Nope. Not Torture.

[oscardeuce]

Originally Posted by lion_crazz
http:///forum/post/3049388
The problem is, those are just two of the many wrongly accused and tortured. And as for the last statement, there is no way that while I am being tortured, I am "thankful" that it is being done to me by an American. No way.. .
How many were waterboarded? Please you tell me that?
Why do you think Obama is only releasing the information on the techniques, and not the results? Bush would be vindicated as a defender of this Nation immediately.
Why should I feel bad for people who cut throats on airplanes, then flew them into civilian targets. Why should I feel bad for unlawful, non-uniformed combatants? Why should I feel bad for those who behead LIVING people who scream and beg for their lives. You'd better thank God, was not President when the terrorists tortured, killed, mutilated, and finally hung the corpses of Americans from a bridge, Fallujah would be a parking lot right now.
Read a little book "Fly Boys" by James Bradley. There you will see REAL mistreatment and torture. We defeated Imperial Japan. No, we not only defeated them we gave them two options, total Annihilation, or lasting peace. They are now a valued ally. We didn't talk, we didn't torture, we simple said live or die. You live under OUR rules.
Read about the illegal interrogations of John McCain and others in the Hanoi

[hr]
.
Jane Fonda still needs to face sedition and treason charges during war time.
You think I enjoy all this violence? No, I do not. I love my country and fellow Americans. I want to see her defended. At times the defense will be ugly. Kind of like making sausage. I love the end result, but do not want to see it made.
I've met real torture victims from Viet Nam. They are heroes. They are not lying.
We still do not torture, even though at times we would be well within our rights.

 

[oscardeuce]

Originally Posted by Veni Vidi Vici
http:///forum/post/3050161
Depends on how much you love your mother and if your willing to go to any length to save her.
Where'd I put my towel and garden hose?
Histroy lesson children. The VC were NOT afraid to use women and children, hide behind civilians, and NOT wear uniforms. How did that war turn out politically? We were winning militarily.

 

[uneverno]

Originally Posted by oscardeuce
http:///forum/post/3050165
How many were waterboarded? Please you tell me that?
Sorry, don't have security clearance. I cannot speculate.
Why do you think Obama is only releasing the information on the techniques, and not the results? Bush would be vindicated as a defender of this Nation immediately.
Because the results are classified.
That Bush would be vindicated is a non-sequitur. B does not necessarily follow A, and to say so is sheer speculation. Unless you have evidence to the contrary, I don't buy that one.
We still do not torture, even though at times we would be well within our rights.
Disagree on both counts.
As for the history lesson, it's also well worth noting that military victory cannot be maintained w/o long term post-war occupation. That may have been worth calculating when we chose to piss off a populace 3+ times our size which also controls most of the fuel required to operate our war machine.
Neither Germany nor Japan possessed or controlled the oil necessary to win the war they started. We only did because the Middle East at the time was a wholly owned colony of the British Gov't.
The Roman Empire did not collapse for lack of military might, it collapsed for lack of resources.
Amatuers think tactics. Professionals think logistics.
Meantime, China watches and waits.

 

[uneverno]

So, asides aside.
Originally Posted by oscardeuce
http:///forum/post/3050165
I've met real torture victims from Viet Nam. They are heroes. They are not lying.
Did they sell us out under duress?
My inclination is to think that they did not.

 

[stdreb27]

I just have to laugh here. What do liberal nuts in their panties in a wad about? Water boarding 3 or 4 terrorists. I may be wrong, but I don't remember them getting all upset about us water boarding Navy Seals. Heck they drown them, then revive them.
just goes to show who is more important in liberals eyes.
If this was really a core belief they cared about, they would have been screaming bloody murder for years, not just this time.

 

[stdreb27]

remember those attorneys that they wanted to string up like a month ago. Well they basically went in and were asked, legally what do we define as torture.
So they said basically, we have to have the intent to torture some one.
That in a nutshell is the "bush doctrine"
Here is the obama doctrine, (just so you know eric holder is the AG) and this is an exchange they had in one of those useless senate hearings.
[Rep. Dan] Lungren [(R., CA) and the state's former attorney general] then switched gears to a line of questioning aimed at clarifying the Obama Justice Department’s definition of torture. In one of the rare times he gave a straight answer, Holder stated at the hearing that in his view waterboarding is torture. Lundgren asked if it was the Justice Department’s position that Navy SEALS subjected to waterboarding as part of their training were being tortured.
Holder: No, it’s not torture in the legal sense because you’re not doing it with the intention of harming these people physically or mentally, all we’re trying to do is train them —
Lungren: So it’s the question of intent?
Holder: Intent is a huge part.
Lungren: So if the intent was to solicit information but not do permanent harm, how is that torture?
Holder: Well, it… uh… it… one has to look at... ah… it comes out to question of fact as one is determining the intention of the person who is administering the waterboarding. When the Communist Chinese did it, when the Japanese did it, when they did it in the Spanish Inquisition we knew then that was not a training exercise they were engaging in. They were doing it in a way that was violative of all of the statutes recognizing what torture is. What we are doing to our own troops to equip them to deal with any illegal act — that is not torture.

