07-03-2008, 09:58 AM | #51 | |||
Pro Rookie
Join Date: Nov 2000
Location: USA
|
Quote:
Now that I know you would readily trade liberty for security, I know all that I need to know about your view. Count me as a person who is glad that there have been people in the history of the United States that weren't lining up to make that same trade. |
|||
07-03-2008, 09:58 AM | #52 | |
High School Varsity
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: Edge of the Great Dismal Swamp
|
Quote:
My wife would probably leave me if I told her that I would have someone tortured in order to save her life or the life of our children. And vice versa. Why is that hard to believe? Millions of people have been willing to die, or see their loved ones die, for American principles throughout history, and the principle of "the US does not torture" seems like one of the crucial ones. Some people think that how you live is more important than how long you live. I'm one of them, I guess.
__________________
Input A No Input |
|
07-03-2008, 09:59 AM | #53 |
Coordinator
Join Date: Sep 2004
Location: Chicagoland
|
The Founding Fathers are spinning in their graves.
The upside, however, is that we can maybe use their spinning to generate energy! |
07-03-2008, 10:00 AM | #54 | |
Grizzled Veteran
Join Date: Oct 2000
Location: Stuck in Yinzerville, PA
|
Quote:
You really like to extrapolate from a few words in my post. I really hope you aren't a mathematician. I never assumed anything...when you assume you make an ass out of yourself. I took the most extreme case and you ran with it. I've heard the arguement many times...how there were so many ways that we could've stopped the attacks. One was by interrogating people who we were certain were terrorist in custody. Not the only way or reason but it was one of them. |
|
07-03-2008, 10:03 AM | #55 | |
Grizzled Veteran
Join Date: Oct 2000
Location: Stuck in Yinzerville, PA
|
Quote:
I think you are pretty naive to think that if the government wanted to watch you without you knowing they could. |
|
07-03-2008, 10:04 AM | #56 | |
Pro Rookie
Join Date: Nov 2000
Location: USA
|
Quote:
Difference between you and I is that I don't approve of it and I want it stopped. Last edited by Tekneek : 07-03-2008 at 10:05 AM. |
|
07-03-2008, 10:06 AM | #57 | |
Poet in Residence
Join Date: Oct 2000
Location: Charleston, SC
|
Quote:
Which is exactly why there are so many people working towards making sure the government is accountable to the people, and not the other way around. Even if there are plenty of citizens who don't understand our Constitution well enough to understand why. |
|
07-03-2008, 10:09 AM | #58 |
General Manager
Join Date: Oct 2004
Location: New Mexico
|
I spent 6 years in the armed forces, and spent some time working with army intelligence, and even went through some of the SERE courses that sometimes come up in these conversations. There are psychological techniques used in interrogation that work, and there are psychological techniques used in interrogation that don't work - resisting interrogation is almost entirely a psychological exercise. The psychological techniques that do work can resemble torture, or may use elements that could be described by a reasonable person as torture. The blanket statement "torture doesn't work" is only correct if you are speaking on average, and define torture as what happens in 24 - its mostly true that beating on people or pulling their teeth will not elicit cooperation, at least on average. The fact is, however, that it can be part of a successful interrogation (although probably not by itself). However, most successful interrogations do not need anything resembling torture, but DO require some significant advantage for the interrogator - interrogation is mostly a psych-out, not a bullying/beating operation. To be good at interrogation you need psychologists, not thugs.
