Donald Trump: I'd bring back 'a hell of a lot worse than waterboarding'

a reply to: kosmicjack

I honestly can't help but laugh at it really. Its genius.

Re: Torture and its profound history.

Throughout history, torture has been utilized as a means of both entertainment and evoking truth. There is a sort of crowd pleasing effect in the use of public torture, like flaying, whipping, burning and eventual killing for no other purpose than to dissuade the general population from repeating the actions of the victim. It doesn't matter whether the victim was innocent or guilty, the message is sent and the public loved the show. Imagine watching a person torn apart by 4 horses tied to their arms and legs. This was a popular scene called 'Drawn and Quartered'. *crowd cheers*

It doesn't take much imagination to understand a 'Stoning', burning at the stake, being torn apart by lions or having someone 'Tarred and Feathered' either.

Spectacles all meant to send a message by TPTB to the admiring, ecstatic public.

'Mild torture', if there is such a thing, meant to keep the victim alive is a dangerous game, imho. They will say anything or nothing, depending on the spirit of the one being tortured. Normally, a torturer's efforts will escalate quickly if the answers they want are not forthcoming and dead victims tell no tales.

Only a sadist enjoys torturing and only a masochist will put up with it.

a reply to: masqua

And only a barbaric fool condones it...

a reply to: Swills

I don't know if you're male/female, married or not, or have children. But let's role play:

You're a married man with a wife and two small children. A couple thugs break into your home and kidnap your children. One of the thugs is caught by you, the other runs off with the kids. The thug now in your control, knows the whereabouts of where your kids have been taken, but refuses to cooperate.

Do you...

1. Call the police and let them handle it.
2. Or do you carry out "enhanced interrogation" and get the individual to talk.

a reply to: Eilasvaleleyn

It seems like the majority of you think this is being done for fun. I would hope this is being used as a last resort and that it is being done, due to a serious reasoning for obtaining information. It is a discredit to this community to assume than anyone engaging in these practices is doing so just to get their jollies.

originally posted by: Freenrgy2
a reply to: Swills

I don't know if you're male/female, married or not, or have children. But let's role play:

You're a married man with a wife and two small children. A couple thugs break into your home and kidnap your children. One of the thugs is caught by you, the other runs off with the kids. The thug now in your control, knows the whereabouts of where your kids have been taken, but refuses to cooperate.

Do you...

1. Call the police and let them handle it.
2. Or do you carry out "enhanced interrogation" and get the individual to talk.

Your hypothetical here seems intent to try to get someone to excuse breaking the law because he was too emotional to think rationally and do the appropriate course of action no matter how painful it may seem to them.

PS: I think you need to stop watching Taken.

originally posted by: ReadLeader
a reply to: Swills

What is the difference between water boarding and vaporizing IE: targeted Drone attacks?

Torture is intimate and personal. Drone strikes are cold and calculated.

Trump is all of the above and that is why I would not trust him as far as I could throw him.

originally posted by: Freenrgy2
a reply to: Eilasvaleleyn

It seems like the majority of you think this is being done for fun. I would hope this is being used as a last resort and that it is being done, due to a serious reasoning for obtaining information. It is a discredit to this community to assume than anyone engaging in these practices is doing so just to get their jollies.

When it has been proven, even in this thread, that torture doesn't work....what other conclusion is there?

And if trump would do some research he would see that statistics, research and data confirm that torture like waterboarding is ineffective at producing reliable information. He would also find out that it helps to radicalize our enemies, meaning if you were tortured you would have an undying hatred towards your abusers.

What an idiot.

originally posted by: Freenrgy2
The thug now in your control, knows the whereabouts of where your kids have been taken, but refuses to cooperate.

Does he know? You are presuming that the other thug will stick to the original plan, which, imho, would be a stupid move on his (or her) part.

Once the plan had gone awry, the best way forward for the kidnapper would be to change the location where the children are hidden. In that way, it matters not whether the police or the civilian used torture. In either case, the answers under extreme duress will provide nothing usable.

Waterboarding does not create terrorists. The line that waterboarding does not create actual intel is also simply a talking point. If it needs to be used, do it. It is horrible but it does not kill and if it can save even one innocent life it is worth it. The Recipient made his decision. Now bathe in it...

Second, they are unlawful combatants. All of you are talking about how the Geneva convention is against it and blah blah blah...well, so it hiding your leadership among human shields. Or gassing your own people.

Please, enlighten me to what techniques you would use if you had active intel on a terror attack in 72 hours and you had someone from that cell. This is not a movie...it happens in real life everyday. So, if you were running against Trump what is your suggestion?

a reply to: Swills


I'd risk a few on "worse than waterboarding" rather than sacrifice thousands in a terrorist act.

originally posted by: matafuchs
Waterboarding does not create terrorists. The line that waterboarding does not create actual intel is also simply a talking point. If it needs to be used, do it. It is horrible but it does not kill and if it can save even one innocent life it is worth it. The Recipient made his decision. Now bathe in it...

Not being lethal isn't a reason we disapprove of certain torture techniques... I can think of a plethora of torture techniques that wouldn't kill you but are ALL labeled as torture.

Second, they are unlawful combatants. All of you are talking about how the Geneva convention is against it and blah blah blah...well, so it hiding your leadership among human shields. Or gassing your own people.

