree with Spence. UGH. I just hope I don't get the urge to go start buying armani suits to wear in my shop"
|
|
|
05-05-2011, 07:19 AM
|
#10
|
Registered User
Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: Mansfield
Posts: 4,834
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by RIROCKHOUND
Except of course about that damn Iraq mess....
|
Don't forget Lybia. Another war started.
|
|
|
|
05-05-2011, 08:26 AM
|
#11
|
Registered User
Join Date: May 2008
Location: Mansfield, MA
Posts: 5,238
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by buckman
I heard a great analogy to this. Obama is like a teenage kid who thought he knew everything, then grew up and realized Dad (GWB) was right all along.
|
That's a terrible analogy. What exactly was Bush "right" about? Shifting focus away from Al Qaeda and onto Iraq based on shoddy, manufactured "evidence" and then thrusting us into a Trillion Dollar war that accomplished literally nothing of value for the long-term safety of the American people?
Or was he right about the part where he helped progress this country to a point where Americans are forced to live in a Police state where granny will get diddled while trying to get on a plane because her fake hip set of a metal detector.
But hey, at least he got the guy who "tried to kill [his] daddy."
|
|
|
|
05-05-2011, 09:12 AM
|
#12
|
Registered User
Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: Mansfield
Posts: 4,834
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by JohnnyD
That's a terrible analogy. What exactly was Bush "right" about? Shifting focus away from Al Qaeda and onto Iraq based on shoddy, manufactured "evidence" and then thrusting us into a Trillion Dollar war that accomplished literally nothing of value for the long-term safety of the American people?
Or was he right about the part where he helped progress this country to a point where Americans are forced to live in a Police state where granny will get diddled while trying to get on a plane because her fake hip set of a metal detector.
But hey, at least he got the guy who "tried to kill [his] daddy."
|
And the guy who had made it his life mission to kill you and your family. Patriot Act, Gitmo, enhanced interrogation,military tribunals...all Bush policies that Obama either kept or added too.
It's not a"trillion dollar war"....get your talking points from a more reliable source.
|
|
|
|
05-09-2011, 10:52 AM
|
#13
|
Registered User
Join Date: Jul 2008
Posts: 20,441
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by JohnnyD
That's a terrible analogy. What exactly was Bush "right" about? Shifting focus away from Al Qaeda and onto Iraq based on shoddy, manufactured "evidence" and then thrusting us into a Trillion Dollar war that accomplished literally nothing of value for the long-term safety of the American people?
Or was he right about the part where he helped progress this country to a point where Americans are forced to live in a Police state where granny will get diddled while trying to get on a plane because her fake hip set of a metal detector.
But hey, at least he got the guy who "tried to kill [his] daddy."
|
"What exactly was Bush "right" about? "
He saved 1.2 million lives in Africa, with his single-handed pushingh for massive AIDS funding. Does that count for anything? In a fair world, Bush gets the Nobel Peace Prize for that. I believe that he also did a better job of preventing further Al Queda attacks after 09/11 (on Obama's watch, some attacks have been avoided only because bombs didn't go off, and the Fort Hood guy was obviously successful).
"onto Iraq based on shoddy, manufactured "evidence"'
Many, many countries (and the U.N.) felt the evidence was compelling. Back then, very few folks spoke out against the war in Iraq, not until it became politically popular.
"that accomplished literally nothing of value for the long-term safety of the American people?"
Wrong, absolutely false. You need to re-think where you get your news from. I was there. I saw villages being re-built, I saw schools, roads, mosques, and hospitals being built. I spent 48 hours in a village where my entire company were treated like royalty, because these folks could not contain their joy at how much better their futures looked, thanks to us. I still get birthday cards from some of those people.
Johnny, you won't hear this on MSNBC, but Iraq is a much better place today than it was under Saddam. Many folks there know they have us to thank for it. Some of those people will keep that in mind when Al Queda tries to recruit them.
In my opinion, you have been absolutely duped by whoever you listen to.
"he helped progress this country to a point where Americans are forced to live in a Police state where granny will get diddled while trying to get on a plane because her fake hip set of a metal detector."
OK, Johnny. So if there was an airline that didn't have any security apparatus in place...you would fly on that airline?
Last edited by Jim in CT; 05-09-2011 at 11:30 AM..
|
|
|
|
05-05-2011, 07:20 PM
|
#14
|
Registered User
Join Date: Nov 2003
Location: RI
Posts: 21,483
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by buckman
In a world that Obama preached of before becoming President, Gitmo would be closed, trials would be in NY and UBL would be free.
|
This doesn't make any sense, unless you think the CIA and our Armed Forces are completely incompetent. Reality is that there are a lot of very effective and legal methods to get information that the experts seem to think work quite well.
You just don't seem to be able to accept the fact that Obama get's to take credit for authorizing this mission.
-spence
|
|
|
|
05-06-2011, 10:07 AM
|
#15
|
Registered User
Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: Mansfield
Posts: 4,834
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by spence
This doesn't make any sense, unless you think the CIA and our Armed Forces are completely incompetent. Reality is that there are a lot of very effective and legal methods to get information that the experts seem to think work quite well.
You just don't seem to be able to accept the fact that Obama get's to take credit for authorizing this mission.
-spence
|
I can't qoute any woman's magazines or anything, but from what I understand, since Obama's second day in office(when he banned enhanced interrogation) the information we get is not the same as we used to get. It worked.
I credit Obama with making the right choice and using the information to kill UBL. I have never said anything negative about that.
You however are in severe denial.
|
|
|
|
Posting Rules
|
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts
HTML code is Off
|
|
|
All times are GMT -5. The time now is 02:51 AM.
|
| |