Obama--"no harsh interrogation measures against terrorists"!

[oreo]

How short American memories are:

If one looks back at 9/11, one will remember that there were 20 Al Queda terrorists but only 19 were involved in the attack. Why? Because we had one of them in custody at least 2 weeks prior to the attack. Suspicion surrounded this individual terrorist because he was taking flying lessons & only wanted to learn how to steer the plane, & was not in the least interested in take-off's & landings.

Obama, yesterday signed an executive order to "stop" harsh interrogation tactics, including waterboarding against terrorist suspects.

Isn't obvious to everyone on this board that if our agencies would have used "harsher" interrogation tactics on the 20th Al Queda terrorist we may have been able to save 3000 American lives & prevent 2 ensuing wars?

This same senario could indeed happen to Obama--yet he signed an executive order to stop "harsh" interrogation tactics. Yet at the same time, Obama knows that there are terrorists determined to attack this country in our homeland & abroad.

If innocents die in this country or abroad because of this new executive order, so will the Obama Presidency.

 

[WillowTree]

How short American memories are:

If one looks back at 9/11, one will remember that there were 20 Al Queda terrorists but only 19 were involved in the attack. Why? Because we had one of them in custody at least 2 weeks prior to the attack. Suspicion surrounded this individual terrorist because he was taking flying lessons & only wanted to learn how to steer the plane, & was not in the least interested in take-off's & landings.

Obama, yesterday signed an executive order to "stop" harsh interrogation tactics, including waterboarding against terrorist suspects.

Isn't obvious to everyone on this board that if our agencies would have used "harsher" interrogation tactics on the 20th Al Queda terrorist we may have been able to save 3000 American lives & prevent 2 ensuing wars?

This same senario could indeed happen to Obama--yet he signed an executive order to stop "harsh" interrogation tactics. Yet at the same time, Obama knows that there are terrorists determined to attack this country in our homeland & abroad.

If innocents die in this country or abroad because of this new executive order, so will the Obama Presidency.

Clinton proved it, obamalama reaffirms it, they care more about their image around the world than they do about American lives. It's just that simple. We need to get over it.

 

[Lycurgus]

IMO............. In a post 9/11 world, if Obama or anyone thinks that this new order will prevent us from doing what we need to, if we really think valuable information is there, then they are wrong and only kidding themselves. This order is easily skirted, legally.

 

[oreo]

Well, the world-wide popularity contest doesn't work here.

It's only Americans that can vote in this country.

If Obama chooses to be politically correct, versus what he was sworn into office to do, "protect this country & it's citiziens--HE'S toast.

He just took away one of the best tools. "Waterboarding". If he does it, he can be prosecuted, if he doesn't & Americans or others die--he's crucified.

 

[eots]

the Obama loves terrorist...they are his Friends ...he likes to pal around with them

 

[toomuchtime_]

How short American memories are:

If one looks back at 9/11, one will remember that there were 20 Al Queda terrorists but only 19 were involved in the attack. Why? Because we had one of them in custody at least 2 weeks prior to the attack. Suspicion surrounded this individual terrorist because he was taking flying lessons & only wanted to learn how to steer the plane, & was not in the least interested in take-off's & landings.

Obama, yesterday signed an executive order to "stop" harsh interrogation tactics, including waterboarding against terrorist suspects.

Isn't obvious to everyone on this board that if our agencies would have used "harsher" interrogation tactics on the 20th Al Queda terrorist we may have been able to save 3000 American lives & prevent 2 ensuing wars?

This same senario could indeed happen to Obama--yet he signed an executive order to stop "harsh" interrogation tactics. Yet at the same time, Obama knows that there are terrorists determined to attack this country in our homeland & abroad.

If innocents die in this country or abroad because of this new executive order, so will the Obama Presidency.

At the same time he limited all agencies to interrogation methods specified in the military manual, he assigned a group to study whether harsher methods should be included in the military manual, so we don't know how this will turn out.

