On Waterboarding as Torture archived
Nov 1, 2007 at 8:08am Edited
Quote from Tom:
So would the iron maiden, or pulling out fingernails with pliers, or cutting off fingers one-by-one with a cigar cutter, or killing a detainee's children in front of him, or breaking him on the wheel.
Yep, they'd all be effective. Then your point is?
tom, when a TV reporter volunteers to have his fingernails pulled out, I'll let you know.
So would the iron maiden, or pulling out fingernails with pliers, or cutting off fingers one-by-one with a cigar cutter, or killing a detainee's children in front of him, or breaking him on the wheel.
Yep, they'd all be effective. Then your point is?
tom, when a TV reporter volunteers to have his fingernails pulled out, I'll let you know.
Lewisinsov: Dresden and Hiroshima/Nagasaki were unacceptable and unnecessary. It is not my moral compass that is awry--it was the compass of Truman and his military leaders that was awry.
Dresden was totally undefensible on any terms.
The old canard is that H/N were necessary because they broke the Japanese people's will to wage war--without these, the Japanese would have fought for years, costing untold American lives. Let's take Nagasaki first--the second bomb was dropped so fast that the Japanese leadership had hardly any time to react to, or even get information on, the Hiroshima bombing. There is good historical data to show that the second bomb was dropped as much to see how it would work (different architecture from the first bomb) as for any other reason. As for breaking their will, there is also historical data to indicate that the Japanese war effort was already significantly stalled for lack of resources at that time. Even if that was not as evident to US planners at the time, they certainly could have demonstrated a nuclear blast at sea rather than incinerating an entire city (which was mainly a civilian and not a military city). The US had a new weapon, there was a huge debate within the military and civilian leadership on whether it was moral or necessary to use it, and those who wanted to test it out on someone (anyone) won the debate. So, I believe the nukes were unnecessary, and therefore the loss of civilian lives was immoral.
Dresden was totally undefensible on any terms.
The old canard is that H/N were necessary because they broke the Japanese people's will to wage war--without these, the Japanese would have fought for years, costing untold American lives. Let's take Nagasaki first--the second bomb was dropped so fast that the Japanese leadership had hardly any time to react to, or even get information on, the Hiroshima bombing. There is good historical data to show that the second bomb was dropped as much to see how it would work (different architecture from the first bomb) as for any other reason. As for breaking their will, there is also historical data to indicate that the Japanese war effort was already significantly stalled for lack of resources at that time. Even if that was not as evident to US planners at the time, they certainly could have demonstrated a nuclear blast at sea rather than incinerating an entire city (which was mainly a civilian and not a military city). The US had a new weapon, there was a huge debate within the military and civilian leadership on whether it was moral or necessary to use it, and those who wanted to test it out on someone (anyone) won the debate. So, I believe the nukes were unnecessary, and therefore the loss of civilian lives was immoral.
Vandalay: So you're saying because some idiot reporter for whatever reason decides to be waterboarded, then it is not torture? How does even remotely compute?
Nov 1, 2007 at 8:16am Edited
If a TV reporter can come out of waterboarding unscathed, then I am reluctant to call it torture. The other things that tom mentions would be torture. If I am wrong in this assumption, then I ask all three branches of gov to please clarify.
"If a TV reporter can come out of waterboarding unscathed, then I am reluctant to call it torture."
Then you are a ...
Then you are a ...
Dave please give RL a get out of banned free card , so he can call me whatever he wants.
Posted By: lewisinsov
Mind you, some pretty bad things were done by the US in the fights against the Nazis and the Soviets.
How do you know? Where you there?
WW II interrogators did not use those techniques. They stated they they "lamented the chasm between the way they conducted interrogations during the war and the harsh measures used today in questioning terrorism suspects."
"We got more information out of a German general with a game of chess or Ping-Pong than they do today, with their torture," said Henry Kolm, 90, an MIT physicist who had been assigned to play chess in Germany with Hitler's deputy, Rudolf Hess.
Blunt criticism of modern enemy interrogations was a common refrain ...
It seems they don't swallow the crap that is spit out by this administration.
