Nope. Not Torture.

bang guy

bang guy

Moderator
Originally Posted by Veni Vidi Vici
http:///forum/post/3053947
I disagree,you do not have the right to know all that goes on behind the scenes at the cost of security for this country nor do you need to know.Or should we start telling our enemys what our intentions are in advance from now on?
Our intentions should be a lot simpler than they are now.
1 - Leave us alone
2 - Don't harbor our enemies
3 - If #1 or #2 fail prepare for an over the top response that leaves nothing behind
We've left this to becomming the world police instead.
 
veni vidi vici

veni vidi vici

Active Member
Originally Posted by Bang Guy
http:///forum/post/3054125
Our intentions should be a lot simpler than they are now.
1 - Leave us alone
2 - Don't harbor our enemies
3 - If #1 or #2 fail prepare for an over the top response that leaves nothing behind
We've left this to becomming the world police instead.
I like it! Unfortunately we still like to play patty cakes with the UN.The only thing i would add would be #4 Follow through with the warnings.
 
stdreb27

stdreb27

Active Member
Originally Posted by uneverno
http:///forum/post/3053875
Of course not. Is there no difference between training and enacting?
Perhaps what we should be training our troops for is beheading.
Oh - wait. That might be conterproductive.
Silly argument.
funny, I remember defend and protect in the presidents oath, but not, I as president will not make terrorists uncomfortable...
Quite frankly if the act is so bad that we are willing to risk thousands of americans lives, then we shouldn't be doing it to our own soldiers...
 
darthtang aw

darthtang aw

Active Member
Lets approach this another way.
The follow is viwed as torture by some individuals. Placing a bug in a room with an inmate and waterboarding (giving the sensation of drowning for a few seconds).
If this is torture I know millions of Americans that need to be tried and convicted of torture.
How many times as child did you chase someone with a bug. Even as an adult we sometimes do this if we know an individual is afraid of bugs.
How many were taught to swim the old fashioned way. thrown in the pool, lake, or pond. At the time you thought you might drowned.
These actions are not torture......otherwise I need brought up on charges as yesterday I scared my child with a beetle.........
 
reefraff

reefraff

Active Member
Originally Posted by Darthtang AW
http:///forum/post/3054228
Lets approach this another way.
The follow is viwed as torture by some individuals. Placing a bug in a room with an inmate and waterboarding (giving the sensation of drowning for a few seconds).
If this is torture I know millions of Americans that need to be tried and convicted of torture.
How many times as child did you chase someone with a bug. Even as an adult we sometimes do this if we know an individual is afraid of bugs.
How many were taught to swim the old fashioned way. thrown in the pool, lake, or pond. At the time you thought you might drowned.
These actions are not torture......otherwise I need brought up on charges as yesterday I scared my child with a beetle.........
Like I said before, if it don't cause physical damage it ain't torture, I don't give a flying rats petoui what Obama, McCain or anyone else says. My uncle was in Patton's third army during WWII. What he went through just carrying out his duties as a soldier was a heck of a lot more traumatic than these poor misunderstood terrorists who got waterboarded endured. I imagine there are a lot of Vietnam vets out there who are either laughing or crying over this. Some of those guys were fighting under conditions those of us who weren't there would have a hard time even imagining. Then they came home and got spit on by some fowl feces punks who didn't know jack about life in the real world. I have a tremendous amount of respect for them to be able to resist the temptation to beat the wholly bewallerin snot out of those punks.
 
taznut

taznut

Active Member
Originally Posted by Veni Vidi Vici
http:///forum/post/3053830
You have the first amendment and keeping information secret mixed together.These are 2 different subjects.
Do you believe the American public need to know all our countries security secrets?
I also dont think Enhanced Interrogation is torture either .
these become mixed together when the press get documents showing what is going on... there is a REALLY fine line when it comes to what the govt is able to suppress once the press has learned about it... from what i have read so far, all the supreme court cases (in the last 30 years) have ruled in the favor of the press and the govt has to show that publishing WILL put lives or national security at risk... embarrassment isnt a reason to suppress the freedom of press (which is why our former VP is angry about them being published, IMO)
 
taznut

taznut

Active Member
Originally Posted by stdreb27
http:///forum/post/3053855
So accepting your "non-insane" premise that water boarding is torture, does that mean when the Navy water boards navy seals, we are torturing our own soldiers? And where the hell were you to stand up for the people fighting for our freedom? That we "just as bad as the terrorists" were torturing?
2nd against what this country is about, lets try nationalization of the Auto industry, and something our country is really about.

