I read this article, and it made me laugh. Should be good for some heated conversation...

http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,316546,00.html

What's so wrong with a bit of nude waterboarding?

We ll for one thing, the size of image. The enema that would occur if she fell off, for another.

Yes... Waterboarding terrorists IS a good thing.

The leftists don't like it because they don't like anything that will make a terrorist feel uncomfortable.

Maybe if we start using mineral water or Evian, the leftists may come around to waterboarding. Maybe we should use gallons of whatever trendy Starbucks "latte" or whatever else these people drink. Maybe we can promise to recycle the water and be "environmentally friendly". That's the ticket.

One day you're going to surprise people with an independent thought.

Cause everything is black and white. Every person waterboarded is a terrorist. Every person executed is guilty. Only good information is grabbed from torture.

Just think for once, if we torture or kill one innocent person, aren't we the guilty ones?

In special cases maybe, but I think what's currently going on is a violation of the Geneva Convention and though most other countries don't adhere to it, I always thought that was what set us apart from them.. I thought America upheld and was held to a higher standard? Once again, I would have no problem waterboarding say Bin Laden or his top aids, but waterboarding snuffy the infantry man because he made an IED might be going overboard...?

I wonder how long it will take for laws to be passed that allow US citizens to undergo the same treatment under the "War on Terror" banner? without legal council or trial?

Waterboarding is pretty harsh...

I'm willing to bet anyone will admit to anything if they were waterboarded...

Here's an idea...waterboard Jenna Bush and then let's see whether it's torture or not.

...I forget who came up with that idea first, and I'm too lazy to look it up.

That's a good point. We are dealing with an enemy that will kill himself to take out a couple "infidels". How can we even be sure the information gleaned from this method is even useful?

How do you extract information from someone, especially a trained or highly motivated terrorist, without torture?

For all of you who think this is such a terrible thing how would you suggest we get the info? Just lock them up and hope they decide to share?

Yes being water boarded would be horrible, its like being drowned, over and over again, cant breath, cant get away. But it does no permanent damage and stopping provides immediate relief. Should we go back to a shower, battery cables and a sponge?

Who the fuck cares if it IS torture. If it could save your families life I say do it. If saves even 1 solder in Iraq or Afghanistan I say do it.

I'm sure I'd be quick to break under those circumstances. But my understanding of this technique is it's not used to extract a confession for that very reason. People will cave in and admit something relatively easily. Anyone can confess to something, even if they know nothing about it. They use waterboarding to extract information...something that not just anyone will give up at the first sign of discomfort.

How about you one day surprising everyone with an opinion that is based on some facts and not emotion or propaganda.

Every person this country has waterboarded has been a terrorist. It also has only been used in a few cases.

I realize people like you always wish to extend your "everything is gray" argument and moral equivalence to include even the worst terrorists in the world. Especially when you think it is politically expedient.

Waterboarding is not torture. Waterboarding has also saved people's lives.

You people on the left are always claiming you are concerned about the lives of innocent people. Waterboarding has saved the lives of innocent people.

Your supposed concern for innocent people is specious at best.

Technically terrorists are not covered by the Geneva Conventions. Whatever rights we have granted them, we have done it because we ARE better than they are or the state governments that assist them.

We also do not torture "snuffy the infantry man". What country are we at war with that would have infantry men? Infantry soldiers of other countries are covered by the Geneva Convention. We are not at war with any country.

I say "torture the shit out of all of the suspects." During WWII, a SHITload of US pilots, soldiers, etc, who knew NOTHING about troop movements, etc, were tortured. Some of them were tortured to death. Its part of the game called "War." We train soldiers for it, it happens.

After those fucks murdered 2,000+ innocent Americans, it was ON. Sorry, I'm sure some of those tortured were innocent... but there's only one way to find out. give me the wire, I'll zap the shit out of them.

:rolleyes: Hippies...

Those who support America torturing people have obviously either forgotten or abandoned the principles that made this country great. Waterboarding is the kind of thing North Korea does, and the former Soviet Union, and the Japanese and Germans during World War II. Apparently we prosecuted war criminals after World War II for waterboarding people so at some point the United States considered it a crime. That's who you want to line yourself up with?

Of course, that America didn't start wars, either.

For those of you who support it, let me ask you a question: at what point do the interrogators decide that their current subject has no useful information? Wouldn't they pretty much have to render the person dead or damaged for life to be sure they weren't just holding out?

What astounds me the most is that you trust the government - which proves itself incompetent at best and corrupt at worst on a regular basis - to decide who needs to be tortured. Could you be any more naive?

If you're so convinced waterboarding isn't torture, how about we convene the first XOC Waterboarding Demo. All you brave keyboard commandos can step up, let yourself be strapped down, and show us all how tough you are and how waterboarding "does no permanent damage and stopping provides immediate relief." Afterwards, if you can still speak coherent sentences, you can tell us all if having it done to you has changed your definition.

Any takers?

Yeah, didn't think so. :rolleyes:

I would like to respond to Bluesky's comments.

1. Waterboarding is torture.
2. I don't freaking care if terrorists are waterboarded. At least they aren't being threatened with the possibility of living under the command of Hillary.
3. I am not a terrorist, so I won't be waterboarded, nor do I have any fear of being waterboarded.
4. Torture is meant to hurt.
5. If you hate this country that much, move. There's over 200 others to choose from.

Probably, yes. What's your point?

So, what alternative are you suggesting? Picketing? Bitching? Passing out Flowers? I'll do some research and I'll vote. Occasionally I'll write some congressmen. Realistically, that's ALL I can do. I'll tell you this much; at the time, the government did its best under the circumstances and none of us know 100% of the rationale for their decisions. You would rather trust CNN's interpretation of the events? THAT, my friend, is naive.

Maybe I wasn't clear. I believe it most certainly *IS* torture and if it helps, even the slightest little tiny bit, to keep this country free from another terrorist attack, then I'm all for it.

Oh yea, we killed several hundred thousand innocent people in Hiroshima and Nagasaki.

GUILTY!

Sure, it prevented the continued slaughter of a few million more... does anyone think about that?

I guess we should have let Hitler kill ALL of the jews... better that than risking the death of ONE innocent and being "just as guilty ourselves."

Give me a break. War sucks, its part of the deal and some people LOSE and they're not all guilty.

These people would gladly murder every one of you...even Jorge. I see no issue with it.

It IS humane compared to the shit they're doing to our soldiers and their own people in the middle east and elsewhere.

The Norks, Japs and Nazi's did far more than waterboarding. Who are you trying to kid here?

Who have we prosecuted for waterboarding? Post links to the cases and/or transcripts. Don't post links to some leftist propaganda blog where you may have read that.

What principles are we abandoning? We are abandoning no principles. In the past we executed enemy combatants. We also didn't do insane things like grant them the right of habeas corpus in our civilian courts.

People who make the claim that this country is abandoning principles in our dealings with the worst of terrorists, have no concept of how similar type people were dealt with in the past.

All these arguments being presented, largely by the political left, are really nothing more than being tantamount to taking up the cause of these people.

Quote:

For those of you who support it, let me ask you a question: at what point do the interrogators decide that their current subject has no useful information? Wouldn't they pretty much have to render the person dead or damaged for life to be sure they weren't just holding out?

Waterboarding when done properly does no damage and does not kill. Therefore, it is not torture.

The same people who argue that waterboarding is torture, are largely the same people who think putting women's panties on some prisoners head is also torture.

Quote:

What astounds me the most is that you trust the government - which proves itself incompetent at best and corrupt at worst on a regular basis - to decide who needs to be tortured. Could you be any more naive?

Should we trust the people at MoveOn.org or Code Pink to wage the war against terrorists?

Quote:

If you're so convinced waterboarding isn't torture, how about we convene the first XOC Waterboarding Demo. All you brave keyboard commandos can step up, let yourself be strapped down, and show us all how tough you are and how waterboarding "does no permanent damage and stopping provides immediate relief." Afterwards, if you can still speak coherent sentences, you can tell us all if having it done to you has changed your definition.

I doubt anyone here has been trained in the correct procedure of waterboarding.

If you want some video demos, there tons of videos on YouTube of people waterboarding each other at numerous left wing protests.

But then again, few of them spoke coherent sentences prior to being waterboarded, so it is hard to tell if they sustained any permanent damage.

Good point Desert Rat. No one's lopping off hands or heads and posting it on the internet here. What's done is done in private, and only to the extent that is needed to ensure the safety of those involved. These people we're fighting against, they see us as evil incarnate. They want nothing to do with negotiations or discussion. They want us dead. Period. So it would be utterly foolish to sit there and talk to ourselves, hoping to appeal to their humanity and common sense. They have none. All they understand is violence and warfare. It's been in their lives since day one, and it's what their hateful, racist religion requires of them. So I say, if they want violence, and they insist on bringing it to us, then let's give them what they want.

We cannot be baited into a question of a false choice

Torture or die...you choose.

Im REALLY surprised no one has brought up the "OK well what if their was a nuke in a city and this one guy had all the answers?"

"Huh ?!?!? Huh?!?!?! What about that ?!?!"

Torture is a question of ethics.

The question of what does a good man do when desperate?
What does he compromise?

Is torture ever justified?
Real torture such a burning people with acid or skinning alive

Should we torture all terrorists or just reeeely bad ones?

eg. some punk kid with an AK who ran off and was caught or Abu Musab al-Zarqawi?

