UN Official Wants to Prosecute Bush, Rumsfeld for Torture - Page 3

**shel90** · 01-27-2009, 01:09 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by darkdog

I find it amazing that there's so much hand-wringing over the waterboarding of three terrorists to extract information. It might make me feel morally superior to oppose waterboarding no matter what, but that's easy to do when I don't have to pay the price for a wrong decision. I have to ask myself what I would do if some psycho kidnapped my wife and put her in a situation where she was going to die if I didn't get verifiable information out of him. If I'm being honest with myself, then I have to say I would waterboard him. If some human rights group wanted to protest my decision, I'd give them the middle finger. So if I'm willing to waterboard to get information to save one life, who am I to tell the CIA never to waterboard even if thousands of lives are at stake?

I don't think we should waterboard people out of revenge or desire for punishment. We should only do it when we know someone has valuable, verifiable information and we've exhausted all other avenues.

At first, I thought waterboarding was using as a means of revenge or punishment or just for fun but if they did it to extract information to save lots of innocent lives then I am glad it was done.

**Banjo** · 01-27-2009, 01:30 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by shel90

At first, I thought waterboarding was using as a means of revenge or punishment or just for fun but if they did it to extract information to save lots of innocent lives then I am glad it was done.

However, the psychological damages from waterboarding is often life-lasting and difficult to live with. Suppose the person didn't have the information and was really innocent to start with? That's where the gray area is.

It's in mankind's nature to be barbaric whether people want to admit it or not.

The US government does not negotiate with terrorists. Even if it means sacrificing 500,000 Americans. That's a moral principle to live by.

**Jiro** · 01-27-2009, 01:34 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Banjo

However, the psychological damages from waterboarding is often life-lasting and difficult to live with. Suppose the person didn't have the information and was really innocent to start with? That's where the gray area is.

It's in mankind's nature to be barbaric whether people want to admit it or not.

The US government does not negotiate with terrorists. Even if it means sacrificing 500,000 Americans. That's a moral principle to live by.

you speak of cold hard truth that nobody wants to say. that statement is what USA government is trying to instill - "don't **** with us" in hope of deterring future attacks.

darkdog · 01-27-2009, 02:04 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Banjo

However, the psychological damages from waterboarding is often life-lasting and difficult to live with. Suppose the person didn't have the information and was really innocent to start with? That's where the gray area is.

For me, it comes down to trade-offs. The long-term psychological damage of one terrorist is a small price to pay if it saves hundreds or thousands of lives. I'm also fine with having a chain of command to review information to minimize the possibility of waterboarding the wrong guy. However, the fact that we've only waterboarded three people (all high-value targets) indicates that we're not taking it lightly.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Banjo

It's in mankind's nature to be barbaric whether people want to admit it or not.

Very true. Some people just won't respond to playing nicey-nice. The evil nature of some people can be difficult for good people to understand.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Banjo

The US government does not negotiate with terrorists. Even if it means sacrificing 500,000 Americans. That's a moral principle to live by.

Again, this comes down to trade-offs. If we know for sure there are 500,000 American lives at stake, then we have to weigh that against the cost of (1) giving the terrorists whatever it is they want and (2) showing terrorists that we will cave in to their demands if they put us in a precarious enough situation. If they just want a few terrorists released, it probably isn't worth letting half a million people die over that. On the other hand, if we have the option of waterboarding the terrorists and getting out of the precarious situation altogether, that would probably be the best trade-off.

**Banjo** · 01-27-2009, 02:11 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by darkdog

Again, this comes down to trade-offs. If we know for sure there are 500,000 American lives at stake, then we have to weigh that against the cost of (1) giving the terrorists whatever it is they want and (2) showing terrorists that we will cave in to their demands if they put us in a precarious enough situation. If they just want a few terrorists released, it probably isn't worth letting half a million people die over that. On the other hand, if we have the option of waterboarding the terrorists and getting out of the precarious situation altogether, that would probably be the best trade-off.

If you give a mouse a cookie, he's going to ask for a glass of milk. Terrorists shouldn't be negotiated, no matter what the trade off may be. The problem is, if you cave in to their demands, they are more than likely to not honour the agreement. Once you give them what they want, they may end up carrying out the threat anyway despite the demands being met.

There's rarely a trade off when it comes to negotiating with the terrorists.

Steel X · 01-27-2009, 02:55 PM

I knew it! I ****ing knew it!

Bush has GOT to go to hell, seriously.

Steel X · 01-27-2009, 03:02 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Liebling:-)))

Yes, it's not just Bush but Cheney as well. I feel sick with pain to learn that he defended waterboarding to the meida few days before 20th January that Guantanamo should stay open, waterboarding OK. Cheney admitted that he authorized torture against Guantanamo Detainees.

