President spanks Lauer's ass in the Oval Merged with GW V. Matt Lauer

[Mr. P]

So there are no moral imperatives? Does the end justify the means? I am by no means for gong easy on these bastards, but I stop short of torture. Yes, water-boarding is torture.

Depends on what's at stake. In this case water-boarding is trivial in comparison.
Being one that has had a similar experiance I can say it's a powerful persuader. Torture? I donno, I never had physical pain, I survived but still remember it VERY well.

 

[Bullypulpit]

I love Bush's response when Lauer asks him if what we are doing is legal.

"Well, we'll just change the law.."

Which is just what this drive to pass legislation rewriting Common Article III of the Geneva Conventions is about. But more than that, it will retroactively legalize actions taken by CIA operatives in these secret prisons which were, and are, held to be illegal under both US and international law. The effect of this would be to protect not only those who carried out these extreme interrogation methods (<i>torture by any other name...</i>), but also those who authorized those actions, from prosecution under US law. Namely, Chimpy and Co. They just won't be able to travel outside the US.

 

[Bullypulpit]

Depends on what's at stake. In this case water-boarding is trivial in comparison.
Being one that has had a similar experiance I can say it's a powerful persuader. Torture? I donno, I never had physical pain, I survived but still remember it VERY well.

There is an utter dearth of any evidence indicating that torture yields any reliable intelligence. It has, however, been repeatedly demonstrated that under duress, prisoners will tell their captors whatever they want to hear, in the hope that the torture will stop, even briefly.

And despite your opinion to the contrary, under US AND international law, water-boarding is regarded as torture. That doesn't change just because Chimpy and Co regard themselves as being above the law.

 

[Annie]

There is an utter dearth of any evidence indicating that torture yields any reliable intelligence. It has, however, been repeatedly demonstrated that under duress, prisoners will tell their captors whatever they want to hear, in the hope that the torture will stop, even briefly.

And despite your opinion to the contrary, under US AND international law, water-boarding is regarded as torture.

Bully, what is the skinny on asking 'nicely?'

If torture, duress, tough questioning, pretty please doesn't work, should we all just stfu and let them go?

 

[Bonnie]

Bully, what is the skinny on asking 'nicely?'

If torture, duress, tough questioning, pretty please doesn't work, should we all just stfu and let them go?

Im wondering the same??

 

[Bullypulpit]

Yes when the outcome is saving many innocent human lives then the ends justify the means. The whole point of interrogation is not necessarily to use torture but to put the fear in someone that somewhere down the line punishment may be coming, that in and of itself is a great psychological incentive to talk.

You cannot claim to be moral yet advocate the use of immoral acts to achieve your goal.

<blockquote>And the King shall answer and say unto them, Verily I say unto you, Inasmuch as ye have done it unto one of the least of these my brethren, ye have done it unto me. - <i>Matthew 25:40</i></blockquote>

 

[Bullypulpit]

Bully, what is the skinny on asking 'nicely?'

If torture, duress, tough questioning, pretty please doesn't work, should we all just stfu and let them go?

You catch more flies with honey than with vinegar.

Keep them in custody treat them humanely. In one case, FBI agents even arranged for a family member of the prisoner to get needed surgery. They got the information they needed, not by beating the shit out him, and others, but by showing them we were better than their former masters.

 

[Mr. P]

There is an utter dearth of any evidence indicating that torture yields any reliable intelligence. It has, however, been repeatedly demonstrated that under duress, prisoners will tell their captors whatever they want to hear, in the hope that the torture will stop, even briefly.

And despite your opinion to the contrary, under US AND international law, water-boarding is regarded as torture. That doesn't change just because Chimpy and Co regard themselves as being above the law.

My opinion has nothing to do with Bush.

 

[Annie]

You catch more flies with honey than with vinegar.

Keep them in custody treat them humanely. In one case, FBI agents even arranged for a family member of the prisoner to get needed surgery. They got the information they needed, not by beating the shit out him, and others, but by showing them we were better than their former masters.

Excuse me, wasn't that what we were doing at Gitmo? Now they need trials, unless Congress acts? Which I believe you were against.

 

[Bullypulpit]

Hasn't it already been proven that info gathered during torture usually isn't reliable?

<blockquote>You must spread some Reputation around before giving it to CharlestonChad again.</blockquote>

Such inconvenient facts really don't matter to the advocates of torture.

 

[Mr. P]

You catch more flies with honey than with vinegar.

....

Only if yer trying to catch bees. We're not. NO? Well, while you scoop more honey, watch for the one behind you about to cut yer throat. And water-boarding is bad?