Are we to torture for the simple sake of revenge or for intelligence purposes?

How do we know when they have told us everything ?

Who determines who a terrorist is?
The US government administration? The individual soldier on the ground who found him? The people in that town/village?

What if they are US citizens found aiding terrorists?
Should we torture them to see if they know more traitorous Americans?

Does it matter if they are citizens? Should the government be able to strip your rights at will and begin torture?

What about suspected criminals?
It would be much easier to prosecute when they just confess.

A fundemental question:
Are human rights inherent?

Are human rights, in even their most basic sense, truly universal?
Do some people have more basic human rights then others?

first among equals kinda stuff or pretty blond goes missing vs well anyone not pretty blond

Do your personal ethics change when you see others disregard any sense of ethics?

eg. Does the fact there is a hoodrat dealing crack right now make it more ethically acceptable to you personally to sell crack.

or

The terrorist piece of shit just murdered a group a schoolkids is it now morally acceptable to go into his village and murder their schoolkids?

At what point do we become the psychotics we despise for their savagery?

I have always thought that the United States holds itself to a higher standard because we are the LAST force for goodness and decency.

The only true test of morality is what a man does when no one is looking and its hard to do the right thing

Sorry man, I'd have an easier time debating you if I had any idea what you were talking about. Learn how to express yourself in complete and coherent sentences (there and their?) and I'll get back to you.

By "answers," do you mean "buttons?" Why is the "Huh ?!?!?" in quotes? Did someone we should know say that at a rally or something?

WWJD = What Would Jack (Bauer) Do?
Answer = He would knee cap the butt munch with his Glock 40, then strap him to a chair and electrocute him to get the desired information. He did it to his own brother. Gotta love Jack. I remember when he was being tortured, he faked passing out so when the guy came to wake him up, he lunged and tore a chunk out of the guy's neck with his teeth. Good times.

Sorry. Mini-hijack there. As you were...

Maybe you should define what qualifies someone to be considered human and worthy of human rights.

You people on the left are always claiming the needs of the many outweigh the needs of the few.

At what point does the right of the many to continue to live outweigh the human rights you wish to place upon the few who wish to brutally murder the many?

Waterboarding is torture pure and Simple.........the only time water should be used is to throw at the fucker to wake him up, after a nice little session with a car battery some wires and a pair of genitals. Prior to that a dull pair of pliers to the fingernails would be in order. If all else fails a nine iron to the foot soles works wondering....Wollen sie nicht sprechen dann haben wir andere metoden !!!

Like I said, I have no problem with it if it's deemed necassary, I just question the ability of those that do the "deeming"?

I realize that terrorists not being covered under the Geneva convention, and when I compared to an infantry man, I did not mean it literally. I meant some low level non important type.

I also realize that many we are holding captive, some of which are US citizens, are being subjected to this torture with the only due cause being the "they are terrorists!" finger being pointed at them, all the while many of Saddam's family, and other Saudi royals tied to 9/11 walk this earth free and clear. I question that... I mean shouldn't we?

rift, you don't think it could ever be you? Need to open your eyes. It can be anybody who's in the wrong place at the right time. Our government has slowly been putting the laws into place that will circumvent the rights of its citizens. Stuff like this is the slippery slope of precedence that could one day lead to our city's police force being allowed to utilize these methods on us etc. If you think its far fetched, you better read your history....

Today waterboarding "terrorists", tomorrow waterboarding "suspected terrorists", five years waterboarding protesters, 10 years waterboarding for suspicion of illegal activities....

Remember this is the country where moderation and common sense hasn't had a foothold in our society for a good fifty years now. Our children can be sex offenders in elementary school. Our parents can be abusive for spanking. Dodgeball is too violent. Everyone must have trophy in little league or their fragile minds will be damaged......

This is a weird thread. I find myself agreeing more with those I usually vehemently disagree with...

I don't have a problem with using torture methods in general, but I feel it's one of those "there's a time and a place for it" things.

I do not have enough faith in our current government to believe that they are using this method wisely.

I do not have enough faith in our government that they are even capturing the right people let alone true "terrorists" in most cases.

I don't even know why 9/11 lead us almost completely out of Afghanistan/Pakistan and into Iraq.

I don't know why Saudi Arabia is one of our allies when the bulk of the terrorists we are supposedly fighting are all stemming from there.

chicks dig wake boarding

Samuel, I agree. This is a weird thread. I am agreeing with you, when so far, I've found myself on a pretty opposite plain of thought than you. I don't think it could "never" be me. I just don't believe America will ever deteriorate to the point that this stuff is done willy-nilly to our own citizens on our own ground. I agree that logic has seemingly flown out the window in this country, but I don't know if we would agree with why. I see it as a result of general moral decay and the influx of hyper-liberal organizations who live and breathe to demolish anything that would allow a person to assert that there are absolutes *cough*ACLU*cough*.

Also, I agree with you that we probably should never have pulled out of Afghanistan. We very nearly caught OBL on more than one occasion, yet we're still there just kind of dicking around. And, yes, I agree with you also that I don't like our relationship with Saudi. It's where OBL came from and it's where his family still is. They sit there and pretend to be innocent, but all the while, they're hiding their blood-covered hands behind their backs. That relationship, I am confident, is about oil. Pure and simple. The war isn't. But that relationship is.

P.S. I don't trust Syria either. That place is a time-bomb waiting to go off.

So if a policeman beats the living shit out of a "suspect," we shouldn't be outraged? I mean, as long as the cop doesn't break any bones on the guy or anything...there's no permanent damage...

No permanent damage...fucking puh-lease...

I agree.

Wartime versus civilian law enforcement. Apples and oranges. Being a criminal is not the same as being a terrorist. Please tell me I don't need to explain that to you. :rolleyes:

Video

http://www.cnn.com/video/#/video/us/2007/12/11/cooper.waterboarding.t1.cnn

So what are you really saying? Some more actual clarification is warranted.

Are you saying the Bush administration, or maybe even Republicans in general cannot be trusted to do the "deeming"?

Who should we trust? Should we trust the Democrats? Hillary Clinton? Joe Biden? Barack Obama? Should we trust the judiciary and people like Justice Ruth Bader Ginsberg or Justice Breyer?

Should we trust the NY Times, Washington Post, NBC, The Today Show, the people at the DailyKos to decide?

Please tell us who you trust with your life and the lives of your children in deciding such issues.

Quote:

I realize that terrorists not being covered under the Geneva convention, and when I compared to an infantry man, I did not mean it literally. I meant some low level non important type.

I also realize that many we are holding captive, some of which are US citizens, are being subjected to this torture with the only due cause being the "they are terrorists!" finger being pointed at them, all the while many of Saddam's family, and other Saudi royals tied to 9/11 walk this earth free and clear. I question that... I mean shouldn't we?

Who is being subjected to this torture? Name some names.

I think the American public is being subjected to a lot of torture regarding the subject of torture.

The US citizens that have been caught have not been tortured. What proof do you have that they were tortured? Those people have also been granted their due process and habeas corpus rights.

Yes... I think we are all in agreement that the Saudi's are a problem. How do you propose we go about dealing with them?

The Saudi's are a very difficult problem considering almost every former president and many former members of Congress, both Democrat and Republican, takes money from them for various efforts. The same goes for other wealthy Arab countries like the United Arab Emirates. They practically own Washington DC.

Who do you think donates a large part of the money for some of these presidential libraries? Where do you think organizations like The Carter Center get their money? Who do think finances much of the Middle East Studies departments of most American, Canadian, and European universities? It's Arab money.

We just released a bunch of terrorist captives back to Saudi Arabia. They are being treated like V.I.P.'s.

Former terrorist captives who have been released have been recaptured again trying to kill Americans. I don't see any outrage by the "usual suspects" that we let terrorists go free.

Quote:

Need to open your eyes. It can be anybody who's in the wrong place at the right time. Our government has slowly been putting the laws into place that will circumvent the rights of its citizens. Stuff like this is the slippery slope of precedence that could one day lead to our city's police force being allowed to utilize these methods on us etc. If you think its far fetched, you better read your history....

Today waterboarding "terrorists", tomorrow waterboarding "suspected terrorists", five years waterboarding protesters, 10 years waterboarding for suspicion of illegal activities....

You used to be a rational guy Samuel. It seems you are now a member of the 'tin foil hat' crowd.

What happened to you?

That's a huge pile of crap Moby.

The subject of this thread is waterboarding captured international terrorists.

Extrapolating that into an issue of local cops beating a suspect is a pile of crap and nothing but obfuscating the original subject as a whole.

Madman,

I'm saying I don't trust the Federal government as a whole, dems, reps, etc. all included. They have all, over the last 6 years, proven to be completely corrupt and incompetent in my opinion.

As of the here and now with the current state of the world? Me, and that's it.

As far as the torture in general goes, I don't disagree with its use, but I feel like torture in the hands of our current government body is akin to a child wielding a chainsaw. I hope we tread lightly with these tactics as the reputation of countries who often employ them is less than positive on the world stage.

I still am, but I see a trend within our country that seems to lend credence to the fact that we are all too quickly giving up our ethics and liberties for what may ultimately be perceived freedom and safety, and I think that could be dangerous if not metered with some hard questions that we as a nation need to start answering.