The moral question is similarly blurry - nobody doubts that interrogation is ok, nobody seriously doubts that we are the good guys and terrorists are the bad guys, and therefore that it is morally ok for the good guys to acquire an advantage in the interrogation game. Likewise nobody is going to argue that pulling teeth on a terrorist suspect is something we want to sanction. In other words, this is, like most issues, a complicated subject, more complicated than people want to allow. |
07-03-2008, 10:20 AM | #59 | |
Coordinator
Join Date: Sep 2004
Location: Chicagoland
|
Quote:
Ironically, of course, there were several Al-Qaeda members in custody prior and after 9/11 who were giving the FBI (who were not using torture to interrogate them) good information that would eventually lead to several good arrests. Unfortunately, once the CIA got a hold of them and started torturing them, they clammed up. Also ironically, one of the "many ways that we could've stopped the attacks" had nothing to do with torture. The information was already gathered, without torture, and if George Bush or Condi Rice had bothered to read the intelligence briefings.... |
|
07-03-2008, 10:29 AM | #60 |
Coordinator
Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: Conyers GA
|
|
07-03-2008, 10:35 AM | #61 | |
Grizzled Veteran
Join Date: Oct 2000
Location: Stuck in Yinzerville, PA
|
Quote:
I won't disagree with anything you said in the last sentence. But I would like to point out that it doesn't have to be physical abuse to be torture, just like there is physical and psychological abuse at home...it can be that way when interrogating a suspect. Some people react differently to situations and there are people out there that think only physical tourture is the way to go. I believe that it could be one or the other...or a mix of both. Either way you look at it though, it is still torture. |
|
07-03-2008, 10:39 AM | #62 |
Coordinator
Join Date: Jan 2002
|
Actually, lots of people are arguing for this (and much worse).
__________________
Down Goes Brown: Toronto Maple Leafs Humor and Analysis |
07-03-2008, 10:42 AM | #63 | |
Head Coach
Join Date: Oct 2002
Location: Georgia
|
BTW, we could run with bsak's hypothetical a number of ways:
Quote:
__________________
Top 10 Songs of the Year 1955-Present (1976 Added) Franchise Portfolio Draft Winner Fictional Character Draft Winner Television Family Draft Winner Build Your Own Hollywood Studio Draft Winner Last edited by larrymcg421 : 07-03-2008 at 10:43 AM. |
|
07-03-2008, 10:46 AM | #64 |
Grizzled Veteran
Join Date: Oct 2000
Location: Stuck in Yinzerville, PA
|
edit: delete.
Not worth my time. Last edited by Dr. Sak : 07-03-2008 at 10:47 AM. |
07-03-2008, 10:50 AM | #65 |
General Manager
Join Date: Oct 2004
Location: New Mexico
|
There's probably a better way for me to put that. What I meant is, nobody is seriously arguing that we should embrace the Jack Bauer model. Even the most ardent official defenders of waterboarding are simply saying it should be an option open to interrogators, not that it has some magical purpose.
Part of my point is that whatever effect interrogators hope to create with waterboarding, its the effect that is the point. An experiment like what Hitchens did is really pointless, imo. |
07-03-2008, 10:50 AM | #66 |
Coordinator
Join Date: Sep 2004
Location: Chicagoland
|
Nice post-and-run by Cam, btw.
|
07-03-2008, 10:54 AM | #67 | |
Grizzled Veteran
Join Date: Oct 2000
Location: Stuck in Yinzerville, PA
|
Quote:
You put it 10 million times more eloquant than I could have. |
|
07-03-2008, 11:06 AM | #68 | ||
Coordinator
Join Date: Sep 2004
Location: Chicagoland
|
Quote:
Antonin Scalia. Michael Chertoff. Quote:
Source. Maybe no one (in the Administration) believes in the Jack Bauer model now, but at one time they certainly did. Edit: Oh, and pretty much the entire staff of the National Review thinks waterboarding should be used early and often. Last edited by flere-imsaho : 07-03-2008 at 11:10 AM. |
||
07-03-2008, 11:11 AM | #69 | |
Head Coach
Join Date: Oct 2002
Location: Georgia
|
Quote:
Well, we really have two arguments here. 1. Is waterboarding torture? 2. Should we torture suspects to get information? Hitchens experiment is speaking to the 1st question. No doubt some people couldn't care less what the answer is to question 1. They think it should be an option either way.
__________________
Top 10 Songs of the Year 1955-Present (1976 Added) Franchise Portfolio Draft Winner Fictional Character Draft Winner Television Family Draft Winner Build Your Own Hollywood Studio Draft Winner |
|
07-03-2008, 11:23 AM | #70 | |
General Manager
Join Date: Oct 2004
Location: New Mexico
|
Quote:
Well, I was trying to say that both of those questions are basically devoid of meaning. Interrogation is essentially a psychological exercise. There is a wide menu of options available to the interrogator to increase his advantage. To argue that waterboarding shouldn't be used, you can't (imo) simply say "its torture!" I mean, you can, but torture is such a loaded word - essentially when you make that claim you've demolished any chance at having a meaningful discussion about ethics in interrogation. The questions should be 1. Does waterboarding work? 2. Is the effect of waterboarding, in the context of an interrogation, something which meets our minimum expectations of an ethical interrogation? Its possible the answer to these questions is "no." |
|
07-03-2008, 11:29 AM | #71 |
Pro Rookie
Join Date: Nov 2000
Location: USA
|
So, it doesn't matter whether something is torture or not, you should just avoid the question entirely so you keep your options open? That sounds very convenient.
