Waterboarding Hypothetical Question

[Grub (Lenlyvit)]

The use of waterboarding has been talked a lot about with some saying it is a harsher interrogation technique while others say it is torture. That being said, here is a hypothetical situation for you.

Right this second a terrorist is being arrested and he has information on a 9/11 style attack that will happen tomorrow. The target of the attack is where you live. You and your entire family will be in town tomorrow and will unfortunately die as a result of that attack.

If this were the case, would you permit that newly jailed terrorist to be waterboarded or would you accept the inevitable attack and have you and your family perish?

[Greek People Nation (GPN)]

I would use it. How can you call it torture when our special force go through waterboarding during their training. There is no such thing as torture when comes to saving lives of your family and fellow country men.

[New Dracora]

May 24, 2009 10:06:09 GMT -5 Greek People Nation (GPN) said:

I would use it. How can you call it torture when our special force go through waterboarding during their training. There is no such thing as torture when comes to saving lives of your family and fellow country men.

Awesome! In that case bring out the racks and thumbscrews baby because torture's comin' back!

'course never mind if you didn't go around p.ssing off half the world with you're obscenely high arrogance that you'd not be a target for terrorism in the first place.

Or the fact that people will admit to anything under torture - even if they didn't do it.

Or that torture didn't work at stopping crime (let alone terrorism) in the middle ages, so it's likely not going to work in the modern times either.

Or that once you're known to endorse torture publically, you're just about going to p.ss off everyone else who isn't p.ssed off with you already (hence increasing terrorism/decreasing foreign relations).

Or that torture is the most ineffective means of obtaining intelligence and that there are much much better and more effective ways of obtaining information.


...I think you get the point. Not that it matters really, what with the economic depression and all making the US more and more irrelevant with each passing day (and hence lowering the chances of it becoming a target of terrorism again).

[Grub (Lenlyvit)]

In the United States, the Department of Defense orders all branches of the services to implement comprehensive Survival, Evasion, Resistance and Escape (S.E.R.E.) training programs. In the S.E.R.E. training, they waterboard the people going through that training. They have been doing this for 20-30 years. Has the US gov't been torturing their trainees all this time?

[Ananke II]

I wouldn't countenance waterboarding to save my life, no. Torture is torture and I'd very much prefer living in a society, which didn't undermine it's own principles by engaging in it. Besides the risk that you end up doing it to innocent people is just too great imo. The law should protect everyone to the same extent. Just because you're suspected of terrorism rather than some other kind of crime shouldn't invalidate the innocent until proven guilty doctrine.

[Greek People Nation (GPN)]

May 24, 2009 10:35:11 GMT -5 New Dracora said:

May 24, 2009 10:06:09 GMT -5 Greek People Nation (GPN) said:

I would use it. How can you call it torture when our special force go through waterboarding during their training. There is no such thing as torture when comes to saving lives of your family and fellow country men.

Awesome! In that case bring out the racks and thumbscrews baby because torture's comin' back!

'course never mind if you didn't go around p.ssing off half the world with you're obscenely high arrogance that you'd not be a target for terrorism in the first place.

Or the fact that people will admit to anything under torture - even if they didn't do it.

Or that torture didn't work at stopping crime (let alone terrorism) in the middle ages, so it's likely not going to work in the modern times either.

Or that once you're known to endorse torture publically, you're just about going to p.ss off everyone else who isn't p.ssed off with you already (hence increasing terrorism/decreasing foreign relations).

Or that torture is the most ineffective means of obtaining intelligence and that there are much much better and more effective ways of obtaining information.


...I think you get the point. Not that it matters really, what with the economic depression and all making the US more and more irrelevant with each passing day (and hence lowering the chances of it becoming a target of terrorism again).

Sorry, I am not going to bow down to anyone because they don't like to hear my opinion. That is why it is my opinion. If you don't like it. Than don't listen. Let's think here for a moment. Do you think all the other countries, groups, or terrorist go by the Geneva Convention. No, they all don't. If you get captured by the enemy they will torture you till they get what they want. So, spare me the torture is wrong, we shouldn't be doing it. If you don't like it, don't participate. By us doing it, we have saved millions of American lives. Everyone that boo hews about the torture are the ones that are making America look weak. Why do you think they attack us. They have seen a weakness. Finally, you have to fight fire with fire sometimes.

[Bredene-Dorp]

May 24, 2009 8:44:13 GMT -5 Grub (Lenlyvit) said:

The use of waterboarding has been talked a lot about with some saying it is a harsher interrogation technique while others say it is torture. That being said, here is a hypothetical situation for you.

Right this second a terrorist is being arrested and he has information on a 9/11 style attack that will happen tomorrow. The target of the attack is where you live. You and your entire family will be in town tomorrow and will unfortunately die as a result of that attack.

If this were the case, would you permit that newly jailed terrorist to be waterboarded or would you accept the inevitable attack and have you and your family perish?

If you know where the attack is coming, you should start evacuating the area instead of putting time in torturing a terrorist. You will never know for sure if he gives you valuable info in such a short notice.

[Grub (Lenlyvit)]

They didn't know where the attack on Los Angeles was going to happen when they used waterboarding to discover that info. Waterboarding gave them specific info they used to avert an attack.

[Estayland]

I guess my definition of torture is different from everyone else's. I don't consider waterboarding torture. To me, torture involves physical harm. Being uncomfortable isn't. Is waterboarding harsh? YES! I'm not denying that. But is it torture? Not in my opinion.

Now, I do think Sean Hannity is rather stupid for saying he wouldn't mind getting waterboarded and he still hasn't. Mancow did.

[Chronopolice]

I think torture in general as an interrogation technique is ineffective since the person being tortured is under pressure to answer precisely in favor of what the torturer wants to hear.

In the world of intelligence gathering, the critical information needed usually comes from where you least expect it.

I don't like to use torture except as a last resort.

P.S.
What happened to injecting someone with sodium thiopental? It isn't a truth serum but at least you'll have a someone that will talk your ear off. The problem comes when sorting out which statements are the truth. ;D

[Estayland]

Truth serum is considered torture under international law. Now, that one doesn't make sense to me.

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Truth_serum

[New Dracora]

May 24, 2009 12:31:22 GMT -5 Grub (Lenlyvit) said:

In the United States, the Department of Defense orders all branches of the services to implement comprehensive Survival, Evasion, Resistance and Escape (S.E.R.E.) training programs. In the S.E.R.E. training, they waterboard the people going through that training. They have been doing this for 20-30 years. Has the US gov't been torturing their trainees all this time?

Pretty much, yeah.

Of course, when your main goal is to create human death machines well...

May 24, 2009 17:19:33 GMT -5 Grub (Lenlyvit) said:

They didn't know where the attack on Los Angeles was going to happen when they used waterboarding to discover that info. Waterboarding gave them specific info they used to avert an attack.

Even fools get lucky sometimes. I'd imagine they'd have tortured many individuals prior to this without any success what-so-ever... but then it's in the interest of national security that we don't know about such failures right?

May 24, 2009 17:32:27 GMT -5 Estayland said:

I guess my definition of torture is different from everyone else's. I don't consider waterboarding torture. To me, torture involves physical harm. Being uncomfortable isn't. Is waterboarding harsh? YES! I'm not denying that. But is it torture? Not in my opinion.

Now, I do think Sean Hannity is rather stupid for saying he wouldn't mind getting waterboarded and he still hasn't. Mancow did.

I'd imagine that going through a process which involves slowly suffocating, where it slowly gets harder and harder to breathe until eventually you can't breathe at all so you black out from lack of oxygen...

Kinda like drowning I guess. 'cept you don't die. And you get to do it over and over again until you tell your captors what they want to hear (which doesn't have to be true)... yeah, that does sound pretty uncomfortable.