 

[uneverno]

I have to laugh too. The argument is absurd.
Holder is clearly an idiot in not being able to articulate the difference. Must have something to do with beaurocracy and the Peter Principle. Sounds as bright as Ashcroft.
And duh, intent is a huge factor in many legal equations. For example, the difference between 1st and 2nd degree murder.
There's also a slight difference between voluntary and compulsory "training."
I go back to my last question:
Did the VN War POW's (John McCain, etc.) give up state secrets under bone crushing torture?
If the answer is: "No", then what is the point of waterboarding?

 

[stdreb27]

Originally Posted by uneverno
http:///forum/post/3050606
I have to laugh too.
Holder is clearly an idiot in not being able to articulate the difference. Must have something to do with beaurocracy and the Peter Principle. Sounds as bright as Ashcroft.
And duh, intent is a huge factor in many legal equations. For example, the difference between 1st and 2nd degree murder.
I go back to my last question:
Did the VN War POW's (John McCain, etc.) give up state secrets under bone crushing torture?
If the answer is: "No", then what is the point of waterboarding?
didn't he though, if you go back and read his short paper recounting his experience, he does say, that after he did the video for them, had they continued with the daily torture, he would have completely given in. I think it was in time magazine.
But once again, you're muddling the argument. Because this isn't torture, as defined by our legal system, and as stated by the last 3 Attorney Generals. (you know that rule of law that obama is so proud of, until it gets in the way of his social agenda.)
And seriously, we've done worse things to people in college with the intent of inflicting pain. As a joke.

 

[oscardeuce]

Originally Posted by uneverno
http:///forum/post/3050458
Sorry, don't have security clearance. I cannot speculate.
Because the results are classified.
That Bush would be vindicated is a non-sequitur. B does not necessarily follow A, and to say so is sheer speculation. Unless you have evidence to the contrary, I don't buy that one.
Disagree on both counts.
As for the history lesson, it's also well worth noting that military victory cannot be maintained w/o long term post-war occupation. That may have been worth calculating when we chose to piss off a populace 3+ times our size which also controls most of the fuel required to operate our war machine.
Neither Germany nor Japan possessed or controlled the oil necessary to win the war they started. We only did because the Middle East at the time was a wholly owned colony of the British Gov't.
The Roman Empire did not collapse for lack of military might, it collapsed for lack of resources.
Amatuers think tactics. Professionals think logistics.
Meantime, China watches and waits.
Wouldn't a long term occupation of oil rich countries solve our problems ( Gas is up a dollar/gallon where I live)? Would the environmentalists stop our drilling in occupied territory?
Long term occupation might not be bad. We have a decent ally in Japan. If you do it right, you end up with an ally. Do it wrong and you get a Hitler. Me, spank them hard like Japan, show them who's boss, then show the compassion and rebuild, let them earn their way back to self determination.
Why are the techniques and potentially pictures/video of interrogations being thrown around the world, yet the results are secret?

 

[uneverno]

Originally Posted by stdreb27
http:///forum/post/3050626
didn't he though, if you go back and read his short paper recounting his experience, he does say, that after he did the video for them, had they continued with the daily torture, he would have completely given in. I think it was in time magazine.
But he didn't. And he was there for 6+ years - under FAR worse conditions than Gitmo.
Yer kinda re-enforcing my point.
But once again, you're muddling the argument. Because this isn't torture, as defined by our legal system, and as stated by the last 3 Attorney Generals. (you know that rule of law that obama is so proud of, until it gets in the way of his social agenda.)
I'm not so sure I'm the one doing the muddling here. Waterboarding is defineable as torture both under the US Constitution, and the Geneva Convention. Why do you think those being waterboarded are not imprisoned on US "soil?" The Convention can be evaded. Little tougher with the Constitution - you know - that little Cruel and Unusual punishment thingy.
If there are supporting cases, either in US or Int'l court that say otherwise however, I'd love to see the citation.
And seriously, we've done worse things to people in college with the intent of inflicting pain. As a joke.
So what?
There's no "we" involved there. My tax dollars have nothing to do with stoopid frat tricks.

