Page 2 of 5 FirstFirst 1234 ... LastLast
Results 21 to 40 of 85

Thread: Interrogation & Torture

  1. #21
    [QUOTE=HDCentStOhio;2187061]Now you can read my mind? Do you have any original thoughts? Where did I once advocate that the US behead or kill enemy unlawful combatants?

    [B]I never said you [U]advocate[/U] beheading. Read!!... my friend. I said by making your snide statement "Didn't see anything about beheadings being OK listed there" you are suggesting that we hold ourselves to the same standards that terrorists beheading their captives are held. Personally i liketo hold America to a much higher standard. But hey, thats just me.[/B]
    And in your words you say Abu Grave and Daniel Pearl are "both despicable acts". If you don't see what happened to Daniel Pearl as being more heinous, then there is no sense in continuing this conversation.
    [B]No, beheading a person is more heinous. That does not take away the fact that what we did in Abu Ghraib was wrong and despicable for anyone, let alone a civilized nation. [/B]


    History, Kenny. This is a different enemy that relies on attacks upon civilians, does not wear military uniforms, and follow the "rules of war". You used the word "dangerous" , not me. Being a different enemy we must consider alternative ways of combating them.

    [B]yeah, you need to re-read your history. Attacks upon civilians?? Ask the British about how the Nazis attacked civilians. Follow the "rules of war"?? yeah Ok , did Nazi Germany follow the rules of war? Not wearing military uniforms?? You mean like the Viet Cong? Throughout history our leaders have called the enemy at hand- an enemy like no other that we have faced. We said the same thing about the Soviets/Communism. Its empty rhetoric. It means nothing. Its BS!![/B]

    Am not advocating torture at all. Certain techniques, however, should not be ruled out in all circumstances, however. And where is your "proof" that torture may not save lives? You have none. While I can't prove that it has saved lives, you also can not say it has not. Your track record for "facts" on this board, by the way, is suspect.

    [B]Proof? Most of the studies looking at this suggest torture does not provide reliable information. There have been countless of instances docunebted where torture provided faulty information. Just about every intelligence officer has stated this. My track record on facts on this board is just fine thank you[/B]


    [/QUOTE].

  2. #22
    [QUOTE=HDCentStOhio;2187120]First, I am not advocating "torture", ala Casino when Joe Pesci puts that guys head in a vice. However, non-lethal techniques such as "waterboarding" and sleep deprivation I would not consider torture. "Waterboarding" would probably be as extreme as I would like to get, and I would not use it indiscriminantly. However, it may be helpful in the armamentarium of our intelligence officers, and to hamstring them by banning it would be wrong.[/QUOTE]

    So what will you say to those who are falsely arrested and then tortured (which will definitely happen). Woops sorry!

  3. #23
    flushingjet
    Guest
    its stunning how many people support terror over their own
    govt for political or other theoretical reasons

    these people shouldve been forced to dig out ground zero with
    their coke spoons and bongs

    we havent made people jump hundreds of stories out of burning
    buildings, nor do we chop off heads
    we dont blow up innocents with IEDs or bomb belts
    yet the USA we're ALWAYS the bad guys

    whatever it takes to get the intelligence, we should do

    countering evil with extreme prejudice is only evil
    to the evil and their moral relativist sympathisers-plain and simple

    during the civil war, habeus corpus was formally suspended
    yet somehow we un-suspended it and survived as a nation

    yet today we always hear from some (hind)
    quarters about how the constitution is ignored, ripped up, etc
    not even close
    your meagre lives are too important to surveil or infringe

    no one can tell what the future holds
    but id bet almost anything
    if any other 9-11 type sh!t goes down due to
    the inactions/actions of terror apologists & sympathisers
    the aforementioned would do well to find hiding places
    where they can ponder the current
    yet ironic state of a theoretical living
    breathing constitution they cherish
    taking hold instantly
    while "we the people" who survive
    round em up and tell them the good "noose"

  4. #24
    flushingjet
    Guest
    [quote=kennyo7;2187225]So what will you say to those who are falsely arrested and then tortured (which will definitely happen). Woops sorry![/quote]

    So, what did FDR & Truman say to all those Japanese they rounded
    up?

  5. #25
    [QUOTE=flushingjet;2187433]So, what did FDR & Truman say to all those Japanese they rounded
    up?[/QUOTE]

    And b/c they Fuked up, we should do the same???
    Nice logic

  6. #26
    I am guessing you went off your medication again. Why is there no middle ground with anyone who thinks torture is the only way?

