How do you rationalize torture of Iraqis

  1. You have chosen to ignore posts from WhatIsItNow. Show WhatIsItNow's posts

    Re: How do you rationalize torture of Iraqis

    In Response to Re: How do you rationalize torture of Iraqis:
    [QUOTE]I know this is hard for many liberals to believe, but really really bad things happen in war all wars. Yes on both sides, even in wars in which America is not fighting. Even the greatest generation did some really evil things during WW2, I know this is shocking but yep its true. Is it nice? NOPE is it right? Nope  Is it going to stop? NO, sorry to break it to you all.
    Posted by shumirules[/QUOTE]

    Torture is bad.  But other bad things happen in war.  Therefore, we whould not care if we help torture people.

    Brilliant logic!

    I suppose we might as well throw out our criminal code and destroy all jails.  I mean what's the point in trying to stop people from doing bad things - they commit crimes anyway.
     
  2. You have chosen to ignore posts from WhatIsItNow. Show WhatIsItNow's posts

    Re: How do you rationalize torture of Iraqis


    [QUOTE]People get convicted of murder all the time.  It's actually quite exquisitely rare that an actual murderer gets acquitted.
    Posted by Newtster[/QUOTE]

    Merely denying that we torture is certainly an easy way from avoiding the issue. 
     
  3. You have chosen to ignore posts from hawkeye01. Show hawkeye01's posts

    Re: How do you rationalize torture of Iraqis

    Torture is bad.  But other bad things happen in war.  Therefore, we whould not care if we help torture people.


    The point....was that many people act as if the torture that has occurred recently is some new phenomenon. People are just point out that it isn't new. Nothing more....nothing less.
     
  4. You have chosen to ignore posts from WhatIsItNow. Show WhatIsItNow's posts

    Re: How do you rationalize torture of Iraqis


    [QUOTE]Finally, would DWL tell an interogator NOT to waterboard suspect if it meant that was the only way to prevent harm from coming to one of HIS loved ones?? I doubt it. BUt as long as it is some nameless and faceless person that would benefit from intelligence gleaned from waterboarding then he can afford to be the almight judge. Posted by Newtster[/QUOTE]

    Well, coward, you can always go get waterboarded yourself and come back to tell us about how it wasn't torture.

    But I'm sure that would get in the way of your feeling like a "tough guy" who makes the manly decision to torture some brown people so he can feel safe......from his keyboard.
     
  5. You have chosen to ignore posts from ForumCleaner. Show ForumCleaner's posts

    Re: How do you rationalize torture of Iraqis

    In Response to Re: How do you rationalize torture of Iraqis:
    [QUOTE]Well, coward, you can always go get waterboarded yourself and come back to tell us about how it wasn't torture. But I'm sure that would get in the way of your feeling like a "tough guy" who makes the manly decision to torture some brown people so he can feel safe......from his keyboard.
    Posted by WhatIsItNow[/QUOTE]

    I have to say, waterboarding sure looks and sounds like torture to me. It isn't pulling out teeth or cutting off digits. But torture is a spectrum of things.
     
  6. You have chosen to ignore posts from skeeter20. Show skeeter20's posts

    Re: How do you rationalize torture of Iraqis

    What great sources, wikipedia and an former Saddam General.  Yep, I'm not buying it.
     
  7. You have chosen to ignore posts from WhatIsItNow. Show WhatIsItNow's posts

    Re: How do you rationalize torture of Iraqis

    In Response to Re: How do you rationalize torture of Iraqis:
    [QUOTE]What great sources, wikipedia and an former Saddam General.  Yep, I'm not buying it.
    Posted by skeeter20[/QUOTE]

    If this wasn't a serious subject, this would be hilarious.  You try so hard to protect yourself from information that undermines your view. 

    The only people who have ever claimed waterboarding is torture are people who want to waterboard other people.

    Nobody has been waterboarded and described as anything less than horrible.