 

[glockmail]

.....

And despite your opinion to the contrary, under US AND international law, water-boarding is regarded as torture. That doesn't change just because Chimpy and Co regard themselves as being above the law.

Any proof of this or are we just supposed to trust your word?

 

[Bonnie]

You cannot claim to be moral yet advocate the use of immoral acts to achieve your goal.

<blockquote>And the King shall answer and say unto them, Verily I say unto you, Inasmuch as ye have done it unto one of the least of these my brethren, ye have done it unto me. - <i>Matthew 25:40</i></blockquote>

I don't claim to be that moral. Bully if your family was in danger of being attacked by an intruder, would you make him coffee or ring his neck??

Jesus also said when someone slaps you to turn the other cheek, but that wasn't an invitation to be a doormat, turning ones cheek then was a sign of defiance and sticking up for oneself... I personally don't think we need to use cattle prods to get information, loud music, cold rooms and sleep deprivation, along with good old fashioned psychological warfare have been shown to work, but if we as a society go so far as to not even be able to use those things in some ridiculous desire to take "the moral highground" or come to a clear agreement on what is and what isn't acceptable to use on our enemy during war then we have already lost. What good is moral highground if we're all dead??

 

[glockmail]

You catch more flies with honey than with vinegar.

Keep them in custody treat them humanely. In one case, FBI agents even arranged for a family member of the prisoner to get needed surgery. They got the information they needed, not by beating the shit out him, and others, but by showing them we were better than their former masters.

You have a rather odd sense of reality.

 

[glockmail]

....Jesus also said when someone slaps you to turn the other cheek...

...and since we only have two of them, not a third to offer, slap the second one and all bets are off.

 

[Bonnie]

You catch more flies with honey than with vinegar.

Keep them in custody treat them humanely. In one case, FBI agents even arranged for a family member of the prisoner to get needed surgery. They got the information they needed, not by beating the shit out him, and others, but by showing them we were better than their former masters.

Yes and for our soldiers trouble of being nice they get feecies and other bodily fluids thrown at them daily, and can't even give them food without body armour for fear of being stabbed which some have had happen..

 

[Bullypulpit]

Excuse me, wasn't that what we were doing at Gitmo? Now they need trials, unless Congress acts? Which I believe you were against.

Trials are fine, so long as they are fair and impartial, the defendant has been apprised of all charges against him/her, the defendant has ready access to competent counsel, the defense has access to ALL evidence against the defendant, testimony and evidence acquired through coercion, ie. torture, are excluded from the proceedings.

We can either live up to our own standards or down to those of the terrorists.

 

[Bullypulpit]

I don't claim to be that moral. Bully if your family was in danger of being attacked by an intruder, would you make him coffee or ring his neck??

Jesus also said when someone slaps you to turn the other cheek, but that wasn't an invitation to be a doormat, turning ones cheek then was a sign of defiance and sticking up for oneself... I personally don't think we need to use cattle prods to get information, loud music, cold rooms and sleep deprivation, along with good old fashioned psychological warfare have been shown to work, but if we as a society go so far as to not even be able to use those things in some ridiculous desire to take "the moral highground" or come to a clear agreement on what is and what isn't acceptable to use on our enemy during war then we have already lost. What good is moral highground if we're all dead??

I have the moral high ground in defending myself from home invasion or an attacker. I do not have such if I pre-emptively beat the shit out of someone I think may be going to attack me or invade my home. That is morally and legally indefensible, not to metion more than a little psychotic.

 

[Bonnie]

I have the moral high ground in defending myself from home invasion or an attacker. I do not have such if I pre-emptively beat the shit out of someone I think may be going to attack me or invade my home. That is morally and legally indefensible, not to metion more than a little psychotic.

Problem is those who were captured on the battlefield are already those engaged in war against us, their detention is not pre-emptive, especially true when the big catches were made. If Bin-laden were captured tommorrow would you still say the same???

 

[CrimsonWhite]

Yes when the outcome is saving many innocent human lives then the ends justify the means. The whole point of interrogation is not necessarily to use torture but to put the fear in someone that somewhere down the line punishment may be coming, that in and of itself is a great psychological incentive to talk.

Do you think that a person willing to die for a thousnad virgins by strapping on 20 lbs. of plasyic explosives and walking into a cafe is going to fear a little water boarding. I'm pretty sure that the average Al Qaeda foot soldier is unafraid of interrogation. Perhaps the end justifies the means, perhaps it doesn't. The problem is that the means may not lead to an end.