Last edited by Tekneek : 07-03-2008 at 11:29 AM. |
07-03-2008, 11:31 AM | #72 | |
Head Coach
Join Date: Oct 2002
Location: Georgia
|
Quote:
See, I think you're essentially asking the same questions in a different order. Your question 2 is pretty much how I would define torture. Your question 1 definitely factors in to whether or not people think we should use it. I do think the answer to both questions is no, but I could see someone thinking the answer to 1 is yes and 2 is still no.
__________________
Top 10 Songs of the Year 1955-Present (1976 Added) Franchise Portfolio Draft Winner Fictional Character Draft Winner Television Family Draft Winner Build Your Own Hollywood Studio Draft Winner |
|
07-03-2008, 11:34 AM | #73 | |
General Manager
Join Date: Oct 2004
Location: New Mexico
|
Quote:
No, that's not even remotely close to what I'm saying. |
|
07-03-2008, 11:39 AM | #74 |
Hall Of Famer
Join Date: Nov 2002
Location: Newburgh, NY
|
I think we'd all agree that the Israeli's are more experienced at dealing with jihadists. They don't use techniques like this because they have significantly better results with gaining the trust of those they've captured. To argue that that there's no other way to get info than torture is completely wrong.
__________________
To love someone is to strive to accept that person exactly the way he or she is, right here and now.. - Mr. Rogers |
07-03-2008, 11:41 AM | #75 | |
Pro Rookie
Join Date: Nov 2000
Location: USA
|
Quote:
Sounds to me like you're saying you shouldn't call something torture until you've decided whether you want to use it or not. If you think waterboarding is ok, you don't want to call it torture because that sounds bad and could get you into some trouble. Last edited by Tekneek : 07-03-2008 at 11:42 AM. |
|
07-03-2008, 11:44 AM | #76 | |
General Manager
Join Date: Oct 2004
Location: New Mexico
|
Quote:
I suspect the answer to both questions is "mostly no", also, I simply object to using inflammatory language in serious discussions. Calling interrogators "torturers" is not a good way to get your point across. Its like asking "is George Bush evil?" Also, I am sure that there are many, many other techniques used in interrogation which a reasonable person would not think to call "torture" which Hitchens (or almost anybody) would find close to unbearable. To focus on waterboarding is really to avoid the interesting part of the discussion. |
|
07-03-2008, 12:15 PM | #77 | |
Poet in Residence
Join Date: Oct 2000
Location: Charleston, SC
|
Quote:
If interrogation is essentially a psychological exercise, wouldn't you agree that when it becomes a physical exercise it crosses the line into torture? Asking people questions is very different than forcing a towel over their airway and pouring water down their nose and throat. Torture is, after all, essentially a physical exercise. This also makes me think about the dismissive ways in which some have treated the reports of how long people were able to last; for example, the Hitchens article references the unbelievable rumor that KSM lasted for two minutes without breaking. There's no way he didn't give in for two minutes. But I can absolutely see how his interrogators might have continued to waterboard him for two minutes even after he was panicking and trying not to drown, which is one of the specific concerns many of us feel for using torture as a tool. Does such an image feed the primal beast inside many of us for revenge at any cost? Sure. Does it help make America more secure, knowing that across the Middle East there are thousands of fifteen-year-old kids hearing about how the big bad country across the sea is torturing their fathers? Doubtful. This idea of muddying the waters by framing the issue as an imaginative exercise rather than an actual practice doesn't serve us well in trying to determine what methods we should and should not use. The issue of determining the parameters of an ethical interrogation is more helpful. What complicates the matter is that we can't agree on the limits to what torture constitutes. But it's frustrating that we should even be having to parse out the subtleties of such things -- my own hope for Americans would be that anything coming close to torture should be given a wide berth, in part because if we don't hold ourselves to a higher standard it will become more and more difficult to lie to each other about how our country is morally better than others. Last edited by NoMyths : 07-03-2008 at 12:17 PM. |
