|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 28,369
Legend
|
Legend
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 28,369 |
Quote:
I mean, when you hear of a journalist being beheaded or a suicide bombing or a terrorist attack, why not just shrug and say 'eh, we need the oil'?
ummm... because that's an absurd thing to say? Ummm... because the act is unjustifiable? Perhaps because while you can draw such a correlation between the two things, the one does not necessitate the occurence of the other and that other is completely baseless and unjustified?
We are in those countries, just like every other developed country in the world, with the permission of those governments. THAT is all that matters.
Anything else is moot and any violent action is thus either an act of a government supporting that action - to which we are now their enemy, or it is a citizen creating violence because they do not agree with their government's stance on allowing us to be there... to which they are everbody's enemy.
We protect our interests in that region and buy their oil and because we buy so freaking much, we get some pretty sweet prices... then we get blamed for "stealing their oil" because the people never see any of that wealth. Their anger is directed at us instead of at their leaders, because their leaders are delfecting the blame to us while their rape their own countries coffers. Saddam was an absolutely perfect example of this, and he was not the first nor will he be the last. Don't believe it? Look at Abu Dhabi... we're actually well received there - and their wealth is shared across that country. Half the population isn't living in squalor and being fed the lie that it is the fault of the Great Satan the USA that their lives suck because we steal their oil for our own prosperity. Combine those sorts of things with their ingrained hatred of all things Israeli and our continued support of them, and THAT is your recipe for those people wanting to kill us..... and not a single bit of that justifies the killing of a reporter, or a suicide bombing or a terrorist attack, and not a single bit of it is the fault of the USA or any other western nation.
Browns is the Browns
... there goes Joe Thomas, the best there ever was in this game.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 11,465
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 11,465 |
Quote:
then we get blamed for "stealing their oil" because the people never see any of that wealth. Their anger is directed at us instead of at their leaders, because their leaders are delfecting the blame to us while their rape their own countries coffers. Saddam was an absolutely perfect example of this, and he was not the first nor will he be the last.
I agree...and how would that look from the perspective of a citizen?
You've got a leader who lives in a gold palace somewhere, he carries out torture, oppression, genocide, etc. America loves him. Arms him, gives him all kinds of weapons, money to build the rape rooms and such, conducts big business deals with him. Dictator wins, America wins, population loses.
Then one day this cats gets on our bad side...isn't doing business the way we want it done...so we carpet bomb the infrastructure, kill a hundred thousand civilians and oust the guy who was once our best friend, replacing him with someone who will do what we want. We build up military bases everywhere. The new guy can kill and rape and rule with an iron fist...we don't really care...just so long as he's along for the ride we want to take.
Their anger should be directed at us as much as it is their leaders. JMHO.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 28,369
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 28,369 |
Quote:
The new guy can kill and rape and rule with an iron fist...we don't really care...just so long as he's along for the ride we want to take
Oh, Really?
There is no doubt that we didn't make a lot of friends there in Iraq... that sort of thing tends to happen when you invade someone's sovereignty; most folks don't take kindly to that, but I'm speaking of that region as a whole. And for as many that hate us there, there are an equal number that do not and are quite glad that we took that guy and his regime down. The only thing that sucks is that there are so many people hell bent against letting that country get on with doing it's own thing.
Back to the broader topic of our dealing with those nations that people find distasteful: Yes, we continue to do business with people we don't like and whose practices we don't agree with - because we HAVE to in order to preserve our society as we know it. Without their oil, and their oil at the prices our economy is accustomed to, our society will implode. There is no two ways about that at all. Between the Middle East & China, the U.S. does NOT control it's own destiny any longer. Our economic engine runs on Middle East oil and our governemnt is powered with money from selling US Bonds to China. It is something we don't want to admit, but we need THEM more than they need US. We have the military might to impose our will, but they can choke our resources, and unless we have the political will to invade another country over there, we cannot offset that.
Should they hate us? Perhaps, Probably. Should they hate their own government more? Absolutely... But the simple fact remains that they don't because they've all been fed the lie that WE are the cause of all their problems, that we are forcing their crappy lot in life upon them, when it is their own corrupted leaders doing it to them (kinda like here).