 

[uneverno]

Originally Posted by oscardeuce
http:///forum/post/3050630
Wouldn't a long term occupation of oil rich countries solve our problems
Absolutely. If you can propose how we're supposed to blanket 1 billion people and a third of the world's land mass logistically, I'm all ears.
Long term occupation might not be bad. We have a decent ally in Japan. If you do it right, you end up with an ally. Do it wrong and you get a Hitler. Me, spank them hard like Japan, show them who's boss, then show the compassion and rebuild, let them earn their way back to self determination.
Kind of a patronizing attitude if you ask me.
When one of them wins, and eventually it's gonna happen 'cuz nothing lasts forever, how will you react to being slapped and shown who's boss?
Why are the techniques and potentially pictures/video of interrogations being thrown around the world, yet the results are secret?
That's a SERIOUSLY good question.
Normally I susbscribe to one of two theories:
1) "Nothing in politics happens by accident. If it happens, you can bet it was planned that way."
FDR
or
2) Follow the money.
I really can't come up with a logical answer on either one of those here. I'm not being facetious. There's something going on that I can't put my finger on.

 

[stdreb27]

Originally Posted by uneverno
http:///forum/post/3050641
But he didn't. And he was there for 6+ years - under FAR worse conditions than Gitmo.
Ultimately he said had they continued he would have completely broken. Hence torture does work.
However, once again, water boarding with the intent to gather intelligence is not torture. And the Japanese did far more than just water board someone for 1 minute.

 

[uneverno]

If torture actually worked, the Inquisition would've succeeded.
The Axis would've won WWII.
The Soviet Union would've won the Cold War.

 

[stdreb27]

Originally Posted by uneverno
http:///forum/post/3050663
If torture actually worked, the Inquisition would've succeeded.
You think people weren't "converted" during the inquisition. Lets take that line of thought a step further. If torture doesn't work, all of the middle east and north africa isn't muslim...

 

[uneverno]

Please don't put words in my mouth. I did not say, nor do I think people weren't "converted". What I said was that the Inquisition failed in its objective, which was to eliminate, through the use of torture, the Pagan, Jewish, Muslim and Protestant heresies.
If torture doesn't work, all of the middle east and north africa isn't muslim...
Following that line of reasoning, if torture does work, Europe and North America would still be 100% Catholic.

 

[stdreb27]

Originally Posted by uneverno
http:///forum/post/3051008
Please don't put words in my mouth. I did not say, nor do I think people weren't "converted". What I said was that the Inquisition failed in its objective.
Following your line of reasoning, however, if torture does work, Europe and North America would still be 100% Catholic.
If I'm already following a flawed line of logic, to show the rediculous nature of it, would expanding on that flaw even farther help prove anything? Other than the point about the spanish inquisition is rediculous?

 

[uneverno]

k, sorry, I'm truly lost now.
I understand the concept of taking an argument to its logical extreme. I thought I was doing the same thing.
The logic train has somehow derailed for both of us. Would you mind re-iterating how and where?

 

[reefreak29]

idk i had a disableing injury till i could get surgery , work comp took almost a year to approve it resulting in permanent damage . is that torture? i would have rather benn water boarded for 6 seconds

 

[mantisman51]

In Faith Of Our Fathers, John McCain admitted to breaking down and telling everything he knew. By then there was no useful information, because they only knew where they were going and what were priority targets in the breifing the same day they flew the missions. Once again, the altered mind alters all: John McCain had a broken leg that the beat with rifles, twisted and stomped. Then they tied his wrists together behind his back, pulled them up over his head and tied the wrists to his ankles. It destroyed his shoulder blades, which is why he doesn't raise his arms to waive higher than his shoulders. For you to equate a non-injurious discomfort to actual torture proves that you don't believe we are better than the enemy. I'm not going to respond any further because I think that anyone that can be so blind or full of contempt for his/her own country, has serious mental issues.

 

[veni vidi vici]

Enhanced Interrogation is no more torturous than life in a prison living out your remaining days in a cage.
When i think of torture i think of the families that talked on phone to their loved ones as the towers collapsed or searched in vein for loved ones after the towers collapsed not knowing if the survived or not. Or us citizens being decapitated...burned and hung from bridges.......blown up.....