You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.
You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.
Hitchens' voluntary waterboarding
- Thread starter pitz96
- Start date
Muskateer
How's this for a definition:
Treatment we would not do to our people therefore will not do to others.
Exepcting harsh interrogation should you be caught it the act of intellegece gathering or terrorist activities abroad is not unexpected. It is illegal to do either after all and it is thier national security or the lives of thier people that are being threatened.
You should be sure that your prepared for the consequences of threatening a nations security before you go threatening it don't ya think? Waterboarding isn't going to leave them harmed like torture would.
Wouldn't it be cool if countries we had issues with like Iran or China outlawed harsh interrogation. I bet we would have a lot more people willing to risk covert intelligence or other clandestine activities there. Wouldn't be long before we had their whole loaf of bread huh. SWEEEET
How's this for a definition:
Treatment we would not do to our people therefore will not do to others.
Exepcting harsh interrogation should you be caught it the act of intellegece gathering or terrorist activities abroad is not unexpected. It is illegal to do either after all and it is thier national security or the lives of thier people that are being threatened.
You should be sure that your prepared for the consequences of threatening a nations security before you go threatening it don't ya think? Waterboarding isn't going to leave them harmed like torture would.
Wouldn't it be cool if countries we had issues with like Iran or China outlawed harsh interrogation. I bet we would have a lot more people willing to risk covert intelligence or other clandestine activities there. Wouldn't be long before we had their whole loaf of bread huh. SWEEEET
Unregistered
Moderator
And if they're all the same, he'd see no difference between having his children waterboarded versus having their fingernails ripped out or their heads sawn off.
I don't see the difference between waterboarding and having their fingernails ripped out. Neither technique causes permanent disability or death. Neither does electrocuting the genitals, rape, or many other things. I don't see why raping someone is worse than waterboarding them.
Sawing the heads off results in a painful, grisly death and is unnecessarily cruel (ie, you could kill someone by shooting them, and it would be less painful and thus less cruel), so I would put it in a different category.
Luckily no matter who wins in November both oppose torturing US prisoners so this issue is moot. It would have been better if the legislature had gotten off their duffs and passed some legislation on the matter though!
I doubt that. Just because the president doesn't support a practice doesn't mean the CIA will stop using it.
I don't see the difference between waterboarding and having their fingernails ripped out. Neither technique causes permanent disability or death. Neither does electrocuting the genitals, rape, or many other things. I don't see why raping someone is worse than waterboarding them.
Then you are just intentionally being obtuse. Waterboarding does not cause any injury, temporary or permanent. Thats why people line up to be waterboarded and not have their fingernails pulled out.
The traditional definition of torture always has included some form of physical injury/pain. Waterboarding has no such characteristic.
As far as rape, besides being a ridiculous example, it isn't practical at all as a means of extracting information. Plus there is the problem of who exactly is going to "interrogate". I doubt the CIA puts that in the job description. Also, there is the potential for internal injuries as well as the pain associated with such an act.
Waterboarding does not cause any injury, temporary or permanent.
Let's rephrase that so it is correct: Waterboarding done correctly does not cause any PHYSICAL injury, temporary or permanent.
Permanent mental injury is, on the other hand, quick possible.
As far as rape, besides being a ridiculous example, it isn't practical at all as a means of extracting information. Plus there is the problem of who exactly is going to "interrogate". I doubt the CIA puts that in the job description. Also, there is the potential for internal injuries as well as the pain associated with such an act.
"Bring out the Gimp." Come on. Done properly it will leave not permanent injury and there are plenty of men voluntarily lining up for gay sex so why would you consider out of line. If you have no problem with water boarding I don't see why you would have a problem with this.
As far as finding one who will do it, give the interrogators enough time to start drawing enjoyment from demeaning and debasing others. Torture takes its toll on the torturer as well if they had any type of moral upbringing. In time, with their own gov't telling them it is right, justified and needed, I am certain you will get some torturers mentally deranged enough to rape some prisoners. After all, given time just locking prisoners away in the black hole in Cuba resulted in the naked prisoner pyramids. Give those deranged jailers enough time and I am certain you will get a rapist or two. Considering the prisoners as less than human is simply the first step.
