Ed Senate: Torture should not be our legacy

[RandFan]

And thank you for a well reasoned reply.
In reference to Xenu's paradox I am assuming you are referring to dichotomy paradox, but no, I am not. I am only seeking a general point where the line should be drawn.
As you probably know, I have more than a passing familiarity with the techniques of interrogation, but I am more interested in what the general public feels is excessive.

Personally I feel that any technique which has a likelihood of causing permanent physical harm exceeds the boundary. In short, the blowtorch is out, and I think everyone on both sides of the line is in agreement with that.
After that, we have shades of grey.
As example, sleep deprivation (which you mentioned before), or threats of action (but not the action in itself).
Am I clear about this? (no sarcasm intended)

Thanks. Quite clear. I'd like to add an anecdote to clarify a point.

My children all suffered febrile seizures (5 episodes total). This happens as a result of high fevers and is actually the bodies way of dealing with the fever. A visit to an emergency room and a doctor can quickly rule out serious underlying conditions.

In the case of my youngest and the last episode (she was 2), her tests were not reassuring to the attending physician. He kept ordering more blood draws. My daughter became more and more frightened as time progressed and I was unable to calm her.

Finally the doctor ordered a spinal tap but needed my permission. I agonized over that but after a few minutes I agreed.

The doctor asked me to place my one hand behind my daughters neck and one behind her knees. Then he wanted me to force her head and knees together. My daughter cried and then yelled out when the doctor placed the needle. After that getting my daughter to the doctor became a hell and resulted in fights between my wife and I.

My daughter will not go to see a doctor on her own. My wife often makes appointments for her and she goes with her. I've taken her a couple of times but she is less stressed with my wife. Often she won't stay for the appointment but leaves early.

Some people don't believe PTSD is real or all that maladaptive. It is. The fear of cancer is not enough to get my daughter to get her exams on her own.

Having told the anecdote let me make some quick concessions. Arrest can cause PTSD. Incarceration can cause PTSD. Many things can cause PTSD. My only point is that we ought to avoid causing PTSD particularly if there is another technique that is effective and less likely to cause PTSD.

 

[ponderingturtle]

I wouldn't want any potential trials pooched by tainted confessions, for sure. I think unfortunately that might be the case for *********** KSM, the murderous bastard.

It also did wonderful things for waiting time and money. And who cares about a few innocent people tortured to death by mistake? Not a legal issue in that at all.

Shame we punished the enlisted people at Abu Graib for doing what they were told to do though. They should get the same coverage as everyone else.

 

[Toontown]

Without waterboarding, this wonderful thread full of morally superior posturing could not exist.

 

[Cl1mh4224rd]

Without waterboarding, this wonderful thread full of morally superior posturing could not exist.

I'd be OK with that.

 

[RandFan]

I'd be OK with that.

I don't think we are going to be water boarding anytime soon. IMO: That legacy belongs to George Bush and Dick Cheney.

So long as we as a nation are appalled at the policies and, IMO, illegality of Bush and co we can confine that horrible chapter in our history mostly to them. We have to accept some of that though. It happened under our watch.

 

[Toontown]

Without torture, Saddam could not have maintained the vaunted "stability" in Iraq for 3 decades. in fact, every time someone bemoans the forcible overthrow of Saddam, citing the "stability" he wrought, they are implicitly approving Saddam's torturous methods of maintaining said "stability".

 

[RandFan]

It also did wonderful things for waiting time and money. And who cares about a few innocent people tortured to death by mistake? Not a legal issue in that at all.

Shame we punished the enlisted people at Abu Graib for doing what they were told to do though. They should get the same coverage as everyone else.

Failure all around. It's sad we cannot simply own up to our crimes. They happened. Why the need to pretend otherwise?

Did torture help lead to bin Laden?

It's ineffective, wastes resources and reduces our moral standing in the world. Why do people feel compelled to defend it?

 

[Toontown]

It's ineffective, wastes resources and reduces our moral standing in the world. Why do people feel compelled to defend it?

There is really no need to defend or condemn it ad infinitum. It doesn't amount to a mole hill in the context of this brutish monkeyball we live on.

 

[RandFan]

False consolation

"False consolation is a fallacy because it fails to deny the claim."

 

[Belz...]

Lindsey Graham

Of course he would vote against it. *********** idiot.

 

[Belz...]

And now I'm just taking a moment to enjoy the irony that an American political body seems to be doing a better job of thinking critically than are the skeptics here gathered.

You got me, it is that easy.

Yes, yes it was.

Could you provide an example to explain what it is you mean? I once defended the techniques I now think should be forever left in our past. I changed my mind due to discussion of the issues involved. This makes me uncritical how?

Well, you don't agree with theprestige. Ergo you are wrong.

 

[Cl1mh4224rd]

I don't think we are going to be water boarding anytime soon. IMO: That legacy belongs to George Bush and Dick Cheney.

Toontown was implying that the non-existence of this thread due to a lack of waterboarding on the previous administration's part would somehow be taken as a bad thing by some people here, and, therefore, the fact that waterboarding occurred is a good thing.

I was simply pointing out that I, personally, would be quite alright with this thread not existing if that nonexistence meant that no waterboarding had occurred.

 

[RandFan]

Toontown was implying that the non-existence of this thread due to a lack of waterboarding on the previous administration's part would somehow be taken as a bad thing by some people here, and, therefore, the fact that waterboarding occurred is a good thing.

I was simply pointing out that I, personally, would be quite alright with this thread not existing if that nonexistence meant that no waterboarding had occurred.