    [QUOTE=flushingjet;2187433]So, what did FDR & Truman say to all those Japanese they rounded
    up?[/QUOTE]

  7. #27
    Hall Of Fame
    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Location
    Long Island & Section 337
    Posts
    4,859
    [QUOTE=cr726;2187642]I am guessing you went off your medication again. Why is there no middle ground with anyone who thinks torture is the only way?[/QUOTE]

    Reading is fundamental, who said anything about torture being the only way?

  8. #28
    Reading is fundamental.

    [QUOTE]whatever it takes to get the intelligence, we should do

    countering evil with extreme prejudice is only evil
    to the evil and their moral relativist sympathisers-plain and simple

    during the civil war, habeus corpus was formally suspended
    yet somehow we un-suspended it and survived as a nation[/QUOTE]

    [QUOTE=HDCentStOhio;2187671]Reading is fundamental, who said anything about torture being the only way?[/QUOTE]

  9. #29
    Hall Of Fame
    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Location
    Long Island & Section 337
    Posts
    4,859
    [QUOTE=cr726;2187674]Reading is fundamental.[/QUOTE]

    He said "whatever it takes", you take that to mean "only torture"- not what he said.

  10. #30
    I know the following information will probably be used against me at some future stage on this forum.

    I got into a fair bit of trouble with the 'peak' policing organisation in Australia, the Australian Federal Police. And when I say, a fair bit, I mean quite a fair bit.

    For the record I have never been charged with a criminal offence. I am not, and never will be, a sexual deviate, a murderer or someone that deliberately harms somebody, or a terrorist or anything like that. I did mix with a criminal mileuax for a while, though those days are a long way behind me. I was asked to go into a witness protection program but I told them to **** off.

    Take it from me, as someone who has been 'in the mix', and someone who has written a thesis on the topic of police surveillance, the police have far, far more sophisticated methods of extracting information than techniques that were around in the 15th century.

    Torture, like water-boarding etc, is not needed these days to get information of possible terrorist attacks etc. If you want evidence for this, look at the fact that there has been no repeat of 9/11 on US soil. There have been a slew of terrorist attacks halted on surveillance and information that wasn't obtained by 'traditional' torture techniques.

    The police/FBI/CIA/NSA do not need to torture people 'in a traditional sense' to obtain information about potential terrorist attacks.

  11. #31
    [QUOTE=Black Death;2187990]I know the following information will probably be used against me at some future stage on this forum.

    I got into a fair bit of trouble with the 'peak' policing organisation in Australia, the Australian Federal Police. And when I say, a fair bit, I mean quite a fair bit.

    For the record I have never been charged with a criminal offence. I am not, and never will be, a sexual deviate, a murderer or someone that deliberately harms somebody, or a terrorist or anything like that. I did mix with a criminal mileuax for a while, though those days are a long way behind me. I was asked to go into a witness protection program but I told them to **** off.

    Take it from me, as someone who has been 'in the mix', and someone who has written a thesis on the topic of police surveillance, the police have far, far more sophisticated methods of extracting information than techniques that were around in the 15th century.

    Torture, like water-boarding etc, is not needed these days to get information of possible terrorist attacks etc. If you want evidence for this, look at the fact that there has been no repeat of 9/11 on US soil. There have been a slew of terrorist attacks halted on surveillance and information that wasn't obtained by 'traditional' torture techniques.

    The police/FBI/CIA/NSA do not need to torture people 'in a traditional sense' to obtain information about potential terrorist attacks.[/QUOTE]

    I agree with that the intelligence gathring has come a long long way but I still believe no collection methods should be off limits.

    The government should do what it feels it has to do to ensure the safety of its citizens.

    If that means innocent people will be locked up and tortured in the process i am fine with that.

    If they can prevent another attack on US soil or prevent an IED in Baghdad then they have done their job and I don't care about how they did it. The end result does indeed justify the means in this case.
    I feel bad for the people wrongly held and or tortured but this is a prime example of Utilitarianism.

    I am sorry but for me it is about the "Greater Good"

  12. #32
    [QUOTE=Jetfan_Johnny;2188005]I agree with that the intelligence gathring has come a long long way but I still believe no collection methods should be off limits.

    The government should do what it feels it has to do to ensure the safety of its citizens.

    If that means innocent people will be locked up and tortured in the process i am fine with that.