May 24, 2009 14:03:00 GMT -5 Greek People Nation (GPN) said:

Sorry, I am not going to bow down to anyone because they don't like to hear my opinion. That is why it is my opinion. If you don't like it. Than don't listen. Let's think here for a moment. Do you think all the other countries, groups, or terrorist go by the Geneva Convention. No, they all don't. If you get captured by the enemy they will torture you till they get what they want. So, spare me the torture is wrong, we shouldn't be doing it. If you don't like it, don't participate. By us doing it, we have saved millions of American lives. Everyone that boo hews about the torture are the ones that are making America look weak. Why do you think they attack us. They have seen a weakness. Finally, you have to fight fire with fire sometimes.

H'oh boy... *cracks knuckles*

H'ok. Firstly, please direct myself and others to the section of my original response which stated and/or implied that I do not like to hear your opinions? Because I mean hell mate, I love hearing your opinions - especially one's like those above. I love 'em because it gives me the perfect opportunity to come into a debate thread such as this and point out - with great satisfaction - just how hopelessly moronic it is, and because I love you it gives me a great sense of pride and joy to take that moronic opinion, show you why it's moronic, and then grace you with my kind enlightening words in the hopes that you may see the light. Then after, once I have imparted my gift of good will upon you and all is good in the world again we are free to ride happily into the sunset to go enjoy tacos and margaritas together - just like old times.

In short: "Likewise."


So yeah now the emotive cr.p has been dealt with - back on topic:

May 24, 2009 14:03:00 GMT -5 Greek People Nation (GPN) said:

Do you think all the other countries, groups, or terrorist go by the Geneva Convention. No, they all don't.

Guess from the sounds of things, the US doesn't either. You really proud of that fact?

May 24, 2009 14:03:00 GMT -5 Greek People Nation (GPN) said:

If you get captured by the enemy they will torture you till they get what they want. So, spare me the torture is wrong, we shouldn't be doing it. If you don't like it, don't participate.

The key phrase here is "till they get what they want." In many many cases of torture, it's not 'truth' that the torturers are after. As I already stated torture is a highly ineffective way of getting viable intelligence and many who torture are quite aware of this. What it IS good for however, is making people say (and even in some extreme cases, believe) what you want. This is perfect if you're looking to make some propaganda because you can show 'detractors' making statements in your favour without having to show all the threats/torture it took to break that person. Torture is also a good way of spreading fear - and if you are in control of a totalitarian regime, this is just what you need to check the population in check - torturing potential detractors is a much more potent way of getting your message across than simply killing them as the results are often more horrific. There are of course other reasons for torture (such as sadistic pleasure, vengence, breaking down the minds of soldiers to make them into better killing machines, etc) but propaganda and suppression are generally the main reasons why others do it.

Which one do you think the US favours? Propaganda or suppression?

May 24, 2009 14:03:00 GMT -5 Greek People Nation (GPN) said:

By us doing it, we have saved millions of American lives.

HA! I guess the answer to the above question is propaganda folks!

May 24, 2009 14:03:00 GMT -5 Greek People Nation (GPN) said:

Everyone that boo hews about the torture are the ones that are making America look weak. Why do you think they attack us. They have seen a weakness.

No, the ones who do the torturing are making the US look weak because it basically goes against all those 'american' ideals that you have been force feeding us ever since the end of the second world war. It highlights american hypocracy, and basically sends out a loud and clear message that americans in general are full of sh.t. The icy relations caused by this sentiment in addition to the usual US xenophobia is why people attack you because they have no respect you and it's the only real way of getting their own message across through your thick arrogant moronic skulls.

That's why you've got peeps like jumping up and down whenever you and others spew cr.p like your first post above because it highlights everything I've just said. You are all lowering yourselves to a new level of hypocracy and it is killing your national identity (I would national reputation, but that's pretty much dead already).

May 24, 2009 14:03:00 GMT -5 Greek People Nation (GPN) said:

Finally, you have to fight fire with fire sometimes.

This is the icing on the stupid cake and proof that watching too much Fox News is bad for you. Fight torture with torture? I suppress your citizens and you suppress mine? I don't understand - please elaborate. It can't be on the intelligence front surely, since I already stated that torture is a horrible means of gathering viable intelligence since the one begin tortured will eventually tell you what they think you want to here if they're is a chance that it'll get you to stop torturing them.

But perhaps I'm not making myself clear. So let's try another persons attempt shall we:

May 24, 2009 19:48:09 GMT -5 Chronopolice said:

I think torture in general as an interrogation technique is ineffective since the person being tortured is under pressure to answer precisely in favor of what the torturer wants to hear.

Have you got the point yet? Hmm?


Glad we could have this discussion. Your turn ;D

[Iwerddon]

The problem in this thread (and this debate globally) is that people don't understand the difference between true torture and psychology. You can whip out the definition "mental anguish" all you want, but that can bleed to all aspects of life. Everything including most individuals personal lives are torture then. You capture an enemy, and do anything but give them food and a comfy ride back to their friends, and that is by definition torture. So definitions aside, if you personally want to consider waterboarding "torture", then you can consider it level 1... and if you think all "torture" should be "torture" period, then you are naive and you should probably go read some history so you can get a feel for what you wanna clump into a single word.

When tortured, the majority of individuals will pull strength and resolve from their cause. Confronted with horrible pain and fear of death most people will tell you anything except the truth you actually want. If you want them to lie to be put out of their misery, most will lie.

When you look at the psychology of interrogation, the goal - the proven effective goal - is to break them. Not "oh this hurts so much not having fingernails or a glass rod shoved up my *** and smashed" broken, but psychologically broken. It's a mental state that is extremely difficult if not near impossible to obtain through torture.

Waterboarding has several variations. It ranges from a drop, to drips to dunking and everything in between. If you dunk them until they pass out - or get too close, you have tortured. That is counter-productive if you are trying to interrogate. If done properly though, it totally messes with your mental state. It's feeds on a inate base fear. They don't repeatedly drown you until you pass out for hours on end.

So the question you should ask yourself is, who told you exactly what those interrogaters did? Which reenactment done by who for what agenda did you watch? Why are you so ready to jump completely on one side or another of "waterboarding" when there is really some potential middle ground. same goes for the word "torture". Do you even know how many people were waterboarded, and who they were?

Do I support waterboarding? Very limited. Very targetted. The one thing that people keep not mentioning is that the only groups who would ever get the go ahead to perform something like this are extremely well educated in the human mind. It's not a bunch of privates dunkin' terrorists and knockin' back brews. (although, i'm sure new dracora will venomously disagree with this)

May 24, 2009 10:35:11 GMT -5 New Dracora said:

'course never mind if you didn't go around p.ssing off half the world with you're obscenely high arrogance that you'd not be a target for terrorism in the first place.

You just about can't do anything without irking half the world. And at least half of any group who is pissed about something are just pawns in the game anyway... They have the opinion they were told to have.

May 24, 2009 10:35:11 GMT -5 New Dracora said:

Or the fact that people will admit to anything under torture - even if they didn't do it.

Torture as more specifically defined, correct.

May 24, 2009 10:35:11 GMT -5 New Dracora said:

Or that torture didn't work at stopping crime (let alone terrorism) in the middle ages, so it's likely not going to work in the modern times either.

Yes, because things like the spanish inquisition are so akin to U.S. waterboarding. Seems like a very logical analogy.

May 24, 2009 10:35:11 GMT -5 New Dracora said:

Or that once you're known to endorse torture publically, you're just about going to p.ss off everyone else who isn't p.ssed off with you already (hence increasing terrorism/decreasing foreign relations).

Yea, the "entire" world is having an aneurism over what in perspective is immensely small and focused - when considering that over half the world would have absolutely no problem actually torturing Americans... or Australians for that matter. And, that's odd because Australia would never do anything to make anyone else mad, right? Those quirky middle easterners have no problems with Australians.