One side breaking the Geneva Conventions doesn't excuse the other side from doing it.

Please, enlighten me to what techniques you would use if you had active intel on a terror attack in 72 hours and you had someone from that cell. This is not a movie...it happens in real life everyday. So, if you were running against Trump what is your suggestion?

Well if it happens everyday, then ask the people who do it everyday. Why are you asking people on the internet to answer that question? Clearly its already been figured out if we are able to stop these "everyday threats" that are imminent to happen within 72 hours without torture.

Nothing justifies torture, or "enhanced interrogation techniques" which have a sanitized name but are also absolutely torture. Nothing. It would be one thing if it actually was incredibly useful for obtaining necessary information. Then, I might say: Only in the most dire of circumstances. (Country and world-ending. Nuclear threats, biochemical weapons, so on and so forth.)

But it just isn't EFFECTIVE. It just doesn't work. It violates human rights and the sensibilities of anyone with a conscience and a soul, and it doesn't even get results.

originally posted by: matafuchs
Waterboarding does not create terrorists. The line that waterboarding does not create actual intel is also simply a talking point. If it needs to be used, do it.

So ignore the contitution and sacfrifice your morals and what makes us better?

Cowardness.

USA:
Land of the Tyrant home of the cowards!

originally posted by: matafuchs
The Recipient made his decision. Now bathe in it...

And what about the cases were the CIA have accidently got the wrong person?

originally posted by: matafuchs
Second, they are unlawful combatants. All of you are talking about how the Geneva convention is against it and blah blah blah...well, so it hiding your leadership among human shields. Or gassing your own people.

If they are in war zone. Kill them. If they have been found guilty in a court of law hang them.

But torture is wrong.

originally posted by: matafuchs
Please, enlighten me to what techniques you would use if you had active intel on a terror attack in 72 hours and you had someone from that cell.

Think you have been watching to much 24!

In fact I don’t think torture would be any good.
Very easy to just make up false information. How does the torturer know if its correct? By the time its verified hours have been wasted maybe days. And what’s to stop the person just making up more crap after you find out he was lying and stringing you along further?
And that’s if you pick up the right guy in the first place as the CIA had a woeful record of detaining the wrong person!

originally posted by: matafuchs
This is not a movie....

No its not Torture does not work as in 24!

originally posted by: matafuchs
So, if you were running against Trump what is your suggestion?

Not selling out my moral fabric and values out of cowardness that for sure.

Hell if Sanders or Clinton had suggested this you would be ranting and raveing I bet. Only because its your messiah Trump you think its a good idea!

State sanctioned torture should worry any sane individual!

Again, no answers on how to get the information, right? What technique we as a country should use. Is pharma better? Jack them up with drugs and try to get a good answer out of them.

I would think you would be more concerned that the US passed provisions that make it easier to simply kill someone with no blowback that to waterboard. This was also done during the BUSH admin but no one talks about how it was during that term 'waterboarding' became something not to use. KSM, the 9/11 mastermind did not give up information during that time but months later finally broke. That is not evidence that it did not work.

This is also not a partisan issue. This is a military issue and DHS/CIA issue. I could care less if Bozo the Clown was POTUS if one interrogation lead to lives saved it is worth it.

You know that saying about doing the same thing over and over while expecting different results? Yeah, well, here's the conclusions a look at Bush's Enhanced Interrogation Techniques revealed:

“The use of the CIA’s enhanced interrogation techniques was not an effective means of obtaining accurate information or gaining detainee cooperation,” the Senate report says. “Multiple CIA detainees fabricated information, resulting in faulty intelligence … on critical intelligence issues, including the terrorist threats which the CIA identified as its highest priorities.”
This information comes from the CIA’s own records. And false intelligence is worse than no intelligence.

blogs.reuters.com...

1) The CIA's use of "enhanced interrogation techniques" was not an effective means of acquiring intelligence or gaining co-operation from detainees.

www.bbc.com...

The Senate report on the CIA’s detention and interrogation program represents the most authoritative and comprehensive finding since the US launched its so-called “war on terror” more than 13 years ago that torture does not work.

www.theguardian.com...

originally posted by: matafuchs
This is also not a partisan issue. This is a military issue and DHS/CIA issue. I could care less if Bozo the Clown was POTUS if one interrogation lead to lives saved it is worth it.

Whereas the rest of them lead to false leads, apologies, war crimes, and possibly contributing towards creating new terrorists? But you got that ONE. Thanks Jack Bauer.

a reply to: masqua

You're all skirting the issue. Trying everything in your power to justify not obtaining information through any means necessary. If they were your kids, you would do whatever it took to get information. Would I waterboard, yep. I do know whatever was necessary, short of death, to obtain information that I believed would be credible and actionable in order to prevent mass murder.

a reply to: Freenrgy2

And I'm sure you'd be very pleased when the false information you received led to the police failing to recover you child, who is then lost forever.

Very, very pleased, to be sure.

You see, it's not "information by any means necessary," because the information is never trustworthy and accurate. It is pointless, because it does not work.
If I were a person totally free of morals, and my morality is already quite blue-and-orange, I still would advocate against torture. Because it is not logical. Because, I will repeat, it does not work.