What a horrible...

No wonder they made our country look so bad already.

They should go back to dumb**** mountain where they came from.

Steel X · 01-27-2009, 03:03 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Hear Again

george w. bush doesn't seem to mind losing over 4,000 soldiers in iraq, so why should we be surprised that he doesn't consider waterboarding as torture?

Yeah he doesnt seem to care about anyone but himself and his power of doing things his way.

...freaking asshole.

**Beowulf** · 01-27-2009, 03:11 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Reba

Did you know that our own SEAL and Special Forces members are waterboarded as part of their training? It's not pleasant, for sure, but it's not torture.

Hear Again · 01-27-2009, 04:11 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Steel X

Yeah he doesnt seem to care about anyone but himself and his power of doing things his way.

...freaking asshole.

you can say that again.

**Reba** · 01-27-2009, 04:17 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Hear Again

george w. bush doesn't seem to mind losing over 4,000 soldiers in iraq, so why should we be surprised that he doesn't consider waterboarding as torture?

You don't know that he "doesn't seem to mind losing" the soldiers. Would you say the same thing about FDR, Lincoln, Washington, Wilson, Truman, Eisenhower, or any other Commander-in-Chief who has troops die on his watch?

Byrdie714 · 01-27-2009, 04:18 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Banjo

If you give a mouse a cookie, he's going to ask for a glass of milk. Terrorists shouldn't be negotiated, no matter what the trade off may be. The problem is, if you cave in to their demands, they are more than likely to not honour the agreement. Once you give them what they want, they may end up carrying out the threat anyway despite the demands being met.

There's rarely a trade off when it comes to negotiating with the terrorists.

Not necessairly.....

The British had their own terrorist group for years and had a hard time dealing with them. Eventually they got to talking and came up with a Peace agreement.

It was the IRA and Northern Ireland.

**Reba** · 01-27-2009, 04:19 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Steel X

Yeah he doesnt seem to care about anyone but himself and his power of doing things his way....

Just because he didn't do things the way you want doesn't mean he doesn't care about other people.

**shel90** · 01-27-2009, 04:19 PM

I understand that sometimes war is necessary to protect this country but torturing prisoners...I agree if they are terrorists and we want to get info from them but Banjo brought up a good point..what if they were innocent? I thought it was illegal to torture prisoners here in America so why is the law being broken over there?

**Jiro** · 01-27-2009, 04:20 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Byrdie714

Not necessairly.....

The British had their own terrorist group for years and had a hard time dealing with them. Eventually they got to talking and came up with a Peace agreement.

It was the IRA and Northern Ireland.

difference is... IRA as terrorist group has a nation of their own - Northern Ireland... which is just like Israel-Palestine. But American's terrorists don't. We're pretty much cherry-picking them on several countries.

**Jiro** · 01-27-2009, 04:22 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by shel90

I understand that sometimes war is necessary to protect this country but torturing prisoners...I agree if they are terrorists and we want to get info from them but Banjo brought up a good point..what if they were innocent? I thought it was illegal to torture prisoners here in America so why is the law being broken over there?

that's why they were confined at Gitmo Camp until their identities and roles can be established. They are immediately released if found innocent/harmless. If their roles have been linked to terrorism, then that's when they get interrogated.

**shel90** · 01-27-2009, 04:24 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Jiro

that's why they were confined at Gitmo Camp until their identities and roles can be established.

So was the waterboarding technique used on them before their identities and roles were established? If this torture had been done on innocent people, that is not gonna help with the peacekeeping process...

**Jiro** · 01-27-2009, 04:26 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by shel90

So was the waterboarding technique used on them before their identities and roles were established? If this torture had been done on innocent people, that is not gonna help with the peacekeeping process...

I don't know because I wasn't there.

Byrdie714 · 01-27-2009, 04:26 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Jiro

difference is... IRA as terrorist group has a nation of their own - Northern Ireland... which is just like Israel-Palestine. But American's terrorists don't. We're pretty much cherry-picking them on several countries.

Actually the IRA wanted reunification with the Republic of Ireland whereas the Loyalists to the crown wanted to keep Northern Ireland within the United Kingdom........

darkdog · 01-27-2009, 04:27 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Banjo

If you give a mouse a cookie, he's going to ask for a glass of milk. Terrorists shouldn't be negotiated, no matter what the trade off may be. The problem is, if you cave in to their demands, they are more than likely to not honour the agreement. Once you give them what they want, they may end up carrying out the threat anyway despite the demands being met.