May 24, 2009 10:35:11 GMT -5 New Dracora said:

Or that torture is the most ineffective means of obtaining intelligence and that there are much much better and more effective ways of obtaining information.

Yes, torture is extremely ineffective intelligence tactics. You don't capture 5,000 random terrorists and torture them while asking "WHAT DO YOU KNOW!"... That won't do anything.

As already stated, you find the right people, break them, and use information gleaned from other sources of intelligence to aid the questioning process... Very effective.

May 24, 2009 13:29:40 GMT -5 Ananke II said:

I wouldn't countenance waterboarding to save my life, no.

I find it hard to believe that most people who say things like this would gladly step up and put their head on the block. If you would, maybe we should start a list? Then before any terrorist attack they could just give us a weeks notice and we can put the willing in the way so they can be altruistic in their own way.

May 25, 2009 0:09:21 GMT -5 New Dracora said:

Even fools get lucky sometimes. I'd imagine they'd have tortured many individuals prior to this without any success what-so-ever... but then it's in the interest of national security that we don't know about such failures right?

And that point comes down to who you believe. Do you believe the Nancy Pelosis of the world, or do you believe the military & intelligence folk who are actually doing interrogation? In my experience one of those groups is almost entirely made up of professional liars.

May 25, 2009 0:09:21 GMT -5 New Dracora said:

because I love you it gives me a great sense of pride and joy to take that moronic opinion, show you why it's moronic, and then grace you with my kind enlightening words in the hopes that you may see the light. Then after, once I have imparted my gift of good will upon you

And you can say that as lovingly as you want... but what you just came off as to me was, "I don't care what your opinion is. I don't care what other facts there are. I have made up my mind, and you are stupid and wrong. My facts are guaranteed, and I am right. End of story.. oh your still talking? Well this sure is hopeless, you won't shut up and see the light."

May 25, 2009 0:09:21 GMT -5 New Dracora said:

Guess from the sounds of things, the US doesn't either. You really proud of that fact?

Yea... good point. It's impossible to debate a topic with someone that just enjoys jabbing and running. what no facts? no need. jab jab. but it doesn't matter because people who disagree with you are just moronic and should be taunted since they won't see the light, right?

May 25, 2009 0:09:21 GMT -5 New Dracora said:

What it IS good for however, is making people say (and even in some extreme cases, believe) what you want. This is perfect if you're looking to make some propaganda because you can show 'detractors' making statements in your favour without having to show all the threats/torture it took to break that person. Torture is also a good way of spreading fear - and if you are in control of a totalitarian regime, this is just what you need to check the population in check - torturing potential detractors is a much more potent way of getting your message across than simply killing them as the results are often more horrific. There are of course other reasons for torture (such as sadistic pleasure, vengence, breaking down the minds of soldiers to make them into better killing machines, etc) but propaganda and suppression are generally the main reasons why others do it.

So where would be your specific examples of the U.S. using this as propoganda? When was it we did the propoganda campaign in the middle east to make them fear our torture? Who is torturing detractors where? Are you just rambling in general about torture, and since that rambling is scary, it somehow bolsters your argument? I am at a complete loss to connect this to your argument.

May 25, 2009 0:09:21 GMT -5 New Dracora said:

HA! I guess the answer to the above question is propaganda folks!

Was all the rambling so you could do this little jab? I would love to see your explanation on specific instances and why they are propoganda. Knowing the whens and whys surrounding this timeline... yer gunna have a hard time making a reasonable case.

May 25, 2009 0:09:21 GMT -5 New Dracora said:

No, the ones who do the torturing are making the US look weak because it basically goes against all those 'american' ideals that you have been force feeding us ever since the end of the second world war.

We get it. You despise America for all reasons. You are better than us in every way. If only we could see the light and become as magnificent as you and your country.

May 25, 2009 0:09:21 GMT -5 New Dracora said:

It highlights american hypocracy, and basically sends out a loud and clear message that americans in general are full of sh.t.

All people. You've infered many times (in numerous threads) that Americans are full of themselves... but have you ever listened to yourself? I mean... seriously...

I hold no delusions that America isn't full of hypocrites etc... but I don't hold your delusion that you or your country or any country isn't also. The vast majority of humans are at least mostly if not completely... full of sh.it... But I bet you disagree. It's just those pesky losers who don't agree with you completely.

May 25, 2009 0:09:21 GMT -5 New Dracora said:

The icy relations caused by this sentiment in addition to the usual US xenophobia is why people attack you because they have no respect you and it's the only real way of getting their own message across through your thick arrogant moronic skulls.

Yep, people with differing opinions are morons and arrogant. Again... you think you aren't arrogant? Have you listened to yourself? And you really want to dumb down the complex nature of world events to "you're xenophobic and full of yourselves"? It's amazing how simplistic things can be when all the blame is on anyone who disagrees with you.

No need to find middle ground or try to agree or debate things. Just resort to name calling, because after all.. they are stupid morons.

May 25, 2009 0:09:21 GMT -5 New Dracora said:

But perhaps I'm not making myself clear. So let's try another persons attempt shall we:

Oh you're being very clear, you just aren't debating. You are yelling at the other side with your fingers in your ears. It's amazing how someone with so many more morals than the hypocritical thick skulled arrogant bags of sh.t can so easily dehumanize those not of his ilk.

edit: spellin'

[Greek People Nation (GPN)]

May 25, 2009 6:13:15 GMT -5 Iwerddon said:

The problem in this thread (and this debate globally) is that people don't understand the difference between true torture and psychology. You can whip out the definition "mental anguish" all you want, but that can bleed to all aspects of life. Everything including most individuals personal lives are torture then. You capture an enemy, and do anything but give them food and a comfy ride back to their friends, and that is by definition torture. So definitions aside, if you personally want to consider waterboarding "torture", then you can consider it level 1... and if you think all "torture" should be "torture" period, then you are naive and you should probably go read some history so you can get a feel for what you wanna clump into a single word.

When tortured, the majority of individuals will pull strength and resolve from their cause. Confronted with horrible pain and fear of death most people will tell you anything except the truth you actually want. If you want them to lie to be put out of their misery, most will lie.

When you look at the psychology of interrogation, the goal - the proven effective goal - is to break them. Not "oh this hurts so much not having fingernails or a glass rod shoved up my *** and smashed" broken, but psychologically broken. It's a mental state that is extremely difficult if not near impossible to obtain through torture.

Waterboarding has several variations. It ranges from a drop, to drips to dunking and everything in between. If you dunk them until they pass out - or get too close, you have tortured. That is counter-productive if you are trying to interrogate. If done properly though, it totally messes with your mental state. It's feeds on a inate base fear. They don't repeatedly drown you until you pass out for hours on end.

So the question you should ask yourself is, who told you exactly what those interrogaters did? Which reenactment done by who for what agenda did you watch? Why are you so ready to jump completely on one side or another of "waterboarding" when there is really some potential middle ground. same goes for the word "torture". Do you even know how many people were waterboarded, and who they were?

Do I support waterboarding? Very limited. Very targetted. The one thing that people keep not mentioning is that the only groups who would ever get the go ahead to perform something like this are extremely well educated in the human mind. It's not a bunch of privates dunkin' terrorists and knockin' back brews. (although, i'm sure new dracora will venomously disagree with this)

May 24, 2009 10:35:11 GMT -5 New Dracora said:

'course never mind if you didn't go around p.ssing off half the world with you're obscenely high arrogance that you'd not be a target for terrorism in the first place.

You just about can't do anything without irking half the world. And at least half of any group who is pissed about something are just pawns in the game anyway... They have the opinion they were told to have.


Torture as more specifically defined, correct.


