U.S. Interrogator: Torture doesn't work

[LnGrrrR]

I think your logic is flawed in that no matter who has captured our servicement we would want them to be treated humanely even though we know with some enemies there's no chance in of that...and, that would include those enemies we are on record as having waterboarded.

So, no, that I am willing to waterboard an al Qaedan does not necessarily translate to acceptance of the same treatment of Americans by al Qaeda. Period. If only we could expect such treatment of our service men captured by our enemies.

Name a potential enemy of the United States that abides by any of the Geneva Conventions that would be deterred from using harsh interrogations techniques on our servicemen or would be influenced by our treatment of their captives. Just one.

You are a DUMBASS.

If waterboarding is not torture, then it should be morally ok for other countries to use it on our serviceman.

Since when is something ok if the enemy would do worse? Have you passed the 5th grade yet? "Mommy, he kicked me in the shin so I stole his candy bar!"

[Yonivore]

You are a DUMBASS.

If waterboarding is not torture, then it should be morally ok for other countries to use it on our serviceman.

There's no moral equivalence in war. We try to kill as many of enemy as we can in battle; does that make it "morally" right for them to try and kill as many of us?

No, in a just war, there is a right side of the conflict. In this case, I believe the United States in on the right side of the argument and, in that context, nothing the enemy does is justified...except surrender.

Since when is something ok if the enemy would do worse? Have you passed the 5th grade yet? "Mommy, he kicked me in the shin so I stole his candy bar!"

You keep trying to tie our actions to the enemy's. I'm saying we shouldn't predicate our actions on what our enemies would or wouldn't do but on what will achieve victory with the least number of allied and innocent deaths.

[LnGrrrR]

There's no moral equivalence in war. We try to kill as many of enemy as we can in battle; does that make it "morally" right for them to try and kill as many of us?

No, in a just war, there is a right side of the conflict. In this case, I believe the United States in on the right side of the argument and, in that context, nothing the enemy does is justified...except surrender.


You keep trying to tie our actions to the enemy's. I'm saying we shouldn't predicate our actions on what our enemies would or wouldn't do but on what will achieve victory with the least number of allied and innocent deaths.

I think you'll find that many minds agree with you. Including the military.

What will achieve victory with the least amount of allied deaths is to either nuke every country that disagrees with us, or not go to war with anyone.

Your idea that morality has no play at war is laughable, both for strategic and moral reasons.

Why do you think General Washington insisted we treat the British troops with respect, hm? Do you think he was foolish?

[Yonivore]

I think you'll find that many minds agree with you. Including the military.

What will achieve victory with the least amount of allied deaths is to either nuke every country that disagrees with us, or not go to war with anyone.

Your idea that morality has no play at war is laughable, both for strategic and moral reasons.

Why do you think General Washington insisted we treat the British troops with respect, hm? Do you think he was foolish?

Washington didn't fight al Qaeda. I suspect he would have had a different perspective.

[Yonivore]

What will the ACLU say and, I wonder what al Qaeda plays to their prisoners?

It’s official: Listening to Bruce Springsteen is torture.

Also on the list is that torturous Barney Song: “I Love You.”

The Sesame Street song as well.

The Associated Press published the top songs that the military has used at Club Gitmo to get the guests to talk. I wonder if Henry Waxman will call a hearing to see if the Geneva Conventions cover this.

The Waterboard Top Ten:

• “Enter Sandman,” Metallica.

• “Bodies,” Drowning Pool.

• “Shoot to Thrill,” AC/DC.

• “ ’s Bells,” AC/DC.

• “I Love You,” from the “Barney and Friends” children’s TV show.

• “Born in the USA,” Bruce Springsteen.

• “Babylon,” David Gray.

• “White America,” Eminem.

• “Sesame Street,” theme song from the children’s TV show.

Other bands and artists whose music has been frequently played at U.S. detention sites: Aerosmith, Britney Spears, Christina Aguilera, Don McLean, Lil’ Kim, Limp Bizkit, Meat Loaf, Rage Against the Machine, Red Hot Chili Peppers and Tupac Shakur.

Now then, AP did not note in the story that these songs are not selected randomly. The army has what it calls a psy ops group that figures out how to psyche out the enemy.

Which explains why, sadly, Barbra Streisand did not make the cut.