 

[DavidS]

How short American memories are:

Isn't obvious to everyone on this board that if our agencies would have used "harsher" interrogation tactics on the 20th Al Queda terrorist we may have been able to save 3000 American lives & prevent 2 ensuing wars?

Or the terrorist would have told us anything we wanted to hear. Say we did torture the terrorist and he told us there was an immanent attack on Los Angeles that someone with bio weapons was going to crash a helicopter into an office building which would unleash the agent. We would have done everything to prevent this and pulled our resources, which could have made 9/11 worse than it is.

There is no guarantee that when we try to get information from a terrorist that they are going to give us factual information, no matter what we do to them. We have to hold the moral high ground, because we know if one of our troops are captured by these animals, they would torture him like the Vietnamese did to John McCain.

 

[Vel]

How short American memories are:

Isn't obvious to everyone on this board that if our agencies would have used "harsher" interrogation tactics on the 20th Al Queda terrorist we may have been able to save 3000 American lives & prevent 2 ensuing wars?

Or the terrorist would have told us anything we wanted to hear. Say we did torture the terrorist and he told us there was an immanent attack on Los Angeles that someone with bio weapons was going to crash a helicopter into an office building which would unleash the agent. We would have done everything to prevent this and pulled our resources, which could have made 9/11 worse than it is.

There is no guarantee that when we try to get information from a terrorist that they are going to give us factual information, no matter what we do to them. We have to hold the moral high ground, because we know if one of our troops are captured by these animals, they would torture him like the Vietnamese did to John McCain.

Oh come on. A little dose of reality please. Do you REALLY think that a terrorist group is going to recognize the Geneva Convention rules? They are going to torture our guys no matter how freakin' high our perch on the moral ground is. And they won't just be dumping some water over our guys faces either. What a ridiculous argument.

 

[jreeves]

How short American memories are:

Isn't obvious to everyone on this board that if our agencies would have used "harsher" interrogation tactics on the 20th Al Queda terrorist we may have been able to save 3000 American lives & prevent 2 ensuing wars?

Or the terrorist would have told us anything we wanted to hear. Say we did torture the terrorist and he told us there was an immanent attack on Los Angeles that someone with bio weapons was going to crash a helicopter into an office building which would unleash the agent. We would have done everything to prevent this and pulled our resources, which could have made 9/11 worse than it is.

There is no guarantee that when we try to get information from a terrorist that they are going to give us factual information, no matter what we do to them. We have to hold the moral high ground, because we know if one of our troops are captured by these animals, they would torture him like the Vietnamese did to John McCain.

Oh come on. A little dose of reality please. Do you REALLY think that a terrorist group is going to recognize the Geneva Convention rules? They are going to torture our guys no matter how freakin' high our perch on the moral ground is. And they won't just be dumping some water over our guys faces either. What a ridiculous argument.

It's like playing poker with someone you see cheating and abstaining from cheating due to your personal morals. No matter what if the other player is cheating he will win.

Obama took an executive order and put us back to pre-9/11 days. That is dangerous and unexcusable......

 

[DavidS]

How short American memories are:

Isn't obvious to everyone on this board that if our agencies would have used "harsher" interrogation tactics on the 20th Al Queda terrorist we may have been able to save 3000 American lives & prevent 2 ensuing wars?

Or the terrorist would have told us anything we wanted to hear. Say we did torture the terrorist and he told us there was an immanent attack on Los Angeles that someone with bio weapons was going to crash a helicopter into an office building which would unleash the agent. We would have done everything to prevent this and pulled our resources, which could have made 9/11 worse than it is.

There is no guarantee that when we try to get information from a terrorist that they are going to give us factual information, no matter what we do to them. We have to hold the moral high ground, because we know if one of our troops are captured by these animals, they would torture him like the Vietnamese did to John McCain.