Browns is the Browns
... there goes Joe Thomas, the best there ever was in this game.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 4,563
Hall of Famer
|
|
Hall of Famer
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 4,563 |
j/c
Personally, I don't think we are doing enough torture.
We should be bombing their villages, threatening them with more force and beheading any prisoners.
Unfortunately, we have to play by the rules while these bastards don't have to, because there are people here who don't think that is very "moral."
The American public demands a "clean" war. Basically, we are not doing everything we can to win. Why should I have mercy on my enemy when they will show no mercy towards me? That is why the "War" on terror is taking so long.
you had a good run Hank.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 11,465
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 11,465 |
Quote:
That is why the "War" on terror is taking so long.
The War on Terror will be won right around the same time as we wrap up the War on Drugs and the War on Poverty.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 4,563
Hall of Famer
|
|
Hall of Famer
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 4,563 |
Quote:
Quote:
That is why the "War" on terror is taking so long.
The War on Terror will be won right around the same time as we wrap up the War on Drugs and the War on Poverty.
Pretty much.
you had a good run Hank.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 27,799
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 27,799 |
Quote:
You can't be a little bit dead
Oh I don't know don't we both have one foot in the grave 
I AM ALWAYS RIGHT... except when I am wrong.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 30,930
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 30,930 |
Quote:
I really thought we Americans were better than that.. Perhaps I was wrong...
Wrong. Plus, that's borderline elitist. Now, I know you're not an elitist because you denounce the U.S. quite often.
The sooner people get that thought out of their heads the better off we'll be. Why? When the U.S. has fought to win, we have won. Every time. When we have fought in a "politically correct" manner, we struggle.
Again, the sooner people get the notion that "the u.s. is better than that" out of their heads, the better off we'll be. You may not like it, but that's the way it is.
And this "torture" thing. I laugh my ass off about us considering water boarding "torture". Uncomfortable? Apparently. Slapping someone? Torture? How many people in our custody have been killed?
Go to a u.s. prison - wanna talk torture? It's there.
Oh, maybe I was wrong when I said we aren't better than others. See, we don't cut the heads off of people.......not our military, not our CIA, not the FBI, not even in our prisons, so yeah, I guess we are better.
The U.S. needs to look out for the U.S., simply because no other nation will look out for us. And that's the way it should be......we take care of us. A guy feels like he's drowning, but later that evening he's eating, drinking, and covered up on his cot? That's torture? He's got his head attached to his body, right?
Not to you, but to ANYONE that disagrees with the U.S. "torture": Where else would you rather be tortured?
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 5,276
Hall of Famer
|
|
Hall of Famer
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 5,276 |
j/c...Anyone who think's that we are wrong for doing that is not thinking the whole thing through......
Is it inhumane?....yes, but if it get's the trouth out then good!
I hate that this has come to what is right or wrong!.....How in the world do you all think we can do this?...anyone? can anyone person here answer that?
I hate the thought of doing this to another human, but on the same thought think...will it save live's? if they are not realy in harm, just scareing them into thinking they are? jmho.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Nov 2006
Posts: 15,188
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Nov 2006
Posts: 15,188 |
One of the many things I do not understand about how some view this ... they use the phrase .... "were better than that" ... I don't get it ... that makes no sense to me ... to me protecting your loved ones is the MOST NOBLE thing u can do ... there is nothing I would not do to protect my loved ones ... NOTHING ... is it preferable to let our LOVED ONES POTENTIALLY DIE?? .. yet some folks act like torturing someone else is a bad thing .. when fact is when were doing the torturing its to SAVE SOMEONES IN THIS COUNTRIES LOVED ONES ... its not like were doing it for fun ... were doing it to PROTECT OURSELVES and OUR LOVED ONES .. Daman even admits it ... 1. Torture is wrong ... 2. I would do it to save a loved one ... then he goes whacko and thinks he should be punished for it .. punished for what .. PROTECTING HIS FAMILY?? ... 