Or the Dixie Chicks.

Or even Barry Manilow.

[Yonivore]

I guess it's adult swim time...

House Intelligence Chairman to President Obama: Keep the guys who supported waterboarding and the terrorist surveillance program.

Intelligence Chairman Silvestre Reyes, D-Texas, told Congress Daily: “There’s got to be some continuity, and the leadership of both the CIA and the DNI is going to be pivotal to keeping us safe and secure. I made a recommendation that they stay on during the transition so that there would be a period of time that there would be overlap.”

That means keeping Mike Hayden on at CIA and Mike McConnell as Director of National Intelligence.

Hayden has defended waterboarding, telling Congress it was necessary even if it is no longer legal. It was used on 3 al-Qaida members including KSM, the mastermind of the 1993 and 2001 attacks on the World Trade Center.

“There was the belief that additional catastrophic attacks against the homeland were inevitable. And we had limited knowledge about al-Qaeda and its workings,” he said. “Those two realities have changed.”

Jonathan Karl at ABC News reported: “McConnell has told colleagues that he intends to step down on Jan. 20. Hayden, however, has said that he would be willing to stay on the job for a while longer.”

Reyes may not know his Shia from his Sunni, but he does know that a politically correct war on terrorism is one-armed paper hanging.

The Congress Daily report is here.

The Hayden testimony story is here.

The ABC report is here.

[Yonivore]

one-armed paper hanging?

Ever tried it?

[mookie2001]

well me like that show sesame street, why dont they make a version of that for kids?

[Yonivore]

i wouldn't know where to start

Exactly.

[Cant_Be_Faded]

• “White America,” Eminem.

Those...crazy....psychotic....heartless...BAS S !!

[doobs]

Torture doesn't work.

I'll literally say ANYTHING to make this thread disappear.

[Yonivore]

Al Qaeda arrested in Belgium

Fourteen alleged al Qaeda members have been arrested in a series of raids in Brussels. One of the fourteen was reportedly about to undertake a mission as a suicide bomber and had said goodbye to his family. Officials cautioned that they did not know the bomber's destination, but a European Union summit meeting is currently underway in Brussels, and one obvious possibility is an attempt to assassinate European leaders.

So, if it's discovered that the information used to capture these terrorists and thwart a possible attack on European leaders was gained through some extreme interrogation technique; would it have been worth it?

I say yes.

[ChumpDumper]

Euphemisms are fun.

So is torture to some here.

[Oh, Gee!!]

Al Qaeda arrested in Belgium


So, if it's discovered that the information used to capture these terrorists and thwart a possible attack on European leaders was gained through some extreme interrogation technique; would it have been worth it?

I say yes.

The year-long investigation "probably prevented plans for an attack from being carried out in Brussels," last year, it added.

sounds like old-fashioned investigative work, or one long waterboarding session.

[LnGrrrR]

Al Qaeda arrested in Belgium


So, if it's discovered that the information used to capture these terrorists and thwart a possible attack on European leaders was gained through some extreme interrogation technique; would it have been worth it?

I say yes.

If torturing Yonivore's mother would have gotten the terrorists to confess, would it have been worth it? I say yes.

The utilitarian argument is worthless.

[DarrinS]

torture = reading this thread

[RandomGuy]

There's no moral equivalence in war. We try to kill as many of enemy as we can in battle; does that make it "morally" right for them to try and kill as many of us?

No, in a just war, there is a right side of the conflict. In this case, I believe the United States in on the right side of the argument and, in that context, nothing the enemy does is justified...except surrender.


You keep trying to tie our actions to the enemy's. I'm saying we shouldn't predicate our actions on what our enemies would or wouldn't do but on what will achieve victory with the least number of allied and innocent deaths.

Opinion is not an either/or proposition, either love or hate us.

It is a full spectrum of those two extremes and everthing in between.

There is some undefinable but definite line past which an individual may help this network. It may not be joining up to be a suicide bomber or anything as active, but may be as simple as a sympathetic border gaurd looking the other way. Every act that helps them, either overt or covert, by definition, hurts us.

When you torture, you start moving people over that line that were not there before, and helping the enemy.