Yes, because things like the spanish inquisition are so akin to U.S. waterboarding. Seems like a very logical analogy.


Yea, the "entire" world is having an aneurism over what in perspective is immensely small and focused - when considering that over half the world would have absolutely no problem actually torturing Americans... or Australians for that matter. And, that's odd because Australia would never do anything to make anyone else mad, right? Those quirky middle easterners have no problems with Australians.


Yes, torture is extremely ineffective intelligence tactics. You don't capture 5,000 random terrorists and torture them while asking "WHAT DO YOU KNOW!"... That won't do anything.

As already stated, you find the right people, break them, and use information gleaned from other sources of intelligence to aid the questioning process... Very effective.



I find it hard to believe that most people who say things like this would gladly step up and put their head on the block. If you would, maybe we should start a list? Then before any terrorist attack they could just give us a weeks notice and we can put the willing in the way so they can be altruistic in their own way.


And that point comes down to who you believe. Do you believe the Nancy Pelosis of the world, or do you believe the military & intelligence folk who are actually doing interrogation? In my experience one of those groups is almost entirely made up of professional liars.



And you can say that as lovingly as you want... but what you just came off as to me was, "I don't care what your opinion is. I don't care what other facts there are. I have made up my mind, and you are stupid and wrong. My facts are guaranteed, and I am right. End of story.. oh your still talking? Well this sure is hopeless, you won't shut up and see the light."


Yea... good point. It's impossible to debate a topic with someone that just enjoys jabbing and running. what no facts? no need. jab jab. but it doesn't matter because people who disagree with you are just moronic and should be taunted since they won't see the light, right?


So where would be your specific examples of the U.S. using this as propoganda? When was it we did the propoganda campaign in the middle east to make them fear our torture? Who is torturing detractors where? Are you just rambling in general about torture, and since that rambling is scary, it somehow bolsters your argument? I am at a complete loss to connect this to your argument.


Was all the rambling so you could do this little jab? I would love to see your explanation on specific instances and why they are propoganda. Knowing the whens and whys surrounding this timeline... yer gunna have a hard time making a reasonable case.


We get it. You despise America for all reasons. You are better than us in every way. If only we could see the light and become as magnificent as you and your country.


All people. You've infered many times (in numerous threads) that Americans are full of themselves... but have you ever listened to yourself? I mean... seriously...

I hold no delusions that America isn't full of hypocrites etc... but I don't hold your delusion that you or your country or any country isn't also. The vast majority of humans are at least mostly if not completely... full of sh.it... But I bet you disagree. It's just those pesky losers who don't agree with you completely.


Yep, people with differing opinions are morons and arrogant. Again... you think you aren't arrogant? Have you listened to yourself? And you really want to dumb down the complex nature of world events to "you're xenophobic and full of yourselves"? It's amazing how simplistic things can be when all the blame is on anyone who disagrees with you.

No need to find middle ground or try to agree or debate things. Just resort to name calling, because after all.. they are stupid morons.

May 25, 2009 0:09:21 GMT -5 New Dracora said:

But perhaps I'm not making myself clear. So let's try another persons attempt shall we:

Oh your being very clear, you just aren't debating. You are yelling at the other side with your fingers in your ears. It's amazing how someone with so many more morals than the hypocritical thick skulled arrogant bags of sh.t can so easily dehumanize those not of his ilk.

Your my hero! ;D

[Sheynat]

May 24, 2009 12:31:22 GMT -5 Grub (Lenlyvit) said:

In the United States, the Department of Defense orders all branches of the services to implement comprehensive Survival, Evasion, Resistance and Escape (S.E.R.E.) training programs. In the S.E.R.E. training, they waterboard the people going through that training. They have been doing this for 20-30 years. Has the US gov't been torturing their trainees all this time?

Uh, yeah. A major component of the S.E.R.E training is basically How to Survive Torture 101.
As for waterboarding, this should be standard procedure every time someone tries to pretend it's not torture. Everyone in this thread who denies that it's torture-go get waterboarded. We'll see what you think then. Christopher Hitchens did, and broke in fifteen seconds flat.

[Iwerddon]

How to survive torture, and resist interrogation tactics. Looks like most people agree that torture doesn't get information, and while you surviving torture is very important, it's even more important that you don't divulge information that could put several or many at risk - and that isn't obtained with torture.

It's easy to say waterboarding is waterboarding and all of it is torture... but would you rather be waterboarded by the CIA, or by some middle eastern faction, or by the Russians? If you can name 1, 2, 3 preference then why? What is it that constitutes a difference?

I actually wouldn't mind getting water boarded. If it was done as the CIA does it and not how some crazy foreign faction would do it, then I strongly doubt it could be as bad as when I did almost drown when I was a kid. Especially if you know before hand the precautions in place. Nothing worse than that last moment where you think to yourself, "thats it. i'm dead". "Oh my this is the scariest non-life threatening thing thats ever happened to me" can't compare.

[Anime Daisuki]

May 25, 2009 17:35:46 GMT -5 Iwerddon said:

but would you rather be waterboarded by the CIA, or by some middle eastern faction, or by the Russians? If you can name 1, 2, 3 preference then why? What is it that constitutes a difference?

The middle eastern terrorists won't use such "mild" measures as waterboarding... think cutting of limbs, gang rape, etc.

[Bad Infinitum]

May 25, 2009 16:12:05 GMT -5 Sheynat said:

May 24, 2009 12:31:22 GMT -5 Grub (Lenlyvit) said:

In the United States, the Department of Defense orders all branches of the services to implement comprehensive Survival, Evasion, Resistance and Escape (S.E.R.E.) training programs. In the S.E.R.E. training, they waterboard the people going through that training. They have been doing this for 20-30 years. Has the US gov't been torturing their trainees all this time?

Uh, yeah. A major component of the S.E.R.E training is basically How to Survive Torture 101.
As for waterboarding, this should be standard procedure every time someone tries to pretend it's not torture. Everyone in this thread who denies that it's torture-go get waterboarded. We'll see what you think then. Christopher Hitchens did, and broke in fifteen seconds flat.

Resisting torture and aggressive interrogation techniques is the "R" in SERE. The Army's techniques for SERE school are classified, so I can't really say what goes on in there, but some of it is akin to police taser training. If you want to carry and use a taser, you have to be tasered yourself.

An old saying in any training school is this: "Train hard, fight easy. Train easy, fight hard...and die." Typical military training is much more intense and physically taxing than actual combat scenarios, but this is only for the benefit of the soldier. This is not the case in SERE training. Torture is flat-out terrifying in any situation, not matter how much training you have for it.

May 26, 2009 13:47:19 GMT -5 Anime Daisuki said:

May 25, 2009 17:35:46 GMT -5 Iwerddon said:

but would you rather be waterboarded by the CIA, or by some middle eastern faction, or by the Russians? If you can name 1, 2, 3 preference then why? What is it that constitutes a difference?

The middle eastern terrorists won't use such "mild" measures as waterboarding... think cutting of limbs, gang rape, etc.

Terrorists aren't bound by any military code of uniform justice. They aren't kept in check by their peers and superiors. If a terrorist commits a terrible atrocity, they are hailed as heroes. They torture and kill indiscriminately. We have rules and checks and balances in place so that we don't cross that line again...but interrogators are always looking for a way around the rules, so they can still be effective at their jobs. This is where waterboarding and other "creative" interrogation techniques came from.

In the other torture thread I went into more detail about waterboarding and the moral boundaries of interrogation. Regarding waterboarding, I'll quote myself (for the lazy):

May 26, 2009 18:17:21 GMT -5 Bad Infinitum said:

Torture has never been condoned by the DoD, for obvious reasons, but restriction breeds creativity. Waterboarding, before it became a media phenomenon, was not considered torture and was technically completely legal. The actual act of waterboarding can barely be constituted as torture, since the person's body is never actually harmed, just the psyche. Waterboarding gives the detainee the sense that they are drowning. This sensation, though physically harmless, is extremely terrifying.