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 5,276
Hall of Famer
|
|
Hall of Famer
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 5,276 |
That is how I see it...is it wrong? well to a point it is, but if it get's what we need to save live's then so it is the right thing to do.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Oct 2006
Posts: 1,102
Dawg Talker
|
|
Dawg Talker
Joined: Oct 2006
Posts: 1,102 |
Mainly what I've tried to get across is that ever since 9/11 the government has portrayed itself as the solution to terrorism and not part of the problem. I don't completely buy that and feel we would all be better off to get back to what made this country special in the 1st place: self reliance and a healthy mistrust of government. The right to torture anybody is a right that I don't trust with any government in the world - including ours.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 11,465
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 11,465 |
This article refutes the legitimacy of the claim made in the initial post, citing that what was admitted under waterboarding regarding this 'Second Wave' was already known and dealt with....I really haven't read over any documents pertaining to this, so I have no idea...I imagine everyone's stretching the facts to fit their agenda. http://www.slate.com/id/2216601/
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 43,543
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 43,543 |
Quote:
Daman even admits it ...
1. Torture is wrong ...
2. I would do it to save a loved one ...
then he goes whacko and thinks he should be punished for it .. punished for what .. PROTECTING HIS FAMILY?? ...
Yup,, I go whacko on anyone that would harm a family member,, no doubt,, But that doesn't make it right.. I stand by that....
#GMSTRONG
“Everyone is entitled to his own opinion, but not to his own facts.”
Daniel Patrick Moynahan
"Alternative facts hurt us all. Think before you blindly believe."
Damanshot
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 17,438
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 17,438 |
I have loved ones in California. If it saved their lives and others then good. Freakin waterboard those bastards. They are bent on killing us and we should protect ourselves. If it means we have to make them uncomfortable (no physical damage is done) to get the truth out and protect our citizens then so be it. This really seems like an no brainer to me.
No Craps Given
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 12,061
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 12,061 |
I'm absolutely against torture. Good thing for me is that I don't consider this crap anything near torture. I'm more pissed off that we are allowing this to be called torture without calling them on it at every turn.
In case some of you don't know it, we do this to some of our very own servicemen and operatives as training. Another fact is that before they did any of the enhanced interrogation techniques they go over them with a doctor who has examined these TERRORISTS. They make sure that these TERRORISTS can handle what they are going to be put through.
Oh, the part where I said I was against torture...I lied. I think it wouldn't be a good thing to be terrorizing these scumbags in Gitmo. I do think it is a great idea that if we catch them in some of these less than reputable countries we allow them to do what they want to these piles of crap. We can just sit back in a dark corner and observe.
Also, people say torture doesn't work. When trying to gain confessions it really doesn't because they will say anything. When you are trying to gain certain info they can lie but we can at least look into it to see if the intel is good. I think the same goes for enhanced interrogations. I wouldn't want either used on most of the run of the mill combatants but we are talking about high up guys who have be responsible for indiscriminately killing thousands.
I do wonder what some of the responses would be if we were unable to get the info out of these guys that ended up stopping the "Second Wave." Especially if it were family members of some of you that are completely opposed. Would you really say it's ok that my family member died because we chose to only ask these guys politely to give us info?
#gmstrong
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Oct 2006
Posts: 4,458
Hall of Famer
|
|
Hall of Famer
Joined: Oct 2006
Posts: 4,458 |
I thought it was totally appropriate for our government to say that "we don't torture." We will Waterboard, bind people in uncomfortable positions for long periods of time, confine people in small boxes for long periods of time, keep them naked and in cold conditions for long periods of time, or simply slam them against walls, or keep them awake and without food for indefinite amounts of time------- yes we use these techniques----but we don't torture.  I think that we should not do these things, use these techniques, and we should honor any international mandates that forbid torture. It is in the best interest of the whole of humanity to not engage in any kind of torture.
I wish to wash my Irish wristwatch......