Moby-

What are you talking about? You are comparing a civilian beaten by a cop to a captured armed insurgent? Apples to oranges.....

S.

Are you saying we should go back to the policy prior to 9/11 that Islamic terrorism wasn't a problem to be forcibly dealt with?

Who do you trust to combat terrorism? The Pittsburgh Police Department? The Fire Department?

I think you are forgetting that when the feds weren't doing anything serious about terrorism, that resulted in a major attack and the murder of almost 3000 people right here on American soil.

Many terrorist plots have been thwarted in the interim years. Some of them because of the use of waterboarding.

That is too easy and convenient to forget and even ignore.

Quote:

As of the here and now with the current state of the world? Me, and that's it.

As far as the torture in general goes, I don't disagree with its use, but I feel like torture in the hands of our current government body is akin to a child wielding a chainsaw. I hope we tread lightly with these tactics as the reputation of countries who often employ them is less than positive on the world stage.

Ahhh.... We are back to the bogus "reputation in the world" argument.

Do you think that many of our own intelligence operatives and Special Forces soldiers are waterboarded and trained in what to expect if they are captured because no one else waterboards? Please tell you me you are not that naive.

We waterboard our people during training because everyone else uses waterboarding.

You are just one of the many people who are falling into the trap being used by nefarious people who want us to take this very important tool out of our arsenal of available interrogation techniques.

How far are you willing to go along with others in weakening this country? That is what the whole debate is all about. Don't kid yourself about it for one minute.

Quote:

I still am, but I see a trend within our country that seems to lend credence to the fact that we are all too quickly giving up our ethics and liberties for what may ultimately be perceived freedom and safety, and I think that could be dangerous if not metered with some hard questions that we as a nation need to start answering.

If you think that waterboarding people like Khalid Sheik Mohammed or Abu Zabidah(sp) is equivalent to American citizens giving up any of their liberty... or a violation of any sort of ethics, I don't know what the hell to say to you.

As a nation we did ask a lot of hard questions right after 9-11. Most of them included how did we allow this happen.

It appears that many are trying as hard as they can to allow it to happen again.

You seem to have been drinking from a very dirty fountain of late.

Is waterboarding considered torture? Yes, but very mild in comparison to what terrorists do to us and their own people.

Shit, I had worse stuff done to me in college when I was pledging a fraternity.

Rift- very surprised with your stance. It is not very Christian like. Not critizing, just pointing it out.

Samuaeul- same with you. You are former military. You understand what needs to be done to obtain certain objectives.

For all the bleeding hearts on the left here, if you considering waterboarding severe torture, what do you considering the beheadings, burning of bodies, chopping off of limbs, and the shots to head that the terrorists do to the people they catch? I do not believe the US would stoop to that level to obtain information.

Another thing, do you all think that we have not been using some form of torture, in the history of the US to obtain informtion? I am sure the American Revolutionsists tortured British soldiers to give up their camps. Same during the Civil War. None of this is new stuff going on. Some things we are just better off not knowing.....

S.

That statement right there is the meat of it. We go too far one way or the other and we weakening our country. I question if we have gone too far in one direction as a reaction to 9/11. I am not siding with any "faction". The left is doing it, the right is doing it... we have to find a solid middle ground. We need balance and I don't think we have it right now. As far our world reputation goes, I don't see how it's a bogus claim? Should we not care to some degree how we are perceived by the rest of the world powers? Do we not judge other countries by their actions and deal with them accordingly?

Not at all. I'm saying that it's very easy for a nation, especially a nation who is passing more and more laws that circumvent citizens rights, to fall into that very trap. History shows this again and again and I am wary that we are falling into that trap.

Stone - Absolutely, but I question our current governments competence in utilizing the tools (our military, torture, intelligence) that are necessary to obtain certain objectives. It's the politics that keep fucking this shit up.

I'm saying it's complete bullshit to say it doesn't cause any permanent damage. To claim that is beyond specious...it's flat out dishonest.

You know...I really wish you conservatives would stop pulling out this bullshit comment.

You are the one's ok with torture...why don't YOU move...say to North Korea - nobody in THAT government is going to mind if you're ok with it.

To you cowards who will give up your righteousness for the illusion of safety, I say fuck you. Anyone who engages in torture to protect themselves isn't worthy of protection.

I want rule of law, stiff upper lip, and I'll happily go down with the ship--free, morally righteous, and sticking to my guns. We all die. If I die a good person, I'll die a good person. You want to die a coward who sold your morals for an illusion of safety, that's your business, but don't tell me you're the good guys!!! Sometimes good guys die at the hands of bad guys, but that's life! As for me, I won't sell my relationship with God to assuage your fear. Torture is wrong, no matter who does it. Murder is wrong, no matter who does it. This is inarguable. Wrong is wrong. Anyone who is willing to do anything, including the things that IN THIS SOCIETY we have found morally abhorrent, in order to stay safe, isn't worth fighting for. They are fucking cowards, and they deserve what they get.

NO SYMPATHY FOR COWARDS!!!

I'm skipping over a lot of previous posts because they go into too much detail over specific scenarios and most of them have the same problem: It is too easy to say waterboarding is good or bad, because the use of Waterboarding is modified with a specific target to make the good/bad point...
Or more simply:
Torturing terrorists is good.
Torturing newborn Babies is bad.
torturing the Guilty is good.
Torturing the innocent is bad.
Torturing Bin Laden is Good
Torturing American Soldiers is bad.

Someone mentioned that this is an argument of ethics, and that person is right.

Waterboarding is Torture, plain and simple. It doesn't matter who it is done to, innocent or guilty, it's torture.

The question isn't "How many lives does torture (Waterboarding) save," but rather "Under what circumstances should torture be allowed to be used?"

Now your ethics will dictate what you believe about the circumstances allowing the use of torture.

I, personally, am not against the use of torture. I think the threat of using torture can be just as effecient as torture itself for gathering information, a pshycological benefit of not banning the use of torture. However, I am against the use of torture aginst the wrong people. Torturing Bin Laden for information on Al Qaeda's plans - sure, go right ahead. Torture an American Citizen who knows nothing about Al Qaeda other than it was behind the 9/11 attacks - that's wrong (again, here the argument is modified by a specific target of the torture)

Why is "How many lives does torture save" the wrong answer:
The use of torture on the Columbine Shooters would have prented the incident and the death of their victims. The problem is that there was no knowledge of the plans until after they were executed. So how many students in how many schools over how many years would have had to have been tortured to prevent the incident? At what point does injustice of the number of wrongly tortured people outweight the justice of the saved lives? And, most importantly, who gets to make that judgement?

My opposition to Torture is based on the flaw in it's use. The idea of torture is sound, but the use of torture is the problem because people will utilize torture with as little as a suspicion of guilt or the hope that maybe some useful information can be gained.
The Japanese and Vietnamese tortured American soldiers with just the hope they may gain some useful information, and/or just to punish the Americans for opposing them. If that doesn't strike you as being wrong, then you must be a member of the Westboro Baptist Church.

And the problem we have concerning the use of torture is not just how the determination of whom whould be tortured is made, but who determines how torture should be used? No one seems to know who has that power, or under what circumstances torture will be allowed.

And maybe we aren't supposed to know, keeping a pshycoligcal edge on our enemies that they may beileve we will use torture, even if we don't.

However, I have no faith in this administration, with it's track record, to be making the right determination as to whom should be tortured and whom should not.

Hell, all of us on the board could be one waggin finger away from being waterboarded ourselves - no matter how supportive of the administration we seem to be.

Afterall, Madman, that could be part of your Al Qaeda cover before you blow us all up in a attack with your Al Qaeda Buddies.

And that's how easy it could be to become a victim of torture.

Think about that for a moment.

"Those who would give up essential liberty to purchase a little temporary safety deserve neither liberty nor safety." - Ben Franklin

"Let every nation know, whether it wishes us well or ill, That we shall pay any price, bear any burden, meet any hardship, support any friend, oppose any foe to assure the Survival and success of liberty." - JFK

Let's just call it what it really is...

Simulated Drowning.

Let's see how far they get calling it that.

So extremely well said.

I love this quote by Greg Gutfeld in his article (first post) by the way:
Has anyone told this guy that the NYT, NPR, Tim Robbins, Sean Penn and Hugo Chavez really, really, really hate pulling plastic bags over their heads until they asphexiate and die?

Or how about that they really hate going swimming with their feet embedded in concrete?

You know, with a philosphy in life like that, getting rid of him might be a heck of a lot easier than we'd think.

Now I am supposed to be a member of Al Qaeda because I support waterboarding the worst of terrorist captives?

It's crap like that is the reason why most people can never take you people on the left serious.

Also, don't throw Ben Franklin quotes into the debate. International terrorists are not citizens of this country. They are enemies and enemy combatants and don't have the rights under the law granted to Americans.

We have NEVER previously given enemy combatants constitutional rights under our system. They have usually been executed after a military trial.

You people on the left need to start asking yourselves why all of a sudden you wish to grant the constitutional rights of American citizens upon foreign enemy combatants.

There is no historical precedent to back up any of your bullshit arguments regarding enemy combatants.

Even killing foreign enemy combatants is not in any way related to the liberties of American citizens. It never has been regardless of the amount of ridiculous propaganda you wish to throw around.