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/10/05/AR2007100502492.html
Posted By: lewisinsovTR - Ever read about what Mohammed did to the Kureish? Do you think that his violation of the Treaty of Hudaybiyyah was fair play?
No, I haven't read of it, and violations of treaties sound wrong. I'm not saying he was a role model. I cited the story because it's interesting to hear of a leader who sets high standards, whose warriors say they can't win under those rules, and who sticks to the rules anyway and wins. Don't you find that type of story intriguing?
As a former Master Instructor and Chief of Training at the US Navy Survival, Evasion, Resistance and Escape School (SERE) in San Diego, California I know the waterboard personally and intimately Tom
I also went through prisoner of war training during the Viet Nam War and learned first hand about interrogation techniques, including water boarding. We were introduced to the practice to demonstrate what did not work.
Later, I was Security Officer at the, then top secret, Guantanamo Bay Naval Intelligence facility.
Water boarding has never been an effective tool. Right or wrong, there has never been reliable intelligence gained from this practice. Never!
Other countries use torture in interrogation, not to gain specific information, but to terrorize dissenting individuals and groups in general.
The only protection that an American POW had was the moral high ground and the threat to captors that they would ultimately be exposed and punished for disregarding the Geneva Conventions. This protection, however small, is now gone and our service people and our country will suffer the consequences.
I also went through prisoner of war training during the Viet Nam War and learned first hand about interrogation techniques, including water boarding. We were introduced to the practice to demonstrate what did not work.
Later, I was Security Officer at the, then top secret, Guantanamo Bay Naval Intelligence facility.
Water boarding has never been an effective tool. Right or wrong, there has never been reliable intelligence gained from this practice. Never!
Other countries use torture in interrogation, not to gain specific information, but to terrorize dissenting individuals and groups in general.
The only protection that an American POW had was the moral high ground and the threat to captors that they would ultimately be exposed and punished for disregarding the Geneva Conventions. This protection, however small, is now gone and our service people and our country will suffer the consequences.
re: "If it comes down to "dunking a terrorist in water" or risking American lives , it a no brainer."
OK - I freely admit that I haven't read this whole thread because I just don't have time. But I just can't let this go by.
By using this or any other torture technique, as at least one poster has already pointed out, we ARE risking American lives. We are doing so because by using torture we are saying that it is "OK" and if we say it is "OK" then others who don't use it or not so much, will follow suit and those who do use it, will likely do it more. And guess who they will be doing it to?
If we want to be the "Leader of the Free World" and "A Beacon of Light" or any other such BS descriptors that our current so-called leaders want to use, then by God, we need to start acting like it. And that means refraining from torture and other acts that are clearly illegal and that we do not tolerate within our borders against our own citizens.
This kind of stuff makes me so mad and also very sad.
OK - I freely admit that I haven't read this whole thread because I just don't have time. But I just can't let this go by.
By using this or any other torture technique, as at least one poster has already pointed out, we ARE risking American lives. We are doing so because by using torture we are saying that it is "OK" and if we say it is "OK" then others who don't use it or not so much, will follow suit and those who do use it, will likely do it more. And guess who they will be doing it to?
If we want to be the "Leader of the Free World" and "A Beacon of Light" or any other such BS descriptors that our current so-called leaders want to use, then by God, we need to start acting like it. And that means refraining from torture and other acts that are clearly illegal and that we do not tolerate within our borders against our own citizens.
This kind of stuff makes me so mad and also very sad.
Nov 1, 2007 at 8:57am Edited
From a poster above:
"If AQ wins, it won't be the same America you grew up with either."
The whole waterboarding issue is just a smokescreen covering some of the worst US policies and lame-brained implementation in the past two centuries.
I don't understand this: the US and its sole functioning ally, Great Britain, were able to defeat major military forces in Europe, Asia, and North Africa, with millions under arms, on land and sea, and the US was able to co-exist for more than 40 years with the Soviet Union threat and its military might.
Yet our leaders throw conniptions about a few hundred thousand fanatics, seek to instill irrational fear in us and are willing to toss out the rule of law because of those few hundred thousand fanatics.
'splain that, somebody?
