Torture? I went through worse in basic training

Originally posted by miketwosix
reply to post by jfj123

 

Yep, I guess I missed it. I thought this was about waterboarding being torture and how awful America is for stooping so low. No matter how many lives it saved.

Here the deal. When all of this rotten violent stuff finally comes too you, just keep talking, I'm sure they'll be very attentive.

[edit on 25-4-2009 by miketwosix]

I'm sorry, how many lives has torture saved? Could you specific regarding the actual numbers saved and the incidents that were averted? Thanks.

Originally posted by jfj123

Originally posted by miketwosix
Directly too you 5th.

Someone you LOVE is about to have thier head cut off right before your very eyes. Your choice is to do what? A little patty cake maybe? Ah, but what if they lose at patty cake and you hurt thier feelings?

Put yourself in the positition, then answer. Would you let it happen or prevent it by any means?

No offense but this example has nothing to do with what is being discussed. What you're talking about is a person witnessing the commission of a crime involving attempted murder. At that point, it is reasonable to prevent the murder using lethal force. You have a direct cause and effect relationship and there is none between torturing people and saving lives.

None taken. If you've read your way through this entire thread you should know I'm the fool that has no idea what it's even about. I seem to be that a lot around here. Even so I still think you guys get my point. I'd rephrase it but none of us are going to convince the other that they're wrong in what they think, no matter how many different ways we approach the subject.

Originally posted by pexx421
Jesus. This person (op) whining about "what i did in basic training was worse than their torture" Just shows what a wimp he is. Basic training was a cakewalk,

One of my ex girlfriends joined the army. She's 5 ft 2 inches, 120 lbs and didn't have a problem with basic training at all with one exception. They put her unit in a room with teargas and they had to stay in there for a certain amount of time without breathing protection. She said that was uncomfortable.

Originally posted by dooper

Anyone who claims that torture doesn't get to the truth, isn't doing it right!

Please enlighten us on how to do it right. Please be specific regarding technique.

There's a right way, and a wrong way.

Do it right, you get your info.

Please post data to support your conclusion.

Originally posted by mmiichael


Good news for all, those waterboarded are still alive and well. Maybe some bad dreams, but that could be indigestion too.

Good news ! All those women who were raped and not killed are still alive. Maybe some bad dreams, but that could be indigestion too.

See how STUPID that sounds?????

Death and dismemberment are worse.

Yes....AND ?

Rules and laws shouldn't be broken. Sometimes they are.

Obvious observation.

The US is far from the only place this happens.

Good excuse. Hey the other guy does it so it's ok for us too !
So if someone rapes and murders a woman in another country, that makes it ok to do in this country ????? Nice logic you have.

One can only try to do better in the future and learn from past mistakes.

Oh and don't forget...we can also prosecute those who committed those..."mistakes".

Why are there no threads on ATS about torture from other countries.

Because it's not topically in the news at the moment. There have been a few though. Do a search if you want to post in those threads.

Finding fault with the US government seems to be some kind of obsessive driving force for so many.

I wonder what that really means.

It means that the bad seeds need to be weeded out.

Originally posted by Styki
reply to post by jfj123

 

You have to understand that these interrogation methods are just one way of gaining information. They aren't pulling people off of that streets and waterboarding them.

Yes they have pulled people off the streets to torture them.

In reality they don't even care about what most people know. There are certain individuals that have key pieces of information and these are high priority targets. Why would they even waste their time interrogating people with useless information?

How do they know they have useless info?

This is not a tell us everything you know type situation. This is a we know you have this information and you are going to tell us situation.

If they know they have specific information, they must already know what information they have so they already have the info, thus making torture pointless.

Originally posted by jfj123

Originally posted by miketwosix
reply to post by jfj123

 

I'm sorry, how many lives has torture saved? Could you specific regarding the actual numbers saved and the incidents that were averted? Thanks.

You're a sharp guy. I have to hand it too you. Now, lets be specific.
Were you refering to waterboarding torture or wet wool mitten torture?

Just stop all the nonsense OK? I'm not going to convince you and you're not going to convince me. When push comes to shove I hope talking works out well for you.