|
07-03-2008, 12:25 PM | #78 | |
General Manager
Join Date: Oct 2002
Location: The Mountains
|
Quote:
I'm not a pro-torture guy but how would you possibly know this? And some point, doesn't someone in custody just not have any more info? What's your source that torture caused anyone specific to "clam up" and withold information. |
|
07-03-2008, 12:32 PM | #79 | |
General Manager
Join Date: Oct 2004
Location: New Mexico
|
Quote:
I disagree with this. There are psychological methods available which are pretty horrifying. I understand your point, though, and I think we all agree that there SHOULD be an ethical boundary for interrogation. I also don't think the desire for revenge has anything to do with this. I believe interrogators want to have successful interrogations, not just make somebody piss their pants and cry. There is no doubt in my mind that there are SOME situations where waterboarding or the threat of waterboarding would result in a successful interrogation. That doesn't mean it would be the only thing that would work in those situations, though, so then it becomes a question of value and ethics - is there value in having this method available, in terms of increasing the success of our interrogations? And does this method violate our minimum ethical expectations? An interrogators point of view might well be "I need this method to be able to do my job", focusing on the marginal advantage he perceives, and overlooking or understating the defective ethics of the practice. But that doesn't make him a sadist. |
|
07-03-2008, 01:41 PM | #80 |
Pro Rookie
Join Date: Nov 2000
Location: USA
|
Water boarding was designated as illegal by U.S. generals in Vietnam 40 years ago. A photograph that appeared in The Washington Post of a U.S. soldier involved in water boarding a North Vietnamese prisoner in 1968 led to that soldier's severe punishment.
"The soldier who participated in water torture in January 1968 was court-martialed within one month after the photos appeared in The Washington Post, and he was drummed out of the Army," recounted Darius Rejali, a political science professor at Reed College. Earlier in 1901, the United States had taken a similar stand against water boarding during the Spanish-American War when an Army major was sentenced to 10 years of hard labor for water boarding an insurgent in the Philippines. "Even when you're fighting against belligerents who don't respect the laws of war, we are obliged to hold the laws of war," said Rejali. "And water torture is torture." http://abcnews.go.com/WNT/Investigat...ory?id=1356870 |
07-03-2008, 01:57 PM | #81 | |
Coordinator
Join Date: Oct 2000
Location: Big Ten Country
|
Quote:
The Weimar Republic would have loved you. |
|
07-03-2008, 02:29 PM | #82 | ||
Coordinator
Join Date: Sep 2004
Location: Chicagoland
|
Quote:
I direct the distinguished gentleman to my post previously in the thread: Jack Cloonan, FBI Special Agent (full article in link, description/summary below): Quote:
Furthermore, in those links posted previously you'll see a number of interrogators who suffered setbacks with their detainees when other interrogators employed torture techniques after the detainee had been giving good information while not under duress. This, I'm sure, is the basis for while many prominent military and intelligence leaders (and Israel's Mossad for goodness sake) maintain that torture isn't effective and may in fact be detrimental. |
||
07-03-2008, 02:50 PM | #83 |
High School Varsity
Join Date: Oct 2002
Location: Colorado
|
I don't have much to add to this discussion (yet I'm posting anyway)...flere, your post listing all of those sources and what they had to say about the ineffectiveness of torture was an eye-opener for me. Thanks for sharing all of that...good stuff.
__________________
BALLERZ YO, fo shizzle. - QuikSand |
07-03-2008, 03:02 PM | #84 |
Grizzled Veteran
Join Date: Oct 2000
Location: San Jose, CA
|
I disagree with anyone who says America is spineless if it isn't willing to torture people. What happened to being better than the other guy? I thought this country was a superpower that lead by example.
Also, how long until college frat parties start doing "Beerboarding"?