'splain also why, since we know we will be attacked again, we are not working to make our country resilient to disasters and attacks, and why we aren't doing better at protecting our borders and vital installations.
I'll tell you why, in my opinion. Because the direction-less leaders of this country take the easy road: they sow fear and cast about with useless threats, and they waste our resources where they will do the least long-term good, shuffling the deck in Iraq and rattling sabers about Iran.
What a waste of resources. What a waste of precious time.
Shame on any of us who buy that crap.
"If AQ wins, it won't be the same America you grew up with either."
The whole waterboarding issue is just a smokescreen covering some of the worst US policies and lame-brained implementation in the past two centuries.
I don't understand this: the US and its sole functioning ally, Great Britain, were able to defeat major military forces in Europe, Asia, and North Africa, with millions under arms, on land and sea, and the US was able to co-exist for more than 40 years with the Soviet Union threat and its military might.
Yet our leaders throw conniptions about a few hundred thousand fanatics, seek to instill irrational fear in us and are willing to toss out the rule of law because of those few hundred thousand fanatics.
'splain that, somebody?
'splain also why, since we know we will be attacked again, we are not working to make our country resilient to disasters and attacks, and why we aren't doing better at protecting our borders and vital installations.
I'll tell you why, in my opinion. Because the direction-less leaders of this country take the easy road: they sow fear and cast about with useless threats, and they waste our resources where they will do the least long-term good, shuffling the deck in Iraq and rattling sabers about Iran.
What a waste of resources. What a waste of precious time.
Shame on any of us who buy that crap.
The moral authority meter is off the charts. It is ok to lob cruise missiles at Bin Laden and kill innocent people, buy it is morally wrong to dunk Khaleed Sheik Mohamad.
re: torture, waterboarding is [the least of it](http://www.rollingstone.com/politics/story/11128331/follow_omar_khadr_from_an_al_qaeda_childhood_to_a_gitmo_cell/print)
Vandalay,
I don't think you read the article in Small Wars Journal that tom linked to, so I'm going to post the more salient points here:
"Unless you have been strapped down to the board, have endured the agonizing feeling of the water overpowering your gag reflex, and then feel your throat open and allow pint after pint of water to involuntarily fill your lungs, you will not know the meaning of the word.
Waterboarding is a controlled drowning that, in the American model, occurs under the watch of a doctor, a psychologist, an interrogator and a trained strap-in/strap-out team. It does not simulate drowning, as the lungs are actually filling with water. There is no way to simulate that. The victim is drowning. How much the victim is to drown depends on the desired result (in the form of answers to questions shouted into the victims face) and the obstinacy of the subject. A team doctor watches the quantity of water that is ingested and for the physiological signs which show when the drowning effect goes from painful psychological experience, to horrific suffocating punishment to the final death spiral.
Waterboarding is slow motion suffocation with enough time to contemplate the inevitability of black out and expiration usually the person goes into hysterics on the board."
Let me emphasize the difference between a "dunking" and "waterboarding". Dunking of course implies only that a person is dropped in water. Waterboarding is forcing the victim to allow water to enter his lungs. Lungs filled with water cannot exchange oxygen. A little water--no permanent damage. A lot of water--now you're talking about the same process in which people die of congestive heart failure or some forms of pneumonia, only speeded up.
I don't think you read the article in Small Wars Journal that tom linked to, so I'm going to post the more salient points here:
"Unless you have been strapped down to the board, have endured the agonizing feeling of the water overpowering your gag reflex, and then feel your throat open and allow pint after pint of water to involuntarily fill your lungs, you will not know the meaning of the word.
Waterboarding is a controlled drowning that, in the American model, occurs under the watch of a doctor, a psychologist, an interrogator and a trained strap-in/strap-out team. It does not simulate drowning, as the lungs are actually filling with water. There is no way to simulate that. The victim is drowning. How much the victim is to drown depends on the desired result (in the form of answers to questions shouted into the victims face) and the obstinacy of the subject. A team doctor watches the quantity of water that is ingested and for the physiological signs which show when the drowning effect goes from painful psychological experience, to horrific suffocating punishment to the final death spiral.