    You do know - we executed, for example, Japanese officers who did the same to our troops?



    You're saying something painful enough that people can break their bones struggling against restraints isn't torture...   you're happy to do that to other people because it makes you feel a bit more safe.  What a disgusting coward; a false Christian; a low man.

    You wouldn't last three seconds.  You wouldn't even have the stones to do it to someone else. 
     
  8. You have chosen to ignore posts from StalkingButler. Show StalkingButler's posts

    Re: How do you rationalize torture of Iraqis

    In Response to Re: How do you rationalize torture of Iraqis:
    [QUOTE]

    Terrorist didn't exist in Iraq until long after the US entered Bagdad.  They weren't terrorist. 

    Posted by DirtyWaterLover[/QUOTE]

    So many lies, so little time.

    DWL, are you aware that the Duelfer Report confirmed that Iraqi intelligence trained terrorists from around the Arab world?  They even had a facility at Salman Pac that contained was Boeing airliner that they used to simulate hijackings.

    There were lots of terrorists in Iraq before the war, these included both native Iraqis who specialized in terrorism and non-Iraqi arabs who were given safe haven in Iraq.

    Is your argument really that thin that you have to resort to lying to try to make your point?

     
  9. You have chosen to ignore posts from skeeter20. Show skeeter20's posts

    Re: How do you rationalize torture of Iraqis

    In Response to Re: How do you rationalize torture of Iraqis:
    [QUOTE]In Response to Re: How do you rationalize torture of Iraqis : So many lies, so little time. DWL, are you aware that the Duelfer Report confirmed that Iraqi intelligence trained terrorists from around the Arab world?  They even had a facility at Salman Pac that contained was Boeing airliner that they used to simulate hijackings. There were lots of terrorists in Iraq before the war, these included both native Iraqis who specialized in terrorism and non-Iraqi arabs who were given safe haven in Iraq. Is your argument really that thin that you have to resort to lying to try to make your point?
    Posted by StalkingButler[/QUOTE]

    StalkingButler:  So right.  Most people forget that a major player on the world terorrist stage was killed a few days before the war started.  He was the honored guest of Saddam Hussein.

    Abu Nidal was there.  the question is why, the answer may very well have to do with the anthrax attack on the U.S. in 2001.


     
  10. You have chosen to ignore posts from StalkingButler. Show StalkingButler's posts

    Re: How do you rationalize torture of Iraqis

    [QUOTE]Nobody has been waterboarded and described as anything less than horrible.[/QUOTE]

    Did you know that FBI agents are waterboarded as part of their training?


    [QUOTE]You do know - we executed, for example, Japanese officers who did the same to our troops?[/QUOTE]

    Did you know that the Japanese officer to which you refer engaged in torture practices that were far worse than what we refer to today as waterboarding?
     
  11. You have chosen to ignore posts from WhatIsItNow. Show WhatIsItNow's posts

    Re: How do you rationalize torture of Iraqis

    I
    [QUOTE]Did you know that FBI agents are waterboarded as part of their training?
    Posted by StalkingButler[/QUOTE]

    1.  That doesn't mean it wasn't "horrible"; maybe they're just bad*sses.

    2.  It's voluntary.

    3.  They are not being held for the rest of their lives in a secret prison.

    4.  Do you think the government is more or less agressive in that training?  Do you think the government is more or less likely to worry if the agent dies.

    5.  The FBI? You mean the CIA and Army -- SERE you know?  I suppose it doesn't matter to you that what they do is different than what is done at Gitmo.