Shahram said it well...wrong is wrong. There is a flaw in people (or countries) that justify their own actions by citing the actions of others. Some of you claim the only people being tortured are "captured international terrorists." How do you know which of the however many people we've rounded up are terrorists and which just got caught in the net? You don't care because you just want somebody to suffer for what's been done to America.

You guys are pissed off because Osama and his crowd kicked our country in the nuts on 9/11. So am I. We've been chasing our own tails in Iraq instead of devoting every resource we have towards capturing Bin Laden, and if you're not pissed about that, you should be. You want justice, and so do I. I'm just not willing to become the enemy because of what the enemy did to us.

You want to protect America? Get some serious security in place on the border and in our ports before somebody smuggles a nuke across the Rio Grande or into the port of New Orleans and vaporizes a city. Make the TSA more than a joke. Those are things we need to work on.

You know, you guys point out the horrific things done by terrorists, the beheadings and so on. Well, in their minds, those actions are justified because of the horrible things they think America has done. Then you say torture is justified because they behead people and fly planes into buildings. You're using the same justification they are. Can't you see that?

I know you can't see it, but I'm waving my hand over my head in that "Wow, that went way over your head" kind of way.

Did you happen to eat a lot of paint chips as a kid?

I know this is gonna sound crazy, but............no?

Ok, so terrorists (doesn't matter their religion, nationality, etc...) kill every single person that you care about. But it could have been prevented with intel. Intel that wasn't available because we're not allowed to even think nasty thoughts about terrorists, much less question them (questioning terrorists...just asking them what they know, nothing more...might harm their psyche don't you know) about what they know. You're seriously OK with that? I thought your random posts were for comedic relief, your ideas on this make me wonder.

OK...where did I miss this...where did I miss people saying you couldn't interrogate them?

Talk about obfuscation...

The CIA says they only waterboarded three people since 9-11. Anyone who has any objections to the three bastards that were waterboarded has some very serious issues.

Where the fuck is all this evidence to back up the rhetoric that you people on the left are throwing around that many people are being waterboarded or tortured by our government?

The level of irresponsibility of you people making these claims is insurmountable and completely inexcusable under any circumstances.

Quote:

You guys are pissed off because Osama and his crowd kicked our country in the nuts on 9/11. So am I. We've been chasing our own tails in Iraq instead of devoting every resource we have towards capturing Bin Laden, and if you're not pissed about that, you should be. You want justice, and so do I. I'm just not willing to become the enemy because of what the enemy did to us.

That is also completely ridiculous. How are you or any of us becoming the enemy by waterboarding or even killing enemy combatants?

We killed enemy combatants in every single conflict this country has been involved. What makes Islamic terrorists any different in your mind? They are actually far more ruthless than any other enemy faced previously, yet you fail to realize that fact. You are convinced that they are no different than a common criminal. You seem to think they are worthy of the same constitutional rights afforded a common criminal or US citizen.

That is a dangerous mode of thought.

It is also nothing but a lie to say that Osama Bin Laden or Afghanistan is being ignored. There are 40,000 coalition troops in Afghanistan.

Also, if you are so sure of the location of Bin Laden, maybe you should be out looking for him.

Capturing OBL is also not the end of the war against Islamic terrorism. Sometimes when I read stuff posted by certain people, I often wonder are we better off not capturing him. I wonder how much "rights" certain people will want to confer upon him.

Quote:

You know, you guys point out the horrific things done by terrorists, the beheadings and so on. Well, in their minds, those actions are justified because of the horrible things they think America has done. Then you say torture is justified because they behead people and fly planes into buildings. You're using the same justification they are. Can't you see that?

Thanks for the terrorist point of view and justifying terrorists actions with your insane moral equivalencies.

People like you will wind up getting a lot of people in this country killed with that type of thinking.

Something, somewhere, somehow, is going to kill every single person I care about--my wife, my son, my friends and family. How and when they die is, for the most part, out of my control. I have no illusions about how little power I personally have to protect them from the big, bad world. But how they die and when they die is of much less concern to me than how they live! I want to see my son grow up a human being who does not torture or murder, and does not condone others to torture or murder so that he doesn't have to deal with the big, bad world. I love my family more than anything, but I won't sacrifice their relationship with God so that they can be safe. No one is ever safe. Safety is a temporary condition at best, an insidious lie at worst. Everyone will be killed. Not everyone will live righteously. I won't have my family live like cowards, and to do so, if I have to sacrifice my own safety, to show them that a just and righteous life can be lived, even when others are attacking you, then that's it. That's all there is to do.

The statement stands for itself Shahram. No amount of obfuscation or bullshit on your part can make it otherwise.

People like you and some of the others who try to claim that we are no different than the terrorists because we waterboarded a few of the worst of them, couldn't be further from the truth.

You use the issue for own ends or agenda.

Not a single person who thinks that "waterboarding is torture" has ever come up with a single solution or method to get information from these hardened terrorists. All of whom are well versed in interrogation methods and who even have their own training manuals. Most of whom are more than willing to give up their own lives for their cause.

These people are unlike any other enemy this country has faced. Many either don't realize that fact, or maybe some just don't care.

But, you know these people and their determination.

You yourself are a Muslim. You have never once that I have seen, denounced these Islamic fanatics... nor as a Muslim who claims to love his country,... have you ever offered a constructive method to combat these fanatics.

All I have ever seen you do is denigrate this country; the methods it uses to fight these Islamic fanatics; and denigration of anyone who supports the fight against Islamic terrorism.

How about some constructive dialog from you for a change. How about some ideas from an American Muslim who just might love his country more than he loves Islam.

I hope I am talking about you Shahram.

30,000 of those troops (the ISAF) are NOT looking for Bin Laden. Afghanistan may not be being ignored, but Bin Laden IS being ignored.

Nope, it's the direction our pussified society is heading. Ya know, there are no winners and losers in kids sports anymore; even if you fail miserably at something you still get told you did an amazing job; don't be honest, you might hurt someone's feelings waaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaa. It's bullshit...ah fuck it, I'm not going to bother trying to open the eyes of the blind.

How can you say that Bin Laden is being ignored? That is nothing but complete bullshit and basically, Democrat, or left wing propaganda.

There would probably be no bigger prize for this administration than frog marching Bin Laden into a military tribunal.

Saying we are ignoring him is close to implying that we know where he is located. We don't know where he is. We don't know if he is being helped or hidden with the help of some other government. He could be a guest in Tehran for all anyone knows.

I think it is safe to say he is getting help. Are you willing to attack another country for one terrorist mastermind?

Maybe so. You seem to under the impression that tens of thousands of troops should be out looking for one guy.

Oh, come on man. Everyone will be killed? That's the most bullshit thing I've seen you type, ever, including your funny posts. Everyone will die, yes, but most people in this world aren't killed. Fucking hell, man, one person kills everyone you care about and it could have been prevented and you wouldn't fucking care that it wasn't prevented? That's a load of bullshit, and you know it. We all get it, Sharam, you disagree with everything Madman posts, it's getting old.

In the eyes of a hypersensitive coward, all criticism is denigration. He has no more defense than to cry "traitor" or "lunatic" at everyone who shows him his own cowardice. Since we're talking about "all we've ever seen" from each other, all I've ever seen from you is fear-mongering, hate, and brow-beating. I've never really summed you up with a word before, but that's what you are--a coward. Everything you've written, every time your fingers touch the keyboard, you show your fear. You warn others of the dangers that lurk behind every corner, around every hedgerow--the homosexual, the leftist, the druggie, the hippie, the illegal alien, the loonies, the atheists, the myriad enemies of America, legions of them, and all out to get....you. Everything that you can't wrap your incredibly limited mind around is a "major threat", a "major problem", everything to you is dangerous, out to hurt you.

You're a coward, Madman. I actually feel bad writing this, but you need to hear it. Your fear will kill you someday. And doubly worse, it will prevent you from living before it does.

I gotta tell ya, people don't just die spontaneously. Something's gotta kill them for them to die. That really wasn't the point of my post. Go back and read it again. Take your time with it. Chew on it. Move your lips while you read, if you need to. Would I want my family's murder to be prevented? Duh. What will I condone in order for that, not just to be prevented, but to have my government tell me that they can prevent it? Yeah...there's the rub.

Stuff like that seems to be your standard response Shahram.

Whenever you are confronted with any serious questions or response to any of your bullshit, it always the same. I am either a coward or some fear driven, hate filled individual with a limited mind. For a guy who tries to portray himself as an enlightened Libertarian type, your responses are nothing but standard left wing debate tactics.

Instead of expending all of your time and energy trying to attack me and denigrate me for even having the nerve to question the "almighty Shahram", how about answering the questions I posed to you.

That is cowardice.

Oh, you mean the "Why do you hate America" questions?

You playin' the Hannity card on me, Brian?

I asked a lot more than that Shahram.

I'm not playing any card on you. You know that too. The only one playing here is you.

As far as XOC standards go on political debates of what can be considered serious issues, the debate on this topic has been fairly civil by XOC standards. That was at least until you jumped into the thread and started throwing around insults like you were giving away fatwas at a jihad convention.

You are even misquoting what I asked you.

Stop being a coward and answer the questions I asked of you.

If you are not a coward you would do so.

First of all, Madman, I never once said I wanted to grant Constitutional rights to non-American citizens - so don't put words in my mouth.