Muskateer
How's this for a definition:
Treatment we would not do to our people therefore will not do to others.
Please explain as the above is not clear.
Let's rephrase that so it is correct: Waterboarding done correctly does not cause any PHYSICAL injury, temporary or permanent.
Ok. So what evidence do you have that shows we don't do it correctly. Everyone that we have waterboarded is no worse for the wear health wise.
"Bring out the Gimp." Come on. Done properly it will leave not permanent injury and there are plenty of men voluntarily lining up for gay sex so why would you consider out of line. If you have no problem with water boarding I don't see why you would have a problem with this.
Because there isn't anything that suggests that poking achmed in the rear would be an effective method of getting information. If waterboarding wasn't effective then I wouldn't support it either.
As far as finding one who will do it, give the interrogators enough time to start drawing enjoyment from demeaning and debasing others. Torture takes its toll on the torturer as well if they had any type of moral upbringing. In time, with their own gov't telling them it is right, justified and needed, I am certain you will get some torturers mentally deranged enough to rape some prisoners.
Thats just complete unsubstantiated baloney.
Waterboarding causes no pain? If you think this, you really have no idea. It is a form of asphyxiation and it is routinely described as agonizing. Perhaps you should read the Hitchens article.The traditional definition of torture always has included some form of physical injury/pain. Waterboarding has no such characteristic.
Waterboarding causes no pain? If you think this, you really have no idea. It is a form of asphyxiation and it is routinely described as agonizing. Perhaps you should read the Hitchens article.
A gag reflex is not pain. Its certianly uncomfortable, but its not pain.
Defining something that leaves you whole, uninjured, and as well 20 minutes after as were before (esentially frightening them into spilling their guts about he details) requires a very strained definition of torture and facing it for threatening ANY nations national security or for killing their innocent civilians for the purpose of causing terror is hardly unreasonable let alone immoral.
Unregistered
Moderator
So you are saying that it would be OK to electrocute someone, as long as you don't leave a scar?
Or it would be OK to rape someone? Stage II has said that rape has the potential to do physical damage, but so does waterboarding, if done improperly, or by an inexperienced torturer.
Or it would be OK to rape someone? Stage II has said that rape has the potential to do physical damage, but so does waterboarding, if done improperly, or by an inexperienced torturer.
That is the strained logic I was talking about. Been raped or electrocuted? Well your NOT left WHOLE, or INJURED, or as WELL as you were 20 minutes after as you were before........So they are obviously QUITE different.
You seem to feel rape is a minor thing. That's troubling iif true. Rape leaves someones soul permanently damaged. It's not the damage to the orafice that is the injury.
You seem to feel rape is a minor thing. That's troubling iif true. Rape leaves someones soul permanently damaged. It's not the damage to the orafice that is the injury.
Or it would be OK to rape someone? Stage II has said that rape has the potential to do physical damage, but so does waterboarding, if done improperly, or by an inexperienced torturer.
You keep making ridiculous comparisons. Electrocution causes pain. Rape causes pain and there's no evidence that suggests that it is even remotely effective at getting information. Most of all, however, I'm not going to ask one of our people to engage in that.
If you can't see the difference between dunking some guy and physically raping him, its no wonder we are having this logical block.
Unregistered
Moderator
Been raped or electrocuted? Well your NOT left WHOLE, or INJURED, or as WELL as you were 20 minutes after as you were before
If electrocuted mildly, you can certainly be as whole, uninjured, and well as you were 20 minutes earlier. And while painful at the time, the psychological trauma must be less than waterboarding, as people seem to talk quicker when being waterboarded than electrocuted.
I have no doubt that many would support mild electrocution (and even rape) if it gave better results than waterboarding.
The one good thing that seems to be coming out of the current presidential candidates is that both are opposed to torture. Perhaps we will put barbarism behind us in the next administration.
Well give us some 'raped as an interrogation method' story or write up a forced sodomy for national security novel.
Back to reality, electrocution means death or near death by electric shock. A tad infurous.....