    "

    However, according to a declassified Justice Department memo attempting to justify torture which references a still-classified report of the CIA Inspector General on the CIA's use of waterboarding, among other "enhanced" interrogation techniques, the CIA applied waterboarding to detainees "in a different manner" than the technique used in SERE training:

    The difference was in the manner in which the detainees' breathing was obstructed. At the SERE school and in the DoJ opinion, the subject's airflow is disrupted by the firm application of a damp cloth over the air passages; the interrogator applies a small amount of water to the cloth in a controlled manner. By contrast, the Agency interrogator ... applied large volumes of water to a cloth that covered the detainee's mouth and nose. One of the psychiatrist / interrogators acknowledged that the Agency's use of the technique is different from that used in SERE training because it is 'for real' and is more poignant and convincing.

    According to the DOJ memo, the IG Report observed that the CIA's Office of Medical Services (OMS) stated that "the experience of the SERE psychologist / interrogators on the waterboard was probably misrepresented at the time, as the SERE waterboard experience is so different from the subsequent Agency usage as to make it almost irrelevant" and that "[c]onsequently, according to OMS, there was no a priori reason to believe that applying the waterboard with the frequency and intensity with which it was used by the psychologist/interrogators was either efficacious or medically safe


    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Waterboarding#cite_note-9

    Oh wait, the links is to wikipedia.  So it and the sources it cites must clearly be lying liberals.  Quick!  Put your head in the sand!

    [QUOTE]
     Did you know that the Japanese officer to which you refer engaged in torture practices that were far worse than what we refer to today as waterboarding?
    Posted by StalkingButler[/QUOTE]

    And that makes the aterboarding A-OK?  Murder is really bad, so we shouldn't punish robbery - oops; a stupid argument.

    No one who has been waterboarded comes out and says it wasn't horrible.

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Waterboarding#cite_note-9

    Oh, but that's wikipedia, so it and all the sources it cites must all be lying liberals.  That's a nice way to avoid information you don't like.  After all, cowardly conservatives who advocate torture from behind a computer obviously know best.

     
  12. You have chosen to ignore posts from hawkeye01. Show hawkeye01's posts

    Re: How do you rationalize torture of Iraqis

    Oh, but that's wikipedia, so it and all the sources it cites must all be lying liberals.  That's a nice way to avoid information you don't like. 


    Seems to work for Lefties
     
  13. You have chosen to ignore posts from WhatIsItNow. Show WhatIsItNow's posts

    Re: How do you rationalize torture of Iraqis

    Even if you are a Cowardly Conservative who hides behind his keyboard to advocate torture...  that is "who cares if we torture some brown people"...  shouldn't you care about the reliability of the information?


    "One of Abu Zubayda's interrogators, Ali Soufan, later testified to Congress that Zubayda was producing useful information in response to conventional interrogation methods and stopped providing accurate information in response to harsh techniques.[161] Ali Soufon, also one of the FBI's most successful interrogators, explained, "When they are in pain, people will say anything to get the pain to stop. Most of the time, they will lie, make up anything to make you stop hurting them. That means the information you're getting is useless."["

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Waterboarding#cite_note-9


    Ways to avoid the information:

    1.  Call this FBI interrogator a "progressive" and pat yourself on the back.

    2.  Say,  "who cares, they're terrorists" and feel like a Big Man because you made a "tough decision" to torture.

    3.   Say that because wikipedia is quoting him, its source must actually be a lying liberal, and ignore the information.
     
  14. You have chosen to ignore posts from StalkingButler. Show StalkingButler's posts

    Re: How do you rationalize torture of Iraqis

    [QUOTE]No one who has been waterboarded comes out and says it wasn't horrible.[/QUOTE]

    As a former Gunny of mine was fond of saying, no screaming eagle sh*t.

    It's supposed to be horrible, that's the freaking point. This is why it has only been authorized for use on three individuals who were deemed to have high value information, information that once extracted was used to save uncounted lives.

    Damn, I miss having the adults in charge.
     
  15. You have chosen to ignore posts from Mattyhorn. Show Mattyhorn's posts

    Re: How do you rationalize torture of Iraqis

    Interesting that the best arguments the right can come up with is "you lie" and "you hate america".  They are so full of it that they are leaking excrement from the corners of their eyes.

