Twirdman
Twirdman
Joined: Jun 5, 2013
  • Threads: 0
  • Posts: 1004
December 9th, 2014 at 6:10:33 PM permalink
Quote: Gandler



You have to understand, a lot of what people consider "torture", is wrong. The physically worst things we (Americans, allies) do is Sleep Deprivation and Waterboarding. Everything else is simply ways to make people uncomfortable.



One detainee faced particularly rough treatment in late 2005. Per the report: "According to CIA records, Abu Ja'far al-Iraqi was subjected to nudity, dietary manipulation, insult slaps, abdominal slaps, attention grasps, facial holds, walling, stress positions and water dousing with 44 degree Fahrenheit water for 18 minutes. He was shackled in the standing position for 54 hours as part of sleep deprivation, and experienced swelling in his lower legs requiring blood thinner and spiral ace bandages.
"He was moved to a sitting position, and his sleep deprivation was extended to 78 hours. After the swelling subsided, he was provided with more blood thinner and was returned to the standing position. The sleep deprivation was extended to 102 hours. After four hours of sleep, Abu Ja'far al-Iraqi was subjected to an additional 52 hours of sleep deprivation, after which CIA Headquarters informed interrogators that eight hours was the minimum rest period between sleep deprivation sessions exceeding 48 hours. In addition to the swelling, Abu Ja'far al-Iraqi also experienced an edema on his head due to walling, abrasions on his neck and blisters on his ankles from shackles."

Seems a bit more then just a little sleep deprivation and waterboarding I would say. Also about that just waterboarding this man almost died due to it because he was denied medical treatment during interrogation

The CIA decided that interrogating Abu Zubaydah would take precedence over his medical care. He almost died as a result of waterboarding. In at least one waterboarding session, Abu Zubaydah "became completely unresponsive, with bubbles rising through his open, full mouth." He remained unresponsive until medical intervention, when he regained consciousness and expelled "copious amounts of liquid."

But your right none of this was torture right.
EvenBob
EvenBob
Joined: Jul 18, 2010
  • Threads: 421
  • Posts: 23215
December 9th, 2014 at 6:14:01 PM permalink
Quote: Gandler


One of the most sane posts here.



There will always be torture to get
info. Norway can say they've never
tortured anybody. They've also never
needed to.

I loved the first season of 24, I hope
that's how it really goes when you need
to get things done.
"It's not enough to succeed, your friends must fail." Gore Vidal
Twirdman
Twirdman
Joined: Jun 5, 2013
  • Threads: 0
  • Posts: 1004
December 9th, 2014 at 6:14:52 PM permalink
Quote: Zcore13

You site one opinion. I've seen others. I'll stay with my opinion that it was needed with the situation at hand.

If family members of the terrorist in question are not part of it, do don't involve them, but you definitely threaten the terrorist to.

ZCore13



Its a bit more then one opinion it is the official Senate report on the matter. Also citing reasons for that conclusion like the fact that most of the people who gave information leading to the courier specifically gave the information before torture started.
Gandler
Gandler
Joined: Jan 27, 2014
  • Threads: 29
  • Posts: 1235
December 9th, 2014 at 6:15:14 PM permalink
Quote: Twirdman

Also where do we draw the line with what is acceptable? Torture including threatening of the family is acceptable so what about killing the family after all it could save American lives and that's all people seem to care about. So if we can kill them what about other people in the area who are unrelated I mean we could save many lives by saying screw a ground campaign and just carpet bombing the country after all.



A family would never be killed. Though we could claim to the inmate they are in the process of being killed to scare him. This is a psychological tactic. They are already in total isolation if they get to the stage where it is used so they have no way of knowing otherwise. Obviously nobody would actually be harmed, its purely mentalism.

Carpet bombing a country would not save lives, it would cause a lot of collateral damage and a lot of political enemies.