I couldn't agree more.

I spent 8 years defending Bush on this forum. I continued to defend him even after the Katrina nightmare and even after knowing that the Iraq invasion was based on wishful thinking. I defended Abu Ghraib and torture.

 

[Mark6]

Of course he would vote against it. *********** idiot.

The sad thing is Lindsey Graham is NOT an idiot. He is one of very few Republican Senators who do not think climate change is a liberal hoax, and yesterday he basically told the rest of his party to get onto right side of history WRT gay marriage. Yet he is also probably the biggest warmonger in the Senate.

 

[thaiboxerken]

Without torture, Saddam could not have maintained the vaunted "stability" in Iraq for 3 decades. in fact, every time someone bemoans the forcible overthrow of Saddam, citing the "stability" he wrought, they are implicitly approving Saddam's torturous methods of maintaining said "stability".

There is a difference between using torture to gather intelligence and using torture to subjugate people.

Are you actually defending the use of torture for either purpose?

 

[Toontown]

Without torture, Saddam could not have maintained the vaunted "stability" in Iraq for 3 decades. in fact, every time someone bemoans the forcible overthrow of Saddam, citing the "stability" he wrought, they are implicitly approving Saddam's torturous methods of maintaining said "stability".

There is a difference between using torture to gather intelligence and using torture to subjugate people.

Are you actually defending the use of torture for either purpose?

Are you actually trying to re-write my post? Yes, you are. Wow. I never expected that.

Try taking what I wrote verbatim, and, if you possess the reading comprehension I'm sure you do, then you will quickly understand that I was simply pointing out the hypocrisy of people who bemoaned the overthrow of Saddam, citing the "stability" Saddam wrought through his torturous methods. Who, BTW, are often the same people who bemoan the use of waterboarding and sleep deprivation on terrorists.

See how ridiculous this whole song and dance routine is? That's almost the same thing I wrote in the first place. And completely different from what you tried to suggest I might have meant to convey on some level. And anyone who possesses any level of reading comprehension can see this at a glance.

This is tiresome. I write a post. Then some aspiring indoctrinator re-writes it. Then I have to write it again to correct the re-write. Then the would-be indoctrinator re-writes the correction. And so it goes.

This is why you indoctrinators will never accomplish anything, and will seldom be mistaken for actual skeptical people. Your motivations are too obvious, as well as being incredibly annoying.

Please quantify the "difference between using torture to gather intelligence and using torture to subjugate people", and tell us which you prefer, and why.

 

[thaiboxerken]

The hypocrisy of people saying that we shouldn't torture people? It's not hypocrisy at all. Yes, Saddam did horrible and ugly things to maintain power and stability in the region. That doesn't mean those people who understood that it was unwise to wage war with Iraq should condone everything Saddam did. To insist that we should is idiotic.

 

[Garrette]

Are you actually trying to re-write my post? Yes, you are. Wow. I never expected that.

Try taking what I wrote verbatim, and, if you possess the reading comprehension I'm sure you do, then you will quickly understand that I was simply pointing out the hypocrisy of people who bemoaned the overthrow of Saddam, citing the "stability" Saddam wrought through his torturous methods. Who, BTW, are often the same people who bemoan the use of waterboarding and sleep deprivation on terrorists.

See how ridiculous this whole song and dance routine is? That's almost the same thing I wrote in the post. And completely different from what you tried to suggest I might have meant to convey on some level. And anyone who possesses any level of reading comprehension can see this at a glance.

This is tiresome. I write a post. Then some aspiring indoctrinator re-writes it. Then I have to write it again to correct the re-write. Then the would-be indoctrinator re-writes the correction. And so it goes.

This is why you indoctrinators will never accomplish anything. You're too freaking obvious, as well as being incredibly annoying.

Please quantify the "difference between using torture to gather intelligence and using torture to subjugate people", and tell us which you prefer.

There are undoubtedly a subset of people who fit your description; I have decried them elsewhere, but in this thread it is not the topic, nor has a representative of that subset either (a) shown himself to be participating or (b) demonstrated that hypocrisy.

You are straying from the thread topic, even including any natural drift, and have brought in what I am tempted to call a strawman except that you do not posit it in reference to anything.

So please enlighten me: given that your hypocritical subset of people exists, how does it pertain to the current discussion of whether US use of torture should be condoned?

 

[Toontown]

Toontown was implying that the non-existence of this thread due to a lack of waterboarding on the previous administration's part would somehow be taken as a bad thing by some people here, and, therefore, the fact that waterboarding occurred is a good thing.

I was simply pointing out that I, personally, would be quite alright with this thread not existing if that nonexistence meant that no waterboarding had occurred.

Actually I implied that the waterboarding has served as a convenient springboard for innumerable instances of posturing and preening aimed at establishing an image of moral superiority.

 

[Toontown]

The hypocrisy of people saying that we shouldn't torture people? It's not hypocrisy at all. Yes, Saddam did horrible and ugly things to maintain power and stability in the region. That doesn't mean those people who understood that it was unwise to wage war with Iraq should condone everything Saddam did. To insist that we should is idiotic.

Another attempted re-write. Wow. That is so clever. And subtle. Like a bull in a china shop.

In an attempt to avoid further misunderanding, I will endeavor to point out what I actually wrote and highlight the part you apparently missed:

"...every time someone bemoans the forcible overthrow of Saddam, citing the "stability" he wrought", they are implicitly approving Saddam's torturous methods of maintaining said "stability""

Oh, and I almost missed that re-write-based messenger attack at the end.

This is your brain on politics.