I thought this was a bad move. It really hurts America's fight in the war on terror. With this decision it seems he is more concerned about the safety of the terrorists than he is about our American military ! I liked this analysis. They gave him an F on this and so do I:
http://www.thebarackobamawatch.com/TERRORISM.html

Originally Posted by larry5

I thought this was a bad move. It really hurts America's fight in the war on terror. With this decision it seems he is more concerned about the safety of the terrorists than he is about our American military ! I liked this analysis. They gave him an F on this and so do I:
http://www.thebarackobamawatch.com/TERRORISM.html

I think you've got the cart before the horse.

What really hurts Americas fight against terrorism is being caught out like a naughty kid with his hand in the biscuit barrel, using tactics no better than the terrorists and then trying (very unsuccessfully) to hide the fact.

We're supposed to be "The Good Guys" remember??? Unprofessional.....

Not to mention we just had a man run for president who successfully resisted interrogation methods like the ones we're using; they don't work that well.

Originally Posted by larry5

I thought this was a bad move. It really hurts America's fight in the war on terror. With this decision it seems he is more concerned about the safety of the terrorists than he is about our American military ! I liked this analysis. They gave him an F on this and so do I:
http://www.thebarackobamawatch.com/TERRORISM.html

Do you know at the end of WWII. The US military tried, convicted and executed Japanese war criminals who used waterboarding to interogate American POWs. The Japanese sadistically called it "The Water Cure".

If we could hang the Japanese for using the exact same techniques doesnt that make us look abit hypocritical when we say its OK?

Oh and using a "bash-obama'' website as a source is not what I'd call reliable information.

Exactly, M. We have no right doing what we have punished others for in the past and the present. And going to a bash Obama site for reliable info on Obama is like asking the KKK for their opinion on Morris Dees. It just doesn't work.

I would like to see ONE instance where US troops broke bones, tore off fingernails, used drills into kneecaps, or hacked off ANYONE's head, terrorist or no, in this Global War on Islamist Terror. Had we done so, THEN someone could claim "using tactics no better than the terrorists and then trying (very unsuccessfully) to hide the fact."

Until that point is proven, then claiming we are acting as bad as the scum we were interrogating is sophistry and moral equivalency of a shoddy nature. Not trying to pick a fight here, but we WERE interrogating hardbitten fanatics who probably faced worse treatment than they received at the hands of US personnel in their own terrorist training camps.

And, trying to claim that our "waterboarding" techniques were the same as the Japanese water torture in WWII is another complete mischaracterization.

Frankly, Obama showing to the world what kid gloves we used on these lunatics makes the bad guys LESS afraid of us than before.

There is a huge reason that the violence in Iraq is escalating again: Weakness in the White House. When facing down murderers, puppy dog motivational posters are NOT the way to win.

Bropous stated:

I would like to see ONE instance where US troops broke bones, tore off fingernails, used drills into kneecaps, or hacked off ANYONE's head, terrorist or no, in this Global War on Islamist Terror. Had we done so, THEN someone could claim "using tactics no better than the terrorists and then trying (very unsuccessfully) to hide the fact."

So because we dont use the tactics you listed above we dont torture? Thats a very silly arguement. You didnt list the Bolivian Telephone or the Chinese Water Treatment, do you not think those arent methods of torture? Lets be honest here, you wouldnt last 10 seconds if you were being waterboarded. Everybody I have read about who has undergone the treatment says unequivilably that it IS torture, including a sitting Republican US Senator.

Until that point is proven, then claiming we are acting as bad as the scum we were interrogating is sophistry and moral equivalency of a shoddy nature. Not trying to pick a fight here, but we WERE interrogating hardbitten fanatics who probably faced worse treatment than they received at the hands of US personnel in their own terrorist training camps.

And, trying to claim that our "waterboarding" techniques were the same as the Japanese water torture in WWII is another complete mischaracterization.

Oh really? Please explain this in detail.

Frankly, Obama showing to the world what kid gloves we used on these lunatics makes the bad guys LESS afraid of us than before.

Obama has been in power about 4 months and you have already written him off? Doesnt sound like you were very objective to begin with. And lets not forget, who it was that got us into the mess in Iraq in the first place...it wasnt Obama.

There is a huge reason that the violence in Iraq is escalating again: Weakness in the White House. When facing down murderers, puppy dog motivational posters are NOT the way to win.

