Torture

BWahlberg · Post by **BWahlberg** » Fri Nov 18, 2005 10:13 pm

OK, does anyone think that its a good idea to have torture as an option for interrogation?

Personally I think Cheney is nuts for pushing this. Many members of his own party don't even agree with this, hell the Senate voted 90-9 to make sure the US does not torture in its investigations.

I just got the latest Newsweek and read the essay by McCain, I firmly agree with him, if we stoop (or continue to) to torture we're undermining our efforts of what we're actually trying to accomplish, spreading a peaceful democratic style of living.

'93HonoluluCat · Post by **'93HonoluluCat** » Sat Nov 19, 2005 2:10 pm

Re/Max Griz wrote:OK, does anyone think that its a good idea to have torture as an option for interrogation?

Personally I think Cheney is nuts for pushing this. Many members of his own party don't even agree with this, hell the Senate voted 90-9 to make sure the US does not torture in its investigations.

I just got the latest Newsweek and read the essay by McCain, I firmly agree with him, if we stoop (or continue to) to torture we're undermining our efforts of what we're actually trying to accomplish, spreading a peaceful democratic style of living.

What do you define as torture? There are some perfectly legitimate interrogation techniques that are unpleasant to the receiver...

BWahlberg · Post by **BWahlberg** » Sat Nov 19, 2005 5:18 pm

Most physical abuse, extreme phsycological, near death, things like that for the most part.

'93HonoluluCat · Post by **'93HonoluluCat** » Sat Nov 19, 2005 6:12 pm

Re/Max Griz wrote:Most physical abuse, extreme phsycological, near death, things like that for the most part.

Sorry I had to ask the question--just had to make sure we were using the same frame of reference.

That said, I completely agree. If we practice/condone torture, we label ourselves as hypocritical when we espouse freedom and respect for all humans. Hypocracy doesn't make for very good diplomacy.

BWahlberg · Post by **BWahlberg** » Sun Nov 20, 2005 11:50 pm

I wonder why Cheney wants to "keep that option open" then, it baffles me. And I've recently heard that the White House may veto what congress voted on...ugh...

BobCatFan · Post by **BobCatFan** » Sun Nov 20, 2005 11:59 pm

Re/Max Griz wrote:Most physical abuse, extreme phsycological, near death, things like that for the most part.

Can you show one example?

I do not consider placing underwear on someones head as an abuse.

gtapp · Post by **gtapp** » Mon Nov 21, 2005 9:55 am

'93HonoluluCat wrote:
Re/Max Griz wrote:OK, does anyone think that its a good idea to have torture as an option for interrogation?

Personally I think Cheney is nuts for pushing this. Many members of his own party don't even agree with this, hell the Senate voted 90-9 to make sure the US does not torture in its investigations.

I just got the latest Newsweek and read the essay by McCain, I firmly agree with him, if we stoop (or continue to) to torture we're undermining our efforts of what we're actually trying to accomplish, spreading a peaceful democratic style of living.
What do you define as torture? There are some perfectly legitimate interrogation techniques that are unpleasant to the receiver...

Watching the griz passing game would qualify. Sorry, I could not resist!

BWahlberg · Post by **BWahlberg** » Mon Nov 21, 2005 6:58 pm

BobCatFan wrote:
Re/Max Griz wrote:Most physical abuse, extreme phsycological, near death, things like that for the most part.
Can you show one example?

I do not consider placing underwear on someones head as an abuse.

Yes, besides watching the Grizzly offense

As brought up by McCain, waterboarding. Tying and blindfolding the detainee and pouring water over their face and mouth as if to simulate drowning. Nothing physical there, but could cause deep pshycological issues.

Threatening death, any physical abuse, sleep deprivation, exposure to extreme cold weather or water are some of the cyrrent "unapproved" things as well.

