CIA and torture

[LuciferSam]

Most people would torture the man who poisoned them in order to obtain the antidote. Self-interest is a strong motivator. This extreme hypothetical scenario doesn't justify systematic indiscriminate implementation of a torture program by civilian and military personnel assigned to serve and protect.

 

[Lynnie]

Sorry to hear that you suffered loss. But, I did say most, not all people. I also think it depends on the situation whether 60% of folks would be swayed or 99%.

;-)
I know where you were going. I know what you meant and you are right.

We, in my family, were very fortunate in our love and support for each other to get through it.........and, we still are as she was killed on my birthday and buried on her birthday. And, we are still strong and still laugh everyday. In my opinion, going after the death penalty is just exhausting....forgiveness is so much more rewarding, yet difficult, I know.

Now, the ultimate has not happened to us or to me in that my child has not been gravely injured or killed. But, I think my fundamental beliefs would override a death penatly, eye for an eye situation regardless. That's just me. And, I digg that about me. I really do.

 

[fisher]

the closer it gets to home, the more you seek revenge. it's only after your bloodlust is satisfied that you realize you can never really get revenge, because nothing can replace your loss.

Right, the closer to home, the more likely you are to get down and dirty.

Those guys fighting over in Afghanistan and Iraq are very close to home when it comes to the Taliban and other factions blowing people away (almost entirely civilians, but also some of their comrades in arms) day and night. They are up close and personal to it so that's why I agree with Geo. Let them do their jobs which might include "torture" (waterboarding, sleep deprivation, loud music aren't what I consider torture) to get it done.

It's easy to be an armchair quarterback like Holder and Obama when you aren't getting shot at (your close to home analogy is appropriate).

 

[poppy]

If you want to disbelieve everything we have been told about our interrogation of our enemies, then you are right. I don't know its true. You are also correct that we should agree to disagree on whether we should interrogate our terrorism captives or not. I think we should.

No one is against interrogation, just the methods used. I have never been on either side of interrogation or torture so I have no first hand experience in the matter but it's seems to be a difficult task to find someone who has been tortured to say it is effective (unless of course you torture them). There also doesn't seem to be any evidence that torture is effective in obtaining any credible useful information. Mr. Cheney disputes this but there are many who refute his claims. We are also a country of laws, and it appears torture is against the law. We had war crime trials against the very methods we are using today.

If we are going to use torture as national policy change the law to allow it. We have people putting their lives on the line for us who are working in grays areas of the law not knowing if one day they will charged with a crime. And they will be the ones to take the fall, not those who gave the orders. I don't believe all this cloak and dagger b.s. makes these methods any more palatable or keeps us any more safe. I not trying to argue or say my position is correct and yours is wrong, I'm just expressing an opinion.

 

[LuciferSam]

 

[Bob]

Waterboarding - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia Chase J. Nielsen, one of the U.S. airmen who flew in the Doolittle raid following the attack on Pearl Harbor, was subjected to waterboarding by his Japanese captors.[104] At their trial for war crimes following the war, he testified "Well, I was put on my back on the floor with my arms and legs stretched out, one guard holding each limb. The towel was wrapped around my face and put across my face and water poured on. They poured water on this towel until I was almost unconscious from strangulation, then they would let up until I'd get my breath, then they'd start over again? I felt more or less like I was drowning, just gasping between life and death."[34]Waterboarding was designated as illegal by U.S. generals in the Vietnam War.[109] On January 21, 1968, The Washington Post published a controversial front-page photograph of two U.S soldiers and one South Vietnamese soldier participating in the waterboarding of a North Vietnamese POW near Da Nang.[110] The article described the practice as "fairly common".[110] The photograph led to the soldier being court-martialled by a U.S. military court within one month of its publication, and he was discharged from the army.[109][111] Another waterboarding photograph of the same scene, referred to as "water torture" in the caption, is also exhibited in the War Remnants Museum in Ho Chi Minh City.[112]

 

[Bob]

Right, the closer to home, the more likely you are to get down and dirty.

Those guys fighting over in Afghanistan and Iraq are very close to home when it comes to the Taliban and other factions blowing people away (almost entirely civilians, but also some of their comrades in arms) day and night. They are up close and personal to it so that's why I agree with Geo. Let them do their jobs which might include "torture" (waterboarding, sleep deprivation, loud music aren't what I consider torture) to get it done.

It's easy to be an armchair quarterback like Holder and Obama when you aren't getting shot at (your close to home analogy is appropriate).

waterboarding is not torture? are you that clouded by ideology?