So... that torture report

[tough old man]

.

[Blaidd Drwg]

And what about the people trying to make a religious pilgrimage to Karbala who are killed by suicide bombers, or those trying to watch a marathon in Boston? While you're at it, you might want to look up some of the torture policies used by the organizations and regimes we've gone after.

Turd,

That is the most ridiculous false equivalency argument I've seen.

You are above that.

TOM, I respect the hell out of you, Man...You have put yourself at risk for ideal, for money for family for country in a way that is not really able to be repaid..But seriously, that shit is so far off point it's staggering. Thing One, you know that emotional reactions dont result in good strategy. Thing Two, no one here is really adverse to the idea of "torture" its a time place and manner discussion.

Respectfully....

[Turdacious]

And what about the people trying to make a religious pilgrimage to Karbala who are killed by suicide bombers, or those trying to watch a marathon in Boston? While you're at it, you might want to look up some of the torture policies used by the organizations and regimes we've gone after.

Turd,

That is the most ridiculous false equivalency argument I've seen.

You are above that.

Simply point out that it's about choices, and that we're dealing with fanatics.

[Blaidd Drwg]

Fair enough.

[nafod]

In all seriousness fuck all of your arguments on this subject...
I have dead friends. I have friends with no legs or arms or eyes. I can name 20 peple including myself who are deaf in an ear or two.

Any, and i do mean ANY means that leads to those things not happening to a soldier, contractor or civilian at home or deployed is good by me.

We have laws, we have a Constitution that we've sworn an oath to defend that these laws draw their legitimacy from, and torture violates these laws.

I don't use jihadi ragheads to set the bar for my behavior. I have my own internal compass. I am not going to set up firing positions in Elementary schools, I am not going to convince my neighbor to let me use her kid for a suicide bomb mission, and I don't torture.

[climber511]

So - no one will ever change their mind on either side of this debate I'm pretty sure. But the fact remains that there are times in which we desperately need the information that captured soldiers/terrorists have. How do we get that information from them in a timely enough manner that it can make a difference in saving American lives and accomplishing our goals? Some where in between "asking nicely" and "feeding them their nuts" or whatever - where is the line? Then we have the "chemicals" which may actually be the worst form of torture - at least in my mind. I'd rather get water boarded and beaten than have my brain scrambled personally.

Does torture of any possible kind work - well yes and no it seems? But the information in anyone's head is usually quite time sensitive so whatever is to be done needs to happen quickly. I don't know the answer and I'm sure none of you do either. I'm fairly certain that some low level grunt didn't come up with the current procedures (they have to carry it out and live with it though) - but a bunch of over educated pointy heads kept trying stuff until something worked I imagine. And I imagine they will continue to do what needs done to find more and more effective ways to get what we need regardless of what the general population thinks. I don't believe the general public needs to know or even should know everything that goes on in war or behind the scenes in war even.

[Shafpocalypse Now]

Vice put up an a-z trading card set for torture. I found it hilarious ona variety of levels

https://www.vice.com/read/an-illustrate ... re-cia-284

[Shafpocalypse Now]

The delight on the faces of the torturers gives me hope that they haven't compromised their sanity for a shitty job

Plus, I thought ragheads didn't circumcise their dicks, and that dude has a ton of hang for being tortured and ridiculed

[dead man walking]

So - no one will ever change their mind on either side of this debate I'm pretty sure. But the fact remains that there are times in which we desperately need the information that captured soldiers/terrorists have. How do we get that information from them in a timely enough manner that it can make a difference in saving American lives and accomplishing our goals? Some where in between "asking nicely" and "feeding them their nuts" or whatever - where is the line? Then we have the "chemicals" which may actually be the worst form of torture - at least in my mind. I'd rather get water boarded and beaten than have my brain scrambled personally.

Does torture of any possible kind work - well yes and no it seems? But the information in anyone's head is usually quite time sensitive so whatever is to be done needs to happen quickly. I don't know the answer and I'm sure none of you do either. I'm fairly certain that some low level grunt didn't come up with the current procedures (they have to carry it out and live with it though) - but a bunch of over educated pointy heads kept trying stuff until something worked I imagine. And I imagine they will continue to do what needs done to find more and more effective ways to get what we need regardless of what the general population thinks. I don't believe the general public needs to know or even should know everything that goes on in war or behind the scenes in war even.

the whole notion that we need to get information quick to save lives has no merit. there is zero evidence we got essential intelligence immediately from fucking up bad guys.

[nafod]

I don't believe the general public needs to know or even should know everything that goes on in war or behind the scenes in war even.

Certainly secrecy is needed. But we live in a democracy, and the idea that we should just trust the smart people and put our blinders on is anathema to that. We have elected officials who should, on our behalf, know this stuff. when they don't we don't have a democracy.

Biometrics, the unblinking eye, and huge databases have done far more to help us hunt down and kill terrorists.

[Turdacious]

I don't believe the general public needs to know or even should know everything that goes on in war or behind the scenes in war even.

Certainly secrecy is needed. But we live in a democracy, and the idea that we should just trust the smart people and put our blinders on is anathema to that. We have elected officials who should, on our behalf, know this stuff. when they don't we don't have a democracy.

Biometrics, the unblinking eye, and huge databases have done far more to help us hunt down and kill terrorists.

Except we don't have an unblinking eye everywhere.

What is wrong with the committee’s report?

First, its claim that the CIA’s interrogation program was ineffective in producing intelligence that helped us disrupt, capture, or kill terrorists is just not accurate. The program was invaluable in three critical ways:

• It led to the capture of senior al Qaeda operatives, thereby removing them from the battlefield.

• It led to the disruption of terrorist plots and prevented mass casualty attacks, saving American and Allied lives.

• It added enormously to what we knew about al Qaeda as an organization and therefore informed our approaches on how best to attack, thwart and degrade it.

A powerful example of the interrogation program’s importance is the information obtained from Abu Zubaydah, a senior al Qaeda operative, and from Khalid Sheikh Muhammed, known as KSM, the 9/11 mastermind. We are convinced that both would not have talked absent the interrogation program.

Information provided by Zubaydah through the interrogation program led to the capture in 2002 of KSM associate and post-9/11 plotter Ramzi Bin al-Shibh. Information from both Zubaydah and al-Shibh led us to KSM. KSM then led us to Riduan Isamuddin, aka Hambali, East Asia’s chief al Qaeda ally and the perpetrator of the 2002 Bali bombing in Indonesia—in which more than 200 people perished.

The removal of these senior al Qaeda operatives saved thousands of lives because it ended their plotting. KSM, alone, was working on multiple plots when he was captured.

http://www.wsj.com/articles/cia-interro ... 1418142644
It's not a question of either/or because interrogation and the methods you mention are all used in conjunction with each other. A valid question is whether enhanced interrogation/'torture' can supply missing pieces that we need. There are no easy answers in a world of classification, need to know, and time sensitivity.

[nafod]

I don't believe the general public needs to know or even should know everything that goes on in war or behind the scenes in war even.

Certainly secrecy is needed. But we live in a democracy, and the idea that we should just trust the smart people and put our blinders on is anathema to that. We have elected officials who should, on our behalf, know this stuff. when they don't we don't have a democracy.

Biometrics, the unblinking eye, and huge databases have done far more to help us hunt down and kill terrorists.

Except we don't have an unblinking eye everywhere.

What is wrong with the committee’s report?

First, its claim that the CIA’s interrogation program was ineffective in producing intelligence that helped us disrupt, capture, or kill terrorists is just not accurate. The program was invaluable in three critical ways:

• It led to the capture of senior al Qaeda operatives, thereby removing them from the battlefield.

• It led to the disruption of terrorist plots and prevented mass casualty attacks, saving American and Allied lives.

• It added enormously to what we knew about al Qaeda as an organization and therefore informed our approaches on how best to attack, thwart and degrade it.

A powerful example of the interrogation program’s importance is the information obtained from Abu Zubaydah, a senior al Qaeda operative, and from Khalid Sheikh Muhammed, known as KSM, the 9/11 mastermind. We are convinced that both would not have talked absent the interrogation program.

Information provided by Zubaydah through the interrogation program led to the capture in 2002 of KSM associate and post-9/11 plotter Ramzi Bin al-Shibh. Information from both Zubaydah and al-Shibh led us to KSM. KSM then led us to Riduan Isamuddin, aka Hambali, East Asia’s chief al Qaeda ally and the perpetrator of the 2002 Bali bombing in Indonesia—in which more than 200 people perished.

The removal of these senior al Qaeda operatives saved thousands of lives because it ended their plotting. KSM, alone, was working on multiple plots when he was captured.

http://www.wsj.com/articles/cia-interro ... 1418142644
It's not a question of either/or because interrogation and the methods you mention are all used in conjunction with each other. A valid question is whether enhanced interrogation/'torture' can supply missing pieces that we need. No easy answers.

Every single person we meet on the battlefield might be that guy who holds the keys to preventing another 9/11. So should we anal rape, I mean rectally rehydrate, all of them?

There is an easy answer. Follow the law. Don't torture.

[dead man walking]

[A valid question is whether enhanced interrogation/'torture' can supply missing pieces that we need. There are no easy answers in a world of classification, need to know, and time sensitivity.

the whole point is whether torture gets us info we otherwise would not get.

to fall back on "there are no easy answers" strikes me as a hopelessly weak co-out. they did this shit for years. they spent hundreds of millions.

but . . . we don't know.

therefore, we think the only sensible thing to do is violate our principles and our laws on the chance we might get lucky.

[Turdacious]

[A valid question is whether enhanced interrogation/'torture' can supply missing pieces that we need. There are no easy answers in a world of classification, need to know, and time sensitivity.

the whole point is whether torture gets us info we otherwise would not get.

to fall back on "there are no easy answers" strikes me as a hopelessly weak co-out. they did this shit for years. they spent hundreds of millions.

but . . . we don't know.

therefore, we think the only sensible thing to do is violate our principles and our laws on the chance we might get lucky.

We've always done it, we do it more humanely now. Hopefully we also do it better.

[nafod]

[A valid question is whether enhanced interrogation/'torture' can supply missing pieces that we need. There are no easy answers in a world of classification, need to know, and time sensitivity.

the whole point is whether torture gets us info we otherwise would not get.

No, that's not the whole point at all.

[tough old man]

the whole notion that we need to get information quick to save lives has no merit.

Worked for the Canadians in Somalia.

[dead man walking]

[A valid question is whether enhanced interrogation/'torture' can supply missing pieces that we need. There are no easy answers in a world of classification, need to know, and time sensitivity.

the whole point is whether torture gets us info we otherwise would not get.

No, that's not the whole point at all.

fair correction.

that's the justification, and the justification is without merit.

[Turdacious]

[A valid question is whether enhanced interrogation/'torture' can supply missing pieces that we need. There are no easy answers in a world of classification, need to know, and time sensitivity.

the whole point is whether torture gets us info we otherwise would not get.

No, that's not the whole point at all.

fair correction.

that's the justification, and the justification is without merit.

Body count be damned? Does it matter of we're doing it to for sadistic reasons or if we do it to save lives? Keep in mind that those who know aren't talking.

[climber511]

I don't know where everyone lives but here is the USA you DO NOT live in democracy - a representative democracy perhaps (although with the do nothing congress we have had in place for a while now, even that might not be accurate). In a true democracy, everyone would get to vote on every single issue - and obviously that isn't the case (thank God). With the advent of the internet, social media, and 24/7 news stations - everyone thinks they know the answer to everything - and shouts it from the tree tops - when really we probably only see the tiniest tip of the iceberg on any of this stuff (and by "we", I doubt congress is kept much better informed than we are).

[dead man walking]

I don't know where everyone lives but here is the USA you DO NOT live in democracy - a representative democracy perhaps (although with the do nothing congress we have had in place for a while now, even that might not be accurate). In a true democracy, everyone would get to vote on every single issue - and obviously that isn't the case (thank God). With the advent of the internet, social media, and 24/7 news stations - everyone thinks they know the answer to everything - and shouts it from the tree tops - when really we probably only see the tiniest tip of the iceberg on any of this stuff (and by "we", I doubt congress is kept much better informed than we are).

i know turd is usually wrong. but me, never.

[johno]

Anyone living in the Real World knows that negative consequences shape people's behavior. We accept that fear of prison prevents (some) crime. Accused criminals confess or snitch to avoid greater punishment. I see no reason why negative consequences wouldn't make some terrorists divulge information.
The rest of the discussion is about line-drawing: What negative consequences should we visit on whom, and under what justification?

The idea that torture/harsh treatment can never yield valuable results is laughable.

[theoverman]

It seems to me that, like most things, it's a question of trade-offs. War is a win at all costs type of game, so as the top of the heap, we can afford to hamstring ourselves in the name of moral superiority. Certainly some lives have and can be saved through enhanced interrogation, or maybe a better way to put it is, we can improve our strategic position using enhanced interrogation techniques. If a bad guy was, whatever, forced to listen to loud music for 10 hours and dropped a dime, most people would be ok with that. So it's a debate about what's too severe and what isnt, in my opinion. Win at all costs, no one talks about how much moral integrity the loser had.

[nafod]

we can afford to hamstring ourselves in the name of moral superiority.

It's not hamstringing. It is strength to be morally superior.

[powerlifter54]

.

+1

[Turdacious]

we can afford to hamstring ourselves in the name of moral superiority.

It's not hamstringing. It is strength to be morally superior.

How do you put that conviction to a leader who's putting his men in harms way? Most from the ivory tower and fort living room perspectives don't look at that aspect, but I know you understand and respect that aspect of the equation. My answer is to keep enhanced interrogation as humane as possible, partially for selfish reasons-- I believe it made me and those around me safer on at least a few occasions. I don't apologize for those selfish reasons.