Hell's Bells · Post by **Hell's Bells** » Tue Nov 22, 2005 10:26 am

Re/Max Griz wrote:
BobCatFan wrote:
Re/Max Griz wrote:Most physical abuse, extreme phsycological, near death, things like that for the most part.
Can you show one example?

I do not consider placing underwear on someones head as an abuse.
Yes, besides watching the Grizzly offense

As brought up by McCain, waterboarding. Tying and blindfolding the detainee and pouring water over their face and mouth as if to simulate drowning. Nothing physical there, but could cause deep pshycological issues.

Threatening death, any physical abuse, sleep deprivation, exposure to extreme cold weather or water are some of the cyrrent "unapproved" things as well.

does making victim listen to air america radio count??

'93HonoluluCat · Post by **'93HonoluluCat** » Tue Nov 22, 2005 11:36 am

Re/Max Griz wrote:
BobCatFan wrote:
Re/Max Griz wrote:Most physical abuse, extreme phsycological, near death, things like that for the most part.
Can you show one example?

I do not consider placing underwear on someones head as an abuse.
Yes, besides watching the Grizzly offense

As brought up by McCain, waterboarding. Tying and blindfolding the detainee and pouring water over their face and mouth as if to simulate drowning. Nothing physical there, but could cause deep pshycological issues.

Threatening death, any physical abuse, sleep deprivation, exposure to extreme cold weather or water are some of the cyrrent "unapproved" things as well.

Here's where I disagree with the "rules of engagement." Mind you, I'm not an interrogator--glad I'm not--but if we removed all discomfort in these people's lives, then we would get zero information. Zero information means we're back to September 10th, and have no possible way of early warning of attacks.

Sleep deprivation and physical discomfort can pay benefits, with no permanent side effects (at least none that I can find.)

Hell's Bells wrote:does making victim listen to air america radio count??

BWahlberg · Post by **BWahlberg** » Tue Nov 22, 2005 10:15 pm

Here's the problem though, torture (like that) will not get good results. In his article McCain recounted his time in a POW camp, through torture, he gave his captors names, ones they wanted to get out of him.

Although at the time his interrogators didn't know it, the names McCain gave them were the names of the starting O-linemen for the Green Bay Packers.

Torture would only get forced results. If a captive was being deprived of sleep in order to find out if he was ordered to purchase uranium there might come a point where he'll lie so he could get some sleep. Those lies could lead to serious consequences (cough cough cough Iraq cough cough cough)

'93HonoluluCat · Post by **'93HonoluluCat** » Wed Nov 23, 2005 12:18 am

Re/Max Griz wrote:Although at the time his interrogators didn't know it, the names McCain gave them were the names of the starting O-linemen for the Green Bay Packers.

Standard technique taught by the US military--the course curriculum is classified, for obvious reasons.

Re/Max Griz wrote:Torture would only get forced results. If a captive was being deprived of sleep in order to find out if he was ordered to purchase uranium there might come a point where he'll lie so he could get some sleep. Those lies could lead to serious consequences (cough cough cough Iraq cough cough cough)

Political commentary aside, that's why a good interrogator will ask for the same information in different ways. If a prisoner is deprived sleep, the prisoner's cognitive skills are severly diminished to the point any cover story doesn't mesh with other information revealed by the prisoner. Only if the prisoner tells the truth does the story hold together from all the angles a competent interrogator will cover.

It's not like they ask the question once and take the person's word for it...

Post by **SonomaCat** » Wed Nov 23, 2005 12:28 am

AAAHHHHH!!!! gtapp's rat-dog is ffffreaakin me out!

Post by **SonomaCat** » Wed Nov 23, 2005 12:50 am

'93HonoluluCat wrote:It's not like they ask the question once and take the person's word for it...

Well ... at least we all can agree that they certainly SHOULD NOT rely solely on one source of intel only if it happens to meet one's preconceived notion of the "right" answer.

http://www.dartcenter.org/blog/2005/11/ ... -work.html

Torture

Torture

Re: Torture

Re: Torture