To suggest otherwise is to claim, as Yoni does, that ordinary people aren't repulsed by the act of torture. That is just stupid. Shame on Yoni for not having the intellectual honesty to admit he might be wrong at the expense of common sense.

Worse, he is actively advocating a line of action that HELPS the enemy.

Why do you hate America, Yoni?

[RandomGuy]

Torturing a prisoner may indeed prevent one attack in the short term, but as the professional interrogator in the OP noted, it causes more in the long term, because you create more enemies.

Not torturing a prisoner has more long-term benefits than torturing a prisoner, and prevents more attacks.

If your whole argument for torturing prisoners hinges on preventing attacks, that falls apart when it is shown that not torturing prevents more attacks than torturing.

Pretty simple, but we all know Yoni will never admit he is wrong.

[Winehole23]

Al Qaeda arrested in Belgium


So, if it's discovered that the information used to capture these terrorists and thwart a possible attack on European leaders was gained through some extreme interrogation technique; would it have been worth it?

I say yes.

Your reliance on counterfactuals and hypotheticals is telling IMO. If we can imagine some extreme case that appears to justify the policy, that is not a good argument for normalizing the policy.

Assuming arguendo that expediency trumps morality, or that the ends justify the means, it would seem there is a threshhold of certainty about about the detainee's state of knowledge that would have to be reached before we would be justified in torturing him.

So I put it to you, Yonivore: How certain would you need to be beforehand that the man actually has knowledge of an impending attack, before torturing him?

[Yonivore]

Your reliance on counterfactuals and hypotheticals is telling IMO. If we can imagine some extreme case that appears to justify the policy, that is not a good argument for normalizing the policy.

Assuming arguendo that expediency trumps morality, or that the ends justify the means, it would seem there is a threshhold of certainty about about the detainee's state of knowledge that would have to be reached before we would be justified in torturing him.

So I put it to you, Yonivore: How certain would you need to be beforehand that the man actually has knowledge of an impending attack, before torturing him?

I would use extreme interrogation techniques if there was a preponderance of evidence demonstrating the terrorist had information of an impending attack.

[Winehole23]

Translation: I would torture someone if I thought a terrorist attack was coming, like really thought.

Preponderance of evidence is the civil standard of proof.

Translation: 51% of the evidence.

Of course, such a standard if honestly assumed requires that evidence is fairly weighed before we torture someone. The exigence of the ticking time bomb scenario puts the lie to this supposed scruple.

It's like you say, 4cc. To people slightly to the right of Genghis Khan, we're justified in torturing people based on mere su ion. The precision of Yonivore's standard is bull , though I do appreciate his candor. At least we know where he really stands on the topic.

[Yonivore]

Preponderance of evidence is the civil standard of proof.

Translation: 51% of the evidence.

Of course, such a standard if honestly assumed requires that evidence is fairly weighed before we torture someone. The exigence of the ticking time bomb scenario puts the lie to this supposed scruple.

It's like you say, 4cc. To people slightly to the right of Genghis Khan, we're justified in torturing people based on mere su ion. The precision of Yonivore's standard is bull , though I do appreciate his candor. At least we know where he really stands on the topic.

preponderance doesn't equal mere su ion.

[Winehole23]

preponderance doesn't equal mere su ion.

The whole reason for torture in the described scenario is that exigent cir stances preclude an orderly inquiry.

Unless you're suggesting that evidence be weighed in advance by some competent authority and the exotic interrogation specifically authorized, your preponderance of evidence standard is puffery, as pointed out by 4cc.

[Yonivore]

The whole reason for torture in the described scenario is that exigent cir stances preclude an orderly inquiry.

Unless you're suggesting that evidence be weighed in advance by some competent authority and the exotic interrogation specifically authorized, your preponderance of evidence standard is puffery, as pointed out by 4cc.

The evidence has been ac ulated before the opportunity presents itself. We didn't wait until KSM was in custody before we had ac ulated all sorts of evidence he probably had a wealth of knowledge of ongoing al Qaeda operations..and that extracting that information could save live.

[ChumpDumper]

Al Qaeda arrested in Belgium


So, if it's discovered that the information used to capture these terrorists and thwart a possible attack on European leaders was gained through some extreme interrogation technique; would it have been worth it?

I say yes.

Too bad there was no torture used in this case at all and you have no point whatsoever.