Oh come on. A little dose of reality please. Do you REALLY think that a terrorist group is going to recognize the Geneva Convention rules? They are going to torture our guys no matter how freakin' high our perch on the moral ground is. And they won't just be dumping some water over our guys faces either. What a ridiculous argument.

I don't think you read my comment correctly.

We know if one of our troops are captured by these animals, they will torture him like the Vietnamese did McCain. We know they don't give a shit about laws or have any ethics or values.

We do, though.

At least... we should.

It is unacceptable for us to revert to the way we used to be. We must be a better people than they are. Not for them, but for ourselves.

 

[DavidS]

the Obama loves terrorist...they are his Friends ...he likes to pal around with them

He just killed 11 of them. Your statement is idiotic and ridiculous. You cannot, on any level whatsoever, compare Ayres with Al Queda.

 

[jreeves]

Or the terrorist would have told us anything we wanted to hear. Say we did torture the terrorist and he told us there was an immanent attack on Los Angeles that someone with bio weapons was going to crash a helicopter into an office building which would unleash the agent. We would have done everything to prevent this and pulled our resources, which could have made 9/11 worse than it is.

There is no guarantee that when we try to get information from a terrorist that they are going to give us factual information, no matter what we do to them. We have to hold the moral high ground, because we know if one of our troops are captured by these animals, they would torture him like the Vietnamese did to John McCain.

Oh come on. A little dose of reality please. Do you REALLY think that a terrorist group is going to recognize the Geneva Convention rules? They are going to torture our guys no matter how freakin' high our perch on the moral ground is. And they won't just be dumping some water over our guys faces either. What a ridiculous argument.

I don't think you read my comment correctly.

We know if one of our troops are captured by these animals, they will torture him like the Vietnamese did McCain. We know they don't give a shit about laws or have any ethics or values.

We do, though.

At least... we should.

It is unacceptable for us to revert to the way we used to be. We must be a better people than they are. Not for them, but for ourselves.

Tell me that when your building gets slammed by a commerical airliner and the building collapses under your feet.

This is what happens when we elect an ACLU lawyer(might as well have been one) as president.

 

[toomuchtime_]

How short American memories are:

Isn't obvious to everyone on this board that if our agencies would have used "harsher" interrogation tactics on the 20th Al Queda terrorist we may have been able to save 3000 American lives & prevent 2 ensuing wars?

Or the terrorist would have told us anything we wanted to hear. Say we did torture the terrorist and he told us there was an immanent attack on Los Angeles that someone with bio weapons was going to crash a helicopter into an office building which would unleash the agent. We would have done everything to prevent this and pulled our resources, which could have made 9/11 worse than it is.

There is no guarantee that when we try to get information from a terrorist that they are going to give us factual information, no matter what we do to them. We have to hold the moral high ground, because we know if one of our troops are captured by these animals, they would torture him like the Vietnamese did to John McCain.

First off, the reports I've seen claim the anxiety response brought on by water boarding is so intense that after less than a minute of it the prisoner almost involuntarily pours out everything he knows. If these reports are true, it is highly improbable the prisoner will have presence of mind to invent a credible story to mislead the interrogators or will be willing to risk another session if he is found to be lying. If the anxiety response is not that intense, then why would anyone think water boarding is anything more than pouring some water over the prisoner's head? In any case, any piece of intel has to be corroborated by at least two other sources before it is considered reliable, so it is unlikely a prisoner could mislead interrogators for any length of time in the unlikely circumstance that water boarding didn't produce an intense and disorienting anxiety response in him.

No one has suggested that water boarding or other harsh interrogation techniques should be common practice or administered by untrained interrogators, but if there is reason to believe a prisoner has information that might save thousands of Americans from terrorist attack, how can you be standing on high moral ground if you would rather see them die than water board one of their would be killers to try to save them?