[New Dracora]

May 25, 2009 6:13:15 GMT -5 Iwerddon said:

*snip*

...damn your rational debate skills. Why won't everyone just agree that I'm right all the time and you're all wrong? - j/k

Anywho.....

May 25, 2009 6:13:15 GMT -5 Iwerddon said:

The problem in this thread (and this debate globally) is that people don't understand the difference between true torture and psychology. You can whip out the definition "mental anguish" all you want, but that can bleed to all aspects of life. Everything including most individuals personal lives are torture then. You capture an enemy, and do anything but give them food and a comfy ride back to their friends, and that is by definition torture. So definitions aside, if you personally want to consider waterboarding "torture", then you can consider it level 1... and if you think all "torture" should be "torture" period, then you are naive and you should probably go read some history so you can get a feel for what you wanna clump into a single word.

Ok fair enough. You get a cookie for being the first to actually attempt to define what level of torture we are talking about here rather than saying "all forms of torture are acceptable".

May 25, 2009 6:13:15 GMT -5 Iwerddon said:

When tortured, the majority of individuals will pull strength and resolve from their cause. Confronted with horrible pain and fear of death most people will tell you anything except the truth you actually want. If you want them to lie to be put out of their misery, most will lie.

Exactly. Wow, so far I mostly agree with you. What the hell is going on???

May 25, 2009 6:13:15 GMT -5 Iwerddon said:

When you look at the psychology of interrogation, the goal - the proven effective goal - is to break them. Not "oh this hurts so much not having fingernails or a glass rod shoved up my *** and smashed" broken, but psychologically broken. It's a mental state that is extremely difficult if not near impossible to obtain through torture.

Indeed. Again, the main thing I'm trying to harp on about.

May 25, 2009 6:13:15 GMT -5 Iwerddon said:

Waterboarding has several variations. It ranges from a drop, to drips to dunking and everything in between. If you dunk them until they pass out - or get too close, you have tortured. That is counter-productive if you are trying to interrogate. If done properly though, it totally messes with your mental state. It's feeds on a inate base fear. They don't repeatedly drown you until you pass out for hours on end.

So the question you should ask yourself is, who told you exactly what those interrogaters did? Which reenactment done by who for what agenda did you watch? Why are you so ready to jump completely on one side or another of "waterboarding" when there is really some potential middle ground. same goes for the word "torture". Do you even know how many people were waterboarded, and who they were?

Ah ha... ok, I see where this is going now. Fair enough, you've got me again. However, in my defence - when the only other side at the point of debate when my argument occured is: "all forms of torture are acceptable" what choice do I have but form a rebuttal which returns: "all forms of torture are unacceptable[/i]"?

May 25, 2009 6:13:15 GMT -5 Iwerddon said:

Do I support waterboarding? Very limited. Very targetted. The one thing that people keep not mentioning is that the only groups who would ever get the go ahead to perform something like this are extremely well educated in the human mind. It's not a bunch of privates dunkin' terrorists and knockin' back brews. (although, i'm sure new dracora will venomously disagree with this)

And you would be correct (darn, you know me so well don't you? ;D ). You and I both know that no matter what the profession, no matter the responsiblity there is always the potential for abuse. Remember Abu Ghraib? Wasn't that meant to be run by educated, responsible minds? At least I'm sure that's what the public perception was (if not the reality) - yet look what happened there.

Same argument here. How do you know with 100% certainity that the people performing these acts are "extremely well educated" enough to know when to stop? What if they themselves are emotional compromised in some way? Don't you think they might be just a little bit tempted?

Anyway, point I'm trying to get across is it is a slipperly slope - before you know it what started as "minor" waterboarding could become something most worst - and when this is all happening behind closed doors by people used to operating outside normal law and order how are we supposed to keep an eye on them and let them know when they have gone too far?

May 25, 2009 6:13:15 GMT -5 Iwerddon said:

May 24, 2009 10:35:11 GMT -5 New Dracora said:

'course never mind if you didn't go around p.ssing off half the world with you're obscenely high arrogance that you'd not be a target for terrorism in the first place.

You just about can't do anything without irking half the world. And at least half of any group who is pissed about something are just pawns in the game anyway... They have the opinion they were told to have.

You can actually - you just need to consider the needs of the other party in addition to your own. It's not hard, trust me.

May 25, 2009 6:13:15 GMT -5 Iwerddon said:

May 24, 2009 10:35:11 GMT -5 New Dracora said:

Or the fact that people will admit to anything under torture - even if they didn't do it.

Torture as more specifically defined, correct.

I'm glad we can agree. See, it feels good to agree with me doesn't it?

May 25, 2009 6:13:15 GMT -5 Iwerddon said:

May 24, 2009 10:35:11 GMT -5 New Dracora said:

Or that torture didn't work at stopping crime (let alone terrorism) in the middle ages, so it's likely not going to work in the modern times either.

Yes, because things like the spanish inquisition are so akin to U.S. waterboarding. Seems like a very logical analogy.

Because no one expects U.S waterboarding! ;D

Point I was trying to make - torture didn't help back then, torture doesn't help now. Nothing good comes from torture, sorry.

May 25, 2009 6:13:15 GMT -5 Iwerddon said:

May 24, 2009 10:35:11 GMT -5 New Dracora said:

Or that once you're known to endorse torture publically, you're just about going to p.ss off everyone else who isn't p.ssed off with you already (hence increasing terrorism/decreasing foreign relations).

Yea, the "entire" world is having an aneurism over what in perspective is immensely small and focused - when considering that over half the world would have absolutely no problem actually torturing Americans... or Australians for that matter. And, that's odd because Australia would never do anything to make anyone else mad, right? Those quirky middle easterners have no problems with Australians.

Of course! We give them a nice place to stay when you mean Americans run over and kick down their sand cities (a nice place inside an overcrowded detention centre in the middle of nowhere that is)... aren't we just so lovable. Wanna hug?

Back on topic: You haven't actually "endorsed" torture per se (yet?) hence the lack of 'outrage'. Nah, you just do it behind closed doors where no one knew about it... until now that is (thanks Nancy!)

May 25, 2009 6:13:15 GMT -5 Iwerddon said:

May 24, 2009 10:35:11 GMT -5 New Dracora said:

Or that torture is the most ineffective means of obtaining intelligence and that there are much much better and more effective ways of obtaining information.

Yes, torture is extremely ineffective intelligence tactics. You don't capture 5,000 random terrorists and torture them while asking "WHAT DO YOU KNOW!"... That won't do anything.

As already stated, you find the right people, break them, and use information gleaned from other sources of intelligence to aid the questioning process... Very effective.

Indeed, and none of that actually involves any torture does it?

May 25, 2009 6:13:15 GMT -5 Iwerddon said:

May 24, 2009 13:29:40 GMT -5 Ananke II said:

I wouldn't countenance waterboarding to save my life, no.

I find it hard to believe that most people who say things like this would gladly step up and put their head on the block. If you would, maybe we should start a list? Then before any terrorist attack they could just give us a weeks notice and we can put the willing in the way so they can be altruistic in their own way.

Too late - You already did that when you attacked Iraq remember? Send over all your detractors, Saddam placed them around his power plants, you bombed them, no more detractors!



You're assuming torture would actually prevent terrorism. When it doesn't.

And before you use the argument "but there hasn't been a serious terrorist attack since 9/11" might I just ask is that really because of torture? I seem to recall that there hadn't been a serious terrorist attack prior to 9/11 either.

And of course why attack americans on their home soil when they come to you (how convenient!).

