Bush vetoes ban on harsh interrogation

Status
Not open for further replies.
Why I might not disagree with banning water-boarding in alll cases I sure don't think it was a bright idea to make the veto an international event. Just what the country needs is notice to the entire world that America favors torture. Considering everything Bush has done in secret. Making his veto a televised event this seems a bit impractical.
Click to expand...

Not at all. It shows to all the world that President Bush is in favor of torture.
 
It is quickly forgotten that President Bush did a good job keeping this country together after 9/11 and along with our government, intelligence agencies and law enforcement has kept another attack from happening on our soil. While there is a lot more that can be done, those that are there to protect us have done a good job.
 
and it is likely that waterboarding will reveal her location
Click to expand...
for the life of me I can't recall the name of the logical fallacy to which this applies

You're assuming waterboarding is effective in the first place.
 
I have a simple question. If your daughter has been kidnapped by terrorists and it is likely that waterboarding will reveal her location (before she is raped and murdered/beheaded), would you be OK with waterboarding? Remember -- you said its use can never be justified.
Click to expand...

Can you name even ONE police agency in the free world that would allow such a thing to happen? Of course not, and it's because they know as much as you do that this would be a case of REVENGE more than anything else.
 
I guess we need to send apologises to the brave Japanese and German soldiers, bravely following orders who we executed for waterboarding people then.

Unfortantly it is not a proven technique and has a habit of getting people to confess to anything you want them too, while revealing little information available by other methods. In the process it destroys the reputation that at least the country appears to follow laws that have been in place for over a hundred years that ban such treatment and have the moral highground that lead to examples, diplomatic respect and allies wishing to help you out just because people think Jack Bauer is real.
 
Quote:
and it is likely that waterboarding will reveal her location

for the life of me I can't recall the name of the logical fallacy to which this applies

You're assuming waterboarding is effective in the first place.
Click to expand...

You might want to re-read the first part and assume it is your daughter ---"and it is likely that waterboarding will reveal her location"

Assuming it is likely that waterboarding would reveal the location of your daughter you would not want to subject this terrorist to this "horrible" torture. You can probably guess what I think about the prospect of being your daughter.

The only thing I can't figure out is whether you will vote for Clinton or Obama.
 
I vaguely recall a Gitmo officer being interviewed a couple of years ago about interrogation tactics. Bear with me because my memory of it is foggy...

He stated the interrogation tactics that they use to retrieve information takes months, if not, years. This is one reason why they needed to be detained for a lengthy period of time. Most of the tactics were obviously classified. However, he did disclose some psycological methods.

He stated something to the effect that they stripped them of all items sans essentials. He would bring them into rooms to carry out simple questions. No yelling. Not derogatory remarks. Only simple questions. If no positive information is disclosed, back to their cells. They would wake them every hour to ask similar questions. Once they broke silence, he'd grant small amenities as they give up relevant, useable information. Obviously, is doesn't work most of the time, but he claimed that they can figure out rather quickly which ones are likely to break. I think long periods of solitude and no amenities can work on occasion. However, the hard core needs different tactics....

I see a term here used with a very, very broad brush....torture.

To me, there's a major difference between torture and coercive interrogation. This, alone, IMHO needs to be addressed on what's what. Otherwise, we all may not be on the same frequency here.

My take on the difference between the two is basic. It won't divide everything in black and white, but will separate several. Besides, even with a line drawn, there's always gray. Again, my opinion here:

Torture: An act that would case direct permanent physical bodily harm. Example is taking a baseball bat and crushing knees.

Coercive interrogation: An act that would cause discomfort in any degree up to the point of injury. Waterboarding seems to be the hot topic here. I'll use it. Yes, I'm sure one in a million people will have adverse effects of this tactic, but I don't see the immediate permanent physical damage it will do to a person. Will it irritate tissues and membranes? Yes. Will it take a psychological toll on the individual? Yes, and I hope it does. It's the whole point of the matter.

Am I for torture? Not at this time. Will I ever change my mind? Well, yes, if it's my wife's life on the line....

Am I for coercive interrogation? You're damn right I am. My take is that 99.9% of people that are suspects of acts of terrorism are in some way connected. I'm not convinced that we have very many "I was walking down the street, minding my own business" lads in Gitmo. Even if there were innocents, the ratio to guilty parties far outweigh the innocent. That's just part of war. It's ugly as hell. Innocent people are caught in the crossfire. Innocent people are caught in the middle if nothing was ever done also. So, it's a moot point to me...

Just my rambling thoughts...
 
You might want to re-read the first part and assume it is your daughter ---"and it is likely that waterboarding will reveal her location"

Assuming it is likely that waterboarding would reveal the location of your daughter you would not want to subject this terrorist to this "horrible" torture. You can probably guess what I think about the prospect of being your daughter.

The only thing I can't figure out is whether you will vote for Clinton or Obama.
Click to expand...
Your argument falls flat on its face because you're making this assumption

Assuming it is likely that waterboarding would reveal the location of your daughter
Click to expand...
without anything to support it.