I guess a good compromise would be to take no prisoners. Drop em right where they stand. Then you won't have anyone to torture. Problem solved!

Something tells me you won't like that idea either.

Originally posted by miketwosix

I'm sorry, how many lives has torture saved? Could you specific regarding the actual numbers saved and the incidents that were averted? Thanks.

You're a sharp guy. I have to hand it too you. Now, lets be specific.
Were you refering to waterboarding torture or wet wool mitten torture?

Nice way of avoiding my question. Care to really answer it or did you have absolutely zero evidence to back up your claim?

Just stop all the nonsense OK?

What nonsense ? You made a statement. I asked you to back it up. How is that nonsense ? Or do you mean it's nonsense that I should expect an answer from you that resembles any type of factual and logical response?

I'm not going to convince you and you're not going to convince me.

I'm not trying to convince you of anything. I'm just asking you to back up your statements.

When push comes to shove I hope talking works out well for you.

I have no problem with defending myself, my friends, family or anyone I might see that needs help. I am not a pacifist by any means.

I guess a good compromise would be to take no prisoners. Drop em right where they stand. Then you won't have anyone to torture. Problem solved!

Something tells me you won't like that idea either.

Death on the battlefield is a sad fact of warring nations and/or ideologies which cannot be prevented. Picking potentially innocent people off the street and torturing them has nothing to do with POW's or deaths on the battlefield.

reply to post by jfj123


You want data on how many lives have been saved, and honestly, I think a lot of that stuff would be classified.

You want to know my personal successes?

I made it a habit to not take prisoners if they weren't in uniform, but on the two occasions I did, both times we needed to know their unit and any other units in the area.

I got my information, and if you want to get your information, you have to buy chips to get into the game, and then earn your place at the table. You haven't earned it, and you can mine for your "data" with someone else.

You're not baiting me with your holier-than-thou pretentious BS.

Just because you're either not smart enough to figure it out, or don't have the stomach for it, doesn't mean there aren't those of us who can't or haven't.

And we did get accurate information, and in fact were able to locate a regiment that at the time was "off the map," not three hundred meters from where we were told they would be.

Oh yes. The informer survived.

reply to post by jfj123


Are you saying that not even one life has ever been saved by information gained from torture?

Originally posted by dooper
reply to post by jfj123

 

You want data on how many lives have been saved, and honestly, I think a lot of that stuff would be classified.

No data huh? No proof it works huh?
Well I guess we can just trust darth cheney HAHAHAHAHHHAHAH

You want to know my personal successes?

I made it a habit to not take prisoners if they weren't in uniform, but on the two occasions I did, both times we needed to know their unit and any other units in the area.

I got my information, and if you want to get your information, you have to buy chips to get into the game, and then earn your place at the table. You haven't earned it, and you can mine for your "data" with someone else.

You've seen too many movies tough guy

You're not baiting me with your holier-than-thou pretentious BS.

It has nothing to do with that.
There is plenty of data that shows torture is not a reliable means of obtaining data. Even the people who'd done the water boarding have said this. They are the experts.

Just because you're either not smart enough to figure it out, or don't have the stomach for it, doesn't mean there aren't those of us who can't or haven't.

Oh please. Now with the personal insults. You can't back up anything you've said so you result to calling me dumb. Wow I'm impressed with your tactics

And we did get accurate information, and in fact were able to locate a regiment that at the time was "off the map," not three hundred meters from where we were told they would be.

Uhuh...sure you did.

[edit on 27-4-2009 by jfj123]

reply to post by dooper


Well Dooper, I've got to ask you. Is this guy really worth the time? He's not worth mine. I'm going to go torture my neighbors cat. See ya!

Originally posted by miketwosix
reply to post by jfj123

 

Are you saying that not even one life has ever been saved by information gained from torture?

I'd be interested to know. Wouldn't you?
So far there has not been any evidence to suggest that anyone has been saved from information obtained by torture. Unless of course you're willing to take cheney at his word

so.....
Real Torture


You had to go through stuff like this in training right?