Waterboarding is slow motion suffocation with enough time to contemplate the inevitability of black out and expiration usually the person goes into hysterics on the board."
Let me emphasize the difference between a "dunking" and "waterboarding". Dunking of course implies only that a person is dropped in water. Waterboarding is forcing the victim to allow water to enter his lungs. Lungs filled with water cannot exchange oxygen. A little water--no permanent damage. A lot of water--now you're talking about the same process in which people die of congestive heart failure or some forms of pneumonia, only speeded up.
From the same article, on the effectiveness of waterboarding:
"On a Mekong River trip, I met a 60-year-old man, happy to be alive and a cheerful travel companion, who survived the genocide and torture he spoke openly about it and gave me a valuable lesson: If you want to survive, you must learn that walking through a low door means you have to be able to bow. He told his interrogators everything they wanted to know including the truth. They rarely stopped. In torture, he confessed to being a hermaphrodite, a CIA spy, a Buddhist Monk, a Catholic Bishop and the son of the king of Cambodia. He was actually just a school teacher whose crime was that he once spoke French. He remembered the Barrel version of waterboarding quite well. Head first until the water filled the lungs, then you talk."
"On a Mekong River trip, I met a 60-year-old man, happy to be alive and a cheerful travel companion, who survived the genocide and torture he spoke openly about it and gave me a valuable lesson: If you want to survive, you must learn that walking through a low door means you have to be able to bow. He told his interrogators everything they wanted to know including the truth. They rarely stopped. In torture, he confessed to being a hermaphrodite, a CIA spy, a Buddhist Monk, a Catholic Bishop and the son of the king of Cambodia. He was actually just a school teacher whose crime was that he once spoke French. He remembered the Barrel version of waterboarding quite well. Head first until the water filled the lungs, then you talk."
On the role of waterboarding in American history:
"After World War 2, Japanese waterboard team members were tried for war crimes. In Vietnam, service members were placed under investigation when a photo of a field-expedient waterboarding became publicly known."
"After World War 2, Japanese waterboard team members were tried for war crimes. In Vietnam, service members were placed under investigation when a photo of a field-expedient waterboarding became publicly known."
On the effectiveness of waterboarding Sheik Mohammed:
"the administration has selectively leaked supposed successes of the water board such as the alleged Khalid Sheik Mohammed confessions. However, in the same breath the CIA sources for the Washington Post noted that in Mohammeds case they got information but "not all of it reliable." "
"the administration has selectively leaked supposed successes of the water board such as the alleged Khalid Sheik Mohammed confessions. However, in the same breath the CIA sources for the Washington Post noted that in Mohammeds case they got information but "not all of it reliable." "
On the "ticking bomb" scenario:
"What next if the waterboarding on a critical the captive doesnt work and you have a timetable to stop the ticking bomb scenario? Electric shock to the genitals? Taking a pregnant woman and electrocuting the fetus inside her? Executing a captives children in front of him? Dropping live people from an airplane over the ocean? It has all been done by governments seeking information. All claimed the same need to stop the ticking bomb."
"What next if the waterboarding on a critical the captive doesnt work and you have a timetable to stop the ticking bomb scenario? Electric shock to the genitals? Taking a pregnant woman and electrocuting the fetus inside her? Executing a captives children in front of him? Dropping live people from an airplane over the ocean? It has all been done by governments seeking information. All claimed the same need to stop the ticking bomb."
Sorry, one more cut and paste. This is for those of you who prefer to describe Malcolm Nance as a no-nothing "retiree":
Once at SERE and tasked to rewrite the Navy SERE program for the first time since the Vietnam War, we incorporated interrogation and torture techniques from the Middle East, Latin America and South Asia into the curriculum. In the process, I studied hundreds of classified written reports, dozens of personal memoirs of American captives from the French-Indian Wars and the American Revolution to the Argentinean Dirty War and Bosnia. There were endless hours of videotaped debriefings from World War Two, Korea, Vietnam and Gulf War POWs and interrogators. I devoured the hundreds of pages of debriefs and video reports including those of then Commander John McCain, Colonel Nick Rowe, Lt. Dieter Dengler and Admiral James Stockdale, the former Senior Ranking Officer of the Hanoi Hilton. All of them had been tortured by the Vietnamese, Pathet Lao or Cambodians. The minutiae of North Vietnamese torture techniques was discussed with our staff advisor and former Hanoi Hilton POW Doug Hegdahl as well as discussions with Admiral Stockdale himself. The waterboard was clearly one of the tools dictators and totalitarian regimes preferred.