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 17,438
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 17,438 |
According to the wikipedia info on waterboarding (not sure on how accurate this is), CIA members who subjected themselves to waterboarding lasted about 14 seconds before they cried uncle. Now, like if we put it to a terrorist and they lasted, maybe 3 times that, or maybe 5 times that, or 20 times that, what is 5 minutes of suffering on a insane killer terrorists mind, in place of saving thousands of u.s. citizens lives ? Protect our citizens.
No Craps Given
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Oct 2006
Posts: 4,458
Hall of Famer
|
|
Hall of Famer
Joined: Oct 2006
Posts: 4,458 |
Our government scares me a lot more than "insane killer terrorists."
We don't need to give them a free pass to torture--we let them get away with enough stuff already.
I wish to wash my Irish wristwatch......
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 30,930
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 30,930 |
Quote:
I thought it was totally appropriate for our government to say that "we don't torture." We will Waterboard, bind people in uncomfortable positions for long periods of time, confine people in small boxes for long periods of time, keep them naked and in cold conditions for long periods of time, or simply slam them against walls, or keep them awake and without food for indefinite amounts of time-------
yes we use these techniques----but we don't torture.
Waterboard. Bind people in "uncomfortable" postions, put people in small boxes, keep them naked.....cold.....yeah, that's torture allright.
At least we don't kill them, like our enemies do.
Get off this " we're the u.s., we're better than that" kick.
Course, coming from a self admitted drug addict I would expect you to feel like you do. You're against penalizing druggies too.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Oct 2006
Posts: 4,458
Hall of Famer
|
|
Hall of Famer
Joined: Oct 2006
Posts: 4,458 |
Quote:
Get off this " we're the u.s., we're better than that" kick.
It has to do with dealing with prisoners humanely, and not subjecting them to things that we wouldn't want our own troops subjected too. Personally, I think that these techniques are torturous----I certainly wouldn't want to undergo any of these interrogative tactics.
Quote:
coming from a self admitted drug addict I would expect you to feel like you do. You're against penalizing druggies too.
This statement has no place in this thread, and is completely unrelated to the issue at hand.. It is a blatant cheap shot and an unwarranted personal attack.
I wish to wash my Irish wristwatch......
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 1,267
Dawg Talker
|
|
Dawg Talker
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 1,267 |
Quote:
Personally, I don't think we are doing enough torture.
I was thinking the same thing. I read there were about 38,000 people killed in motor vehicle crashes in 2008. If we used a little torture, I'll bet we save alot of lives. Would you roll that stop sign if you knew that instead of a fine you were going to get a super swirly or finger nail extraction? Bring back the rubber hose beatings and save lives! 
BTW The only serious thing I can say about this subject is I'm really glad I won't ever have to make the call.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 40,433
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 40,433 |
Quote:
One of the many things I do not understand about how some view this .
I agree Diam....that's why I quit trying to understand them. The ole' 1 finger salute is about all I have for them.
We don't agree on football many times, but we agree here...and I will tell you what Bubba...I would fight like a savage to protect your family from a terriorist.
I am not sacrificing anybody on my team.
Screw that.
The only way to defeat aggression is to meet it with greater aggression.
On a small scale, I would like to see some of these people talk their way out of getting mugged on some dark, back street.
If everybody had like minds, we would never learn. GM Strong ![[Linked Image]](http://www.dawgtalkers.net/uploads/small-gator-chomp.gif)
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Oct 2006
Posts: 9,149
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Oct 2006
Posts: 9,149 |
j/c to chime in,...Agree. None of these anti-waterboarders can tell me they wouldn't have rather had one terrorist undergone the procedure than what happened on September 11.
This wouldn't be a big deal if the media would leave it alone.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 4,480
Hall of Famer
|
|
Hall of Famer
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 4,480 |
Quote:
j/c to chime in,...Agree. None of these anti-waterboarders can tell me they wouldn't have rather had one terrorist undergone the procedure than what happened on September 11.
This wouldn't be a big deal if the media would leave it alone.
Unfortunately, I think some of them would actually rather "sacrifice" the 2000 law abiding US citizens in the name of treating terrorists with dignity. 
My brain cannot comprehend that in any way, shape, or form.