That is Sam Harris's main defense of torture. Is making a known terrorist uncomfortable acceptable if it saves a lot of civilian lives by allowing a precise strike on the individual? Many say yes (many liberals its not just a NeoCon thing).

Torture is many ways is more humane as it allows us to precisely arrest or eliminate terrorists without putting civilians on either side at risk. I know it sounds ironic to word it like that, but actually think about it without using emotions, it is the logical conclusion.
"Whatever is my right as a man is also the right of another; and it becomes my duty to guarantee as well as to possess.” -Thomas Paine
Twirdman
Twirdman
Joined: Jun 5, 2013
  • Threads: 0
  • Posts: 1004
December 9th, 2014 at 6:22:49 PM permalink
Quote: Gandler

A family would never be killed. Though we could claim to the inmate they are in the process of being killed to scare him. This is a psychological tactic. They are already in total isolation if they get to the stage where it is used so they have no way of knowing otherwise. Obviously nobody would actually be harmed, its purely mentalism.

Carpet bombing a country would not save lives, it would cause a lot of collateral damage and a lot of political enemies.

That is Sam Harris's main defense of torture. Is making a known terrorist uncomfortable acceptable if it saves a lot of civilian lives by allowing a precise strike on the individual? Many say yes (many liberals its not just a NeoCon thing).

Torture is many ways is more humane as it allows us to precisely arrest or eliminate terrorists without putting civilians on either side at risk. I know it sounds ironic to word it like that, but actually think about it without using emotions, it is the logical conclusion.



Except for the fact numerous studies into have found the information it gets to be not valuable. Again senate report showed it was ineffective. Torture is an ineffective shortcut for people do lazy or stupid to do proper intelligence gathering.

People like to site the stupid argument would you torture a person if he knew the location of a bomb about to go off in 24 hours and I can logically say the answer to that is no because it is clear that a captured person who is intent on doing evil with an ideology can easily last 24+ hours giving false information or just withstanding torture and if you go significant enough a time to where you can guarantee he will break counting all the time it takes to track down false leads if such a time even exist there are far more effective methods of getting that info.

Also you act like torture doesn't create political enemies. It galvanizes both populaces and many countries against us I mean Abu Gharab was used as part of recruitment for terrorist organizations.
Gandler
Gandler
Joined: Jan 27, 2014
  • Threads: 29
  • Posts: 1235
December 9th, 2014 at 6:26:49 PM permalink
Quote: Twirdman

Except for the fact numerous studies into have found the information it gets to be not valuable. Again senate report showed it was ineffective. Torture is an ineffective shortcut for people do lazy or stupid to do proper intelligence gathering.

People like to site the stupid argument would you torture a person if he knew the location of a bomb about to go off in 24 hours and I can logically say the answer to that is no because it is clear that a captured person who is intent on doing evil with an ideology can easily last 24+ hours giving false information or just withstanding torture and if you go significant enough a time to where you can guarantee he will break counting all the time it takes to track down false leads if such a time even exist there are far more effective methods of getting that info.

Also you act like torture doesn't create political enemies. It galvanizes both populaces and many countries against us I mean Abu Gharab was used as part of recruitment for terrorist organizations.



As I said nobody is defending the American incident at Abu Gharab, and everybody involved was publically outed and harshly punished.

But if you want to see real torture look at what Abu Gharab was used for before we seized it...
"Whatever is my right as a man is also the right of another; and it becomes my duty to guarantee as well as to possess.” -Thomas Paine
terapined
terapined
Joined: Dec 1, 2012
  • Threads: 76
  • Posts: 5247
December 9th, 2014 at 7:10:32 PM permalink
Quote: EvenBob

Norway can say they've never
tortured anybody. They've also never
needed to.

.