i dont think the "water boarding" of the seals and the terrorist is the same thing... this argument is weak at best... this is just one of several hard training techniques our military has to go through... one main difference in this is the willingness, the seals are willing participants where as the terrorist are not... these techniques are used to prepare the seals for torture in the case they are captured by a country that tortures, then we say that it is not torture when we do it to POWs???
and although the auto industry thing is off topic, we can either let them fail or do something to help them... should the govt give them OUR tax dollars and let them continue to bury themselves or try and do something about it??? i disagree with the way the auto industry had been treated after the banks got off so much easier, we are helping out the industry that shuffles papers and counts beads and punishing the one that actually produces something... but i dont think we should give them a huge amount of money and do nothing to help them get to a point this doesnt happen again...
 
veni vidi vici

veni vidi vici

Active Member
Originally Posted by taznut
http:///forum/post/3054278
these become mixed together when the press get documents showing what is going on... there is a REALLY fine line when it comes to what the govt is able to suppress once the press has learned about it... from what i have read so far, all the supreme court cases (in the last 30 years) have ruled in the favor of the press and the govt has to show that publishing WILL put lives or national security at risk... embarrassment isnt a reason to suppress the freedom of press (which is why our former VP is angry about them being published, IMO)
I would argue that when the press get hold of info,specifically the New York Times ,it isnt looking out for the greater good of the country.They are trying to save there sorry ass paper.
There is a reason why we classify info.It isnt so we can hold on to it for leverage at a later date.
I think the Freedom of info act could be better utilized to track down where my tax money goes as far as the likes of Acorn and other special interest groups go.Not spilling security secrets.
 
taznut

taznut

Active Member
Originally Posted by stdreb27
http:///forum/post/3054223
If intent is the key which you just said, how is protection of Americans lives not a valid intent?
at face value this sounds good... but how do we determine that his is the case... lets assume that IITs work and we did get information that saved lives, how do we balance this with the fact that terrorist agencies are using gitmo as propaganda to recruit more terrorists which our armed forces have to deal with...
i know the view i, and a couple others in this thread, are taking on this seems as though we are sympathizing with the terrorists... this is not the case, i dont care what happens to these people and i would not be arguing against this if some other country was doing it, i just feel that we are going against our values as a country by doing this (partly because if we had done what some as suggested and kept this secrete how far would the govt have gone to protect America, this is a slippery slope), we ask our men and women in the armed forces to risk their lives for our countries values, i dont see how standing up for our belief of "no torture" and taking on that small, if not non-existent, possibility that something might happen if we dont torture is any different. they are getting shot at and people trying to blow them up everyday... we live our lives with a really small threat that something might happen to us that is terrorist related...
 
taznut

taznut

Active Member
Originally Posted by Veni Vidi Vici
http:///forum/post/3054284
I would argue that when the press get hold of info,specifically the New York Times ,it isnt looking out for the greater good of the country.They are trying to save there sorry ass paper.
There is a reason why we classify info.It isnt so we can hold on to it for leverage at a later date.
I think the Freedom of info act could be better utilized to track down where my tax money goes as far as the likes of Acorn and other special interest groups go.Not spilling security secrets.
these two things go together... either the FBI or CIA, cant remember which, has a budget that is not published because of national security... how do you know where, and how much, money goes here???
and once you say that the press cant publish anything that is classified where does that stop??? couldnt the govt just classify anything they didnt want us to know (no matter the reason)??? how do we know that this isnt happening if the press doesnt publish anything that is classified???
 
veni vidi vici

veni vidi vici

Active Member
Originally Posted by taznut
http:///forum/post/3054289
these two things go together... either the FBI or CIA, cant remember which, has a budget that is not published because of national security... how do you know where, and how much, money goes here???
and once you say that the press cant publish anything that is classified where does that stop??? couldnt the govt just classify anything they didnt want us to know (no matter the reason)??? how do we know that this isnt happening if the press doesnt publish anything that is classified???
This is where a functional congress come into play.They are our elected officials that are supposed to be looking out for us and the US Constitution.
The American public dosent need to know everything that goes on behind e closed doors when it comes to national security if it will cause harm.
 