Once at SERE and tasked to rewrite the Navy SERE program for the first time since the Vietnam War, we incorporated interrogation and torture techniques from the Middle East, Latin America and South Asia into the curriculum. In the process, I studied hundreds of classified written reports, dozens of personal memoirs of American captives from the French-Indian Wars and the American Revolution to the Argentinean Dirty War and Bosnia. There were endless hours of videotaped debriefings from World War Two, Korea, Vietnam and Gulf War POWs and interrogators. I devoured the hundreds of pages of debriefs and video reports including those of then Commander John McCain, Colonel Nick Rowe, Lt. Dieter Dengler and Admiral James Stockdale, the former Senior Ranking Officer of the Hanoi Hilton. All of them had been tortured by the Vietnamese, Pathet Lao or Cambodians. The minutiae of North Vietnamese torture techniques was discussed with our staff advisor and former Hanoi Hilton POW Doug Hegdahl as well as discussions with Admiral Stockdale himself. The waterboard was clearly one of the tools dictators and totalitarian regimes preferred.
America, under this administration, is no longer acting like a great nation.
Posted By: bettydAmerica, under this administration, is no longer acting like a great nation.
And all we get as a defense is that the ends justify the means. How utterly shameful.
...And a debate on whether waterboarding is actually torture.
Yes, this is where the Bush admin has brought us.
Yes, this is where the Bush admin has brought us.
Nov 1, 2007 at 10:06am Edited
over the U.S. history there have been many times where it (people acting on the USA's behalf) has not acted like a great nation, torture on behalf of the U.S. has been carried out since before you were born, and most likely will still be around after we are all gone, it's nothing new.
America has not ratified Protocol I to the Geneva Conventions. Therefore, you can call it what you like, but that doesn't make it illegal.
TR - "Proven not to work. Unproven to work." - KSM = res ipsa loquitur
"Don't you find that type of story intriguing?" - Maybe, in a fairy tale sort of way. I would love to think that America can fight wars against dirty opponents whilst remaining squeaky clean itself. However, I prefer to live in the real world.
Bern - "How do you know? Where you there?" - No. And I wasn't around during WWII, yet I believe it happened. Maybe you should read a book or two and learn what the US did during the Cold War. A lot of it was not very nice (not that the Soviets were any better) and yes even torture was used during the Cold War.
sac - "we ARE risking American lives" - do you really think that AQ would treat us more gently if we were nicer to them? The history of the United States has been that its opponents have almost without exception flagrantly violated the Geneva Conventions. They will do what they like regardless of what we do. It would be lovely for the US to be a "Leader of the Free World" and a "Beacon of Light", but firstly it needs to ensure its existence.
Inny - mutually assured destruction. They have nothing to lose. And "a few hundred thousand" is a gross underestimate. There are over a million members of Hizb ut-Tahrir alone.
TR - "Proven not to work. Unproven to work." - KSM = res ipsa loquitur
"Don't you find that type of story intriguing?" - Maybe, in a fairy tale sort of way. I would love to think that America can fight wars against dirty opponents whilst remaining squeaky clean itself. However, I prefer to live in the real world.
Bern - "How do you know? Where you there?" - No. And I wasn't around during WWII, yet I believe it happened. Maybe you should read a book or two and learn what the US did during the Cold War. A lot of it was not very nice (not that the Soviets were any better) and yes even torture was used during the Cold War.
sac - "we ARE risking American lives" - do you really think that AQ would treat us more gently if we were nicer to them? The history of the United States has been that its opponents have almost without exception flagrantly violated the Geneva Conventions. They will do what they like regardless of what we do. It would be lovely for the US to be a "Leader of the Free World" and a "Beacon of Light", but firstly it needs to ensure its existence.