Mild shocks low enough to not cause injury are often used therapeutically in physical therapy and even though not painful will cause permanent injury in the form of nerve damage before causing intolerable discomfort.
Your consistent rape references are starting to make me wonder. You are being facetious aren't you. You fully recognize the devastation a rape causes right. Seriously, you understand the severe trauma of rape right?
victims of rape are never whole again.
It seems that it takes a strained definition of torture, an exploded view of what the scope of the subject is (prolonged submergence of a soldier head to investigate a crime for example), or the use of a fascist state scenario to try to keep a hold of the hash interrogation=torture sophistry.
Defining something that leaves you whole, uninjured, and as well 20 minutes after as were before (essentially frightening them into spilling their guts about the details) requires a very strained definition of torture in the face of threatening ANY nations national security or for killing their innocent civilians for the purpose of causing terror is hardly unreasonable let alone immoral.
Back to reality, electrocution means death or near death by electric shock. A tad infurous.....
Mild shocks low enough to not cause injury are often used therapeutically in physical therapy and even though not painful will cause permanent injury in the form of nerve damage before causing intolerable discomfort.
Your consistent rape references are starting to make me wonder. You are being facetious aren't you. You fully recognize the devastation a rape causes right. Seriously, you understand the severe trauma of rape right?
victims of rape are never whole again.
It seems that it takes a strained definition of torture, an exploded view of what the scope of the subject is (prolonged submergence of a soldier head to investigate a crime for example), or the use of a fascist state scenario to try to keep a hold of the hash interrogation=torture sophistry.
Defining something that leaves you whole, uninjured, and as well 20 minutes after as were before (essentially frightening them into spilling their guts about the details) requires a very strained definition of torture in the face of threatening ANY nations national security or for killing their innocent civilians for the purpose of causing terror is hardly unreasonable let alone immoral.
and how about those who are FORCED to undergo water boarding? I am not talking about those volunteering for it who know it is being done by trained professionals to just give them the experience as well as those given an out in the form of a word or action to end it. I am talking about those who are held down and forced to undergo it until they manage to give enough information to make it stop.Your consistent rape references are starting to make me wonder. You are being facetious aren't you. You fully recognize the devastation a rape causes right. Seriously, you understand the severe trauma of rape right?
victims of rape are never whole again.
Claim all you want it has only been done a handful of times. Stop it now before it becomes more widespread, as several here seem to think it should.
and how about those who are FORCED to undergo water boarding? I am not talking about those volunteering for it who know it is being done by trained professionals to just give them the experience as well as those given an out in the form of a word or action to end it. I am talking about those who are held down and forced to undergo it until they manage to give enough information to make it stop.
What about them? Are you suggesting that terrorists should be detained in an environment totally free of fear and apprehension?
Unregistered
Moderator
I believe that what Musketeer is saying is that no one knows the psychological effects of waterboarding on someone who is forced to undergo the procedure involunatarily. I doubt any psychologist has ever looked into the long term effects.
We know that forcible rape has long term psychological effects, as this has been well studied. However, some people have a rape play fetish, and there is no long term effect of this, other than its really weird.
I think it is reasonable to contend that voluntary waterboarding is equivalent to "rape play" fetishes. There is no real fear of death in either. With real rape or real waterboarding, of course there is.
We know that forcible rape has long term psychological effects, as this has been well studied. However, some people have a rape play fetish, and there is no long term effect of this, other than its really weird.
I think it is reasonable to contend that voluntary waterboarding is equivalent to "rape play" fetishes. There is no real fear of death in either. With real rape or real waterboarding, of course there is.
I think it is reasonable to contend that voluntary waterboarding is equivalent to "rape play" fetishes. There is no real fear of death in either. With real rape or real waterboarding, of course there is.
EXACTLY!
The contention that we should not care what is done to them because they are terrorists is asinine. They are "terrorists" because the people intent on incarcerating and interrogating them indefinitely say they are. What type of "due process" in even a rudimentary form exists? It is easy to justify any actions against "those people" as long as "those people" are someone else. That such behavior is given endorsement by our gov't should scare the hell out of everyone. What keeps them from labeling you a terrorists or me? Who would we plead our case to?