May 25, 2009 6:13:15 GMT -5 Iwerddon said:

May 24, 2009 10:35:11 GMT -5 New Dracora said:

Even fools get lucky sometimes. I'd imagine they'd have tortured many individuals prior to this without any success what-so-ever... but then it's in the interest of national security that we don't know about such failures right?

And that point comes down to who you believe. Do you believe the Nancy Pelosis of the world, or do you believe the military & intelligence folk who are actually doing interrogation? In my experience one of those groups is almost entirely made up of professional liars.

You know, a british soldier send to me once that "military intelligence" was an oxymoron.... sorry, had to say it.

*ahem*

Ok, you've got a good point here except what happens when the 'Nancy Pelosi's of the world' also include the 'military & intelligence folk'? I mean, you can't seriously tell me that the US military doesn't have specialised lobby groups and doesn't have political motivations - ok, maybe not the rank and file who could've actually done the interrogation but they are not the ones addressing the public are they?

Of course, I wouldn't know. So if you can find a testimony/article of some sort that claims to be from someone in the US military who actively participates/participated in interogation please provide a link here and I will stand corrected.

May 25, 2009 6:13:15 GMT -5 Iwerddon said:

May 24, 2009 10:35:11 GMT -5 New Dracora said:

because I love you it gives me a great sense of pride and joy to take that moronic opinion, show you why it's moronic, and then grace you with my kind enlightening words in the hopes that you may see the light. Then after, once I have imparted my gift of good will upon you

And you can say that as lovingly as you want... but what you just came off as to me was, "I don't care what your opinion is. I don't care what other facts there are. I have made up my mind, and you are stupid and wrong. My facts are guaranteed, and I am right. End of story.. oh your still talking? Well this sure is hopeless, you won't shut up and see the light."

Awesome, we're getting to the emotional bits now. I love this bit. *hugs Iwerrdon*

The key here is context. GPN specifically stated that:

May 24, 2009 10:06:09 GMT -5 Greek People Nation (GPN) said:

There is no such thing as torture when comes to saving lives of your family and fellow country men.

Which I basically read as: "Torture is justified as a means to an end, and if the ends are just then so are the means." Now some may consider that very noble and perhaps that's what angle GPN was aimming for, but to me that was a very stupid thing to say because:

1. It assumes you can say lives with torture, and

2. Putting torture in that context makes it appear as if it ain't a bad thing after all.

Which is completely ridicious. So, yeah in this case I don't care what your opinion is. I don't care what other facts there are. I have made up my mind, and you are stupid and wrong. My facts are guaranteed, and I am right. End of story... oh your still talking? Well this sure is hopeless, you won't shut up and see the light.

Understand?

May 25, 2009 6:13:15 GMT -5 Iwerddon said:

May 24, 2009 10:35:11 GMT -5 New Dracora said:

Guess from the sounds of things, the US doesn't either. You really proud of that fact?

Yea... good point.

Thank you

May 25, 2009 6:13:15 GMT -5 Iwerddon said:

It's impossible to debate a topic with someone that just enjoys jabbing and running.

I'm still here aren't I?

May 25, 2009 6:13:15 GMT -5 Iwerddon said:

what no facts? no need. jab jab.

You show me yours and I'll show you mine... *blush*

May 25, 2009 6:13:15 GMT -5 Iwerddon said:

but it doesn't matter because people who disagree with you are just moronic and should be taunted since they won't see the light, right?

Correct. I'm glad we had this conversation and have been able to come to a mutual understanding.

May 25, 2009 6:13:15 GMT -5 Iwerddon said:

May 24, 2009 10:35:11 GMT -5 New Dracora said:

What it IS good for however, is making people say (and even in some extreme cases, believe) what you want. This is perfect if you're looking to make some propaganda because you can show 'detractors' making statements in your favour without having to show all the threats/torture it took to break that person. Torture is also a good way of spreading fear - and if you are in control of a totalitarian regime, this is just what you need to check the population in check - torturing potential detractors is a much more potent way of getting your message across than simply killing them as the results are often more horrific. There are of course other reasons for torture (such as sadistic pleasure, vengence, breaking down the minds of soldiers to make them into better killing machines, etc) but propaganda and suppression are generally the main reasons why others do it.

So where would be your specific examples of the U.S. using this as propoganda? When was it we did the propoganda campaign in the middle east to make them fear our torture? Who is torturing detractors where? Are you just rambling in general about torture, and since that rambling is scary, it somehow bolsters your argument?

Pretty much, yeah.

May 25, 2009 6:13:15 GMT -5 Iwerddon said:

I am at a complete loss to connect this to your argument.

Yeah, ok. You did miss my point here but since I was just rambling and because I'm terrible at debating I can understand why so it's ok.

I wasn't refering to the US here (not everything is about the US - remember that!) rather I was trying to show what torture IS used for. I was more thinking along the lines of what happens in China, Iran, other less scruptulous nations, etc as well those odd video messages you see plastered across the news every now and again where you see some kidnapped individual reading off a piece of paper while an armed individual of some sort tries to look as manly as possible.

Of course, given the nature of the political freedoms in said countries and organisations all of the above is hearsay and built upon a general sense of what others think go on there. Make of that what you will - but none of that rant was directed at the US. It was aimmed at the practice of torture.

May 24, 2009 10:35:11 GMT -5 New Dracora said:

Which one do you think the US favours? Propaganda or suppression?

Now this part you missed in your quotes - THAT was directed at the US.

My way of saying: "Now given all the reasons why others commit torture above, what do you believe the US is trying to achieve with torture?"

No examples provided because it was an actual question I want an answer to - if the US is partaking in torture, why?

May 25, 2009 6:13:15 GMT -5 Iwerddon said:

May 24, 2009 10:35:11 GMT -5 New Dracora said:

HA! I guess the answer to the above question is propaganda folks!

Was all the rambling so you could do this little jab? I would love to see your explanation on specific instances and why they are propoganda. Knowing the whens and whys surrounding this timeline... yer gunna have a hard time making a reasonable case.

Heh. No silly - it's because once again GPN made the stupid assumption that torture saves lives. But I felt bad about calling him stupid too many times (because he's not really stupid, he's actually very smart - it's just a little unfortunate he choose to say a stupid thing because now I have to call him out and that makes me sad ) so I decided to do it in a more clever way... at least I thought I was being clever... meh.

May 25, 2009 6:13:15 GMT -5 Iwerddon said:

May 24, 2009 10:35:11 GMT -5 New Dracora said:

No, the ones who do the torturing are making the US look weak because it basically goes against all those 'american' ideals that you have been force feeding us ever since the end of the second world war.

We get it. You despise America for all reasons. You are better than us in every way. If only we could see the light and become as magnificent as you and your country.

Ok, now you're starting to put words in mouth. Please direct me and others to the section in the above where it specifically states where I despise America.

For the record, I don't despise America. It just saddens me and others when certain individuals decide they are going - to put it very bluntly - run America into the ground. But what really annoys me is when people buy into all the cr.p of these individuals thus swelling there ranks.

To all offended americans here: you're country was supposed to be about freedom and liberty for all, yet instead it seems it's more about self-importance and self-righteousness. You've become a parody - a never-ending joke - and it seems like the only one's who can't see it are yourselves. So if you see me running around harping on like an idiot (as I am wont to do) it's because I'm secretly sobbing on the inside whilst trying to get you all to wake up and fully realise just what the f*ck are you doing?

So there you are, there's the core of my issue, make of it what you will, forgive my french, etc, etc, etc. Rant over, back on topic:

May 25, 2009 6:13:15 GMT -5 Iwerddon said:

May 24, 2009 10:35:11 GMT -5 New Dracora said:

It highlights american hypocracy, and basically sends out a loud and clear message that americans in general are full of sh.t.