If your daughter was kidnapped and it is likely that giving the kidnapper a big smooch on the cheek and a new Corvette will reveal her location, would you do it?

edit: Oh and I gave no indication as to what I would do, I simply pointed out the error of your argument. Another assumption on your part.
 
using this technique the innocence or guilt of the individual was determined by wrapping them in chain and tossing them into the moat. The guilty drowned and the innocent would float to safety.
Click to expand...

Actually, the innocent drowned, and the guilty floated, because "the water rejected them". Hence, the accused was dead either way. Only drowning was probably less painful than the other forms of execution popular at the time.

I'm disgusted that our country in now stooping to the same "standards" of the lowest of the low. I thought we Americans were better than that, but obviously not. Who knows just how many prisoners have died under torture in secret CIA prisons and in foreign jails we outsource to? More to the point, who cares?

It's handy to assume all prisoners in the unending "war on terror" are the absolute worst of the worst. With no real trials or proper legal representation or procedures, no one can know how many prisoners were just in the wrong place (eg, their home countries) at the wrong time, and got swept up in raids, with no chance of proving innocence. Life in prison and "harsh" treatment too. And no suicide allowed: a tube forced up the nose 3 times a day prevents that. That some Americans support this is a sad comment on our sense of fairness and morality.

I'd think making our borders really secure would be the first priority in keeping our country safe from terrorists. But that isn't politically feasible and torture is.
 
Isn't it sort of ironic that we COURT-MARTIALLED the bad guys in WW2 for using water-boarding during interrogation, and punished American soldiers in Vietnam for doing the same thing, but now claim that it's an indispensable tool to fight terrorism?
Click to expand...

No, its not ironic at all. Uniformed soldiers of opposing armies have always been treated differently under the law than terrorists. But since you're going to go down this route, both armies used to shoot spies regardless of whether they were military or not, so waterboarding seems pretty benign.


Wow, you obviously have no intelligence experience. Those methods are only proven to do one thing...not work. I was in MI for my entire 8yr stint and all those methods accomplish are getting someone to tell you what you want to hear whether it is true or not
Click to expand...

Then why are there several examples of waterboarding being successful to the point of enabling us to prevent future terrorist plots and capturing/killing al quaeda members.

Just out of curiosity how many people have you waterboarded.
 
Then why are there several examples of waterboarding being successful to the point of enabling us to prevent future terrorist plots and capturing/killing al quaeda members.

Just out of curiosity how many people have you waterboarded.
Click to expand...
I will say I have never witnessed it to be successful, and how many times have you witnessed it be successful...and what expertise or experience do you bring to the table? Face it, all the top people in the intelligence game will tell you physical torture is not effective in retrieving true information. It is only good in coercing people into saying what you want them to say or at least saying what they think you want to hear.
 
Last edited:
I'm not talking.... Go ahead, force me to have sex with Paris Hilton, I can take it you jackbooted thug....I'm gonna keep my mouth shut, no matter how many Latex coated blondes you beat me with.

WildiknowwherethebombissocomeonetorturemeAlaska TM
 
'm not talking.... Go ahead, force me to have sex with Paris Hilton, I can take it you jackbooted thug....I'm gonna keep my mouth shut, no matter how many Latex coated blondes you beat me with.
Click to expand...
Paris Hilton!?!? I just lost a little respect for you. :)

Why don't you just have sex with a raw underfed chicken carcass? It would be about the same thing physically and would have a better personality. :p
 
No, its not ironic at all. Uniformed soldiers of opposing armies have always been treated differently under the law than terrorists. But since you're going to go down this route, both armies used to shoot spies regardless of whether they were military or not, so waterboarding seems pretty benign.
Click to expand...

If it was "wrong" for the Japanese and Germans to do this to OUR soldiers during WW2, and it was "wrong" for US soldiers to do this to Vietnamese suspects during Vietnam, why is it suddenly "not wrong" for US interrogators to do it NOW? I don't see anything at all wrong with killing every last terrorist we can, but this sort of "Oh, it's OK when WE do it" nonsense is a perfect example of hypocrisy.
 
Then why are there several examples of waterboarding being successful to the point of enabling us to prevent future terrorist plots and capturing/killing al quaeda members.
Click to expand...
Lookie! The old "correlation = causality" fallacy. Isn't it cute? Notice it's unique markings;
Event A occured and event B occured. Therefore event A caused event B.

Why don't you first establish that the two have something to do with each other?
 
Last edited:
Then why are there several examples of waterboarding being successful to the point of enabling us to prevent future terrorist plots and capturing/killing al quaeda members.
Click to expand...
Didn't General Hayden say it had only been used a grand total of three times? Where there any reports that those three times actually helped at all?
 
I have no sympathy for terrorists. Especially foreign ones associated with a radical religon which I will leave un-named. I for one am not happy about my hard earned tax dollars going to well paid politicians who are spending their time making laws to protect the rights of murderous criminals and terrorists whch in turn spends more of my hard earned tax dollars paying other well paid politicians to try to fight off these stupid laws.

Terrorists have no rights in my opinion. I frankly don't care what they have do to them to keep America safe.
 
Terrorists have no rights in my opinion. I frankly don't care what they have do to them to keep America safe.
Click to expand...
You can't start saying it is okay to torture some people but not others. When it starts to be okay to torture even the worst people then it is okay to torture anyone as long as you can try and label them as bad people.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top