There is no comparison. You say people spend longer time in pools but after being constantly dunk for hours on end for 20-40 seconds, with barely any time to breath in between the time you are underwater, that is considered torture. Where you are at the point of suffocating and dying and they keep you alive for that bit of information you DON'T EVEN HAVE, that is considered torture. Half these terrorists have nothing to tell yet they are being held without even getting a proper trial.

How credible is torture anyway? Terrorists can just tell the people what they want to hear.


You put yourself through water boarding and tell me how it is. I will fully be convinced that torture is nothing in comparison to your training if you tell me that you could endure what these so called "terrorists" go through.




[edit on 27-4-2009 by synyster.]

Extreme and unusual protective measure were enacted in the wake of the first major attack on American soil in over a century.

We do not know if any information obtained from the waterboarding interrogations was useful in preventing the claimed planned attack
on Los Angeles.

We do know no one died in any attacks on LA. Also, the detainees who went through excruciating waterboarding are still alive and well, only slightly worse for wear.


Mike

reply to post by jfj123


Had you read the entire thread, instead of jumping in like a fat man in a wading pool, you'd already know a few things, and some of us wouldn't have to repeat stuff over and over again.

You read the opinions of a couple "experts" who likely obtained their opinions from a journal somewhere, and you're convinced that on can't get accurate information out of a prisoner. Yeah. Riiiiight.

And how are things in Never-Neverland?

Just for you, those on long-range patrols do not take prisoners. It's manpower inefficient, it's a walking, talking liability, they consume precious food and water, they require extra guarding when the handful of men need all the sleep they can get, so we couldn't and WOULDN'T spare the manpower nor the effort.

I'll say it again. You either aren't smart enough to figure it out, or you wouldn't suggest such BS.

The key in any interrogation/confrontation is to first know your enemy. Each enemy has certain collective abominations they fear, whether due to religious beliefs, superstitions, or cultural fears and untouchables. Then there are abominations and fears that we as mankind fear, regardless of where we are from how we were raised, or regardless or religious beliefs.

Once you know them, you use them. It's a form of extreme psychological dislocation.

One can have another whimpering in terror in just a few minutes. Filled with absolute dread, and you haven't even laid a hand on them. They have been psychologically destroyed though sheer fear and anticipation.

You ask for data? Would you consider official Army documentation to be adequate for your statistical quest?

reply to post by miketwosix


I've already got the cat.

Come on over.

Originally posted by dooper
reply to post by jfj123

 

Had you read the entire thread,

I did but thanks for asking.

instead of jumping in like a fat man in a wading pool,

Why? have you already filled your wading pool?

you'd already know a few things, and some of us wouldn't have to repeat stuff over and over again.

blah blah blah

You read the opinions of a couple "experts" who likely obtained their opinions from a journal somewhere,

Actually they came from the people who did the water boarding and the agencies who authorized it.

and you're convinced that on can't get accurate information out of a prisoner. Yeah. Riiiiight.

Historically, torture has been proven ineffective when trying to obtain accurate information from prisoners.

Secret Justice Department memos, released last week ...
...They also note that nonviolent tactics more often were successful than violence.

"The scientific community has never established that coercive interrogation methods are an effective means of obtaining reliable intelligence information," former military interrogation instructor and retired Air Force Col. Steven M. Kleinman wrote in the Intelligence Science Board report. "In essence, there seems to be an unsubstantiated assumption that 'compliance' carries the same connotation as 'meaningful cooperation.'"

Are you claiming you know more then former military interrogation instructor and retired Air Force Col. Steven M. Kleinman wrote in the Intelligence Science Board report ?

In short: Slam someone up against the wall, keep him awake for days, lock him naked in a cell and slap his face enough, and he will probably say something. That doesn't necessarily make it true.

Elsewhere in the Justice Department documents, there are suggestions that the toughest tactics weren't always the most successful. Of the 94 terrorist suspects in the CIA program, only 28 were subjected to "enhanced" methods, the documents said. That means two out of three detainees gave up valuable intelligence in simple interviews.

2 out of 3 detainees gave up VALUABLE intelligence in simple interviews. Hmmmmm. I think that says a lot.

