Comments on: Does Torture Work? The Debate Heats Up

[margroks]

Bottom line is that people would probably say anything to stop the torture. There is no evidence it would be true. THis is more of Cheney-Bush claiming they did things to keep us safe when there is no real evidence to that effect. It would be better to gather intelligence from reputable sources and get at the real truth than to believe what a liar like Cheney or his equally stupid and strident wife say any day of the week.

[notblue]

jondevine by that definition anything unpleasent is torture. That is a not a definition. What techniques would you use to interrogate and obtain info from a terrorist? After answering what techniques you think would be acceptable we will have a conversation to determine if your techniques would fall under the broad and vague definition you coppied. And if they would be considered illegal by that definition.

[johndevinejr]

vetturner, no one can really define what is torutre and what isn't. Obama himself said "other techniques" work better. What are those techniques? could they be considered "torture" . Is torture striclty defined as physical pain and or damage or can "psychological techniques" be defined as torture. Sleep derpivation can lead to death, is that torture? you people cherry pick waterboarding out of a political agenda not a defining one.
Posted by notblue at 8:27 AM : May 13, 2009


Why don't you read my post. The prohibitions are clear to anyone who is able to read.

.

[johndevinejr]

Nothing you can say would make me change my view it is that simple. You people still have not defined what is and is not torture SPECIFICALLY.
Posted by notblue at 8:46 AM : May 13, 2009

Three major treaties that the United States has signed and unambiguously ratified prohibit the United States from subjecting prisoners in the War on Terror to this kind of treatment. First, Common Article 3 of the Geneva Convention Relative to the Treatment of Prisoners of War, which the Senate unanimously ratified in 1955, prohibits the parties to the treaty from acts upon prisoners including ?violence to life and person, in particular murder of all kinds, mutilation, cruel treatment and torture; . . . outrages upon personal dignity, in particular, humiliating and degrading treatment.?

Now, of course there is much more. http://lawreview.wustl.edu/slip-opinions/waterboarding-is-illegal/

I was able to find this information out in approximately 10 minutes. This website details the laws regarding torture and is far too long to cut and paste here.

One important thing to note, and the reason that I chose this short section is the phrase "outrages upon personal dignity, in particular, humiliating and degrading treatment.?

Waterboarding is certainly more serious than humiliation.

When water is poured up a man's nose and thoat, his body reacts as if he were drowning. The main reason for strapping a man to a board is to prevent his limbs from flailing about. The instinctive reaction of the body to this form of torture often causes the man to break his own arms or legs.

Nothing that anyone says can change your mind. It is certainly within your rights to pretend that waterboarding is not cruel. It is.
And it is certainly a despicable and degenerate position to take.

But it is the republican party line and as with all republicans, party first country second.

MORALS; NONE

.

[superdem1]

If we're going to argue that torture works, and that we should do it to our own benefit, then we cannot use the bestial behavior of the enemy as a justification for opposing them. They are only doing what works, right ? They'd be stupid to do anything else, and so would we - right ? This is the right wing argument now. So - if we are "better" than they are, we need another - truthful - justification for opposing the enemy. We've conceded the barbarous issue.

[notblue]

jondevine, explain how allowing tens of thousands of innocents to be exterminated more "brave and moral" than roughly interrogating one terrorist.

[specialty8]

Everytime Pelosi,Reid, Geithner and Obama go to one of their signing parties to create a bunch of new AIG millionaires, is't that a form of torture to the tax payer?

[johndevinejr]

notblue, What is wrong with you. You support pain/torture on someone else. What is wrong with you? You really need to go see a doctor. It is not funny in any way. That our government - of by and for the people - tortured in our name is simply unacceptable. And if you are justifying it in any way, that is also unacceptable.
Posted by Vet_Turner at 8:39 AM : May 13, 2009


I totally agree. Brave and moral men do not torture other men. It is a cowardly thing to do.

.

[jsl45]

Darth Cheney has no credibility with the American people so it really doesn't matter what he says.....he was a moron while he was in office and he is a moron today.

[notblue]

bigmo47, tell us all waht techniques you would use to obtain information from a captured terrorist. Please enlighten us all.

