- Joined
- Aug 27, 2005
- Messages
- 43,602
- Reaction score
- 26,256
- Location
- Houston, TX
- Gender
- Male
- Political Leaning
- Conservative
danarhea said:What did we learn from the Korean and Vietnam wars? How to torture people, of course, but we learned wrong on when to apply the application of torture. What the Red Army already knew was that torture was no good for extracting information, but that is not the reason they used those techniques. All they were going for were false confessions which they could use in their propaganda. On the other hand, we use them for the very reason the Communists didnt - To extract information, and of course, when people are tortured, they will do anything to make it stop, including making up whatever "facts" necessary to stop it.
Aside from the pragmatic fact that we should not torture because it does not work, we should also not do it because it is repugnant and immoral. Once upon a time, America was looked up to because we represented a higher moral standard. That is no longer the case. We have lost our standing as the world's moral leader.
Article is here.
Archon said:Wether or not torture does in fact work to gain intelligence is not determined by sitting behind a keyboard and reading various press releases. With all due respect.
It takes a very strong willed person to endure torture and not spill the beans. It is common practice in all forms of law enforcement to use many tactics that in no way equate to torture, yet do serve to break the psyche of their suspects. Mostly it is done in the form of deprevation.
There comes a time, on rare occasions, when torture may be your only means to extract information from a particular source.
I realize your implication here... that nothing may be good enough for the marxist type of torture... regardless of what might be said the torture will persist. However there is reward factor involved in revelation. Today we have the technology and intelligence network which can help us to determine if a person is being truthful or if their claims hold any credence. We can more so than ever determine when someone is being truthful or sincere.
There are times when certain cruel and unusual tactics are used by several facets of law enforcement. To attempt to exonorate our own ideal of patriotism and constitutional law in this aspect is too little and too late. Things happen behind closed doors and they have been happening for years. Contrary to the belief of the press or yourself when circumstance dictates the neccessity for such intervention it can be effective.
danarhea said:First of all, let me congratulate you on a well thought out response. Debate such as you are giving is all I am looking for - Not personal attacks, but real debate. That is very much appreciated. Thank you.
Now for my rebuttal. I may be sitting behind a keyboard, but I know enough about the subject to realize that this is not the result of deprivation, or other such techniques - Only of governmental spin used to justify the kinds of techniques you see here:
God help us all if we choose to accept this.
Archon said:I can completely agree with you here. The type of torture that we have witnessed many times over in Abu Ghraib do nothing more than to relic the type of senseless inhumane treatment that should not ever exist.
I suppose I may have misperceived your original post as competely anti-improvisational. I apologize. I do think that many techniques used by somewhat non-qualified (pfc, enlistees and outside intelligence analysists) are overbearing in many instances. Even at Gitmo the sense of emotional torture was blanketed and only served the marxist view of torture. I do now realize what you are saying and I agree. (and thank you for being civil as well, it's quite refreshing. Sincerely)
danarhea said:Actually, you have brought up a good point yourself. Almost all the torture we have witnessed at places such as Abu Ghraib were not carried out by our troops, but by "contractors". However, those few, and I mean very few, soldiers who are doing this are a disgrace to the uniform. Any soldier who is found out to have committed acts like this should be court-martialed, busted down to private, imprisoned, and dishonorably discharged. It is my feeling (and only my feeling, since I am not there) that the witnessing of acts of torture by "contractors" have had a demoralizing effect on our troops all by themselves, and may partially account for the fact that the administration needs to use stop-loss because fewer are voluntarily reenlisting these days.
danarhea said:Actually, you have brought up a good point yourself. Almost all the torture we have witnessed at places such as Abu Ghraib were not carried out by our troops, but by "contractors". However, those few, and I mean very few, soldiers who are doing this are a disgrace to the uniform. Any soldier who is found out to have committed acts like this should be court-martialed, busted down to private, imprisoned, and dishonorably discharged. It is my feeling (and only my feeling, since I am not there) that the witnessing of acts of torture by "contractors" have had a demoralizing effect on our troops all by themselves, and may partially account for the fact that the administration needs to use stop-loss because fewer are voluntarily reenlisting these days.
danarhea said:What did we learn from the Korean and Vietnam wars? How to torture people, of course, but we learned wrong on when to apply the application of torture. What the Red Army already knew was that torture was no good for extracting information, but that is not the reason they used those techniques. All they were going for were false confessions which they could use in their propaganda. On the other hand, we use them for the very reason the Communists didnt - To extract information, and of course, when people are tortured, they will do anything to make it stop, including making up whatever "facts" necessary to stop it.
Aside from the pragmatic fact that we should not torture because it does not work, we should also not do it because it is repugnant and immoral. Once upon a time, America was looked up to because we represented a higher moral standard. That is no longer the case. We have lost our standing as the world's moral leader.
Article is here.
Stinger said:We are doing exactly that, prosecuting those who engage in prohibited behaviors and reenlistments rates are up and all branches met the goals last month.
danarhea said:I would like to believe that, but everything I have read indicates otherwise. Read this link. Its the second article down, "A better option than the draft?" from April of this year, and addresses first term attrition. In addition, this link shows that recruiting is down 8%, and that recruiting for the important military jobs is down 35%. In order to make up for the deficit on important jobs, other jobs are overstaffed. While that might make some areas appear to have reenlistment and recruiting increases, there is still an overall loss, and America's readiness suffers because of it. Depending on exactly where you are in the service, the overall appearance will be as either meeting goals or falling dreadfully short of those goals, hence the differing opinions from voices within the military itself, but from the raw numbers themselves, the military has been missing its goals for overall recruitment and retention for quite some time now.
danarhea said:Actually, you have brought up a good point yourself. Almost all the torture we have witnessed at places such as Abu Ghraib were not carried out by our troops, but by "contractors". However, those few, and I mean very few, soldiers who are doing this are a disgrace to the uniform. Any soldier who is found out to have committed acts like this should be court-martialed, busted down to private, imprisoned, and dishonorably discharged. It is my feeling (and only my feeling, since I am not there) that the witnessing of acts of torture by "contractors" have had a demoralizing effect on our troops all by themselves, and may partially account for the fact that the administration needs to use stop-loss because fewer are voluntarily reenlisting these days.
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?