uneverno

uneverno

Active Member
Originally Posted by Veni Vidi Vici
http:///forum/post/3054291
The American public dosent need to know everything that goes on behind e closed doors when it comes to national security if it will cause harm.
Quis custodiet ipsos custodes?
(Who will guard the guards themselves?)
 
stdreb27

stdreb27

Active Member
Originally Posted by taznut
http:///forum/post/3054287
at face value this sounds good... but how do we determine that his is the case... lets assume that IITs work and we did get information that saved lives, how do we balance this with the fact that terrorist agencies are using gitmo as propaganda to recruit more terrorists which our armed forces have to deal with...
i know the view i, and a couple others in this thread, are taking on this seems as though we are sympathizing with the terrorists... this is not the case, i dont care what happens to these people and i would not be arguing against this if some other country was doing it, i just feel that we are going against our values as a country by doing this (partly because if we had done what some as suggested and kept this secrete how far would the govt have gone to protect America, this is a slippery slope), we ask our men and women in the armed forces to risk their lives for our countries values, i dont see how standing up for our belief of "no torture" and taking on that small, if not non-existent, possibility that something might happen if we dont torture is any different. they are getting shot at and people trying to blow them up everyday... we live our lives with a really small threat that something might happen to us that is terrorist related...
Can you prove that water boarding has been a deciding factor in recruiting terrorists?
This is how I see it, before water boarding we had 9/11. After water boarding we stopped the next 9/11 out of LA...
Since water boarding is such a heinous, where were you defending our own troops from torture?
 
uneverno

uneverno

Active Member
Originally Posted by stdreb27
http:///forum/post/3054295
Can you prove that water boarding has been a deciding factor in recruiting terrorists?
Not an answerable question. Some of those released from Gitmo have returned to terrorism (according to the media). Whether they were among those waterboarded is not public knowledge, so who knows?
This is how I see it, before water boarding we had 9/11. After water boarding we stopped the next 9/11 out of LA...
How you see it may or may not be the truth.
Lacking emperical evidence, there is no knowing. There can only be conjecture.
We report (whatever we please) you decide.
 
uneverno

uneverno

Active Member
Then, as uninformed citizens, how can we vote?
The secrets are not relegated to issues of "National Defence", nor do I trust those who decide what "State Security" is.
Sounds just a touch on the Fascist side - no?
As a concerned voter, whom am I supposed to trust?
 
taznut

taznut

Active Member
Originally Posted by uneverno
http:///forum/post/3054305
Then, as uninformed citizens, how can we vote?
The secrets are not relegated to issues of "National Defence", nor do I trust those who decide what "State Security" is.
Sounds just a touch on the Fascist side - no?
As a concerned voter, whom am I supposed to trust?
+1
 
stdreb27

stdreb27

Active Member
Originally Posted by uneverno
http:///forum/post/3054297
Not an answerable question. Some of those released from Gitmo have returned to terrorism. Whether they were among those waterboarded is not public knowledge, so who knows?
If it isn't an answerable question, then how can it be one of the corner stones of the argument against water boarding?
Besides that is muddling the argument, they aren't being held to be rehabilitated as a non terrorist. They were being held to prevent more torture from happening, and to gather information.
Originally Posted by uneverno
http:///forum/post/3054297
Lacking emperical evidence, there is no knowing. There can only be conjecture.
We report (whatever we please) you decide.
Look we had the horse, who have seen the results ask for those results to be released. Claiming that it did prevent future terrorism. Assuming Obama acts in his own best interest, (and there is no evidence that he has not to this point) by refusing to release those memo's he is all but admitting that Cheney is correct.
You know the logic I see behind that.
I feel very safe reaching that conclusion.
 
taznut

taznut

Active Member
my argument regarding the recruiting idea isnt that the people in gitmo return and become terrorists (which my be true), i feel (and have heard a few different times) that terrorist groups use gitmo the same way as our country has used "the war on terror" and the idea of speading freedom... come join us and fight for x, y, and z...
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top