The quotes are related to American Liberties, but you obvously didn't get it.

read my post. Notice I said read, not re-read, because based on your comments you just read what you quoted cause your name was in it, and didn't read anything else I wrote.


Yes, I am also waving my hand over my head in that "Wow, that went way over your head" kind of way.



Holy shit, you couldn't have missed the obvious if you were fishing in the middle of the desert and then figured that you weren't catching anything because you were using the wrong bait.

No, I'm not calling you a member of Al Qaeda because you support waterboarding the worst of terrorist captives. I said it because you said wtaerboarding Terrosits is a good thing - your first line of your first post. You modify your argument by later poting that "Waterboarding is not torture. Waterboarding has also saved people's lives. You people on the left are always claiming you are concerned about the lives of innocent people. Waterboarding has saved the lives of innocent people."

So I make the accusation that you are a Terrorist - now follow along here, this is where you completely didn't get it the first time -
Let me break it down for you in a more simplified version so you can understand.

You argue Torture should be used on Terrorists, even if a few innocent people get hurt along the way, because that saves lives....

So, I promptly accuse you of being a terrorist.

Being a suspected terrorist, the administration uses torture to question you about your suspected terrorist ties - because by torturing terrorists the Government saves lives, even if a few innocent people get hurt along the way.

I'm not saying you are a terrorist, but showing how very quickly the arguement for Torturing terrorists can turn into a circular problem.

How hard is it to accuse someone of being a Terrorist anyway. You obviously thought I just called you one.

Let's also not forget, the 4 Terrorists who flew the planes on 9/11 attended flight schools and lived for some time in the USA.

So yeah, the use of torture on "terrorists" could severly impact a citizens civil liberties, should they be falsely accused of being a terrorist.

Now I also read that if it doesn't kill or cause damage it's not torture.
You obviously don't know the definition of the word:
Torture: 1a : anguish of body or mind : AGONY 1 : something that causes agony or pain
2 : the infliction of intense pain (as from burning, crushing, or wounding) to punish, coerce, or afford sadistic pleasure

Your problem there Rockaholic is that you are basing some of things I have said on your own opinions and suppositions.

You think waterboarding is torture. I DO NOT think waterboarding is torture. If we were pouring water over people and hooking them up to hot electrodes, that would be torture. If we were pulling out their fingernails, that would be torture.

Waterboarding does not meet the definition of torture. If you are going to define torture to include some temporary mental anguish, then watching an episode of "Sex and the City" or listening to JayZ albums could be considered torture.

Actually many people have argued that pyschops like blasting annoying music is torture. That is completely ridiculous. What is next? Not supplying champagne cocktails and cigars will be considered torture? Is denying terrorists the Al Jazerah channel going to be considered torture in the near future?

I think the loud music has already been taken away as a tool. How far are we willing to go in defining down the definition of torture? How far are we willing to weaken ourselves and remove every single tool available to extract information?

If waterboarding is torture as you claim, that means the US government tortures many of their own people during training for their jobs.

Why does the government train people to endure waterboarding? It's not because no one else doesn't do it. Every government does it when they feel the circumstances are warranted. Most governments on earth do far, far worse.

Waterboarding is a tool. It is not torture. You are arguing from a position where you think waterboarding has already been established by everyone as torture. It has not been.

Maybe you personally do not. If I said that you personally did feel that way instead of making a statement regarding the political left, then I agree I would have been wrong.

However, there is no doubt that the political left has been engaged in a long drawn out fight within the system in this country and the judiciary to grant constitutional rights to foreign terrorists... or enemy combatants.

That is EXTREMELY dangerous to this country.

Considering that the Supreme Court has granted cert regarding this issue, I'm afraid that this country is headed in a very dangerous direction. All of it because of politics. None of it because of the law or past case law, history, or precedent. None of it with the best interests of this country in mind.

What's that saying.... "I have seen the enemy and the enemy is me". We are our own worst enemy.

If anyone would have asked almost anyone else on Sept. 12, 2001 if this country would be considering constitutional rights for foreign international terrorists, the 9-11 masterminds, or whether waterboarding the worst of those terrorists to prevent future attacks would ever be an issue in this country... they may have thought you would be insane.

But that is exactly what is occurring.

I think it's hilarious how you constantly single out my race and heritage as some deciding factor in the validity of my opinion. Funnier still how you never mention that I'm half Scottish and a Presbyterian. How come my love for this country isn't obfuscated by my hatred for the English? How come I'm never handing out insults like kippers at a fish smoking competition?

No, really, Madman, why do you always bring up my race?

What is hilarious is that you are trying to claim that Islam is a race... or at least in your case it is somehow a race.

Islam is NOT a race. Don't act like an idiot and try to make any questions regarding Islam into a bogus racial issue. You do nothing but try to obfuscate everything presented in your direction.

Poor little Shahram. You're such a victim.

Keep the race card in your pocket for left wing idiots who don't know any better. I don't give a damn about your racial background. I've never made a point of your racial background.

I asked you some questions because you are a Muslim. That has nothing to do with race. Most Muslims in the world are not Arab. Most are not even from the Middle East. You are not even of Arab extraction. I have always known that, yet somehow you are whipping out a race card. You are just as Caucasian as I am. You are just a pussy.

Let's get past your newfound "victimhood" status and go back to the original questions posed to you as a Muslim or Muslim American. What I said and asked is here.......

Well... What are your answers?

You are a Muslim. What is the Muslim American answer to solving the Muslim terrorist problem? Surely you must have some ideas.

I don't think that it is out of line to ask such a question. Especially of you since you constantly do nothing but attack everyone else for even being critical of Muslims and Islamic terrorism.

Islamic terrorists often kill more of other Muslims then they do anyone else.

So as a Muslim, and an American, what are your ideas for combating Islamic terrorism? Your fellow citizens would like to know. Muslim Americans have been very quiet regarding ideas on combating Islamic terrorism when they should be the ones with the most ideas.

The "official" Muslim organizations that claim to represent Muslims in this country like CAIR have terrorist connections. They also cry "victim" like you are doing right now so they can avoid questions. Are you one of them?

The media talks about the "moderate Muslims". Most Americans never hear from these elusive moderate Muslims. Why is that?

What is the "moderate Muslim" plan or ideas for fighting Islamic terrorism?

You have a big fucking mouth and an opinion about everything else except the group of which you are a part of and now trying to claim victim status as a part of that group. That's pathetic.

That says a lot about you Shahram.

People like you should be the ones at the forefront of this fight. Sadly that is not the case.

Go ahead...just continue the obfuscation.

YES! Holy fuck YES! Isn't that the point! Whoever is helping him NEEDS to be attacked but I guarantee you the people that are helping him and the likes of him are the ones we wouldn't dare touch *cough* Saudi Arabi *cough*. Besides we attacked another country under bad intelligence to dispose of someone who had no teeth to begin with....Why stop there?

We may not know where Bin Laden is, but I can tell you we aren't looking for him in any real capacity. Our troops in Afghanistan are basically doing the same they are doing in Iraq, being dicked around by politics and putting their lives on the line for naught, only they are doing it in a much smaller force.

The bulk of our military and our war on terror should be scouring Afhanistan and Pakistan for the bastard and his entire family should be sitting in a cell somewhere being waterboarded. We actually know who and where they are. Instead we are in another country under bad intelligence wasting valuable resources all the while killing our world image and destroying our own citizens faith in their nation.

Our politicians are inept, and they are using hammers when they should be using scapels..

I agree with you on this, but I think it's accuring because we have lost sight of the goal and gotten way off track with our objective. I feel like our country is in a dark room and anytime someone flicks on the light we shout "terrorist!".

We have gotten into the game of playing whack-a-mole and someone else keeps feeding the damn thing quarters so the game never ends. I believe that someone is the Saudi royals but we won't touch them....

They control the spice.......

No. That is NOT the point. We can't just attack any country at random because we may think Bin Laden may be hiding out there.

If we did have actionable intelligence as to a definite location of Bin Laden, there are other ways we can deal with him and his immediate cronies without attacking a country.

Are you actually serious with some of the stuff you have been writing?

I remember about a year or so ago there was a report that there was actionable intelligence regarding his location at a funeral for some Taliban or high ranking Al Qaeda member, but a Pentagon DOD lawyer supposedly canceled the strike to kill him. If I recall, the reason given was that women and children were also at the funeral.

Unfortunately, DOD lawyers are running a lot of the war on terror and making many of the decisions for the most part. Not the generals. That is what this country has come down to in many respects. Not all decisions, but many. Sometimes decisions are made based on how those decisions will play out in the Hague.

You're the one concerned about international reputation, so that is the price we are paying to international reputation. Appeasing the Hague.

I doubt OBL is in Saudi Arabia. There is no way he could hide there without us knowing about it. He is most likely either in Waziristan (uncontrollable mountainous regions of Pakistan), Iran, South America, or Kashmir.

I don't like the Saudi's any more than you do, but we can't just attack them. Our economy is based on petroleum and we just couldn't do that even if we wanted to. Unfortunately our economy is going to be linked to petroleum long after your children are older than you are right now.

Quote:

We may not know where Bin Laden is, but I can tell you we aren't looking for him in any real capacity. Our troops in Afghanistan are basically doing the same they are doing in Iraq, being dicked around by politics and putting their lives on the line for naught, only they are doing it in a much smaller force.

