Is waterboarding torture?

[Bruxley]

The evidence at hand demonstartes a result counter to the atributes of torture (effective, yields valuble intell).

No evidence has been presented that shows a result that matches the atributes of torture (ineffective, does not yield valuble intell).

Policy of those considered expert by your citing of thier training/opinion/policy is counter to thier position about waterboarding.

The comprehension problem seems to not be the ability to see past emotive bias.

The arguement is repeatedly dependent on a strained definition of torture, an exploded view of what the scope of what waterboarding is or has been used for (asphixiation, dunking heads underwater, drowning, law enforcement applications), 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.

 

[Playboypenguin]

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

You need to research the definition of torture. What you are regurgitating is the neo-con twist on the topic fed to gullible people by the likes of Rumsfeld, Rush, and others.

Torture is defined as pain and/OR anguish of the body and/OR mind.

 

[STAGE 2]

You are the one supporting techniques frowned upon by every official branch of the intel community. You are support methods that every official training course I have ever taken puts forth as unreliable and too easily abused. I believe the burden of proof is yours and those that chose to use these methods. The methods themselves are questionable at best and the negative moral implications are not in doubt at all.

Thats simply a diversion and apparently an incorrect one as the CIA was the one to request to use waterboarding.

I want real world evidence. Whether something is frowned upon doesnt tell me anything, especially in light of the fact that those frowing have no firsthand experience.

The facts are that the official stance of the government has always been that we do not torture and that torture is not reliable. I still do not see where you have put forth any information that distinguished waterboarding from any other method of torture.

More diversion. The facts are that we waterboarding has been successful everytime we used it, and it has been successful where other methods have failed. Unless you have some specific evidence to show me where waterboarding failed, I think its safe to say that you don't have anything to support your conclusions.

You are reading, but not comprehending.

On rare occasion criminals confess, that does not mean we can rely on that fact in leu of proper investigation.

On rare occasions, torture can be used beneficially, that does not make it a reliable practive overall.

I don't dispute that. However the specific facts here all but dispute that this can be attributed to a "rare" circumstance.



Again, please show me some hard evidence where waterboarding has failed. Generalizations about torture or baseless speculation doesn't count.

Torture is defined as pain and/OR anguish of the body and/OR mind.

And under that definition sleep deprivation is torture. Are you and others willing to call sleep deprivation torture?

 

[Bruxley]

Pretty broad definition don't ya think? LOL Wow, torture by that definition is inevitable in the coarse of life.

How about a little bit more specificity there PBP. Adjusting down the definition so it will fit you argument fails to exclude normal life experiences.

QUITE a stretch there........

 

[Bruxley]

I'll toss this one out there:

torture v.- a distortion: the act of distorting something so it seems to mean something it was not intended to mean.

example: 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 tortured 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.

 

[Playboypenguin]

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 tortured 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.

The United States has a historical record of regarding waterboarding as a crime, and has prosecuted individuals for the use of the practice in the past. In 1947, the United States prosecuted a Japanese military officer, Yukio Asano, for carrying out various acts of torture including kicking, clubbing, burning with cigarettes and using a form of waterboarding on a U.S. civilian during World War II.

Whether water boarding is torture is a diversion in itself. It has clearly been defined as torture time and time again throughout American history and is defined as such in numerous treaties to which the US is a signer. That is indisputable.

The current debate is a created diversion by the current neo-con administration to distract ney-sayers to to placate the blood thirsty.

The rationalization of water boarding as not being torture because "no permanent damage is done" is simply a pseudo-intellectual attempt to rationalize barbarism.

As I said before, I can tolerate barbarism. I cannot tolerate deception and dishonesty from my government.

 

[STAGE 2]

The United States has a historical record of regarding waterboarding as a crime, and has prosecuted individuals for the use of the practice in the past. In 1947, the United States prosecuted a Japanese military officer, Yukio Asano, for carrying out various acts of torture including kicking, clubbing, burning with cigarettes and using a form of waterboarding on a U.S. civilian during World War II.

More diversion. Use of waterboarding aginst civilians and uniformed soldiers is a crime. No one here is disputing that or arguing with it. Nor are we arguing against the fact that there are treaties that specifically forbid the use of it.

This, however has no relevance to use on terrorists. Terrorists are neither soldiers nor civilians. As far as treaties are concerned, again, sleep deprivation isn't torture, however its use is prohibited in a variety of settings.

I cannot tolerate deception and dishonesty from my government.