Inny - mutually assured destruction. They have nothing to lose. And "a few hundred thousand" is a gross underestimate. There are over a million members of Hizb ut-Tahrir alone.
Nov 1, 2007 at 10:10am Edited
Monster,
That is correct. But torture has not been officially sanctioned interrogation technique until now. As I posted above, after WW11, Japanese soldiers who had waterboarded were charged with torture.
That is correct. But torture has not been officially sanctioned interrogation technique until now. As I posted above, after WW11, Japanese soldiers who had waterboarded were charged with torture.
"over the U.S. history there have been many times where it (people acting on the USA's behalf) has not acted like a great nation, torture on behalf of the U.S. has been carried out since before you were born, and most likely will still be around after we are all gone, it's nothing new."
But when in history has actual torture been not only condoned but strongly and openly encouraged by the President and his people?
But when in history has actual torture been not only condoned but strongly and openly encouraged by the President and his people?
Nov 1, 2007 at 10:11am Edited
WOB posted the horrors of Guantanemo and that alone should make every person question what and in whose name we are doing these things.
also from the article this incredible paragraph
[quote]There is no scientific evidence that such coercion is better than any other kind of interrogation; it is probably worse. SERE techniques were not designed to be used in the real world; they were designed to test the psychic endurance of Air Force pilots. [b]When the FBI sent some of its best counterterrorism agents to Guantanamo soon after the camps opened, the agents chose to use what is known as rapport-based interrogation, which apparently worked. The FBI agents found the coercive tactics used by military intelligence both disgusting and stupid: The abusive treatment instantly destabilized detainees, making the information they provided unreliable as intelligence and useless in court.[/b] [/quote]
again I say firmly -
torture is NEVER an option
also from the article this incredible paragraph
[quote]There is no scientific evidence that such coercion is better than any other kind of interrogation; it is probably worse. SERE techniques were not designed to be used in the real world; they were designed to test the psychic endurance of Air Force pilots. [b]When the FBI sent some of its best counterterrorism agents to Guantanamo soon after the camps opened, the agents chose to use what is known as rapport-based interrogation, which apparently worked. The FBI agents found the coercive tactics used by military intelligence both disgusting and stupid: The abusive treatment instantly destabilized detainees, making the information they provided unreliable as intelligence and useless in court.[/b] [/quote]
again I say firmly -
torture is NEVER an option
You can not reply as this discussion is Closed!
Rentals
-
Huge Brand New construction Apartment in 2 family home with 4 bedrooms 3 bathrooms
4 Bd | 3Full Ba
$4,500
Employment Wanted
Latest Jobs
Employment Wanted
-
On call house cleaning service
May 6, 2024 at 7:17pm
-
May 6, 2024 at 10:11am
-
Experienced Summer Nanny Available: Thursdays & Fridays ;)
May 6, 2024 at 8:56am
-
Brazilian cleaning 973 776 2481
May 5, 2024 at 7:35pm
-
May 5, 2024 at 11:14am
-
May 4, 2024 at 1:08pm
Help Wanted
-
CF583 PT Nanny for 2 (July Start)
May 7, 2024 at 2:07pm
-
May 7, 2024 at 7:32am
-
May 3, 2024 at 2:32pm
-
Cat Lovers - become part of our lovely Silver Hound Cat Sitter team
May 3, 2024 at 2:12pm
Lessons/Instruction
Advertisement
Proven not to work. Unproven to work.
Can you explain, please? If it applies to the tortured, then doesn't that mean torture is illegal?
Illegal means never. And who gets to decide what's extreme and limited? That's a key question, not a diversion.
Look, I think I know the realities of war. It's going to happen. And when it happens, everyone concerned should be shocked and outraged, even if it's just an act. And the perpetrators should be prosecuted fully. There should be no backpedalling or defense of torture as an institution. There should be no hedging to claim that it's sometimes acceptable. I know I'm saying "no torture" and then winking, or maybe I'm saying, "just don't get caught doing it." I'm not even saying I want torture to happen, but we really ought to agree that those who get caught doing it should have their heads handed to them, perhaps literally.