When the CIA decided to use waterboarding — a tactic that simulates drowning — officials ended up using it far more than intended. Abu Zubaydah was waterboarded at least 82 times in August 2002, the documents said. Khalid Sheikh Mohammed, the admitted mastermind of the 9/11 attacks, was waterboarded 183 times in March 2003.

"You keep thinking, 'Maybe one more time, and one more time," Rejali said, explaining how interrogators ramp up their methods even as their effectiveness wanes.

The lawyers sidestepped some thorny questions, such as the consequences of using tactics the U.S. has condemned in Egypt, Iran and Syria. They repeatedly approved the interrogation policies.

And how are things in Never-Neverland?

Seems you are living in never never land

I'll say it again. You either aren't smart enough to figure it out, or you wouldn't suggest such BS.

Or you aren't as smart as you think you are - actually the case
You most definitely are not as smart as all those listed above

The key in any interrogation/confrontation is to first know your enemy.

Yep whatever you say rambo.

Each enemy has certain collective abominations they fear, whether due to religious beliefs, superstitions, or cultural fears and untouchables. Then there are abominations and fears that we as mankind fear, regardless of where we are from how we were raised, or regardless or religious beliefs.

Once you know them, you use them. It's a form of extreme psychological dislocation.

Or you can simply interview them and apparently get results 2 out of 3 times. Seems like you just like the violence

One can have another whimpering in terror in just a few minutes. Filled with absolute dread, and you haven't even laid a hand on them. They have been psychologically destroyed though sheer fear and anticipation.

You seem to enjoy the thought of this. Typically bully mentality puffing his chest up, wanting people to believe he's tough Oh please.

You ask for data? Would you consider official Army documentation to be adequate for your statistical quest?

Sure. If you data can contradict what I posted. You may want to read the quotes carefully so you know where the info came from. Just a suggestion.

[edit on 27-4-2009 by jfj123]

[edit on 27-4-2009 by jfj123]

reply to post by jfj123


You have one, single Colonel, and one DOJ document that "suggests." Well I would suggest that your overwhelming preponderance of documentation has just blown me away.

That is MOST conclusive! wow.

And why are you calling me Rambo, shifferbranes?

I don't trust military statistics. When given foolish rules of engagement to call in before firing, we knew the enemy when we saw them, with AK's over their shoulder, and we'd light them up.

THEN we'd call in for permission. We'd wait, and if permission was denied, we'd walk off. It never happened. Do you have any idea of how such things skewer the "statistics?"

After a very prosperous day while attached to a line unit, I was asked to report to the Captain, who asked if he could claim three or four of my kills.

I told him they didn't put any more money in my pocket, and that he could claim them all. So that's how he got his Silver Star while concealed underneath a log that day.

Official Army documents.

BS.

Don't believe everything you read.

Originally posted by dooper
reply to post by jfj123

 

You have one, single Colonel, and one DOJ document that "suggests." Well I would suggest that your overwhelming preponderance of documentation has just blown me away.

Yes heaven forbid you actually listen to experts.
If you like, I can post a few hundred more pages of documents to back them up. Would that help?

That is MOST conclusive! wow.

And how many times have I offered to post more info at your request??? Quite a few !
And I've noticed you've avoided posting any factual information.

And why are you calling me Rambo, shifferbranes?

I'm sorry, I wasn't very clear. I meant rambo wannabe.

I don't trust military statistics. When given foolish rules of engagement to call in before firing, we knew the enemy when we saw them, with AK's over their shoulder, and we'd light them up.

Well I guess since you don't trust military statistics, you won't be posting the army stats you claim you had.

THEN we'd call in for permission. We'd wait, and if permission was denied, we'd walk off. It never happened. Do you have any idea of how such things skewer the "statistics?"

I've known a lot of military persons and vets. You sound like none of them.

After a very prosperous day while attached to a line unit, I was asked to report to the Captain, who asked if he could claim three or four of my kills.

Sounds like you're playing the xbox just a bit too much.

I told him they didn't put any more money in my pocket, and that he could claim them all. So that's how he got his Silver Star while concealed underneath a log that day.

Official Army documents.

BS.

Don't believe everything you read.

You mean like the STORY you just posted ?

[edit on 27-4-2009 by jfj123]