__________________
Look into the mind of a crazy man (NSFW) http://www.whitepowerupdate.wordpress.com |
07-03-2008, 03:23 PM | #85 |
Coordinator
Join Date: Jan 2002
|
But it's not like that. "Evil" is a subjective term that we could debate for hours. "Torture" is a term that has a historically established meaning. And it's a meaning that included tactics like waterboarding right up until the US started using them.
__________________
Down Goes Brown: Toronto Maple Leafs Humor and Analysis |
07-03-2008, 03:44 PM | #86 |
College Benchwarmer
Join Date: Jan 2006
|
|
07-03-2008, 04:12 PM | #87 |
Banned
Join Date: Oct 2000
Location: Astoria, NY, USA
|
|
07-03-2008, 04:18 PM | #88 |
Pro Starter
Join Date: Nov 2002
Location: Winnipeg, MB
|
Ok, here is another waterboarding video, this is absolutely brutal. Seriously, it's hard to watch.
hxxp://current.com/items/86417301_kaj_larsen_goes_waterboarding
__________________
"Breakfast? Breakfast schmekfast, look at the score for God's sake. It's only the second period and I'm winning 12-2. Breakfasts come and go, Rene, but Hartford, the Whale, they only beat Vancouver maybe once or twice in a lifetime." |
07-07-2008, 10:22 AM | #89 |
Pro Rookie
Join Date: Nov 2000
Location: USA
|
|
04-30-2009, 11:27 AM | #90 | |
Coordinator
Join Date: Sep 2004
Location: Chicagoland
|
Instead of starting a new thread, and since this seems to be the general-purpose torture thread, I thought I'd post what I heard on NPR this morning:
Quote:
Any added emphasis mine. |
|
04-30-2009, 12:31 PM | #91 |
Pro Rookie
Join Date: Nov 2000
Location: USA
|
I thought this was being re-upped because Sean Hannity will be waterboarded soon.
|
04-30-2009, 01:05 PM | #92 |
Hall Of Famer
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: Chicago, IL
|
|
04-30-2009, 01:17 PM | #93 |
Pro Rookie
Join Date: Nov 2000
Location: USA
|
|
04-30-2009, 01:46 PM | #94 |
Pro Starter
Join Date: Jan 2001
Location: Burke, VA
|
John McCain was tortured, and he lied his ass off to get it to stop.
|
04-30-2009, 01:58 PM | #95 |
Pro Rookie
Join Date: Nov 2000
Location: USA
|
|
04-30-2009, 02:06 PM | #96 | |
Head Coach
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: Bath, ME
|
Quote:
By which you mean, you would rather have her die than have innumerable people tortured, one of which might know something that might save her life. Or how about you would rather have innumerable people tortured so that we could obtain information which is false or incomplete and she dies anyway. It's well documented that things don't work like this in real life. We don't know who has the information we need, we don't even know what the information is, and torturing is shown not to produce accurate intelligence. How about we spend our time and money actually enhancing our intelligence service rather than ensuring we have the ability to torture people once we fail at it? |
|
04-30-2009, 02:11 PM | #97 |
Coordinator
Join Date: Jan 2002
|
No, the people doing it to him were brown, so it was still torture.
__________________
Down Goes Brown: Toronto Maple Leafs Humor and Analysis |
04-30-2009, 02:24 PM | #98 | |
Head Coach
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: Bath, ME
|
Quote:
Thank you. People can disagree on issues around torture. But let's not characterize the only "manly" action as being doing whatever you have to to keep your family safe. Many people, many families have principles that they find greater than their safety. In fact, many soldiers go off in harm's way, knowing that if they're killed they will cause great anguish to their families, maybe leave their children without a parent. We don't force them to videotape telling their spouse that they would rather leave them a widow and single parent than take a safer job, but that's what they do because they believe in something. |
|
05-01-2009, 12:38 AM | #99 | |
College Benchwarmer
Join Date: Dec 2003
|
Quote:
Let the record show that Schmidty has juxtaposed fuck, fucking, and damned with the ever popular goshdamn, to hilarious effect. Well done. |
|
05-01-2009, 12:40 AM | #100 | |
College Benchwarmer
Join Date: Dec 2003
|
Quote:
Ping: Sndvls' signature |
|
Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests) | |
Thread Tools | |
|
|