    If they can prevent another attack on US soil or prevent an IED in Baghdad then they have done their job and I don't care about how they did it. The end result does indeed justify the means in this case.
    I feel bad for the people wrongly held and or tortured but this is a prime example of Utilitarianism.

    I am sorry but for me it is about the "Greater Good"[/QUOTE]I agree. And you know how we'd eliminate the threat of terrorism even more? If we tortured 10% of the people in addition to our suspects. Hey, we'll torture even more innocents but we'll have a higher success rate of finding terrorists who weren't originally on our radar map. I would increase this percentage until we found every terrorist.

  13. #33
    All Pro
    Join Date
    Aug 2006
    Location
    Colorado
    Posts
    6,943
    Most studies suggest that torture doesn't work.

    I can understand using it in the most extreme cases when all other options have failed, but to constitute it as an acceptable widespread policy is both tactically and morally wrong.

  14. #34
    [QUOTE=parafly;2188062]Most studies suggest that torture doesn't work.

    I can understand using it in the most extreme cases when all other options have failed, but to constitute it as an acceptable widespread policy is both tactically and morally wrong.[/QUOTE]

    Torture isn't used these days to extract information, it is use to get people to 'confess' or 'roll over'.

    They don't need torture to extract information, and as you say it is a notoriously bad way of getting information. But for getting people to do what you want them to do, it [I]can[/I] work wonders.

  15. #35
    flushingjet
    Guest
    [quote=kennyo7;2187602]And b/c they Fuked up, we should do the same???
    Nice logic[/quote]


    the usual terror sympathy

    no, the logic, which i would never expect anti-american foreigners to ever understand, is that people were rounded up in wartime by Democrats for real, by the thousands, for predominantly valid purposes and...no outcry
    until decades later - people knew what we were up against

    bush & co roll up terrorists and combatants, on & off actual battlefields, far more dangerous, lacking innocence, in fewer numbers and the outcry by our fifth column is 24 x 7 how we are morally and legally bankrupt

  16. #36
    flushingjet
    Guest
    [quote=cr726;2187642]I am guessing you went off your medication again. Why is there no middle ground with anyone who thinks torture is the only way?[/quote]

    no guesswork involved sherlock, you clearly sympathise with terrorists

    "anything" means surveillance, permanent seizure of assets domestic
    and foreign, deportation of friends and relatives,
    torture, drugging, and should all that fail to
    complete destruction of the perpretators and their homeland
    through total warfare

    some people think committing crimes against america and
    its allies/interests should have no consequences for
    any number of "reasons"

    they should think again

  17. #37
    [QUOTE=flushingjet;2188138]no guesswork involved sherlock, you clearly sympathise with terrorists

    "anything" means surveillance, permanent seizure of assets domestic
    and foreign, deportation of friends and relatives,
    torture, drugging, and should all that fail to
    complete destruction of the perpretators and their homeland
    through total warfare

    some people think committing crimes against america and
    its allies/interests should have no consequences for
    any number of "reasons"

    they should think again[/QUOTE]

    A Final Solution.

  18. #38
    I sympathize with terrorists because I disagree with you? Permanent seizure of assets, what do we do now? Temporarily seize assets? When we seize assets there is two ways of doing it and they both lead to permanent (if done correctly).



    [QUOTE=flushingjet;2188138]no guesswork involved sherlock, you clearly sympathise with terrorists

    "anything" means surveillance, permanent seizure of assets domestic
    and foreign, deportation of friends and relatives,
    torture, drugging, and should all that fail to
    complete destruction of the perpretators and their homeland
    through total warfare

    some people think committing crimes against america and
    its allies/interests should have no consequences for
    any number of "reasons"

    they should think again[/QUOTE]

  19. #39
    [QUOTE=BrooklynBound;2188054]I agree. And you know how we'd eliminate the threat of terrorism even more? If we tortured 10% of the people in addition to our suspects. Hey, we'll torture even more innocents but we'll have a higher success rate of finding terrorists who weren't originally on our radar map. I would increase this percentage until we found every terrorist.[/QUOTE]

    :D

  20. #40
    [QUOTE=kennyo7;2187602]And b/c they Fuked up, we should do the same???
    Nice logic[/QUOTE]

    This isnt about who ****ed up and who didn't, this is about the greater good.

    Sometimes you have to challange your personal ethics when dealing with an issue. I have absolutely no problem with the US Government using everything it can to protect me and my family.

    [B][SIZE="5"]The result DOES justify the means.[/SIZE][/B]

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  

Follow Us