#gmstrong
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 658
All Pro
|
|
All Pro
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 658 |
Quote:
I certainly wouldn't want to undergo any of these interrogative tactics.
I certainly wouldn't want to undergo stopping on the side of the road that morning to see the WTC burning. I haven't witnessed anything like this in my life.
I certainly wouldn't want to undergo wondering if my family was still alive that morning. You couldn't make a cell phone call. I was lucky. My family was unharmed.
I certainly wouldn't want to undergo thinking about which of my friends work in the WTC. Were they on vacation that day? I have interviewed for jobs in those buildings; It could easily have been me.
I certainly wouldn't want to undergo seeing the firemen's funerals every day, for weeks on end. My neighbors were widows, their children were fatherless.
I certainly wouldn't want to endure seeing my fireman friend finally released from the hospital after 3 months. He still is not the same person.
I certainly would much rather undergo some of these interrogative techniques for a few minutes, than endure anything that happened on that day.
I am glad for you that this did not affect you in a personal way.
Last edited by Divot; 04/23/09 08:57 AM.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 40,399
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 40,399 |
Quote:
I've never understood the 'we don't target civilians' thing...
It's akin to lighting M-80's in a mall food court and then saying 'well, I wasn't trying to hurt anyone'.
Not really.
Quote:
We have a long and detailed history of dropping bombs all over civilian areas and then saying 'well, we didn't mean to kill civilians' or 'the terrorists are hiding amongst the civilians'...it's ludicrous.
It's not ludicrous... it's war. To the best of my knowledge, Dresden is the last time we knowingly just flattened a city because we could... but wait, that was WWII, that was the greatest generation, that was FDR..... we can't hold THEM accountable... 
Quote:
When it comes to dropping bombs, our government really does not care if we kill civilians. We may not 'target' them...but we don't do much in the way of ensuring their safety.
I have to admit, I don't think you have any idea the lengths our government goes to in order to try to ensure civilian safety... In fact, I think sometimes we go too far. When is the last time we knowingly bombed a crowded market place? An occupied school? A passenger plane/train/cruise ship? A crowded soccer stadium? even if there were a few terrorists there?.... We don't.
How many potential strike targets have we passed on because the risk to civilians was too great? You have no idea, nor do I.... Phil your contempt for this country is palpable and I understand that when it comes to our government you assume the worst unless proven otherwise....
yebat' Putin
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Dec 2006
Posts: 14,070
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Dec 2006
Posts: 14,070 |
just clicking to add some background to the subject...
Waterboarding Used to Be a Crime
By Evan Wallach
Sunday, November 4, 2007
As a JAG in the Nevada National Guard, I used to lecture the soldiers of the 72nd Military Police Company every year about their legal obligations when they guarded prisoners. I'd always conclude by saying, "I know you won't remember everything I told you today, but just remember what your mom told you: Do unto others as you would have others do unto you." That's a pretty good standard for life and for the law, and even though I left the unit in 1995, I like to think that some of my teaching had carried over when the 72nd refused to participate in misconduct at Iraq's Abu Ghraib prison.
Sometimes, though, the questions we face about detainees and interrogation get more specific. One such set of questions relates to "waterboarding."
That term is used to describe several interrogation techniques. The victim may be immersed in water, have water forced into the nose and mouth, or have water poured onto material placed over the face so that the liquid is inhaled or swallowed. The media usually characterize the practice as "simulated drowning." That's incorrect. To be effective, waterboarding is usually real drowning that simulates death. That is,
the victim experiences the sensations of drowning: struggle, panic, breath-holding, swallowing, vomiting, taking water into the lungs and, eventually, the same feeling of not being able to breathe that one experiences after being punched in the gut. The main difference is that the drowning process is halted. According to those who have studied waterboarding's effects, it can cause severe psychological trauma, such as panic attacks, for years.
The United States knows quite a bit about waterboarding. The U.S. government -- whether acting alone before domestic courts, commissions and courts-martial or as part of the world community -- has not only condemned the use of water torture but has severely punished those who applied it.