All people. You've infered many times (in numerous threads) that Americans are full of themselves... but have you ever listened to yourself? I mean... seriously...

I hold no delusions that America isn't full of hypocrites etc... but I don't hold your delusion that you or your country or any country isn't also. The vast majority of humans are at least mostly if not completely... full of sh.it... But I bet you disagree. It's just those pesky losers who don't agree with you completely.

Come, come now. Quote the rest:

May 24, 2009 14:03:00 GMT -5 Greek People Nation (GPN) said:

May 24, 2009 10:35:11 GMT -5 New Dracora said:

Everyone that boo hews about the torture are the ones that are making America look weak. Why do you think they attack us. They have seen a weakness.

No, the ones who do the torturing are making the US look weak because it basically goes against all those 'american' ideals that you have been force feeding us ever since the end of the second world war. It highlights american hypocracy, and basically sends out a loud and clear message that americans in general are full of sh.t.

There we go. Now we have context! \o/

For further explaination, see my rant above ^^^

May 25, 2009 6:13:15 GMT -5 Iwerddon said:

May 24, 2009 10:35:11 GMT -5 New Dracora said:

The icy relations caused by this sentiment in addition to the usual US xenophobia is why people attack you because they have no respect you and it's the only real way of getting their own message across through your thick arrogant moronic skulls.

Yep, people with differing opinions are morons and arrogant. Again... you think you aren't arrogant? Have you listened to yourself? And you really want to dumb down the complex nature of world events to "you're xenophobic and full of yourselves"? It's amazing how simplistic things can be when all the blame is on anyone who disagrees with you.

No need to find middle ground or try to agree or debate things. Just resort to name calling, because after all.. they are stupid morons.

*sigh* see above

May 25, 2009 6:13:15 GMT -5 Iwerddon said:

May 25, 2009 0:09:21 GMT -5 New Dracora said:

But perhaps I'm not making myself clear. So let's try another persons attempt shall we:

Oh you're being very clear, you just aren't debating. You are yelling at the other side with your fingers in your ears. It's amazing how someone with so many more morals than the hypocritical thick skulled arrogant bags of sh.t can so easily dehumanize those not of his ilk.

edit: spellin'

You know, you started off very rational but here - at the end, you're sounding just like me.

So without much further ado: Pot, meet kettle.


Lots of love,
ND

[Iwerddon]

May 27, 2009 2:40:09 GMT -5 New Dracora said:

You and I both know that no matter what the profession, no matter the responsiblity there is always the potential for abuse. Remember Abu Ghraib? Wasn't that meant to be run by educated, responsible minds? At least I'm sure that's what the public perception was (if not the reality) - yet look what happened there.

Same argument here. How do you know with 100% certainity that the people performing these acts are "extremely well educated" enough to know when to stop? What if they themselves are emotional compromised in some way? Don't you think they might be just a little bit tempted?

Anyway, point I'm trying to get across is it is a slipperly slope - before you know it what started as "minor" waterboarding could become something most worst - and when this is all happening behind closed doors by people used to operating outside normal law and order how are we supposed to keep an eye on them and let them know when they have gone too far?

And they were punished. I don't personally think it was enough - especially the officers. The few officers there are there because it's their job to keep the privates and specialists under control, not join in! But, that is the problem dealing with issues like this. You have to trust someone somewhere and attempt to oversee it. In the case of Abu Ghraib, you can't really just say "we aren't gunna have prisons for these guys" so it needs to be evaluated and try more precautions.

In the case of waterboarding, you can limit it to special cases. Require house and/or senate commitees to approve. Require the president to approve. Have the extraunordinary techniques performed and overseen by the best of the best. Video record the entire thing. I believe that these things appear to have happened. The only thing I would like added to that list would be force the approving political bodies responsible for ok'ing to personally review it as a basis for acceptability of the standards and practices and the extent to which their directions were followed.

May 27, 2009 2:40:09 GMT -5 New Dracora said:

You can actually - you just need to consider the needs of the other party in addition to your own. It's not hard, trust me.

I completely disagree. I can't think of a single issue that isn't mutually beneficial to both parties either locally or internationally where everyone is getting what they want. I would love to hear the easy solutions to some of the major disagreements in the world today that would appease everyone.

May 27, 2009 2:40:09 GMT -5 New Dracora said:

Back on topic: You haven't actually "endorsed" torture per se (yet?) hence the lack of 'outrage'. Nah, you just do it behind closed doors where no one knew about it... until now that is (thanks Nancy!)

And what is torture is exactly the point of contention. It's not that anyone ok with what specifically happened to those 3 terrorists are ok with torture, but that they don't consider that specific experience torture.

May 27, 2009 2:40:09 GMT -5 New Dracora said:

Indeed, and none of that actually involves any torture does it?

Isn't that what we are debating?

May 27, 2009 2:40:09 GMT -5 New Dracora said:

Too late - You already did that when you attacked Iraq remember? Send over all your detractors, Saddam placed them around his power plants, you bombed them, no more detractors!



You're assuming torture would actually prevent terrorism. When it doesn't.

Again, define torture. Does "torture" prevent terrorism? No. Does interrogation? Yes.

May 27, 2009 2:40:09 GMT -5 New Dracora said:

And before you use the argument "but there hasn't been a serious terrorist attack since 9/11" might I just ask is that really because of torture? I seem to recall that there hadn't been a serious terrorist attack prior to 9/11 either.

Actually I wouldn't. I get sick of people using that as an justification for everything over here, just like some would say things like "there have been no mass shootings in Australia since we banned most guns". The issue is so huge and complicated that statements like that are painfully oversimplistic and incorrect.

And btw, there were terrorist plots that were foiled pre-9/11... and some that happened. Maybe you don't remember but the planes were the second time that tower was hit.

May 27, 2009 2:40:09 GMT -5 New Dracora said:

And of course why attack americans on their home soil when they come to you (how convenient!).

And most of us here say why fight them over here when we can fight them over there? See, and you said we weren't good at making everyone happy!

May 27, 2009 2:40:09 GMT -5 New Dracora said:

Ok, you've got a good point here except what happens when the 'Nancy Pelosi's of the world' also include the 'military & intelligence folk'? I mean, you can't seriously tell me that the US military doesn't have specialised lobby groups and doesn't have political motivations - ok, maybe not the rank and file who could've actually done the interrogation but they are not the ones addressing the public are they?

Of course, I wouldn't know. So if you can find a testimony/article of some sort that claims to be from someone in the US military who actively participates/participated in interogation please provide a link here and I will stand corrected.

And all of this considered, I trust the military and intelligence over the politicians by a long shot. intelligence is used to being thrown under the bus, and these days are very very careful. Go look at the pre-waterboarding communication between the CIA and the upper levels of government and you can see it's obvious. As for them just lying about techniques in the first place, there are a lot of people who go through the technique and numerous interviews and statements from interrogaters around. I'm not gunna link hunt for ya though.

May 27, 2009 2:40:09 GMT -5 New Dracora said:

Which I basically read as: "Torture is justified as a means to an end, and if the ends are just then so are the means." Now some may consider that very noble and perhaps that's what angle GPN was aimming for, but to me that was a very stupid thing to say because:

1. It assumes you can say lives with torture, and

2. Putting torture in that context makes it appear as if it ain't a bad thing after all.

Understand?

Soo..... debate like that instead? If GPN disagrees with your rebuttal points and can further expand the point then great. Otherwise yer at an impasse, which even then doesn't warrant the first response.

I also agree that the ends don't justify the means, since I firmly believe that torture doesn't work. An individual that would tell the truth during torture would have already told the truth. The ones who won't are consumed in a cause and torture will just embolden them.

May 27, 2009 2:40:09 GMT -5 New Dracora said:

I wasn't refering to the US here (not everything is about the US - remember that!)