There is no deception or dishonesty. If you are a terrorist you may be waterboarded. If you aren't, we wont. Seems very straight forward to me.

 

[Bruxley]

What 'form of waterboarding' was he performing or is that a tortured effort to make a fit again?

The current debate is a created diversion by the current neo-con administration to distract ney-sayers to to placate the blood thirsty.

And the 'neo-con' adhom again? Really? And blood thirsty neocon administration the boot? very sad.

That is an un-intellectual last resort to a baseless position. Akin to throwing a 'fit'.
It has become clear you position is based on a profoundly hostile political bias. It even clouds what you have been allegedly trained about the attributes of torture. Manic ideas that over ride logic could be symptomatic of larger psychological problems but someone with more expertise then I would have to speak to that.

If the peg doesn't fit the hole it's not the right hole. You know that..........right?

Embarrassed at all by that last post?????

 

[Playboypenguin]

More diversion.

How is pointing out precedent "diversion?"

There is no deception or dishonesty. If you are a terrorist you may be waterboarded. If you aren't, we wont. Seems very straight forward to me.

So, does that mean waterboarding is not torture or that it is okay to torture certain people?

You notice the administration will not make that distinction in any comments they make and refuse to answer direct questions that address the distinction.

 

[Shane Tuttle]

For the longest time I've refrained from posting. I didn't nor do I still have a completely formed opinion if waterboarding is torture or not. As some of you know, I tend to get wordy on my statements. Also, I'm not the most articulate person communicating through the monitor. I have many thoughts and even more questions. With that, I'll do my best to keep them brief so that you don't have to watch paint dry instead:

IIRC, an Englishman once was able to travel alone throughout the known land and NO ONE would even think of touching him. His adversaries knew the consequence if he was harmed in any way. My point?...

I'm coming to the sense that I don't give a rat's behind what other countries think, what our military does to the enemy that doesn't follow the Geneva Convention, and last but not least, HOW they get the upper hand. Send the message: Don't **** with us or Hell will follow. Let the Generals do their job without a video camera shoved up so far that the first person's view is through the mouth.

I'm almost at the point to allow waterboarding as A means of extracting information. If our military received vital information from 3 key terrorist leaders, I'm sure their subordinates will spill something reliable. I don't think this technique should be used on a whim. I do believe there should be specific guidelines. What guidelines? I don't know. I honestly haven't drawn out a detailed plan.

All due respect with ones that disagree with me, but I do think if certain scenarios are going to be for the lack of better terms, embellished, then I present this:

Quoted by PBP(not to pick on you, necessarily. Just stated the definition best)

Torture is defined as pain and/OR anguish of the body and/OR mind.

Is brainwashing a form of torture? My point will be in another post...

Lastly, I do think that both sides of the fence have very compelling arguments and honestly hope this thread doesn't get locked. I know this is a heated debate, but there's a lot of useful dialogue here.

 

[Creature]

And under that definition sleep deprivation is torture. Are you and others willing to call sleep deprivation torture?

Absolutely Yes!

In fact, sleep deprivation can not only damage you physically and mentally, it can kill you.

You really have issues if you cant understand that.

 

[.300H&H]

If waterboarding is just a mundane means of getting information - kinda like a polygraph test - then nobody should have a problem with foreign govts. waterboarding any U.S. soldiers who have been detained by foreign governments. Heck, maybe it could become a routine investigative tool for local U.S. police departments too.


Obviously waterboarding is torture. It crosses the line, and damages the U.S.A.'s credibility as a free world nation.

 

[Hawg]

I'm coming to the sense that I don't give a rat's behind what other countries think, what our military does to the enemy that doesn't follow the Geneva Convention, and last but not least, HOW they get the upper hand. Send the message: Don't **** with us or Hell will follow. Let the Generals do their job without a video camera shoved up so far that the first person's view is through the mouth.

Amen

 

[Playboypenguin]

I'm coming to the sense that I don't give a rat's behind what other countries think, what our military does to the enemy that doesn't follow the Geneva Convention, and last but not least, HOW they get the upper hand. Send the message: Don't **** with us or Hell will follow. Let the Generals do their job without a video camera shoved up so far that the first person's view is through the mouth.

I do not think that other's opinion of our country is the main concern. I think our character is the issue.

I just do not like the "it is okay to be rude, mean, violent, and unfair as long as I get what I want" mentality...and when you start telling politicians that they can be this way, when do they stop applying that philosophy to non-citizens only?