After World War II, we convicted several Japanese soldiers for waterboarding American and Allied prisoners of war. At the trial of his captors, then-Lt. Chase J. Nielsen, one of the 1942 Army Air Forces officers who flew in the Doolittle Raid and was captured by the Japanese, testified: "I was given several types of torture. . . . I was given what they call the water cure." He was asked what he felt when the Japanese soldiers poured the water. "Well, I felt more or less like I was drowning," he replied, "just gasping between life and death."
Nielsen's experience was not unique. Nor was the prosecution of his captors. After Japan surrendered, the United States organized and participated in the International Military Tribunal for the Far East, generally called the Tokyo War Crimes Trials. Leading members of Japan's military and government elite were charged, among their many other crimes, with torturing Allied military personnel and civilians. The principal proof upon which their torture convictions were based was conduct that we would now call waterboarding.
In this case from the tribunal's records, the victim was a prisoner in the Japanese-occupied Dutch East Indies:
A towel was fixed under the chin and down over the face. Then many buckets of water were poured into the towel so that the water gradually reached the mouth and rising further eventually also the nostrils, which resulted in his becoming unconscious and collapsing like a person drowned. This procedure was sometimes repeated 5-6 times in succession.
The United States (like Britain, Australia and other Allies) pursued lower-ranking Japanese war criminals in trials before their own tribunals. As a general rule, the testimony was similar to Nielsen's. Consider this account from a Filipino waterboarding victim:
Q: Was it painful?
A: Not so painful, but one becomes unconscious. Like drowning in the water.
Q: Like you were drowning?
A: Drowning -- you could hardly breathe.
Here's the testimony of two Americans imprisoned by the Japanese:
They would lash me to a stretcher then prop me up against a table with my head down. They would then pour about two gallons of water from a pitcher into my nose and mouth until I lost consciousness.
And from the second prisoner: They laid me out on a stretcher and strapped me on. The stretcher was then stood on end with my head almost touching the floor and my feet in the air. . . . They then began pouring water over my face and at times it was almost impossible for me to breathe without sucking in water.
As a result of such accounts, a number of Japanese prison-camp officers and guards were convicted of torture that clearly violated the laws of war. They were not the only defendants convicted in such cases. As far back as the U.S. occupation of the Philippines after the 1898 Spanish-American War, U.S. soldiers were court-martialed for using the "water cure" to question Filipino guerrillas.
More recently, waterboarding cases have appeared in U.S. district courts. One was a civil action brought by several Filipinos seeking damages against the estate of former Philippine president Ferdinand Marcos. The plaintiffs claimed they had been subjected to torture, including water torture. The court awarded $766 million in damages, noting in its findings that "the plaintiffs experienced human rights violations including, but not limited to . . . the water cure, where a cloth was placed over the detainee's mouth and nose, and water producing a drowning sensation."
In 1983, federal prosecutors charged a Texas sheriff and three of his deputies with violating prisoners' civil rights by forcing confessions. The complaint alleged that the officers conspired to "subject prisoners to a suffocating water torture ordeal in order to coerce confessions. This generally included the placement of a towel over the nose and mouth of the prisoner and the pouring of water in the towel until the prisoner began to move, jerk, or otherwise indicate that he was suffocating and/or drowning."
The four defendants were convicted, and the sheriff was sentenced to 10 years in prison.
We know that U.S. military tribunals and U.S. judges have examined certain types of water-based interrogation and found that they constituted torture. That's a lesson worth learning. The study of law is, after all, largely the study of history. The law of war is no different. This history should be of value to those who seek to understand what the law is -- as well as what it ought to be.
Evan Wallach, a judge at the U.S. Court of International Trade in New York, teaches the law
of war as an adjunct professor at Brooklyn Law School and New York Law School.
web page
GM strong...
Home of the Free, Because of the Brave...
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 11,367
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 11,367 |
Quote:
Quote:
Daman even admits it ...
1. Torture is wrong ...
2. I would do it to save a loved one ...
then he goes whacko and thinks he should be punished for it .. punished for what .. PROTECTING HIS FAMILY?? ...