 

[DavidS]

Oh come on. A little dose of reality please. Do you REALLY think that a terrorist group is going to recognize the Geneva Convention rules? They are going to torture our guys no matter how freakin' high our perch on the moral ground is. And they won't just be dumping some water over our guys faces either. What a ridiculous argument.

I don't think you read my comment correctly.

We know if one of our troops are captured by these animals, they will torture him like the Vietnamese did McCain. We know they don't give a shit about laws or have any ethics or values.

We do, though.

At least... we should.

It is unacceptable for us to revert to the way we used to be. We must be a better people than they are. Not for them, but for ourselves.

Tell me that when your building gets slammed by a commerical airliner and the building collapses under your feet.

This is what happens when we elect an ACLU lawyer(might as well have been one) as president.

If you knew anything about me, or what I've been through, you would take that comment back. I was almost killed in a suicide bombing on a bus in 2003, you fucking moron.

 

[Lycurgus]

David S.

By and large most in our government will agree with you, we do not want to become like our enemy, in order to defeat our enemy, because then in many ways, we would have defeated ourselves in the process.

However, lets not kid ourselves and be unrealistic. If we are holding a person who we feel has vital information, most of all time sensitive information and they aren't talking, well we are going to take the steps needed to get it. Honestly, we should.

These people have one goal, to kill American's, while we do not wish to lower to their standards, war is not pretty business and at certain times it comes down to one basic issue, survival and I expect my government to do what they need to, to ensure our protection.

Being a Zionist you should understand this more so than most.

 

[Diuretic]

Oh come on. A little dose of reality please. Do you REALLY think that a terrorist group is going to recognize the Geneva Convention rules? They are going to torture our guys no matter how freakin' high our perch on the moral ground is. And they won't just be dumping some water over our guys faces either. What a ridiculous argument.

The reality is that the US is no longer a torture nation. That's a plus. The use of torture is pointless. If you have to resort to torture then your intelligence services need to be cleaned out and competent people put in.

 

[Diuretic]

It's like playing poker with someone you see cheating and abstaining from cheating due to your personal morals. No matter what if the other player is cheating he will win.

Obama took an executive order and put us back to pre-9/11 days. That is dangerous and unexcusable......

If the US is going to rely on torturing people in order to get information then, as I said, before, it says much. Your intel people must be very poor at their jobs. Perhaps there's been too much of a reliance on technology and not enough on good old humanint. Either way torture is an admission of failure of other means. It stinks of desparation.

 

[Skull Pilot]

Or the terrorist would have told us anything we wanted to hear. Say we did torture the terrorist and he told us there was an immanent attack on Los Angeles that someone with bio weapons was going to crash a helicopter into an office building which would unleash the agent. We would have done everything to prevent this and pulled our resources, which could have made 9/11 worse than it is.

There is no guarantee that when we try to get information from a terrorist that they are going to give us factual information, no matter what we do to them. We have to hold the moral high ground, because we know if one of our troops are captured by these animals, they would torture him like the Vietnamese did to John McCain.

Oh come on. A little dose of reality please. Do you REALLY think that a terrorist group is going to recognize the Geneva Convention rules? They are going to torture our guys no matter how freakin' high our perch on the moral ground is. And they won't just be dumping some water over our guys faces either. What a ridiculous argument.

I don't think you read my comment correctly.

We know if one of our troops are captured by these animals, they will torture him like the Vietnamese did McCain. We know they don't give a shit about laws or have any ethics or values.

We do, though.

At least... we should.

It is unacceptable for us to revert to the way we used to be. We must be a better people than they are. Not for them, but for ourselves.

I don't think you read my comment correctly.

We know if one of our troops are captured by these animals, they will torture him like the Vietnamese did McCain. We know they don't give a shit about laws or have any ethics or values.

We do, though.

At least... we should.

It is unacceptable for us to revert to the way we used to be. We must be a better people than they are. Not for them, but for ourselves.