World War 2, The Nazis were pretty brutal to Norway. The Occupation was horrible for the country.
Thousands of exiled Norwegians formed their own units to fight with the Allies against the Germans.
"Everybody's bragging and drinking that wine, I can tell the Queen of Diamonds by the way she shines, Come to Daddy on an inside straight, I got no chance of losing this time" -Grateful Dead- "Loser"
rxwine
rxwine
Joined: Feb 28, 2010
  • Threads: 158
  • Posts: 8986
December 9th, 2014 at 7:17:51 PM permalink
Quote: Twirdman

Except for the fact numerous studies into have found the information it gets to be not valuable.



Certainly everyone signing on to the Geneva Conventions (196 countries) were aware that even in more conventional warfare where everyone wears uniforms, there were always conditions presented where torturing a new prisoner 'may' save some of your troops.

It's not a recent idea that torture could save lives. They knew that, and they didn't make exceptions. They could've, but they didn't.

Now some people think they know better.
Quasimodo? Does that name ring a bell?
petroglyph
petroglyph
Joined: Jan 3, 2013
  • Threads: 18
  • Posts: 3231
December 9th, 2014 at 7:23:45 PM permalink
Quote: Gandler

I was speaking to make a philosophical point not to address that specific case.

Heck lets even round up, lets say 200 hours. Is keeping somebody awake for 200 hours because he refuses to give the location of enemy locations, equiviliant to the genocide of 10 million (round down) people on the basis of religion, political affiliation, ethnic group, handicaps, etc.?

The inmate is there by choice (actions he took again allies of America), and can sleep as soon as he gives the specified location. In death camps and firing squad parties, there is no choice you get killed based on the orders of Hitler purely for who you are, nothing to do with action.

That seems like it will be a hard equivalency to make...




Would I be taking you out of context [you say] if I mentioned you invoked Godwin's Law, again?

You seem hell bent on some kind of "Islamaphobia". Not all Muslims are deranged psychotic terrorists.

I don't really understand [if you don't have some agenda] how you cannot see how killing over a million and a half people in the MENA can result in blowback. And no matter how many innocents get killed you will always find some reason it is their fault.
Gandler
Gandler
Joined: Jan 27, 2014
  • Threads: 29
  • Posts: 1235
December 9th, 2014 at 7:42:57 PM permalink
Quote: petroglyph

Would I be taking you out of context [you say] if I mentioned you invoked Godwin's Law, again?

You seem hell bent on some kind of "Islamaphobia". Not all Muslims are deranged psychotic terrorists.

I don't really understand [if you don't have some agenda] how you cannot see how killing over a million and a half people in the MENA can result in blowback. And no matter how many innocents get killed you will always find some reason it is their fault.



Where did I invoke Godwin's law? Not once in that post did I say islam or Muslim.

But my personal opinion is this: there is much to fear in the Islamic world from basic human rights (particularly gay rights). And the Islamic World produces a lot of nasty terrorists. Not all Muslims are terrorists. But look at the percentage of Muslims in certain countries who feel that people who insult the prophet should be punished (it's above 50% in almost every country with a significant Muslim population, even Britian). Is that somehow America's fault?

Most Muslims are not terrorists, however a large number think the terrorists are justified, especially terrorists who act against Isreal. You can call me Islamphpbic, but these are all statsitical facts. I care about gay rights, and freedom of speech. I don't think somebody who is gay should be stoned to death in public.

-Edit: let me further say Islam scares me far more than any other religion and I'm an atheist so I have no scriptural bias. It's not a phobia. A phobia is an irrational fear. Being afraid of the spread of Islam is rational, not only rational critical for our species survival if we want to prosper.

But back to the issue to tortue. Even though I disagree vehemently with Islamic culture, I don't want any innocent people of any background to die. Which is why the collateral damage argument is worth considering.

We can tortue a well established terrorist to save thousands of civilians (often Muslim civilians), they will tortue civilians to find ways to kill thousands of civilians, that is what separates us for them, I have no problem saying we clearly have the moral high ground.
"Whatever is my right as a man is also the right of another; and it becomes my duty to guarantee as well as to possess.” -Thomas Paine

  • Jump to: