Experts Say: Torture Yields Little Reliable Information.

one can only wonder why John McCain...the only US Senator to actually have BEEN tortured by the enemy...is so adamantly against any form of torture for our enemies in this war?

I would suggest that is because he knows that however we treat our prisoners in THIS war will become acceptable for any and all future enemies to use against our troops in the future.... his opposition to torture is based upon his concern for OUR troops.

But then, the chickenshit chickenhawk neocons in the republican party don't REALLY give a FUCK about the troops. They'll never be one.

here was my point and I accurately reflect McCain's rationale for being against torture. Are you, or are you not suggesting that you are more of an expert on torture than he is?

and please show me where I said a fucking thing there about our enemies of today?
 
Your newsmax article says the information McCain gave to the vietnamese was of no real use to them.

Which is exactly what I said: torture does produce reliable or valuable intelligence.

They asked the questions and got the answers...if it was or was of use to them or of value to them is irrelevant...they DID get the answers...
 
They asked the questions and got the answers...if it was or was of use to them or of value to them is irrelevant...they DID get the answers...

LOL

That's the point dummy. You can torture anyone and get them to give you "answers".

Whether or not the answers are useful or accurate is another question. Torture does not generally elicit accurate or useful answers.
 
here was my point and I accurately reflect McCain's rationale for being against torture. Are you, or are you not suggesting that you are more of an expert on torture than he is?

and please show me where I said a fucking thing there about our enemies of today?

Your point ?..........however we treat our prisoners in THIS war will become acceptable for any and all future enemies to use against our troops in the future.... his opposition to torture is based upon his concern for OUR troops.

Do you deny that that torture has been prevalent in EVERY war in the past?
Do you think that what the US does really has some influence on the morality of our enemies ?
Iraq: Execution of Captive Soldiers Violates the Laws of War
Iraq Insurgent Group Claims to Have Executed Two Missing US Soldiers

(New York, June 8, 2007) – An insurgent group named the Islamic State of Iraq announced on Monday that it had executed two US soldiers who went missing last month.

http://tinyurl.com/27lg6t

Are you really that out touch with reality to think our enemy gives a shit about the "rules of warfare"? Are you really that stupid....
How many beheadings must you see to get a clue....

The punishment finally worked, McCain said. "Eventually, I gave them my ship's name and squadron number, and confirmed that my target had been the power plant."

Recalling how he gave up military information to his interrogators, McCain said: "I regret very much having done so. The information was of no real use to the Vietnamese, but the Code of Conduct for American Prisoners of War orders us to refrain from providing any information beyond our names, rank and serial number."

The episode wasn't the only instance when McCain broke under physical pressure.

McCain was taken to an interrogation room and ordered to sign a document confessing to war crimes. "I signed it," he recalled. "It was in their language, and spoke about black crimes, and other generalities."

"I had learned what we all learned over there," McCain said. "Every man has his breaking point. I had reached mine."

That McCain broke under torture doesn't make him any less of an American hero. But it does prove he's wrong to claim that harsh interrogation techniques simply don't work.

Torture is WRONG...but don't fool yourself that its doesn't work....McCain is living proof of that fallacy...
 
LOL

That's the point dummy. You can torture anyone and get them to give you "answers".

Whether or not the answers are useful or accurate is another question. Torture does not generally elicit accurate or useful answers.

In McCains case the answers WERE accurate...being of no value to the Viet's is still irrelevant...because the name of his ship or its location or his target was of little use is not the point....unless the enemy had the ability to attack the ship...
 
“We’ve sent a message to the world that the United States is not like the terrorists,” McCain said earlier as he sat next to Bush in the Oval Office. “We have no grief for them, but what we are is a nation that upholds values and standards of behavior and treatment of all people, no matter how evil or bad they are. And I think this will help us enormously in winning the war for the hearts and minds of people throughout the world in the war on terror.”
John McCain...

Now this is a very valid reason....
 
Your point ?..........however we treat our prisoners in THIS war will become acceptable for any and all future enemies to use against our troops in the future.... his opposition to torture is based upon his concern for OUR troops.

Do you deny that that torture has been prevalent in EVERY war in the past?
Do you think that what the US does really has some influence on the morality of our enemies ?
Iraq: Execution of Captive Soldiers Violates the Laws of War
Iraq Insurgent Group Claims to Have Executed Two Missing US Soldiers

(New York, June 8, 2007) – An insurgent group named the Islamic State of Iraq announced on Monday that it had executed two US soldiers who went missing last month.

http://tinyurl.com/27lg6t

Are you really that out touch with reality to think our enemy gives a shit about the "rules of warfare"? Are you really that stupid....
How many beheadings must you see to get a clue....

The punishment finally worked, McCain said. "Eventually, I gave them my ship's name and squadron number, and confirmed that my target had been the power plant."

Recalling how he gave up military information to his interrogators, McCain said: "I regret very much having done so. The information was of no real use to the Vietnamese, but the Code of Conduct for American Prisoners of War orders us to refrain from providing any information beyond our names, rank and serial number."

The episode wasn't the only instance when McCain broke under physical pressure.

McCain was taken to an interrogation room and ordered to sign a document confessing to war crimes. "I signed it," he recalled. "It was in their language, and spoke about black crimes, and other generalities."

"I had learned what we all learned over there," McCain said. "Every man has his breaking point. I had reached mine."

That McCain broke under torture doesn't make him any less of an American hero. But it does prove he's wrong to claim that harsh interrogation techniques simply don't work.

Torture is WRONG...but don't fool yourself that its doesn't work....McCain is living proof of that fallacy...

I never have said anything about its effectiveness. I have stated McCain's opposition to it, and suggested that I agreed with him...and you, the great Alpha1, claim to know more about torture than McCain...which is fucking ridiculous.
 
If thats what you got out of this exchange, then you are a stupid hack...
one that refuses to comprehend what I have written....
but then, thats quite normal in debating you....
 
let's review the bidding, shall we fuckstick? I weighed in on this thread before you did and I said this:

one can only wonder why John McCain...the only US Senator to actually have BEEN tortured by the enemy...is so adamantly against any form of torture for our enemies in this war?

I would suggest that is because he knows that however we treat our prisoners in THIS war will become acceptable for any and all future enemies to use against our troops in the future.... his opposition to torture is based upon his concern for OUR troops.

But then, the chickenshit chickenhawk neocons in the republican party don't REALLY give a FUCK about the troops. They'll never be one.

to which you replied:

That would be just peachy keen if it were true....EVERY ENEMY in the past has tortured their captives...every one, and THIS enemy don't give a shit how you treat their captives....they'll cut your freekin' head off with dull knife while you try to scream and pray for a quick end ....they are the true evil animals ... they even make movies for you so you get the idea...they execute captives 90% of the time, without blinking an eye....while the US supplies our prisoners a Koran, culturally correct food, medical care, and a fuckin' volley ball to entertain themselves....only the truely simpleminded believe they will treat us as humanely as we treat them....you lie to yourselves so you can cling to a fantasy....

your reply to me has fuck all to do with effectiveness...it is directly contradicting McCain's logic.... so...like I said, the great and powerful alpha1 thinks he knows more about torture than a guy who was tortured. who the fuck are you kidding?
 
let's review the bidding, shall we fuckstick? I weighed in on this thread before you did and I said this:



to which you replied:



your reply to me has fuck all to do with effectiveness...it is directly contradicting McCain's logic.... so...like I said, the great and powerful alpha1 thinks he knows more about torture than a guy who was tortured. who the fuck are you kidding?

MY post has NOTHING to do with the effectiveness of torture...
It has all to do with, no matter how good we treat our prisoners

"THIS enemy don't give a shit how you treat their captives....they'll cut your freekin' head off with dull knife while you try to scream and pray for a quick end ....they are the true evil animals ... they even make movies for you so you get the idea...they execute captives 90% of the time, without blinking an eye....while the US supplies our prisoners a Koran, culturally correct food, medical care, and a fuckin' volley ball to entertain themselves....only the truely simpleminded believe they will treat us as humanely as we treat them....you lie to yourselves so you can cling to a fantasy...."

Have a hard understanding that....""THIS enemy don't give a shit how you treat their captives....they'll cut your freekin' head off with dull knife while you try to scream and pray for a quick end ....they are the true evil animals ... they even make movies for you so you get the idea...they execute captives 90% of the time, without blinking an eye."

These animals don't give a rats ass what happens to their followers....they send them out to commit suicide...and cut the heads off their enemies....
and you think, "if we treat them nice, they will treat us nice"?
 
McCain contradicted himself....trying to say torture doesn't work (effectiveness)
Hes is living proof...It does work...he said so himself...It worked on him...and he should know....
 
REMEMBER THAT THIS BELIEF YOU FIGHT SO HARD TO MAINTAIN AND DEFEND WAS ORIGINALLY A PLAN TO “LIBERATE” THE PEOPLE OF IRAQ AND NOW YOU SHOW NO RESPECT, CONCERN OR REGARD FOR THEIR DIGNITY AND FEELINGS. :confused:

AllieBaba Said:
“Please cite how our invasion of Iran was illegal?”

That was a pretty funny comment Jillian. They certainly thirst for more death and blood shed with the same vigilance that television has conditioned them to view it with a desensitized heart and a smile and have the nerve to call it “entertainment”.

Anyways it’s illegal for the fact that it was unprovoked according to the Geneva Convention codes of conduct, which mattered to American policy and global reputation prior to Bushes arrival in office. It’s always understood that NO MATTER WHAT HAPPENED, these rules would be followed. You don’t opt out of a global agreement because you feel your suffering is greater or more important than the rest of the worlds. That’s just arrogant. Like rules of war it has (humorously I might add) rules with a humanitarian aspect. When America was a part of the G.C. it up held such principles (example Bosnia/ Yugoslavia conflict). Despite the fact that it was STILL A WAR there were rules that were to be followed. And don’t give me your 9-11 rhetoric. Americans have been dying for years by acts of Middle Eastern based terrorism. The only thing the events on 9-11-01 did was cause Americans to briefly crumble with humility and mediocrity. Which caused the “majority” of Americans to silently forfeit its core values to the Federal Government in exchange for more bloodshed and its total and complete immunity from any accountability because the world was supposed to “understand” how we must feel. For a nation that supposed to be under the guidance of the god of The Holy Bible, it seems pretty apparent the lessons of suffering went over their heads. Shitty shit happens, big or small the principle concept it to accept it and come out a better…not bitter person. The Bible, in regards to suffering for the faith, says in Romans 12: 19-21 “Beloved do not avenge yourselves, but leave it to the wrath of God for it is written, “Vengeance is mine, I will repay says the Lord. To the contrary if your enemy is hungry, feed him; if he is thirsty; give him something to drink; for by doing you will heap burning coals on his head. Do not be overcome by evil, but overcome evil with good. Principles G.W. draws supposed identity with, yet in action completely contradicts.

Going to Afghanistan was the right and just reaction but drawing a connection between the events of 9-11-01 to Iraq is and was proven to be absurd. When almost all the terrorist that did those despicable acts where from Saudi Arabia Bush remained bedmates for the simple fact of oil. Iraq is his personal vendetta and possibly his only hope from day one as President Of The United States to make a legacy for himself. So now that it’s clear that Iraq and Saddam had no affiliation with the events of 9-11-01 and Osama Bin Laden so you tell me. WHAT WAS THE PROVOCATION OF WAR ON BEHALF OF IRAQ?

AllieBaba Said:
“More power to you. You're lucky you live in a country where I can't trot over to your house in the middle of the night, drag you out of bed, dig a ditch and drop you into it.”

I suppose you or anyone one really could if they wanted to. I do live in a place that I don’t have to lock my doors at night. It is not to say that they wouldn’t go unpunished for their actions.

But I do live in a country where you can hitch a ride and wind up at the back end of a pickup truck, bound by chains at the legs and dragged to a cruel and horrible death. I’m sure nearly everyone that died by the acts of terrorism died much quicker and painlessly. I don’t support terrorist but I don’t think every one is one either. Some, like yourself, are trenched in a belief, an assumption, a GENERALIZATION that starts out as a seed of self-pity. When we react against hate with hate, we are only playing into the hands of our enemies. You talk about Jesus like you know him. Seems to me like most everyone else, you’ve made it to fit into your thinking. If that’s what you call a “relationship” with the lord than it must be pretty one sided because it’s apparent you don’t know him.

And since we’re on the subject of the blessing of America. Your lucky to live in a country where you can spit every little ridiculous thought and opinion you have from behind your computer without having any accountability. You can spread your racist, elitist, ‘it’s all about me and mine’ bullshit without correction or reprimand from friends, family and co-workers; unless you work at the White House. In that case I’d say “birds of a feather flock together”. Seriously though, do you say anything you write over the net out loud before you hit the send button? You should try a method I call the ‘idiot filter’. That’s when you say something aloud and listen to yourself in third person and truly discern the intellectual, emotional and spiritual basis of it. I’ll refrain from making further assumptions about what kind of person you are. You do a well enough job with that already.

AllieBaba Said:
“But you don't, so you can post all the pro-terrorist drivel you like, without fear of annihilation

Tomorrow is not promised to anyone my friend.
And I'm not pro-terrorist but have you ever heard the term "know your enemy"? Perhaps upon further examination you'll begin to understand, not agree with them; big difference, but UNDERSTAND why they feel the way they do.

AllieBaba Said:
“He told people to support their government. He did nothing to challenge the government

He did nothing to challenge the government? :wtf:
His state of existing alone was a challenge to the government. From birth they tried to kill him for fear that they would lose their power since he was prophesied as “The King Of The Jews”
If your going to talk about scripture at least know what it says.

Jesus never said anything in regards to supporting your government either. Matthew 22:15-21 reads. Then the Pharisees went and plotted to entrap him in what he said. So they sent their disciples to him, along with the Herodians, saying, "Teacher, we know you are sincere and teach the way of God in accordance with truth, and show deference to no one; for you do not regard people with partiality. Tell us, then, what you think. Is it lawful to pay taxes to the emperor, or not? But Jesus aware of their malice, said, "Why are you putting me to the test, you hypocrites? Show me the coin used for the tax". And they brought him a denarius. Then he said to them, "Whose head is on this and whos title?" They answered, "The emperor's". Then he said to them, "Give therefore to the emperor the things that are the emperor's and to God the things that are Gods."

Christ attitude towards nations and kingdoms where that they really weren’t. The only kingdom he recognized was “His Fathers” and that ALL nations were tools of the Prince of the Air.

When he was tempted for forty days and nights. The third temptation was when Satan showed Jesus all the kingdoms and riches of the world. Satan promised Jesus all these things if Jesus worshiped him (Satan), thus relinquishing his authority and allegiance to his Father God. Of course Jesus responded by saying "thou shall worship The Lord God and shall serve no others" According to the scriptures, the kingdoms and nations of the world are Satans to give.

It REALLY bothers me that people around the world have this belief that all Americans are like you. You should be ashamed of yourself. Your a classic example why too much television is bad.

Btw, Shogun, nice piece out there. You too Maineman. :thup:
 
It would be nice to believe that torture never works to get reliable information. Of course, we would then have to ask ourselves why interrogators still want to use it. Are they just stupid? Are they just seeking a rationalization for gratifying their own sadistic impulses?

The fact is, that it can work, sometimes. It is not SO effective that someone who cares only for results will always want to use it as first resort. And other, slower, longer-term methods may yield results that are more reliable than torture. (See [ame=http://www.amazon.com/Interrogators-War-Chris-Mackey/dp/0719566207/ref=sr_1_2/102-7125993-3436965?ie=UTF8&s=books&qid=1192873776&sr=8-2]The Interrogator's War[/ame] or similar books by the same author.)

But it worked pretty well for the French during the Algerian War of Independence -- they cracked the FLN network in Algiers through use of torture, not that it did them any good in the long run. I believe the Chileans under Allende had some successes with it, and also the Gestapo.

In all of these circumstances, you had clandestine urban networks of resisters, and what you wanted from a captive was simply names and addresses. And you wanted them quickly, because as soon as a network realized that one of its agents had gone silent, it would move.

We should eschew torture as either official, or officially-tolerated, policy, because -- especially in the kind of long-term war we are in -- our reputation as "the good guys" is worth many divisions. Our huge advantage over our adversaries is to be seen by ordinary people everywhere as the representatives of the advance of civilization. This does not just mean better entertainment technology and laser-designator fire-control systems.
 
Alpha1, your logic is scarey. You sound like a disciple of VP DICK. Basically you are saying that we are better than they are so it is okay for us to torture them. On one hand you claim moral values and on the other you claim those values only pertain to "us."

I believe the correct term for a person like you is Hypocrite. Is that correct?
 
Now, let's look at the difference between a smart conservative (thank you, Doug):

We should eschew torture as either official, or officially-tolerated, policy, because -- especially in the kind of long-term war we are in -- our reputation as "the good guys" is worth many divisions. Our huge advantage over our adversaries is to be seen by ordinary people everywhere as the representatives of the advance of civilization. This does not just mean better entertainment technology and laser-designator fire-control systems.

and a kool aid drinking, hate filled ignoramous:

Personally, I don't care if they get reliable information when they torture those pigs. I don't see our limited use of coercion as one of the bigger issues of the day. We have laws protecting our people from it, who cares about terrorists?Not me.

Notice, in the first post, the thinking conservative questions... asks himself what the ramifications are of our own actions. He looks ahead.

In the second post, the unthinking, ignorant, hate-filled rabid righter who pretends she's "conservative" (when she's really radical) wants revenge against unnamed people and doesn't care about ramifications or even short-term results. But they aren't like her, so she's decided in advance that these un-named people are terrorists.. .no trial, no evidence, just her own hatred.

Conservative number one can be counted on to try to find results that benefit society, can be compromised with in terms of future governmental action.

Conservative number two is dangerous and she, and anyone like her, should be kept away from any say in what actions we take in the future.

Interestingly, conservative number one claims no religious affliliation or belief. Conservative number two claims she is a "good Christian". Perhaps she needs to ask herself WWJD?

See the difference?

Class dismissed. :)
 
Meh..


Dont worry about Allie's grasp on the bible.. I'm an athiest and she's already run away from two OT challenges...


Open Challenge for those defending the use of Torturer:


I bet anything you want to bet that I can make any one of you admit that you love to suck some throbbing cock every night every chance you get by using the very techniques you are defending. Waterboarding, thermal manipulation.. Want to prove that torture works? let's see you put up or shut up. You'd make a GREAT youtube moment, lemme tellya. INSTANT fame.


After you tell me what I want to hear and I let you up to stop choking you can tell everyone how effective in collecting viable info torture is and why using it is worth OUR moral highground.
 
shogun my friend :cool: , showing off those big balls of steel again are you.

Let me ask you, do you believe the jews were trying to steal their wealth, oppurtunity and resources, or that the countries, were stupid fucking assholes, who stole the jews rights and murdered them.

Oh, and who knows what jesus would do, if you look, their was a time for peace and war :)

I look forward to your answer my friend

I love youre passion

no, no.. They were just concerned with jews taking over their nations wealth, opportunity, and resources. of COURSE we don't see anything like that in America today!

But, thankfully, your christian testimony is like a clarion call to those looking to know what that whole forgiveness thing is about... tell me, Who would Jesus torture, allie? Who, exactly, does the dogma on your sleeve say is ok to disregard as humans? I don't think they are canaanites so you might have to take a minute to answer that.


Half the fucking people at guananamo bay were merely picked up and tossed in jail. "enemy combatant" is a pretty broad fucking category, isnt it?

It's not so different when you want to ignore the Geneva Convention for the sake of feeling OK about torture, eh? What else can you rationalize for the sake of nationalism? WATER BOARDING? I hear jesus was a big fan of that kind of shit.


It's a shame that your concept of "innocent" depends on where YOU happen to be standing.

Indeed, YOU too are lucky that you can hide among the status quo instead of facing the retribution of your selective set of standards.
 
what is and is not defined as torture?

I want everyone's personal opinion on this.

http://news.yahoo.com/s/livescience/20071019/sc_livescience/torturehasalonghistoryofnotworking


Another example of G.Ws' hypocrisy. This is a man who claims to have "convictions" in his religious beliefs yet fails to connect the fact that those individuals that are involved in Jihad do also. To the obvious extremes of suicide bombing for their beliefs. What the hell is torture going to accomplish besides spreading more disdain and distrust toward American soldiers and citizens? In fact, it's been proven that since our illegial invasion of Iraq, terrorist have found it easier to recruit.
 
Whoa!!! In my post #242 above, I referred to "Chileans under Allende" using torture successfully. Of course I meant "Chileans under Pinochet". Had Allende's plan to socialize Chile come to fruition, the results would indeed have been torture for the Chilean people, if standing in queues to get your bread ration can be considered torture. And if the far Left within the Unidad Popular had come to dominate it, perhaps as the outcome of a civil war the Left won, genuine torture of captured Rightists might have taken place. But Allende's government had no political prisoners and did not torture the non-political ones it had.

Jillian: Thank you for the kind compliment but ... Divide-the-enemy is MY tactic!

Praise from a liberal .... how can I redeem myself in the eyes of my fellow reactionary rightwingers?

Hmm... I know! I'll add what may be a small article of exception to my argument that we should never use torture.

Sometimes you hear one of the old chestnuts from sophomore philosophy courses: suppose there were a nuclear weapon hidden in New York, ticking inevitably towards detonation in a couple of hours. Far too soon to evacuate more than a tiny fraction of the population.

But you have captured the person who planted it. And he is susceptible to extreme torture. If you apply the electrodes to the right places, he will definitely tell you where it is, and you can disarm it, saving ten million lives.

Would it then be right to torture him?

Perhaps others would like to comment?

NOTE: do not try to wriggle out of this question by saying, "His information would not be reliable." In this case it will be reliable. Torture, and spare millions. Don't torture, and millions will be vaporized. (Those who raise the it-would-not-be-reliable-dodge are implicitly admitting that there is no other argument against torture, i.e., if t did work, then it would be okay to do it.)
 
Originally Posted by AllieBaba

Personally, I don't care if they get reliable information when they torture those pigs.

I don't see our limited use of coercion as one of the bigger issues of the day. We have laws protecting our people from it, who cares about terrorists?Not me.



Damn. Fascinating. A true black-hearted conservative, bush loving, Neocon. There are far too many of you who condone, excuse, or minimize torture.

You don't care if they get reliable information? You just want to toruture because of a twisted, sado-masochistic desire? This isn't american, dude.
 

Forum List

Back
Top