Boo Radley
DP Veteran
- Joined
- Dec 20, 2009
- Messages
- 37,066
- Reaction score
- 7,028
- Gender
- Male
- Political Leaning
- Liberal
wow. the FAIL is strong with you today. Turn that around and apply it to your anecdotal. :shrug:
I did show you. You choose to believe what you want to believe. :shrug:
You're avoiding the issue. Do you want to torture them or get actionable intel from them?
With some of these guys, both can be a real desire. But, you can't use the same actions to get both results.
0yeah boo. not today, not just because you bore the hell out of me as usual, but cause I'm headed to philly for the stanley cup.
Keep in touch with yourself brother! :2razz:
Ofcourse I don't want our troops to torture anyone. With that said, I don't believe that 'waterboarding' as practiced today is torture.
We need actionable intel to win this struggle with radical Islam, and you can bet that won't be forthcoming with a kiss on the cheek, regardless of what one lone, and exploited ex CIA interrogator says.
There can be situations where a less severe interrogation would work, and work well, but not all situations are the same, and with some terrorists, they need, well, lets just say more incentive to talk.
j-mac
In the case of al Libi, he didn't have the intel. So, wasting our time. And we have tortured others who knew nothing and who were merely innocent civilians. One such evnen died.
Yet, as I noted earlier, we got better intel in Iraq when we stopped the brutal stuff.
Ofcourse I don't want our troops to torture anyone. With that said, I don't believe that 'waterboarding' as practiced today is torture.
We need actionable intel to win this struggle with radical Islam, and you can bet that won't be forthcoming with a kiss on the cheek, regardless of what one lone, and exploited ex CIA interrogator says.
There can be situations where a less severe interrogation would work, and work well, but not all situations are the same, and with some terrorists, they need, well, lets just say more incentive to talk.
It is my personal opinion that it is a mistake to us enhanced interrogation techniques, a position shared by professional operatives, including CIA officers who were present at the initial phases of the Abu Zubaydah interrogations.
These techniques, from an operational perspective, are slow, ineffective, unreliable and harmful to our efforts to defeat Al Qaeda."
Could torture have prevented 9/11? Probably. That event was beyond dispicable.....many good American mothers and fathers, sons and daughters died that day.
Actually, acting on intelligence and intelligence sharing could very well have prevented 9/11. Ali Soufan resigned from the FBI after he found the CIA did not share such info with the FBI.
What relevance does that have with what i was asking?
Says the left and their useful idiots that have come out and said so. Others believe differently.
No offence but US intelligence services decided a terrorist boarded a plane......once it was 30,000 feet in the air. Remember, the Nigerian guy? There is clearly room for improvement. Just like prison/capital punishment/ war has its risks in regards to innocent people, reliable intelligence gathering can avoid this altogether or at least minimize the affects. A guy dying from torture shows clear excessive force by an agent so faults on him. And the US has enough intelligence agencies, soldiers and spy's to waste a bit of time....it certainly pays off, especially when we save thousands of lives. Could torture have prevented 9/11? Probably. That event was beyond dispicable.....many good American mothers and fathers, sons and daughters died that day.
Says the left and their useful idiots that have come out and said so. Others believe differently.
j-mac
Coupled with what this thread is discussing... showing that torture is not effective now and wouldn't be effective prior to 9/11.
The fact that the CIA or FBI or whatever failed to share information does not show torture is ineffective.
The fact that the CIA or FBI or whatever failed to share information does not show torture is ineffective.
No, but that is all that was needed to prevent 9/11.
My point was that this is another instance where there was a better alternative to torture... as always.
9/11 was a hypothetical question.
They obviously infiltrated Al Qaeda some how or information was given to them by other sources, or a direct link which was happy to hand over information during an interview. In the case this terrorist, or whoever this source might have been, did not crack during an interview, and was refusing to hand over the intel to the CIA, you still wont advocate torture?
Clearly stupid stances like this have prevented us foiling many past attacks on Western soil.
But, what if the facts are that a kiss on the cheek will get you more than kicking the **** out of them or torturing them? Would you change your mind then?
This is the testosterone fueled attitude that actually does not work.
Here’s sworn testimony from Ali Soufan, the ex FBI interrogator who elicited “actionable” intel from Abu Zubaydah before Cheeney’s CIA goons came in and insisted on torturing him. He is a walking testimony for why torture Is not only ineffective, even in a ticking time bomb fantasy, but…... stupid as well.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=S88mZArx4IE&feature=related
Paraphrasing from the video, Mr. Soufan testifies:
So, if we want intel to save lives, why would we use techniques that have been proven to not work? The only reason people like these techniques... they inflict pain.
There are 5 other vids in this series. Anyone who wants to know the truth of torture effectiveness should watch these. Otherwise, you're just speaking from a position of ignorance.
"Stupid stances" like yours are how Bush & Cheeney convinced this country to invade an innocent country! Torturing Al Libby produced lies. Those lies were believed, actually "used" in spite of warnings from the Brits they were lies.
0
Enjoy the trip, but it is a fact that you did not provide the specific example I did.
Nice dancing around the issue. Or do you truly not understand it?
US courts have convicted soldiers and civilians of waterboarding.
It is quite accepted by SCOTUS as torture.
The Greatness that is the Good Reverend said:Please link to us courts convicting US Soldiers of torture for waterboarding or stop lying as you are known to do.
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?