I'd say that is false. We are doing the best we can as far as looking for him. He is not in Afghanistan so our troops can turn over every single table and probably not find him. He is a coward. He would not be hiding anywhere that there are American forces nearby.

Quote:

The bulk of our military and our war on terror should be scouring Afhanistan and Pakistan for the bastard and his entire family should be sitting in a cell somewhere being waterboarded. We actually know who and where they are. Instead we are in another country under bad intelligence wasting valuable resources all the while killing our world image and destroying our own citizens faith in their nation.

Our politicians are inept, and they are using hammers when they should be using scapels..

I disagree that we should capture his entire family. They are not all terrorists. He has an extremely large family. Some of them actually are terrorists, but I would say most are not. I think a few are right here in the United States. Some are in Europe too.

I agree that our intelligence agencies are highly problematic. The mistakes they have made over the years are tremendous.

Unfortunately politics seems to be playing too much of a role in deciding what is or has been an intelligence mistake and what is not. Intelligence seems to be a matter of political expediency of late.

Time will tell what turns out to be correct. Let's hope that our intelligence failures don't continue to kill thousands of our own citizens. It doesn't look promising because no one seems to ever get fired regardless of the failures or regardless of the lives lost due to their failures.

It sounds like that fountain you have been drinking from may be too much Alex Jones or some other conspiracy type garbage. Maybe too much Ron Paul.

Quote:

We have gotten into the game of playing whack-a-mole and someone else keeps feeding the damn thing quarters so the game never ends. I believe that someone is the Saudi royals but we won't touch them....

They control the spice.......

The Saudi's control a lot of the spice, but not all of the spice.

Our politicians refuse to allow Americans to see the sources of much of the money that funds many non-profit organizations in this country. If they did, we would be able to see more of the Saudi's activities. Not to mention the activities of many other countries and entities.

A lot of the "spice" winds up in the pockets of many people. Some are people you probably like. Some are probably people we all like.

But, we don't live on "Dune".

Ok Madman - Anguish is not part of the definition fo torture, but agony is. The difference:
Agony is the intense pain of mind or body.
Anguish is extreme pain, distress, or anxiety

There is a difference. Lots of things can cause anxiety but not pain - like being fired and worrying how you are going to pay next months rent.

Being forced to listen to music you don't like is not torture. You may be anguished, but I doubt listening to a Jay-Z album would cause you angony.

Being forced to listen you do not like for 48 straight hours while being denied sleep, food or water is.

You say Waterboarding is ok on Foriegn terrorists or enemy combatants, but not on US citizens:

So what About John Wlaker Lindh? - US Citizen and member of Al Qaeda. Do we treat him as a citizen, as a foreign terrorist, or as an ememy combatant? And who gets to make that call?

Again, we are back to that ethical question...

Madman's funny. Take his post that started, "The CIA says it only waterboarded three terrorists..." And he believes them, because our government in general and the CIA in particular would never, EVER lie.

And then he goes on with his usual putting words in peoples' mouths, smearing them by association, and so on. Usually it's a gang of one with him but he's got some help this time.

Just so we're clear: I believe in interrogating terrorists using every method short of torture.

I believe that following 9/11 the primary and overarching mission mission of the United States and all of its resources was capturing or killing Osama Bin Laden. Any moron can grasp that capturing or killing OBL won't end their jihad. I never said that was the purpose. The purpose of getting him is strictly for the satisfaction of squaring accounts with the guy behind 9/11. Simple as that.

I believe in personal responsibility and that people should learn the idea of decisions resulting in consequences. So yes, school activities and games should have winners and losers. That's how you learn to make better decisions, and the angst of losing is a character-builder that motivates people to get better.

I believe Bush and his cronies have completely botched Iraq and basically ignored border security, port security, and aviation security (they're still not screening most cargo carried on passenger jets), not to mention doing little to stem the tide of illegals coming into the country.

And I believe Madman and his ilk (love using one of his favorite words against him) have to attack others because their viewpoints don't stand on their own. They selectively quote points they think they can refute and ignore the valid ones. They think it's ok to torture as long as it's done to "them" because "they" deserve it. You'd better hope you're never considered one of "them."

To answer Madman's question from earlier, I can't link to anywhere other than the Washington Post on the U.S. prosecuting Japanese war criminals for waterboarding. But Madman would attack that source. Well, I'm not wading through thousands of pages of trial transcripts to prove a point to someone who will dismiss its validity somehow anyway. So no, Madman, I can't link to a mutually-agreed impartial source on that. But I believe it happened based on the account I read, and if I can't "prove" it happened, you can't prove it didn't. Try if you'd like.

And you can't prove everybody at Gitmo or everyone tortured by the U.S. is a terrorist, and I can't prove they aren't. We only have the word of the government. The same government that has lied again and again and again whenever it suits their purposes.

Maybe that's the bottom line here; you trust the government and I don't. Tell me, are you in the, "They can monitor my phone and e-mail because I have nothing to hide" bunch? Good luck with that. Maybe you won't end up taking an innocent picture of your child and being investigated as a pedophile.

I'm sure Madman will find my source to be a liberal left-wing America-hating terrorist-loving puppy-killing rag. After all, it is the magazine Popular Photography and Imaging. Just in case you want to boycott it. :rolleyes:

I would agree, if you made a statement about the political left, and not me personally, then you would not have been wrong.

However, you did lump me in with the left when you made your statement in repsonse to mine:

I was actually joking about the JayZ comment. Well, sort of. To me it is torture. But then again, .... to each his own.

The whole mental anguish, anxiety, or whatever you want to call it regarding the torture issue, is an attempt to downgrade torture. Some even consider humiliation torture. It is getting beyond ridiculous.

Johnny Walker Lindh is an American citizen and received his due process as an American citizen.

I'm not sure why you would even mention his name.

Well, at least we have a good topic of debate here.

Raise your hand if you think the capture of Bin Laden will magically end the war on terror and make all the Al Queda people go back to their huts and live out the rest of their days peacefully.

I'm guessing there's not too many hands up. So now tell me why we should direct all resources towards capturing one sickly Arab fuck with bad kidneys when we can be elsewhere going after the active terrorists? I'm not trying to justify Iraq here, but I am pointing out the obvious that Al Queda are a worldwide scourge that have to be dealt with by a heavy hand.

We've talked about cowards. I can think of nothing more cowardly than planting roadside bombs, car bombs, and suicide bombers that target innocent civilians, women, kids, etc. Yet we're cowards for using somewhat unconventional means to extract information from the bastards we do catch? 3 whole people? C'mon.

Anyone who has served in the US Army and went through basic training suffered more torture than a few hours of waterboarding, and we volunteered to do it.

Don't believe me?

- PT until you experience total muscle failure
- CS Gas Chamber - remember that? That SUCKED!
- Brutal road marches

What is torture, anyways?

Websters definition:

1 a: anguish of body or mind : agony b: something that causes agony or pain
2: the infliction of intense pain (as from burning, crushing, or wounding) to punish, coerce, or afford sadistic pleasure
3: distortion or overrefinement of a meaning or an argument : straining

Based on this, anytime I'm forced to listen to rap music, Britney Spears, etc., that's causing anguish of mind.

Agony and pain. Waterboarding. Maybe.

To those of you against it, what are your thresholds? How would you handle it? Do you think your non-offensive politically correct ways are equally effective?

Guys, remember who we're dealing with here. No, we're NOT stooping to their level. Waterboarding is a little less severe than beheading and blowing people up.

Bluesky, you did imply that the government was treating a lot of people harshly.

Also, considering the fact that things like waterboarding is a questionable technique even with those that have to do it, it is not unreasonable to believe that only a few high profile terrorist captives have been waterboarded.

Maybe you listen to too much Teddy Kennedy when he practically implies George Bush is waterboarding everyone included the White House cleaning staff. You would almost think that Bush is holding their legs to listen to his bullshit.

And since when does this asshole Teddy Kennedy have the right to say anything about waterboarding? He left a woman to die under water and now he is concerned that 9-11 conspirators are being made to feel uncomfortable. FUCK HIM.

I also did not put any words in your mouth or smear you by association.

Lighten up Francis.

You're a piece of work. You quote my point, deny doing it, then do the exact thing you're denying by attempting to link me with Kennedy, then end your Teddy rant by again denying doing what you just did.

What about my other points, Madman? That's the essence of debate, to refute the other guy's points (if you can). Continually taking a pass just because you can't refute it or the answer doesn't fit your agenda is one of the many things that completely undermine your credibility.

Alright Rockaholic. I was trying to be nice in case I said something that you did not say. Now I am being called on a technical foul.

If I included you in a group that you did not belong, I am sorry. If I did not correctly identify you as on the left, I am sorry.

I don't know what the hell I did, but I will graciously say sorry about that.

I don't feel like getting into really serious arguments. Some light debate is fine.

I'm still half loaded from last night and I just cracked open another Heineken.

Merry Christmas bro.

What are you talking about Bluesky?

I never connected you with Kennedy. That was merely just a passing statement about the waterboarding subject. Kennedy was the first politico that came to my mind. Nothing against you.

You take far too much to heart. You need to relax a bit. I wasn't attacking you personally.

I'll use smilies in my responses to your posts in the future. I know I fail to use them sometimes, and that does create some confusion with intent.