There's rarely a trade off when it comes to negotiating with the terrorists.

In general, I agree with you. Rewarding bad behavior only brings more of it. But when it comes to extreme cases like where a significant percent of the population's lives are at stake, then I have to reconsider since the costs of those lives may exceed the costs of rewarding of bad behavior. That is assuming we know they're not bluffing, there is no other way to save those people's lives, and we know for sure they will call off their plan. Still, it must also be weighed against what they want. If they only want a few prisoners released, that's one thing. If they want to take over and impose Taliban-like rule on the whole country, then no, it's not worth it.

**Jiro** · 01-27-2009, 04:27 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Byrdie714

Actually the IRA wanted reunification with the Republic of Ireland whereas the Loyalists to the crown wanted to keep Northern Ireland within the United Kingdom........

either way - they came to peace agreement. how can America do it with Al Qaeda when they don't have a nation of their own.

Babyblue · 01-27-2009, 04:38 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Banjo

If you give a mouse a cookie, he's going to ask for a glass of milk. Terrorists shouldn't be negotiated, no matter what the trade off may be. The problem is, if you cave in to their demands, they are more than likely to not honour the agreement. Once you give them what they want, they may end up carrying out the threat anyway despite the demands being met.

There's rarely a trade off when it comes to negotiating with the terrorists.

Sorry off topic.

Banjo! I read that book all the time. If You Give A Mouse A Cookie to my Pre-Schoolers.

I just love how you used a children book as an example

**Reba** · 01-27-2009, 05:12 PM

Some interesting pictures of GITMO:

Scenes from Guantánamo Bay - The Big Picture - Boston.com

Byrdie714 · 01-27-2009, 05:21 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Reba

Some interesting pictures of GITMO:

Scenes from Guantánamo Bay - The Big Picture - Boston.com

Remember that the pictures can be censored. Afterall the military doesn't want to be seen in a bad light.....

Byrdie714 · 01-27-2009, 05:22 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Jiro

either way - they came to peace agreement. how can America do it with Al Qaeda when they don't have a nation of their own.

Good question.

**Reba** · 01-27-2009, 05:26 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Byrdie714

Remember that the pictures can be censored. Afterall the military doesn't want to be seen in a bad light.....

Censored pictures wouldn't be released.

Byrdie714 · 01-27-2009, 05:28 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Reba

Censored pictures wouldn't be released.

I saw the pictures that were in the link and I believe that there is more to it than that was actually shown.

Censored pictures would never get shown as they don't want to *freak* Americans out.

Remember the coffin picture?

**Reba** · 01-27-2009, 05:30 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Byrdie714

I saw the pictures that were in the link and I believe that there is more to it than that was actually shown.

Censored pictures would never get shown as they don't want to *freak* Americans out.

Remember the coffin picture?

There's nothing I can do about what you believe.

Byrdie714 · 01-27-2009, 05:35 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Reba

There's nothing I can do about what you believe.

Same here in regards to you sweetie!

Byrdie714 · 01-27-2009, 05:36 PM

Afterall--do you believe in everything the government tells you?

01-27-2009, 02:55 PM	#66 (permalink)
Steel X Registered User Join Date: Mar 2003 Location: The Carolinas/Rochester, NY. Posts: 13,821	I knew it! I ****ing knew it! Bush has GOT to go to hell, seriously. __________________

01-27-2009, 04:19 PM	#74 (permalink)
shel90 Let It Snow!!!! Join Date: Sep 2006 Location: A place where crabs are popular Posts: 40,286 Blog Entries: 3	I understand that sometimes war is necessary to protect this country but torturing prisoners...I agree if they are terrorists and we want to get info from them but Banjo brought up a good point..what if they were innocent? I thought it was illegal to torture prisoners here in America so why is the law being broken over there? __________________ "Wine improves with age. The older I get, the better I like it." --- Anonymous

Thread Tools
Show Printable Version Email this Page
Display Modes
Linear Mode Switch to Hybrid Mode Switch to Threaded Mode

Today
Deafness	Sponsored Links __________________ This advertising will not be shown in this way to registered members. Register your free account today and become a member on AllDeaf.com

01-27-2009, 05:12 PM	#83 (permalink)
Reba Granny Terp Join Date: Jun 2004 Location: South Carolina Posts: 39,112	Some interesting pictures of GITMO: Scenes from Guantánamo Bay - The Big Picture - Boston.com

01-27-2009, 05:36 PM	#90 (permalink)
Byrdie714 Banned Join Date: Feb 2005 Posts: 8,941	Afterall--do you believe in everything the government tells you?