    Also interesting is that indignant stance they take - asserting that REAL AMERICANS would NEVER do such a thing and suggesting they would constitutes unpatriotic behavior.

    This is in the public record.  The Red Cross report confirmed that the U.S. tortured detainees - even detainees who had not been charged of any crime.  Point blank.  End of Story.  Living in denial won't change those immutable facts, even if, as suggested, Bush & Cheney will never travel to certain countries (U.K.) over threat of being arrested for war crimes.

    One day, the whole truth will come out.  Until then, we have slimy, yellow-bellied defenders like bobin....
     
  16. You have chosen to ignore posts from ForumCleaner. Show ForumCleaner's posts

    Re: How do you rationalize torture of Iraqis

    In Response to Re: How do you rationalize torture of Iraqis:
    [QUOTE]As a former Gunny of mine was fond of saying, no screaming eagle sh*t. It's supposed to be horrible, that's the freaking point. This is why it has only been authorized for use on three individuals who were deemed to have high value information, information that once extracted was used to save uncounted lives. Damn, I miss having the adults in charge.
    Posted by StalkingButler[/QUOTE]

    We shouldn't torture. Period. I understand why this was done. I don't hold it against Bush for doing it. But it goes against our moral principles to do these kinds of things. And the act itself has a corrupting effect on the people performing it.  We could also shoot suspect's children until they tell us what we want. I'm sure that would be more effective than torture even. But we don't do something simply because we think its effective.
     
  17. You have chosen to ignore posts from WhatIsItNow. Show WhatIsItNow's posts

    Re: How do you rationalize torture of Iraqis


    [QUOTE]information that once extracted was used to save uncounted lives. D
    Posted by StalkingButler[/QUOTE]

    1.  Says Bush.  I guess we can't second guess that.

    2.  Putting aside the disgusting and cowardly aspects of promoting torture, I'm guessing you haven't thought through the implications of the principle that torture is OK if it saves lives.

    Are we limiting this to foreigners?

    People we label "enemy combatants"?

    People someone else said are terrorists?

    If you ascribe any limits, why?  Lives are lives.  If I die, it makes no difference to me that a brown person from Afghanistan did it or a white person from Netwon did it.

    So if being scared of dying authorizes you to torture people you think are likely to have information that could save lives.....   shouldn't we torture American citizens who might have information

    Should we torture mob bosses who might know about present hit contracts?

    Should we torture drug lords to give up the names of underlings who may be about to go kill people for turf?

    Or perhaps when we catch one person suspected of being in a group of bank robbers we should torture them.  Bank robbers sometimes kill people during and after the theft.

    Maybe we should torture Huratee members to find out whether there is anyone else in their group we don't know about who might want to shoot up police officers?
     
  18. You have chosen to ignore posts from WhatIsItNow. Show WhatIsItNow's posts

    Re: How do you rationalize torture of Iraqis

    There are simply too many things wrong with this.  I'm amazed that citizens of the one-time would be city on a hill are now so craven as to push torture whenever they get scared.

    1.  It is evil.  It is wrong.  It is horrid. That's reason enough.

    2.  It doesn't work.  Just ask interrogators - you are FAR more likely to get false information.  That's reason enough. 

    3.  There is no objective and logical reason to limit torture to people we think are in Al Queda.  Your basic necessary premise is "torture when you think it's likely to save lives," and you can apply that to anyone.  That's what you call a real "slippery slope".  That's reason enough.


