Enhanced Interrogation- from a guy who did it, and saved a lot of lives

[indiucky]

I look at torture the same way the Shawnee did....

"You got caught and I know you are very embarrassed about that, so here's what we're am going to do....I am going to torture you and give you the opportunity to show us in the village how brave you are....If you do a real good job there is a chance that someone here in our village will be so impressed with your bravery that we may stop the torture and adopt you....So here is the gauntlet...Make a run for it and good luck...Chin up and be brave..."

Both Daniel Boone and Simon Kenton went to their gauntlets and torture spitting, laughing and mocking their captors and both were adopted due to their bravado..


Just another way of looking at torture through the lens of history....

 

[GodFearinGunTotin]

Or, even asked another way, does a person have an exclusive right to knowledge when it is knowledge of harm done to to others, or eminent harm of others?

So if we applied the libertarian principle of non-agression, who aggressed whom in your scenario?

This is why they invented the term grey area. To people at the extremes in the spectrum, it's all black and white. I think for most people, they think in the linear region where the output is proportional to the input. It's reasonable to suspect there isn't really an objective answer for all. ATM might say there is. Someone like Trigger Time might say there is. But their application of principles which drive their beliefs is subjective.

Exactly.

 

[jamil]

I've never seen anything from Kut that would make me suspect in the slightest that he is callous. I would also agree that at some point you arrive at subjectivity. My main purpose here is to figure out how people who truly care about other people would stop so far short of figuring out how to save their lives. Do they care for the one detainee more than the thousand lives at risk? I don't think so. I have some theories, but I don't want to taint the inquiry with them.

Well, yes. We've both established that you're not saying Kut is callous.

 

[gregr]

Well, it's good to see everyone is nice and comfortable. Since we are channeling Orwell:

"People sleep peaceably in their beds at night only because rough men stand ready to do violence on their behalf."

I'm sure in INGO's twisted morality we're OK with sending a 19 year old to his death, and shooting as many people as he can in the process, but dang it, if he gets somebody's sinuses wet in the process someone needs to pay. Hellfire on a wedding reception? No big deal. Slap someone in the face? We've become just like the people we're fighting.

As to whether it works or not, I'll just say this from someone whose honesty I trust implicitly: everyone cracks in SERE. Everyone. And those guys come out just fine (as long as they went in fine).

So if we have a good enough reason to go to war, we have a good enough reason to use legal forms of torture to shorten that war. Or did you know your squishy feelings were responsible for endangering American troops and civilians?

War is evil, and sometimes, a necessary evil. But I stand by my statement that when one becomes the animal they`re fighting, they have no moral high ground any longer. Obviously you disagree, but that`s where it will stand.

 

[jamil]

War is evil, and sometimes, a necessary evil. But I stand by my statement that when one becomes the animal they`re fighting, they have no moral high ground any longer. Obviously you disagree, but that`s where it will stand.

Do degrees matter? So no interrogation at all? Can we ask KSM if he likes his porkchops rare?

 

[HoughMade]

I have a hard time calling people animals who use techniques that cause discomfort, severe discomfort, but temporary, with no permanent injury and no disfigurement who extract useful information that makes us all safer.

 

[gregr]

Do degrees matter? So no interrogation at all? Can we ask KSM if he likes his porkchops rare?

There are no "degrees" of torture, and we all know what torture entails.

 

[Woobie]

There are no "degrees" of torture, and we all know what torture entails.

I disagree. We obviously don't all know. To a millennial, not having cell phone reception for an hour might seem like torture. To my grandfather, getting some water splashed on his face probably would not be torture. So let's hear how you define it.

 

[actaeon277]

Yes. There are degrees.

 

[Alpo]

Imprisonment for any duration is a form of torture. In a modern society it is still an accepted means of protecting society and punishing the criminal. In earlier societies, banishment or death represented the major options at hand to protect the group. In the future, perhaps they'll wipe minds.

Whether physical or psychologic, it is the action or practice of inflicting severe pain on someone as a punishment or to force them to do or say something, or for the pleasure of the person inflicting the pain. I think most of us would agree that sadism is beyond the pale. Other than that, we are only talking about degree and that is by nature, subjective.

 

[indiucky]

There are no "degrees" of torture, and we all know what torture entails.

Indeed we do.....

 

[jamil]

There are no "degrees" of torture, and we all know what torture entails.

Define torture.

 

[gregr]

Define torture.

Explain to me how there are "degrees".

 

[Woobie]

Explain to me how there are "degrees".

You're evading. I asked you a while ago, and Jamil asked again.

The concept of degrees is known. For instance, we have degrees of punishment in our justice system. Drive too fast in your car, pay $150. Break into a house and murder the family, get life without parole. It is not inconceivable then, that there are degrees of torture, as one might define that word. But let's say what the CIA did is torture (which I'm not ready to). Is slapping someone or making them stand up for 12 hours at a time the same thing as cutting out their tongue or taking a blowtorch to their feet?

 

[ATM]

That's subjective.

Yes, even you are subject to it.

 

[Lex Concord]

What is the origin of the rights protected by the U.S. Constitution?

Bueller?

 

[Fargo]

Bueller?

You're going to need to be more specific about which provisions you are referencing. Some are natural rights inherent in the dignity of man and some are not.

 

[Lex Concord]

You're going to need to be more specific about which provisions you are referencing. Some are natural rights inherent in the dignity of man and some are not.

I'm not asking about any particular provision(s) of the document. I'm really not concerned with the document at this point.

If the document in question, or any other, alleges to protect rights, what is the origin of those rights? Do they pre-date the document? Does the document create them?

What are rights, and what is their origin?

 

[Kutnupe14]

I'm not asking about any particular provision(s) of the document. I'm really not concerned with the document at this point.

If the document in question, or any other, alleges to protect rights, what is the origin of those rights? Do they pre-date the document? Does the document create them?

What are rights, and what is their origin?

We all know. But I'm not going to let the cat out of the bag, because I'm interested in who will speak up first, that supports torture by the state.

 

[ATM]

We all know. But I'm not going to let the cat out of the bag, because I'm interested in who will speak up first, that supports torture by the state.

Indeed.