Is that alright?

Well, are you talking about torture as punishment or torture as a way to get information. Because if you're just extracting information, then according to you, torturing him would be ok. If you're talking about it as punishment, then he received his due process and shouldn't be tortured.

So, which are you for; Extracting information or punishment? Because they're two wildly different reasons for torturing someone.

I'm not talking about torture Wilmac. I'm discussing waterboarding.

*rubbing his hands with glee at the success of the thread*

Okay gang, here's another log to throw on the fire. A couple days ago, I saw this interview on the Today show. It's a former CIA agent who used waterboarding. He talks about his feelings on its use and the authorization required to even have it as an option. Check it out...

http://video.msn.com/video.aspx?mkt=en-US&brand=msnbc&vid=5e5abc17-c215-4567-bc7 1-3749e5cd73bf

You didn't?

Yeah, where'd I ever get the idea you were trying to bogusly link me to Teddy Kennedy?

You are remarkably out of touch with reality.

I'm just curious - because I honestly don't know - but since the start of the Iraq war, has there been any evidence that proves that torturing of bad guy X directly resulted in saving the lives of the Good Guy(s)?

If the answer is "yes," then why would the CIA destroy those tapes? Wouldn't they hold them up as proof/evidence that torture gets results?

Geez... I already explained myself to you.

You never let go. It's constant nitpicking on every single word.

I'm almost expecting you to ask me if you look fat in this dress.

The answer is a definite YES regarding the question did waterboarding yield actionable intelligence and thwart terrorist plots.

Waterboarding is not torture, and the top guys that gave us the information were never going to give us information any other way. Waterboarding is the worse thing that happened to them as far as I have ever read.

We have known this about Khalid Sheikh Mohammed (the 9-11 mastermind) for several years. He lasted longer under waterboarding than anyone would ever have imagined. I think it was somewhere near two and a half minutes. Most people can't go 30 to 40 seconds.

Every single terrorist that is detained tells everyone within earshot that he has been tortured. That is a tactic that is contained within the Al Qaeda Manual as far as procedures in case of capture.

They know very well how to game our system. They are not stupid.

The CIA had to destroy those tapes. CIA employees were in the tapes. God only knows what intelligence information was disclosed and discussed that could be dangerous if those tapes got into the wrong hands... such as the media. I'm sure there are other reasons too.

Interrogations regarding national security are not the same as the local police questioning a suspect in something like a burglary. There are wide ranging implications.

It's not as simple as the media would like to portray it for their agenda.

There's the key - "we VOLUNTEERED".

My guess is that the tapes showed stuff that was maybe worse than waterboarding, which already has debates like this one going.

Al Qaeda terrorists are also volunteers Moby.

You don't seem to approve of harsh interrogation methods or waterboarding. Am I correct in that assessment?

If so... Please tell us the methods you would employ to extract information from hardened terrorists who are well trained in our system, our laws, our politics, our media, and our methods.

Not a single person who disapproves of waterboarding has even ventured to answer that question.

You could be the first Moby.

Right. I show you an explicit example of your BS tactics and it's "nitpicking". No, Madman, it's expecting you to write reasonable statements and then stand behind them instead of trying to weasel out of what you yourself wrote by blaming others for "nitpicking" or misinterpreting. Personal responsibility is empowering. You should try it some time.

And your less-than-subtle attempts to infer on those who dare to disagree with your point of view gets old too. Grow up. It's easy to be a big man from behind your keyboard. You'd wet your pants if you ever had to back any of your BS insults up in person.

Let me preface this statement with a caveat. I am not a veteran. I completely and utterly respect and admire US military veterans. If I had my life to live over again, I am confident that I would have enlisted. Having said that...

When these demonic maniacs volunteered to be a part of these extremist groups and vowed to bring down the "infidels," as far as I'm concerned, they also volunteered to subject themselves to whatever their enemy might dish out if they get caught being demonic maniacs. So when we turn on the light and the cockroaches start scurrying, I am not surprised in the least when one of them get trod upon. I said it before and I'll say it again: waterboarding is torture. Anyone who denies that is fooling themselves. But it's also not deadly, unless its administrators don't know what they're doing. I'll wrap this up by saying this:

THIS IS WAR. It's not tag. It's not Red Rover. It's not Hide and Seek. People die in war. People get hurt in war. People behave unkindly in war. On both sides. So when the enemy brings their hatred of us to our shores, are we supposed to just wag our finger and say, "hey, that's not Geneva Convention behavior!" People, you can't put football and baseball players on the same field and expect a fair game. Different rules. They set the bar when they decided it was okay to MURDER nearly 3,000 men, women and children. So as far as I'm concerned, making them uncomfortable by simulating drowning is a slap on the wrist compared to what they deserve. *cough*bulletinthehead*cough*

I'm reminded of that scene in "Saving Private Ryan" in which (about halfway through the movie) they're looking at a machine gun nest in a secluded field. Ed Burns' character states that they should go around the gun as it's "not part of their objective," and Tom Hanks' character fires back, "Our objective is to win the war!"

At the start of the Iraq war, I felt like Ed Burns: in terms of Iraq, I felt like we could've just "gone around," although I suppose that's debatable. I still do not agree with the war, our presence there, or the fact that our original objective (Osama) is still on the lamb, but I feel more like Tom Hanks at this point: just do whatever it takes to win the war. If torturing someone gets us a step closer to ending this war, then that's fine by me.

You show nothing BlueSky. You are full of yourself.

I've already been reasonable with you and said I would use smilies in the future when responding to your posts.

If your feelings felt slighted, and you need me to say I'm sorry, then I'm sorry.

But, I gotta say, with the inordinate amount of bitching that you continue to do about an innocuous and insignificant post, you definitely aren't going to get an approval of the dress from me.

Lighten up and let it go. We can still be friends. That's if you are willing to hug and make up. :p

It was a very good movie.

FUBAR

Quote:

At the start of the Iraq war, I felt like Ed Burns: in terms of Iraq, I felt like we could've just "gone around," although I suppose that's debatable. I still do not agree with the war, our presence there, or the fact that our original objective (Osama) is still on the lamb, but I feel more like Tom Hanks at this point: just do whatever it takes to win the war. If torturing someone gets us a step closer to ending this war, then that's fine by me.

You are correct and I agree with you. We already started the mission in Iraq and it needs to be completed.

I however am more disappointed with the Iraqi's, or more specifically, their politicians, than I am of ours.

The people we waterboarded seem to have been terrorists involved in planning attacks on civilians here in this country. Maybe Europe too.

I don't think we torture or even waterboard the low level dirtbags in Iraq. It's not official policy. If you think so, what gives you that idea?

Maybe the Iraqi government tortures some of them. If so, I'd say the Iraqis probably have a right to do something to at least some of the dirtbags that come from other countries into their country to kill both Iraqis, Americans, and allies.

Thanks.

I have absolutely no problem with this at all with the caveat that I still believe using these tactics should be handled with care. I don't have faith in our current government to utilize these tactics (torture and such) wisely. I doubt we will ever agree on that as we just see it differently.

My issue with this statement is that I think we are playing the wrong team altogether. The mistake has been made and we need to see it through, but I still can't see how Iraq has any bearing on our war on terror. Either way it's neither here nor there in regards to the subject of this thread.

I'll sum up my feelings and then I think I'm done with this one.

Is waterboarding a form of torture? Yes.

Do I condone it's use? Yes, but it needs to be used with extreme care and not overly abused.

Do I trust that our current government is using it with extreme care and not abusing it? No.

Thanks for a lively and in most cases a constructive "debate" on the subject.

I'm going to go look at the phat chicks thread now.

Exactly.

But let's put another spin on it. US soldiers drafted during WWII that became POWs in German and Japanese concentration camps. They didn't volunteer exactly. Is the US Government guilty of torturing them?

I don't disagree that waterboarding is a form of mild torture (far harsher forms exist), but it's not done on a whim so someone can get their jollies dunking the brown guy. Someone asked why would the CIA destroy the tapes? I'd respond and say they probably did it to avoid the witch hunt the nannies would wage to hang the perpetrators and their careers for something they were likely under order to do. Our military and CIA is doing this for a reason. I don't know how you could prove that it's saving lives.

I still stand by my assertions, however, that until we start televising our guys beheading these grubby little muslims, we're still taking a much higher road than our enemy. Unfortunately, you just can't satisfy everyone, and making this a political issue is ludicrous.

The trouble today is that EVERYTHING makes it to the media in some shape of form, and since this is sensational news at its best, of course the media is all over it. What you're not hearing about is how we dealt with enemy interrogations in wars past - popular wars that had the country's support, like WWII. You're foolish to think that we didn't engage in much more harsh forms of torture to get information then.

The media coverage and spin, and this notion of political correctness at any cost ensures the US will never win another war. We get attacked on our own soil by Al Queda, and we're more worried about dunking some asshole who's lucky he didn't just get shot on site than we are about gaining ground in the war on islamic extremists. Patriotism is never guilt free guys.

No, this is not war. The US hasn't been at war since 1947. This is just the US Executive playing with his big military dick.