Yup,, I go whacko on anyone that would harm a family member,, no doubt,, But that doesn't make it right.. I stand by that....
So protecting your family by any means necessary is wrong? That is some interesting logic. 
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 15,015
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 15,015 |
I thought this thread was about surfing and wakeboards. 
We don't have to agree with each other, to respect each others opinion.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 4,480
Hall of Famer
|
|
Hall of Famer
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 4,480 |
Quote:
Quote:
I certainly wouldn't want to undergo any of these interrogative tactics.
I certainly wouldn't want to undergo stopping on the side of the road that morning to see the WTC burning. I haven't witnessed anything like this in my life.
I certainly wouldn't want to undergo wondering if my family was still alive that morning. You couldn't make a cell phone call. I was lucky. My family was unharmed.
I certainly wouldn't want to undergo thinking about which of my friends work in the WTC. Were they on vacation that day? I have interviewed for jobs in those buildings; It could easily have been me.
I certainly wouldn't want to undergo seeing the firemen's funerals every day, for weeks on end. My neighbors were widows, their children were fatherless.
I certainly wouldn't want to endure seeing my fireman friend finally released from the hospital after 3 months. He still is not the same person.
I certainly would much rather undergo some of these interrogative techniques for a few minutes, than endure anything that happened on that day.
I am glad for you that this did not affect you in a personal way.
#gmstrong
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 13,732
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 13,732 |
I thought it was about a new attraction at Marine Land. 
![[Linked Image from i28.photobucket.com]](http://i28.photobucket.com/albums/c201/shadedog/mcenroe2.jpg) gmstrong -----------------
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 43,543
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 43,543 |
Quote:
So protecting your family by any means necessary is wrong? That is some interesting logic
That's a pretty typical misrepresentation of what I was thinking Jules,,, you do that all the time..
NOT ONCE did I ever say that protecting your family was wrong...
I said that I beleive the act of torture is WRONG...
But if I had to do it to save my family, I would do so in a heartbeat.... and if the world found be guilty for it, I'd take my lumps....
I hope that clears it up for you... if not,, oh well, what can I say...
#GMSTRONG
“Everyone is entitled to his own opinion, but not to his own facts.”
Daniel Patrick Moynahan
"Alternative facts hurt us all. Think before you blindly believe."
Damanshot
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 11,367
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 11,367 |
I didn't misrepresent anything. That's exactly what you've been saying and continue to say. It's baffling to say the least. I should be used to that by now though. Ballpeen was right, I'll just give up on some of you.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 43,543
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 43,543 |
Where did I ever say protecting your family was wrong.. I dare you to show me ONE QUOTE where I used those exact words...
You WILL find that I've repeatedly said that torture is wrong... but NOT ONCE did I ever say that protecting ones family is wrong..
Quote me accuratly or not at all....
#GMSTRONG
“Everyone is entitled to his own opinion, but not to his own facts.”
Daniel Patrick Moynahan
"Alternative facts hurt us all. Think before you blindly believe."
Damanshot
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 11,367
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 11,367 |
Quote:
Quote:
If your daughter were kidnapped, and being raped, would it still be wrong to waterboard someone who knew where she was in order to prevent her from being murdered?
You are a stronger man than I.
Wrong is still wrong... but in this case, I'd be doing a whole lotta wrong.... and if caught, I'd accept the punishment... because,, after all, wrong is still wrong.