It's kinda hard to tell when you: aren't specific, sandwich it between U.S. specific items, and end the paragraph specifying the U.S. =P

May 27, 2009 2:40:09 GMT -5 New Dracora said:

Now this part you missed in your quotes - THAT was directed at the US.

My way of saying: "Now given all the reasons why others commit torture above, what do you believe the US is trying to achieve with torture?"

No examples provided because it was an actual question I want an answer to - if the US is partaking in torture, why?

I believe I have answered this fairly specifically. I don't believe this specific action is torture, simply because it shares the same name as an action that is almost exclusively torture.

May 27, 2009 2:40:09 GMT -5 New Dracora said:

Ok, now you're starting to put words in mouth. Please direct me and others to the section in the above where it specifically states where I despise America.

You've said things across a couple of threads that are rather easily misunderstood. The ones from here...

"goes against all those 'american' ideals that you have been force feeding us ever since the end of the second world war"
"It highlights american hypocracy, and basically sends out a loud and clear message that americans in general are full of sh.t"
"usual US xenophobia"
"through your thick arrogant moronic skulls"
"You are all lowering yourselves to a new level of hypocracy and it is killing your national identity (I would national reputation, but that's pretty much dead already)"
"You've become a parody - a never-ending joke - and it seems like the only one's who can't see it are yourselves."

If I were to say things like that about Australians, I'm sure you'd be wondering what my deal was.

May 27, 2009 2:40:09 GMT -5 New Dracora said:

For the record, I don't despise America. It just saddens me and others when certain individuals decide they are going - to put it very bluntly - run America into the ground. But what really annoys me is when people buy into all the cr.p of these individuals thus swelling there ranks.

So people who disagree with you are running America into the ground. And you are sad that others could agree with 'them'? I guess I don't understand that logic.

May 27, 2009 2:40:09 GMT -5 New Dracora said:

To all offended americans here: you're country was supposed to be about freedom and liberty for all, yet instead it seems it's more about self-importance and self-righteousness. You've become a parody - a never-ending joke - and it seems like the only one's who can't see it are yourselves. So if you see me running around harping on like an idiot (as I am wont to do) it's because I'm secretly sobbing on the inside whilst trying to get you all to wake up and fully realise just what the f*ck are you doing?

Because, obviously, you could never be missing some of the facts and not be right? Especially since I sincerely doubt that your media is better then anyone elses media which means you get the ranting and bashing without 1/2 the facts.

May 27, 2009 2:40:09 GMT -5 New Dracora said:

Come, come now. Quote the rest:
There we go. Now we have context! \o/

For further explaination, see my rant above ^^^

*sigh* see above

Pretty easy to solve. If you don't want people to misinterpret or infer what you are really saying, then say it clearly. Taken completely in context it is near impossible to decipher your true meaning on many statements and it seems like your drawing in your feelings on numerous issues. Several points having been rationally rehashed and are very clear, so obviously you don't lack the ability to do it originally.

May 27, 2009 2:40:09 GMT -5 New Dracora said:

You know, you started off very rational but here - at the end, you're sounding just like me.

Heh, and I'd completely disagree with you there. Rereading your original post, it all holds true. It may not have been your intent, but if given nothing more than that it sure reads that way.

[Sheynat]

Here. This link puts it better than I ever could. Waterboarding is absolutely indefensible, and this guy explains it better than I can.
www.smirkingchimp.com/thread/21517

[New Dracora]

May 29, 2009 21:28:03 GMT -5 Sheynat said:

Here. This link puts it better than I ever could. Waterboarding is absolutely indefensible, and this guy explains it better than I can.
www.smirkingchimp.com/thread/21517

"It's not really "torture." It's just 'getting wet,' or 'playing mind games,' or whatever else you'd like to say it is. Here's a simple thought experiment: Picture it happening to Americans. Does it seem like torture now? Right. That's one of the reasons the generals oppose it."

/thread

[Iwerddon]

Nothing in his blog is new, just same points with rhetoric. waterboarding is waterboarding, and if Americans were waterboarded it would be torture. Experts say torture doesn't work!

Not all waterboarding is equal. Many believe not all waterboarding is torture. And, yes, again... torture doesn't work.

If Americans were CIA-like waterboarded in a foreign country due to they were involved in plans to murder people en masse, I'd have to say I would completely support it. I bet many would - but they wouldn't be the people who get media attention.

The 24 thing is hilarious though. I don't watch the show or know anything about, so i guess it could be true... but a liberal hollywood show with partisan right wing idealogy? heh..

[sunseeker]

May 29, 2009 21:28:03 GMT -5 Sheynat said:

Here. This link puts it better than I ever could. Waterboarding is absolutely indefensible, and this guy explains it better than I can.
www.smirkingchimp.com/thread/21517

A very good article and it really explains why torture shouldn't be used. I mean... The US are the nation that was supposed to bring democracy, freedom, equality and justice to the entire world. At least they've been saying that for the last 60-or-so years. It seems kind of ironic to me that they're doing quite the opposite. They bring fear, death and sufferage.

Since we want to make the world a better place we want to civilize it. At least that's what the US is saying. So why does US not act civilised (and torture isn't a civilised way in my opinion). You can always say:"Well people are being tortured around the globe so why wouldn't we use it?" Because we, the civilised people just don't do that. It's not a civilised way. And it's against the Geneva convention which the US has signed. It makes me wonder why there is no reports of torture from Europe. I mean, we've had "terrorist attacks" in the UK and in Spain.
But still we won't go that low and torture.

So as you probably noticed I am against torture.
And it seems more and more obviouos to me that this is all about "shock doctrine" in order to strip the American people off their fundamental rights (you know... the constitution and all).
It seems funny but the dots seem to connect differently and in a more possible way then the official (mainstream media) stories that are being served to Americans (via Fox News, CNN,...).

Yes... I'm starting to believe that there was no "terrorist" attacks on the US (at least not 9/11).

[Margento]

Selfish as it seems, yeah, sure i'd use it.

[Xenohumanity]

Torture? Waterboarding is Torture?!? PUHLEEZE! I know methods a THOUSAND times worse than waterboarding. Waterboarding scares you silly. A BREAKING WHEEL will tear you to pieces (literally). ELECTROSHOCK gets the job done, with maximum pain, and minimul burning. I could go on, but you probably get where I'm coming from.
My End Statement: I would waterboard him, but if he doesn't break (which he might not), My Spanish Inquisition research paper will come in very handy...

[Koharu]

well if you waterboarded them you wont get any answers, even if you got the guy, he wont tell you and would rather drown to death then tell you from the water-boarding. To put to perspective, Imperial Japan, and North Korea used water-boarding, and we didn't and we won those two wars. Don't get me started on the fact they are Arab. They are fundamentalism, and the way you break a fundamentalist is you prove his beliefs wrong. Those on this site who voted water-boarding saves lives, are either fooling them selves or are idiots. Before you vote yes, ask your self, do you yourself want to be water-boarded Yes or No?

[Everwhere]

The concept of humanity is one that is tried by many degrees. However, while I would support executions of various criminals, I would never condone the drawn out process of such torture. If any person would allow this, they are cruel and inhumane. They believe it is no big deal, but as some others have said, go get waterboarded yourself. There is the feeling of drowning and the panic sensory in your brain fighting for survival, you can't breathe and you can't move. You are tied down and unable to save yourself. Torture, by definition:

"Extreme anguish of body or mind"

Everywhere you look it is considered torture, everywhere but the united states and the middle east. Is it not in American society where they say "Two wrongs don't make a right". Yet America goes against so many of the laws they propose to create "peace". And for those who don't say it causes any lasting damage, waterboarding causes dry drowning, brain damage, oxygen deprivation, may cause broken bones, psychological trauma, and even death. So no, this can't be considered torture at all, can it? It is disgusting.