Tell me that when your building gets slammed by a commerical airliner and the building collapses under your feet.

This is what happens when we elect an ACLU lawyer(might as well have been one) as president.

If you knew anything about me, or what I've been through, you would take that comment back. I was almost killed in a suicide bombing on a bus in 2003, you fucking moron.

Oh come on. A little dose of reality please. Do you REALLY think that a terrorist group is going to recognize the Geneva Convention rules? They are going to torture our guys no matter how freakin' high our perch on the moral ground is. And they won't just be dumping some water over our guys faces either. What a ridiculous argument.

The reality is that the US is no longer a torture nation. That's a plus. The use of torture is pointless. If you have to resort to torture then your intelligence services need to be cleaned out and competent people put in.

The reality is that there are a large number of people in this world and dare i say this country that want nothing more than to see dead Americans on the TV.

IMO if a government agency has credible evidence of a terrorist plot on US soil that any and all means necessary should be used to obtain information that will save American lives.

If that means torture, so be it.

I don't believe saying please to a terrorist is going to work.

I'd rather have America have the reputation that she will do whatever it takes to protect the lives and well being of her citizens, especially on her home soil.

You cut off my finger, I take your hand. You kill one American, your life and the lives of a thousand more of you are forfeit.

Any and all acts of violence should be met with a response that is absolutely overwhelming and devastating.

 

[Diuretic]

I hate this bloody multiple quote thing.

The reality is that there are a large number of people in this world and dare i say this country that want nothing more than to see dead Americans on the TV.

IMO if a government agency has credible evidence of a terrorist plot on US soil that any and all means necessary should be used to obtain information that will save American lives.

If that means torture, so be it.

I don't believe saying please to a terrorist is going to work.

I'd rather have America have the reputation that she will do whatever it takes to protect the lives and well being of her citizens, especially on her home soil.

You cut off my finger, I take your hand. You kill one American, your life and the lives of a thousand more of you are forfeit.

Any and all acts of violence should be met with a response that is absolutely overwhelming and devastating.

Oh bollocks. Skull, Americans are quite adept at killing each other. You've got a massively high domestic homicide rate, if you were really worried about it you'd address it.
I see no qualitative difference between someone killed by a terrorist or someone killed by a common or garden criminal. The end result is the same. Dead.

As for torture doesn't work, what works is good on the ground human intellligence. Torture might be okay for a bit of revenge but as far as intel goes, it's bullshit. You get down to that then you're out of the race.

 

[Skull Pilot]

I hate this bloody multiple quote thing.

The reality is that there are a large number of people in this world and dare i say this country that want nothing more than to see dead Americans on the TV.

IMO if a government agency has credible evidence of a terrorist plot on US soil that any and all means necessary should be used to obtain information that will save American lives.

If that means torture, so be it.

I don't believe saying please to a terrorist is going to work.

I'd rather have America have the reputation that she will do whatever it takes to protect the lives and well being of her citizens, especially on her home soil.

You cut off my finger, I take your hand. You kill one American, your life and the lives of a thousand more of you are forfeit.

Any and all acts of violence should be met with a response that is absolutely overwhelming and devastating.

Oh bollocks. Skull, Americans are quite adept at killing each other. You've got a massively high domestic homicide rate, if you were really worried about it you'd address it.
I see no qualitative difference between someone killed by a terrorist or someone killed by a common or garden criminal. The end result is the same. Dead.

As for torture doesn't work, what works is good on the ground human intellligence. Torture might be okay for a bit of revenge but as far as intel goes, it's bullshit. You get down to that then you're out of the race.

One person killing one person, is not the same as a planned terror attack where the indiscriminate killing of men women and children is the intended result.

I never said I was worried about the homicide rate. And I'm not.

I addressed terrorist attacks on American soil.

And when it comes to terrorists, I am all for a little revenge, the more painful the better.

And I am including chemically enhanced interrogation in my definition of torture.