Oh because the reckless aggression, bravado, shoot first think later, cowboy wannabee tactics worked so well previously right?

mmarsh, sorry, won't get me to shed a tear that Khalid Sheik Mohammed got his face wet. And you are absolutely correct, I would not last ten seconds under ANY of these interrogation methods, but then again, I never did anything to cause me to be interrogated, Sir.

As for Obama, you bet your boots I NEVER gave him a chance. I have strong political convictions, and I have seen what Democrats have done to our nation each time they have been handed the White House in the time I have been alive. I saw Obama as a hard Left fundamentalist America-hating disciple of the Jeremiah Wright version of American geopolitics, which cannot be more diametrically opposed to my world view if he tried. So, no, I'm not one of these types who moisten their finger, hold it up to the wind, and see if the new political winds are to my liking a particular day: Obama is WRONG on EVERY issue, and he has proven so every day he has been in office, as wrong as I knew he would be, and actually, on Iran, even MORE wrong than I anticipated.

Again, I find the claim that US personnel commited actual torture on captives patently absurd, whether I would enjoy being treated in that manner or not. You want torture? Look to Abu Ghraib under Sadam Husayn, look to the Lubyanka, look to Castro's Cuba, look to any Chicom prison. But to call what US personnel did in interrogations of these Islamist savages is NOT "torture", and I for one am GLAD that these methods were used, because they saved American and allied lives, and the lives of countless innocent civilians. Obama just wanted to embarass the Bush Administration and his revelation of personnel's names and faces who carried out LAWFUL orders puts those personnel up as targets for retaliation. THAT, my friend, is TREASON, no matter who does it.

Torture is what the enemies of the west do, Sir. What was done at Abu Ghraib under Coalition control and Gitmo were NOT torture, no matter how many times you say it. I said I did not like what happened with folks who were shipped to Morocco, that WAS torture.

There is a BIG difference.

These tactics don't even work that well! Take waterboarding, for example. I've heard reports that they waterboarded some suspects as many as 200 times. At what point do you think the prisoners figured out that we weren't actually going to drown them and just shut up? Why not do what's worked so well for the past hundred or so years?

I have seen what the Democrats have done each time they have been handed the White House as well. There was a big economic boom in the 1990s, followed by a recession in the 2000s. And what is wrong with negotiating with our enemies? Had we not negotiated during the Cuban Missile Crisis, none of us would be here having this conversation right now.

Yes, you can look at the bad guys. But we're not the bad guys; America is the good guys, and as the good guys we can not use harsh methods to interrogate, whether you call it torture or not! I ask you to name one way that these methods have helped keep America safer. And the roundup of so called "inferior types" was legal in German controlled areas during WWII; in fact it was ordered by the head of state. Does that make it right?

And by your definition, THIS is not torture (viewer discretion advised): http://ancapistan.typepad.com/photos...ghraib2dog.jpg

"I've heard reports that they waterboarded some suspects as many as 200 times."

I heard that, too, then I heard the correction:

http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2009...boarded-times/

"A U.S. official with knowledge of the interrogation program told FOX News that the much-cited figure represents the number of times water was poured onto Mohammed's face -- not the number of times the CIA applied the simulated-drowning technique on the terror suspect. According to a 2007 Red Cross report, he was subjected a total of "five sessions of ill-treatment.

"The water was poured 183 times -- there were 183 pours," the official explained, adding that "each pour was a matter of seconds.

"The memos describe the controversial process: a detainee is strapped to a gurney with his head lowered and a cloth placed on his face. Interrogators pour water onto the cloth, which cuts off air flow to the mouth and nostrils, tripping his gag reflex, causing panic and giving him the sensation that he is drowning.

"At that point the cloth would be removed, the gurney rotated upright and the detainee would be allowed to breathe. The technique could be repeated a few times during a waterboarding session; Zubaydah said it was generally used once or twice, but he said he was waterboarded three times during one session.

The Justice Department memos described the maximum allowed use of the waterboard on any detainee, based on tactical training given to U.S. troops to resist interrogations:
-- Five days of use in one month, with no more than two "sessions" in a day;
-- Up to six applications (something like a dunk) lasting more than 10 seconds but less than 40 seconds per session;
-- 12 minutes of total "water application" in a 24-hour period"

And gee, I wonder, what does the "Al-Qaeda Interrogation Manual" allow, and how often has the IRC and Amnesty International visited the Taliban POW Camps?

Bueller? Bueller?

*cue crickets chirping*