Gee, that was hard to find.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 11,367
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 11,367 |
Obama muddles torture message By JOSH GERSTEIN & MIKE ALLEN | 4/22/09 11:25 AM The president's attempt at clarity creates confusion and political vulnerability over an issue that has inflamed both the left and right. President Barack Obama’s attempt to project legal and moral clarity on coercive CIA interrogation methods has instead done the opposite — creating confusion and political vulnerability over an issue that has inflamed both the left and right. In the most recent instance, Director of National Intelligence Dennis Blair acknowledged in a memo to the intelligence community that Bush-era interrogation practices yielded had "high-value information,” then omitted that admission from a public version of his assessment. That leaves a top Obama administration official appearing to validate claims by former Vice President Dick Cheney that waterboarding and other techniques the White House regards as torture were effective in preventing terrorist attacks. And the press release created the impression the administration was trying to suppress this conclusion. The president, who has said he wants to focus on the future rather than litigate the past, also opened himself to distraction and attack by retracting the earlier assurance by top officials that they had no plans to prosecute lawyers for former President George W. Bush who approved the “enhanced interrogation” program. A Democratic strategist close to the White House said: “The president looked resolute, and like he had threaded the needle perfectly on the substance: The heat from the right was preposterous, and the heat from the left was manageable. But now they look like the scarecrow, pointing in both directions. They got the policy right, but they look confused and beaten down by critics." The implications go beyond a typical Washington spat over “message control.” Obama’s moves virtually guarantee a sharp public focus on two uncomfortable questions that his team previously sought to leave vague: *Should people be tried and even sent to prison—as many Democrats want—for what Obama regards as illegal practices under Bush? *Even if wrong, did those practices have any positive results in stopping new attacks? Obama’s own statements are murky on both questions. On the first, administration sources said that White House chief of staff Rahm Emanuel was articulating the White House’s true position Sunday on ABC’s “This Week” when he said Obama wants to discourage prosecutions. But his blunt-spoken statement of a position the White House usually prefers to keep comfortably vague sent liberal activists, including the influential group MoveOn, into an uproar. Obama was apparently trying to soothe these critics with his comment Tuesday that Attorney General Eric Holder was free to decide the matter on his own. On the second matter, Obama as a candidate embraced the view that torture is both wrong and ineffective. But now that he has full access to the same top-secret documents cited by Cheney, the question cuts more sharply: Does he agree or disagree with Blair that coercive tactics produce valuable intelligence? In a visit to the CIA Monday, he told intelligence personnel that, “What makes the United States special and what makes you special is precisely the fact that we are willing to uphold our values and ideals even when it’s hard. So, you’ve got a harder job, and so do I and that’s OK.” Obama also shifted course Tuesday on another politically delicate issue: whether to create a blue-ribbon panel to investigate alleged anti-terror excesses from the Bush era. “If and when there needs to be a further accounting of what took place during this period, I think for Congress to examine ways that it can be done in a bipartisan fashion….to the extent that there are independent participants who are above reproach and have credibility, that would probably be a more sensible approach to take,” the president said. http://www.politico.com/news/stories/0409/21569.html
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Oct 2006
Posts: 4,458
Hall of Famer
|
|
Hall of Famer
Joined: Oct 2006
Posts: 4,458 |
Since all of you are so supportive of waterboarding---we should just use it in police stations acrossed the country. That way you can all feel safe knowing that we are getting signed confessions even from people who didn't even committ a crime.
Its just plain stupid that people support this kind of thing----it showcases ignorance---but in some cases, thats what this board is for.
It was illegal for decades----the US even prosecuted others for engaging in waterboarding----but now, since we are doing it----it's OK.
I wish to wash my Irish wristwatch......
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 43,543
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 43,543 |
Quote:
Quote:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Quote:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
If your daughter were kidnapped, and being raped, would it still be wrong to waterboard someone who knew where she was in order to prevent her from being murdered?
You are a stronger man than I.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Wrong is still wrong... but in this case, I'd be doing a whole lotta wrong.... and if caught, I'd accept the punishment... because,, after all, wrong is still wrong.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Gee, that was hard to find.
I can't beleive you have the nerve to knock my ability to comprehend.... good lord woman
ONCE AGAIN, show me where I've ever said it was wrong to defend my family..
In this quote I'm saying that TORTURE IS WRONG... can't you freakin read?
#GMSTRONG
“Everyone is entitled to his own opinion, but not to his own facts.”
Daniel Patrick Moynahan
"Alternative facts hurt us all. Think before you blindly believe."
Damanshot
|
|
|
DawgTalkers.net
Forums DawgTalk Tailgate Forum CIA Waterboarding Uncovered 2nd
Wave Attack on L.A.
|
|