[bigmo47]

All of the people saying that its leftists that don't agree with torture, just remember, John McCain said on several occasions that he doesn't agree with torture under any circumstances. He more than anyone should be able to qualify as an expert on the subject. So even if President Obama had not been elected, we would still be dealing with this subject right now.

Not only do most interrogators believe that torture is not an effective technique. The CIA has proven it by admitting that they waterboarded 2 captured Al Qaeda leaders at least 266 times. If it was effective, why would you have to do it so many times?

Not making this up. Here is a link to the story:

http://www.cnn.com/2009/POLITICS/04/20/cia.waterboarding/

[notblue]

vettruner, you people believe that waterboarding one terrorist even if it means saving tens of thousands of innocent lives is unacceptable. you have a right to those beliefs. I however believe that subjecting one terrorist to that type of interrogation technique which saves those lives then it is "unacceptable" not to do it. Nothing you can say would make me change my view it is that simple. You people still have not defined what is and is not torture SPECIFICALLY.

[iDragon13]

Some people just don't get it. IT DOESN'T MATTER IF IT WORKS OR NOT!!!!!!!! THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA DOES NOT TORTURE!!!!!! This "debate" is just a right wing rouse to attempt to influence any potential investigation or jury which may be called upon in the future to prosecute Bush Administration officials.

[Vet_Turner]

notblue, What is wrong with you. You support pain/torture on someone else. What is wrong with you? You really need to go see a doctor. It is not funny in any way. That our government - of by and for the people - tortured in our name is simply unacceptable. And if you are justifying it in any way, that is also unacceptable.

[hotpaulie]

I consider myself pretty tough, but if you waterboarded me I would tell you anythingyou wanted to hear. If torture received so much good results don't you think Cheney and Bush would be flashing those results in our faces???

[HenryDorsettCase]

Wow, I can't even believe this is being discussed. During WWII, we faced an enemy who tortured, performed experiments on people and ruled by terror. We already had policies, both nationally and internationally, that forbid torture and the horrors we found within Germany when our troops marched in, solidified our beliefs that torture, in any form, is unacceptable. Now we are discussing whether it works. Good grief people! Of course you can get people to talk by torture -- they will say anything, the truth or a lie, whatever you want to hear. And nobody is immune to torture. As expressed in the movie 'The Recruit', everyone will break under torture, it's just a matter of how long it takes. But that's NOT the point. The point is that it's inhumane and makes the torturers no better than the evil they are fighting against. "Because it works" is not a legitimate reason to act like a monster. If that were the case, then we would settle any international dispute with nuclear bombs "because it works". I thought the good old U.S.A. had learned this lesson in WWII. Do we actually have to learn this again first hand? Believe me, you don't want to do that.

[notblue]

vetturner, no one can really define what is torutre and what isn't. Obama himself said "other techniques" work better. What are those techniques? could they be considered "torture" . Is torture striclty defined as physical pain and or damage or can "psychological techniques" be defined as torture. Sleep derpivation can lead to death, is that torture? you people cherry pick waterboarding out of a political agenda not a defining one.

[notblue]

rogerinkart, your speculation is no more valid than those that claim these interrogation techniques in question work.

[Vet_Turner]

I am absolutely disgusted that I see this many people agreeing with torture. Please, everyone, just step back and minute and think about it. Those that torture and have authorized or ordered it are criminals: period. That?s the law. It is very simple; never a justification for a nation of laws to use it.
My father used to say that people are generally better than they think they are. The fact that learned individuals like Bybee, CIA officers and doctors were involved makes me question my own dead father. Yes, it is never, ever justified. And you know if it were justified at some point and a CIA officer got over rambunctious, that would be something to deal with on an individual basis but to think that this was a Presidential Administration. I am embarrassed.

As a pilot in Iraq, I once had two infantry guys start beating two Iraqis because they would not get in the helicopter. I pulled the power control levers off, I jumped out, and intervened and before we left, insured that the Iraqis had water and could breathe through their mask/hoods. Every good citizen should be doing the same thing to insure that the torture that took place under Bush, Dick Cheney, Choo, Bybee, and the CIA is never repeated. Thanks.

[biger-e]

People die and suffer brain damage during waterboarding, but your government and biased media aren't going to tell you that.
Posted by hower4

I heard cutting off someones head causes loss of oxygen to the brain as well.