Re: Torture vs. Interrogation
 

Let's turn this question around:

If our enemies used waterboarding today to extract information from U.S. prisoners, and then those U.S. prisoners were released and we had the ability to prosecute the people who did the waterboarding or ordered it to be done, should and would they be prosecuted for torture?

Re: Torture vs. Interrogation
 

Okay, this thread has become way too hard to follow, but just two quick points:

1. His name is Cheney. Not Cheany. Not Cheny. It's C-H-E-N-E-Y. Not that hard.

2. Intelligence is spelled i-n-t-e-l-l-i-g-e-n-c-e.

Thanks, that was driving me insane. Sorry if I was a bit harsh.

Re: Torture vs. Interrogation
 

Another question would be, would we even have the right to do that anymore?

I mean, when it REALLY happend to US soldiers we threw a big hissy-fit over it. But now that we stooped to that level, who the hell are we to tell someone else how to act in times of war?

Re: Torture vs. Interrogation
 

Ok, well after a brief moment of lucidity, you're back to misrepresenting my arguments again, and worse yet, the interrogation methods I was referring to in the post you quoted were the ones that you said we should use instead of waterboarding! My whole point is that not every technique works on everyone, it's a game of hit and miss regardless of technique used.

You're still asking me for proof when we've already explained, ad nauseum, and the proof is still under lock and key. Repeatedly asking for it won't magically make it declassified! And lack of available evidence to the contrary does not equal evidence for your argument, especially when that evidence you ask for is not available to review.

I mean, am I incoherent? Do we speak the same language? We must not, because I can't think of any other reason why you would continue to ask me the same questions over and over again in such a smarmy and condescending fashion after I have given you thorough, comprehensive and polite answers.

I'm not even disagreeing with the heart of your argument, I'm just saying that in my opinion we don't know enough to make a final judgement. I remain undecided, and at the most I'm simply acknowledging that this is a complex issue, as represented by the number of posts and pages this thread has received. Can we simply agree to disagree and not attempt to reinterpret each other's arguments so they fit our world view? I don't think thats much to ask, quite honestly.

Re: Torture vs. Interrogation
 

Ok, strangler, way to avoid the point and clear up nothing.

From my understanding of your arguement (which is apparently wrong according to you).. torture has been used over a long period of time by multiple countries, therefore it must have provided reliable information at some point or another. Do you agree with this statement?

Cause that's the impression I got from this quote:

I don't need side commentary either, just a yes or no. Clarify me on your stance. This is just one thing I've felt you've dismissed as fact.

Re: Torture vs. Interrogation
 

Conservative radio host gets waterboarded:

http://rawstory.com/blog/2009/05/con...-waterboarded/

Re: Torture vs. Interrogation
 

I didn't notice that my video I linked was for radio personality Mancow. I used to listen to his show a little back in the day...

The problem with this argument is that many of the prisoners we are detaining are these terrorist guys that don't belong to any country and no one is holding accountable for. They aren't POW if no one wants to claim them. At least that is my impression, I don't pay enough attention to the news to know if we are globally being held accountable for the safety and quality of imprisonment for these people so you can happily link me to some news sites suggesting otherwise, I'm just lazy. :p

Anyway.....

I don't like the textbook definition of torture and interrogation. I think they both serve 2 different purposes.

When I think of interrogation I think of a situation where someone who is suspected of a crime (perhaps evidence is involved) is questioned. These questions might be held up to the scrutiny of a polygraph test, and they most likely are administered by trained psychologists. They are probably carefully chosen, and used as a litmus test for the truth. Perhaps playing good cop/bad cop still falls within the realm of "interrogation." Threatening the suspect, yelling at them, even beating the shit out of them might all fall within the realm of "interrogation." None of this sounds all that frightening though because usually this is done through the legal system...usually....

When I think of torture I think of a situation where someone has information or plans about an event that may not have happened. In this situation it might be hard to question them or give them a polygraph test. It's kind of like extracting a confession. "Yes, I confess! We planned to blow up your trade center!" In this situation...if good cop/bad cop doesn't work...why not rip off some nails or sleep deprive them or water board them or give them electric shock! Obviously the flaw with this plan is most people will do anything to get out of stress because we enjoy equilibrium. In that situation who is to say someone doesn't give a BS answer to stop the pain? More frightening than the pain though is the fact that a lot of this torture is happening unsupervised. That sucks. If torture is O-K, it should be ok through some sort of system of checks and balances.

I think that system should be global too. I think there should be checks and balances for intelligence between a few of our big allies. I also think the world shouldn't be sympathetic to known terrorists or associates of guys like Bin Laden. If you hang out with Bin Laden I think you probably had the water boarding coming.

The problem is really 'what is torture.' I think it can be both physical and psychological, or just physical, or just psychological. I'd definitely say water boarding is torture though. I've seen numerous people try it out in relaxed environments and no one seems to enjoy it. Could you image getting water boarded in a secret CIA prison? Fucccckkkk no, I say!

Anyway, another issue I have is what is the alternative to no torture? Better interrogation? Better interrogation how? I mean it's one thing to have an armchair discussion about the obvious moral pitfalls of torture. It's much more productive to actually come up with a solution to this problem. I think this very fact is the reason why Obama has been so hesitant with recent policy regarding the issue; the man is a critical thinker.

Re: Torture vs. Interrogation
 

Yeah, I mean think about it.. most videos you see of it, someone is having it done by someone they trust. And they still puss out really fast and call it torture.