     
  19. You have chosen to ignore posts from skeeter20. Show skeeter20's posts

    Re: How do you rationalize torture of Iraqis

    In Response to Re: How do you rationalize torture of Iraqis:
    [QUOTE]There are simply too many things wrong with this.  I'm amazed that citizens of the one-time would be city on a hill are now so craven as to push torture whenever they get scared. 1.  It is evil.  It is wrong.  It is horrid. That's reason enough. 2.  It doesn't work.  Just ask interrogators - you are FAR more likely to get false information.  That's reason enough.  3.  There is no objective and logical reason to limit torture to people we think are in Al Queda.  Your basic necessary premise is "torture when you think it's likely to save lives," and you can apply that to anyone.  That's what you call a real "slippery slope".  That's reason enough.
    Posted by WhatIsItNow[/QUOTE]

    You are right about torture.  We probably don't have a shared definition, but that aside, interrogation is not torture, right?
     
  20. This post has been removed.

     
  21. You have chosen to ignore posts from ForumCleaner. Show ForumCleaner's posts

    Re: How do you rationalize torture of Iraqis

    In Response to Re: How do you rationalize torture of Iraqis:
    [QUOTE]In Response to Re: How do you rationalize torture of Iraqis : You are right about torture.  We probably don't have a shared definition, but that aside, interrogation is not torture, right?
    Posted by skeeter20[/QUOTE]


    Torture is a tool that some use in interogation. the question is whether we have done so.
     
  22. You have chosen to ignore posts from ForumCleaner. Show ForumCleaner's posts

    Re: How do you rationalize torture of Iraqis

    In Response to Re: How do you rationalize torture of Iraqis:
    [QUOTE]In Response to Re: How do you rationalize torture of Iraqis : Glad to see that you have ignored the reality of your hypcorisy on this matter. LOL! GITMO detainee? WhatisitNow wants Constutional rights and a civilians trial! US military? - To hell with what WhatisitNow was saying about the Constitution, that is for the GITMO detainee, not evil US military. To hell with presumption of innocence! To hell with "American values", those are for foreigners! WhatisitNow - he is the almighty judge of what is right and wrong. If it is your son that is in Afghanistan that could be saved from harm by waterboarding a detainee, that is too bad. WhatisitNow and the self-righteous moonbats have declared it "torture" and it is off limits. If it were his son that could be saved from a raid or an IED, he'd be right there with the ball peen hammer, scrooo the waterboarding! It is wrong for anyone to be tortured as long as it is someone else's unknown loved one that is at risk! But if it were WhatisitNow's brother/father/son, etc WhatisitNow willbe first in line to demand waterboarding! What a stallwart of morality!
    Posted by Newtster[/QUOTE]

    You are missing his argument entirely. He is pointing out that your position, when taken to its logical conclusion, leads us to use torture in variety of situations. It becomes okay to use torture in any situaiton where a life could theoretically be saved.
     
  23. This post has been removed.

     
  24. You have chosen to ignore posts from ForumCleaner. Show ForumCleaner's posts

    Re: How do you rationalize torture of Iraqis

    In Response to Re: How do you rationalize torture of Iraqis:
    [QUOTE]In Response to Re: How do you rationalize torture of Iraqis : I suppose you are correct. .But I would limit it to waterboarding. IF you want to call that torture fine go ahead, but I have heard of nothing beyond waterboarding that works. But you miss my point. I maintain that most of us would not want to see our spouse or our child harmed if it could be prevented by waterboarding. I certainly wouldn't. Can you honestly say you would not want a suspect waterboarded if it meant that information could be obtained that would save your spouse's life or the life of your child? It is  easy to say you would waive off the waterboarding in abstract, but when it is real??? OF course this doesn't mean that we have to torture gratuitously or even at all. The only case I have ever heard for "torture" being effective is waterboarding. If we would have someone waterbaorded to save the life of our child, we would certainly owe it to the military and their families the same. Otherwise we are just pompous hypocrites.
    Posted by Newtster[/QUOTE]


    But most of us would do, or allow, illegal and immoral things to save our own children or spouses. TO save my son, I'd have someone's jewels cut off if needed. That doesn't mean we should pursue a policy of castration of suspects or POWs with possible life saving information.
     
  25. This post has been removed.

     

Share