Two thoughts. First, I think everyone missed this when I posted it a little while ago. At least no one commented on it. A couple days ago, I saw this interview on the Today show. It's a former CIA agent who used waterboarding. He talks about his feelings on its use and the authorization required to even have it as an option. Check it out...

http://video.msn.com/video.aspx?mkt=en-US&brand=msnbc&vid=5e5abc17-c215-4567-bc7 1-3749e5cd73bf

Secondly, I have a friend who is a Vietnam vet. He's really screwed up with PTSD, and he walks with a cane because of the damage done to his leg by a VC grenade. He was an interrogator in-field. The only time I have ever seen him get teary-eyed is when he spoke briefly about not being able to forgive himself for the things he did to other people. He described a few of them to me. Friends, let me tell you, waterboarding.... it's nothing. These people walk away without a scratch. What happened to those my friend interrogated.... terrifying. And that's the difference here. We don't do that crap anymore. They do. And then some. So is the US taking the higher road? Without a doubt. And again I say, if it's done with judiciousness, and only as authorized and only by those trained to do it, by all means, make it so. If it gets the information that ultimately saves lives, do it.

It also seems that too many people seem to forget things like the bogus and false media reports that US Soldiers were throwing the Koran down the toilet at GITMO.

That was a lie told by the media, and Muslims rioted in some countries. People lost their lives in places like Pakistan because media like Newsweek lied and had an extremely nefarious agenda.

No one talks about that.

You may not think that what's going on in Iraq is war, but you're not there getting shot at. And if you read my previous post, you'll see that I have a good friend who is a Vietnam vet. If you think for even one second that Vietnam was not a war, you must have your head crammed up Jane Fonda's butt. Just because it't not formally declared a war, it doesn't invalidate it as one. I dare you. Walk up to a Vietnam vet and tell them it wasn't a war. Walk up to a person who just spent 15 months kicking in doors in Baghdad and seeing his comrades get killed and maimed and tell them it isn't war. You'll end up with a U.S. issued combat boot broken off in your behind. Don't diss our men and women like that, man. It's not cool and it's not welcome.

Yes... You are correct Chris. But only half correct.

The United States can no longer declare war against another country. No war since WWII has been an "officially declared war".

Because of the UN Charter, there are legal technicalities that prevent us from outright declaring war against another country. We just don't do it and we won't do it.

What we can do, and what we have always done since signing the UN Charter is have Congress declare a resolution authorizing force.

But, we don't declare war anymore.

Most Americans are completely unaware of this fact.

More of your typical BS smokescreens because you can't or won't refute the views of those who disagree with you. You're pathetic, and you're among the very few who can't see it.

I'd say you would have made a great Nazi but you'd probably thank me for the compliment.

You are completely full of shit.

The fact that you are also calling me a Nazi is also very indicative of yourself.

I'm actually sorry that I ever apologized to you.

You are an asshole.

Tell that to the men and women over there.

That being said, waterboarding is the least of the shit we do. I sincerely doubt we don't torture prisoners. We like to think we take "the high road", so to speak, but I ain't buyin' it.

Not that I'm really against. You got a terrorist? Flush the Koran in front of his face. I don't care if his feelings get hurt. Fuck 'em.

It makes no difference that one naval officer is against waterboarding. There are many in the military who think waterboarding is a valuable tool in certain circumstances and should be used.

Waterboarding is a valuable tool. It is NOT torture and waterboarding HAS saved the lives of Americans.

You don't seem to care that it has saved people's lives.

You also haven't offered any suggestions on how to extract information from the most hardened terrorists without waterboarding. None of the anti-waterboarding people have offered a single suggestion.

The lives of American citizens is more important than any temporary discomfort of a terrorist.

I HAVE offered alternatives by stating in a previous post that I support any interrogation technique short of torture.

Waterboarding IS torture. That much is clear, and that's where we appear to disagree. As crazy as it seems, people like Senior Chief Nance and Senator McCain seem more credible as authorities on this than anyone on the Xterra Owners Club board.

The "saved lives" claim applies to any interrogation technique that yields useful information, so it's not like torture is unique in that way.

Can you categorically state that everybody the U.S. has ever tortured was a terrorist? If not, what about the ones that weren't?

What's the pro-waterboarding crowd's take on rendition?

In that my goal is always to avoid name-calling and stay on topic, I regret my previous Nazi reference. Even you aren't that bad.

These guys know torture. Maybe we should take some notes from them.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3ZQI0Xm29To

Make them listen to "Christmas in Fallujah..." ?

If you support any interrogation short of torture, then you should support waterboarding because it IS NOT torture.

I haven't seen you offer any alternatives to waterboarding. How about some specific techniques. I don't see any of the anti-waterboarding people offering any techniques or methods. All they say is that waterboarding is torture.

I have also noticed that you throw around terms like "all the people the US has tortured". Who are these people? Name some names. Where is your proof that we "torture" people? Where is there any proof that we have "tortured" all those people you claim.

Claims like that are beyond irresponsible.

What is my position regarding rendition? If we have the correct target and the person is a confirmed terrorist, I support it. I supported the practice when the Clinton administration did it. I support this administration doing it, and I will support future administrations doing it.

Rendition is another topic where there has been a lot of false and irresponsible propaganda being thrown around. Even bullshit movies.

You can throw around all the names you want of people who do not support waterboarding. There are just as many people who do support waterboarding as a useful tool.

You think it is torture. I don't know why you would think that because it does not do any harm. Waterboarding is not torture.

Whether you think it is torture or not, it is completely irresponsible for politicians to try to outlaw it's use and remove it as a tool that can be used in some cases. That does nothing but weaken this country and give comfort to enemies.

Soooo...you're a better judge of what is and isn't torture than John McCain, a man who WAS tortured? Right, the same way you can fly an F-18 better than any Blue Angel pilot. Sorry, that just doesn't make sense.

You're naive to believe these extreme techniques have only been used on a few key prisoners. But again, I can't prove that's not the case, and you can't prove it is.

Problem - you aren't just hurting the feelings of the terrorist, you are insulting an entire religion when you do something like that. That insults a lot more people than you really want to piss of.

Let's put it this way - using some random examples -
Instead of calling Barry Bonds a lying cheater, you call all Black people lying cheaters.

Instead of calling Britney Spears a stupid drunken whore, you call all women stupid drunken whores.

Instead of calling Cardinal Law a supporter of Pedophilia, you call all Christians supporters of pedophilia.

Sure you've pissed off the person you wanted to, but now he's not the only one who wants to kick your ass.

Honestly, I don't want to piss of a billion people just to get information out of one terrorist. That makes Al Qaeda's recruit efforts much easier - kind of like Al Qaeda's 9/11 attacks made US military recruiting easier than now.

Do you see the connection?

Hey Madman, since you believe Waterboarding is not torture because you aren't killing or damaging the person, that means it's not torture ever unless you kill or damage someone.

So would you consider it torture to starve someone, but feed them just enough so they don't die, and force them to work without rest or food?
That's what happened to these people

Yet, you must not consider that torture because they weren't killed or damaged by being nearly starved and worked.
That sure looks like torture to me.

What color is the sky in your world, Madman? Physical damage is not the only criterion for what constitutes torture. If it does no harm and isn't torture, why does it make them talk? Maybe they're giggling with glee at how much fun it is and important info accidentally slips out...

Maybe it's not as bad as some other tortures... maybe it's torture-lite... but it's definitely torture.

That said, on to the second quote:

I think most people will disagree with you on this - but at least it is a more honest argument.

My problem with the argument that torture is okay because it saves lives is this:
A lot of Americans have this feeling that America (or at least the USA ) is a great country - that we're a "good" country and that we're the "good guys".

Maybe we're not... maybe we're no better than and no different from the "filthy ragheads" over there... but if we want to try to be the good guys and live up to this idyllic American image with waving flags, forefathers fighting for freedom and all that shit, we have to play by the good guy rulebook - and that means no torture no matter how many lives it might save.

Superman wins because he is smarter, faster, stronger, and braver - not because he hooks up car batteries to the Penguin's nipples

ah shit.. I messed up my superhero/villain pairing... oh well.

Bad example dude

If only he'd waterboarded somebody to get some good intel... :rolleyes:

As an admitted geek, I have to chime in here and comment that yes, Superman died, but not permanently. He was resurrected by the yellow rays of the sun :p . And everyone knows that Superman would never stoop so low as to torture someone. He would just beat the living crap out of them over and over again until they were out of commission entirely. Maybe we should try that instead of horrible ol' waterboarding.

I think most people are better judges of most things than John McCain. I don't want to make this a debate about McCain, but he is a completely despicable politician (and person from what I've heard) who would sell his mother or sell out his country for some favorable press.

McCain is also not the only member of Congress who was held as a POW by the Vietnamese. Congressman Sam Johnson of Texas was held for 7 years in Hanoi and says that John McCain is wrong.

The only naivety here is coming from your direction. Prisoners that are being held in US custody are becoming fat and are treated well. For you to make claims that we are torturing untold amounts of suspects is completely beyond irresponsible. It is basically nothing but propagandizing on behalf of the enemy.

That is a VERY immature argument Rock.

Of course denying prisoners food is a form of torture.

It also has absolutely nothing to do with this debate.

Waterboarding is what is considered a "harsh interrogation" technique. To say it is torture is nothing but a matter of opinion.

You obviously think it is torture. Many people do not.

Superman is a fictitious character.

Terrorists don't live in a world of fiction. Maybe you shouldn't either.