I wouldn't be entirely sure about that.
I'm saying we should not have torture to ensure the higher moral ground.
Its effectiveness may depend on the individual. Think about it. Torture hurts like hell and if they only turn it up every time your intel is no good and then make it stop and make life comfy if your information turns out to be pretty good and this is going to go on for a very long time...

Having said that, if we want to justify ourselves as the good guys, torture is never a good idea. If more innocent people have to die as a result of foregoing torture, I guess that's the price we will have to pay.
Just the next time a terrorist attack isn't averted because of information that could have been extracted from torture, I don't want to hear the public whining again.

Originally Posted by Rob Henderson

Answer me this, Redcell, if you were being starved every day, and the little food you received was absolute CRAP, you were being "drowned" every day, and lived in a hole by yourself... Wouldn't you tell the person doing it to you anything you could to get out of it? Even... Say... A LIE? And before you answer, consider the fact that if you tell me you wouldn't lie and would only break to tell the truth, I'm going to discredit all future posts from you.

Of course Id lie who wouldnt but the people asking the questions have to have other sources and would be able to tell if they are lying or not. not with everything but with a fair amount. so lets say I lie, they check up on other facts and would eventually find out I am lying. then I would go back to being Starved,waterboarded,and put in a hole, repeatedly untill I told the truth. Which is what happend.

Originally Posted by Redcell

Of course Id lie who wouldnt but the people asking the questions have to have other sources and would be able to tell if they are lying or not. not with everything but with a fair amount. so lets say I lie, they check up on other facts and would eventually find out I am lying. then I would go back to being Starved,waterboarded,and put in a hole, repeatedly untill I told the truth. Which is what happend.

In some cases... But who did we catch more of, the first and second in commands or the low level grunts who don't know anything to give away? We know these people are smart and cunning enough to convince people to blow themselves up, do we really think they're stupid enough to give away their valuable information to anyone who MIGHT get caught?

but that isnt who we waterboard. it is people like Khalid Sheikh Mohammed who we interrogate.
if we did that to everyone we would have an issue.

I hope they really do put a stop to the enhanced interrogation. Discomfort will only get someone to say what you want to hear, if you really want to learn a secret you need sleep deprivation and lots of psychedelic drugs.

^^^ What he said.


Yes, we waterboard people like Mohammed, but like I said... Who do we have more of in Gitmo?

Originally Posted by Redcell

but that isnt who we waterboard. it is people like Khalid Sheikh Mohammed who we interrogate.
if we did that to everyone we would have an issue.

You obviously live in fairy land. "They" would use it on you without a second thought, if it suited their needs, believe it or not, there are people who enjoy doing this type of stuff, you would be just another toy for them to play with.

If they want someone to admit that the sky is falling in, torture will easily achieve that aim.... it's absolutely Pointless......

As it has been pointed out. Torture almost never achieves it's alleged aims, even the FBI admit that fact. http://www.smh.com.au/world/torture-...0514-b4t6.html

The very theory upon which it's use is based is flawed.

So how do we feel about torture?

Let's test it, here is a quick scenario.

A soldier from your country has been captured by the enemy, they believe that he has vital operational information, so they use torture to extract the information.

My questions are:

1. How do you react?
2. How should your govt react?
3. Does this fall within the Geneva & Hague Conventions?

I think his signature might be a clue.
"After Carefully Thinking about The Situation I Have Decided THe U.S. Should Use Kill Em All And Let God Sort Em Out As The Official ROE in Iraq. This Decision Took 15 Seconds."

If that was the ROE, that would defeat the purpose of being there.


Do not use torture, simply because it makes us hard to justify a higher moral ground. Actually, it would make it almost impossible.

It's one thing to torture, but looking at what happened in Abu Ghraib, is that permitted? Gee, why not just find their wives and daughters and rape them instead?

If you know the guy has the info, torture him. But to sexually molest him as that female thing did at AG? In such a case I say "what good for the goose is good for the gander". Do it to her, but in public, BY those she did it to.