 

[Creature]

Send the message: Don't **** with us or Hell will follow.

Interesting.

Would the following scene be justifiable: the first person on the street who pisses you off, just bash him in the mouth. To send a message?

 

[Bruxley]

Yeah, we're back to strained definition....I mean tortured definition again.

Imprisonmemt
solitary confinement
having a weapon pointed at you by someone willing to use it
losing custody of your children
divorce

The list is virtually infinate on things that can be done to you that qualify under PBP's definition. In fact it would be an exceptional life that was lived without torture by that definition.

Death by sleep deprivation. Gotta watch out for that one.......

 

[Creature]

Death by sleep deprivation. Gotta watch out for that one.......

Yes, its actually quite sadistic.

Yeah, we're back to strained definition....I mean tortured definition again.

Kind of sits at the crux of the whole argument though...does it not?

 

[divemedic]

Death by sleep deprivation. Gotta watch out for that one.......

From the Scientific American:

In the case of rats, however, continuous sleep deprivation for about two weeks or more inevitably caused death in experiments conducted in Allan Rechtschaffen's sleep laboratory at the University of Chicago.

For obvious reasons, this cannot be tried on humans.

Unless, under your theory, they are terrorists as defined by the President, then we can do what they want, because we all know that people only have civil rights if the President says they do.

Another rare disorder, Fatal Familial Insomnia (FFI), is an autosomal dominate disease that is invariably fatal after about six to 30 months without sleep.

 

[Shane Tuttle]

I do not think that other's opinion of our country is the main concern. I think our character is the issue.

It's been posted before that one of the concerns of using torture would look bad in the eyes of other countries. I don't care. What "character" trumps the will to survive? Just because we may allow waterboarding doesn't necessarily mean it has to be public knowledge on when/if we even conduct it.

I just do not like the "it is okay to be rude, mean, violent, and unfair as long as I get what I want" mentality...and when you start telling politicians that they can be this way, when do they stop applying that philosophy to non-citizens only?

The answer is obvious. It's been posted here and other threads over and over again. I'm not willing to repeat just to fill space.

There's nothing rude, mean, and unfair when you allow the military to unleash hell to our adversaries. War isn't fair. If it's war or an action to eliminate people that don't follow the Geneva Convention for example, then all bets are off. Violent? War is violent. There's nothing pretty about it. Nothing. I want my President to be all the things you don't to ones that don't respect a peaceful life and are willing to end ours.

Imagine if we didn't tip-toe around and make it a political nightmare for our field generals. I honestly don't think we would nearly be in the situation we're in today.

Obviously waterboarding is torture. It crosses the line, and damages the U.S.A.'s credibility as a free world nation.

You really think our credibility is solid as it is now? I think we've done more harm than good with the current situation. I'm engaging in a possible thread drift. Feel free to PM me if you want to reply.

Quoted by Creature:

Would the following scene be justifiable: the first person on the street who pisses you off, just bash him in the mouth. To send a message?

Creature, I think you know good and well what my statement of context is. If you don't, I can't help you. Knowing your statements that you've posted here since becoming a member here leads me to believe that you're more intelligent than this question you pose...

Kind of sits at the crux of the whole argument though...does it not?

I agree with this. So, I must address my question again: Is brainwashing a form of torture?

For obvious reasons, this cannot be tried on humans.

Sleep deprivation on rats are quite the argument. However, some scientific experiments have not carried true to humans as well, have they? I question the parallel to humans since humans are built differently and can withstand harsher environments.

How many careers out there demand so many hours and sleep deprivation is high? Ever ask how many hours worked to hours slept major city ER doctors are exposed to?

Granted, it is due to their own accord. I will concede to this. But, my point is that many people have had to actually work (as opposed to prisoners on solitary confinement) and receive very little work. Does this mean the contract company that built the Hoover Dam can be charged with torture of humans? They went through ultra harsh conditions just to survive and put food on the table for their family. They had ONE day off a YEAR at best. Many of them died. This comparison alone pales to the seconds allowed to use as a tool for survival.

 

[Creature]

Quoted by Creature:
Quote:

Would the following scene be justifiable: the first person on the street who pisses you off, just bash him in the mouth. To send a message?

Creature, I think you know good and well what my statement of context is. If you don't, I can't help you. Knowing your statements that you've posted here since becoming a member here leads me to believe that you're more intelligent than this question you pose...

That was the whole point of my statement...it is not an intelligent argument.