Should the US Military Torture to Gain Information

I quote myself when i forget to add something to a certain post.. as for the question mark, it was to add emphasis on the question and bump the thread, as ben. has not yet answered that question
 
only if that person tortured other people in the past...as for random dudes they want to get info from, no thats stupid because we could get the wrong info just as easily as we could get the right info.
 
Jack Bauer situations like this are fantasy. There never has been a situation where someone was alive in captivity that could have revealed information that could stop a terrorist attack. Its a wonderful fantasy, and makes great television. But this is real life.
 
SuperTroopers_coolchrism5.jpg


these guys advance interrogation techniques rock.
 
Yeah man, Vietnam was so fucked up because U.S. soldiers weren't allowed to kill enough people, oh, wait....
 
Thus rendering torture pointless (not to mention despicable and inhumane). Even innocent people admit to stuff under torture, so the information gained is often worthless.
 
hahahaha.

but no.

Not only is it immoral, and against international law, its rather unreliable. Sure its really fucking effective, when you torture some one they will probably tell you something eventually. But the problem is that they will tend to tell you what they think you want to hear. This may or may not be correct. The result is that you then are acting on a bunch of false intel.

Furthermore if you don't want american soldiers being tortured when they are captured, then its a good idea not to do it to those that you capture. It opens the door up for an opponent who normally would not torture to start considering it.
 
yes. if it could potentially save alot of people, then by all means why whouldn't you? but you better have a good dam reason too.
 
what some don't realize is that torture is not necessarily used to gain information. If you torture the shit out of a guy, then release him or publicize what happened to him, you have a good chance that when someone else is thinking about being a part of this, he'll think about being tortured and back down.

I'm neither completely for it, nor completely against it. I agree its terrible, but there's also some information to be gained by it.
 
besides the fact that torture is wrong, this just highlights how anyoe will say anything to have it stop, even if they dont acutally know.
 
bahahaha i love all the conservatives that were anti torture investigation, but now that they can screw over a dem they are all clamoring for it. on a side note she says she has notes that once declassified will prove her innocent...
 
I love how all the dems and obama brought all this out to try and screw the Bush administration and the GOP, and now it is just screwing them in the ass.
 
It would help if she knew it...

seriusly there is so much back and forth with her I doubt she still knows which side is up.
 
the entire deal with pelosi. Unless that unclassified stuff that you were talking about, which i haven't heard about comes out, even if she doesn't resign or get impeached (please, God, please), its still having a negative effect on the democratic party.

Its pretty obvious she's lying. Look at how she conducted herself on friday. She had to read her statement. You know the truth if its the truth. You dont need to read it. She was stumbling and everything else. It's just that this entire process has turned around and the focus has changed, now to a negative situation for the speaker, and the democratic party.
 
not even close to being a strong enough effect to get the democratic party down where the GOP is right now.

The main people who are seeing this as supper negative on the party as a whole already despise the dems. A lot of people just see it as negative of pelosi, not the party as a whole.

This is generally true of all politics. People have trouble looking down on their party, and are quick to excuse the bad things that party members do as being unique to them, and not reflective of the party. Just as they are quick to see the bad things that members of the opposing party do as signs of the downfall or 'evil' of that party.

People in the Middle generally don't see everything as party lines. While staunch republicans or democrats will vote for someone because they are a democrat or republican, the middle set is more likely to view people as individuals and not tied in exclusively with their party.

Before you say that Pelosi is destroying the pr of the democratic party ask yourself if you think Chaney is distroying the pr of the republican party by endorsing torture? Because there are many people who would argue that his words are having a negative effect on the GOP.
 
I'm sorry but its things like this that make the USA so damn hilarious.
September 12th 2001 not a single american would be anti torture, sorry but your country is not run on logic its run on pure emotion, like a small little girl.
torture can work, history suggests so, if it didnt. it wouldnt continue to be used... its just that simple. the usa has become a soft touchy western culture that just does not translate internationally.
what obama is doing is pantamount to endagering the troops, he is enraging the rest of the world by admitting to things that nobody knew about, what is he fucking stupid?
As a canadian i would LOVE if obama would stop running for re-election, stop governing based on poll numbers and have some beliefs.
hate bush as much as you want but you know where he stood, and he would stand there with a 2% approval or a 90% approval. Mr. obama does not.
 
Torture should ONLY be used in certain circumstances that are justifiable. The issue is that making those certain instances - ones where a large amount of people are at risk - also seems to trickle down and allow others to give a thumbs up of sorts to torture. Regardless, aside from these rare situational instances, torture should NEVER (I repeat, never) be allowed. It is a disgusting form of human indecency, and those who commit torture have ethical and moral misalignment. It is and should remain illegal, in all forms, except for, as I said, extreme cases.
 
I'll vouch for that. There are multiple studies that show torture is ineffective, and can actually fuel even more violence. Basically, torturing can add a cause for radicals who already hold hatred against countries such as the USA.
 
No, I understand that, I'm just using a hyperbolic anecdote I guess. Trying to prove a point, basically, if one man getting tortured can save 20 peoples lives, why would you not do that?
 
I think they should. If what Cheney said is true and torture prevented a WC 9/11 then I am all for it. These men that they torture, like Mayer Arar have terrorist connections. They don't just chain up any random arab and stick electrodes on their nuts. I do agree that we have to be the better person, but arguing from a purely logical standpoint..why should we? What is so bad about stooping to their level? So we can be morally correct and have a clean conscience? Disregarding what I previously said, why can't we? If torturing some terrorist saves 100 people, I think that's acceptable. The ends justify the means.
 
Personally yes i think we should beacuase these are people who just want to kill us all just to kill us all...and it depends on what you mean if you mean putting a catapillar in a room with a terrorist that is afraid of insects ooorrr water boarding there should not be a problem..
 
she may be lying, it hasnt been proven one way OR the other yet.

HOWEVER, i think its actually quite blatantly obvious that this is simply a GOP stunt to try and turn attention AWAY from the real issue, which is the torture. if she lied, i agree she should suffer the consequences, but to be honest the real problem here is the people authorizing/using the torture. i also find it amusing that you said you dont even need to read her statement to know shes lying, bias much?
 
It's gonna take a lot for the dems to get down where the GOP is right now. We just had a huge loss in the last election. I wasn't implying that the democratic party was as low as the GOP.

But if Pelosi gets impeached that's still very negative for the party cause she's the speaker of the house. Im not saying she is destroying the PR of the dems, just hurting it.

Cheney is a badass, and he's prob hurting the GOP. I dont give a shit. I agree with him. And almost everybody was for torture after 9/11. Look at the attitude after a huge attack. We wanted answers. We wanted to know who just killed 3,000 americans. The dems, who historically were not very strong with war efforts and national defense needed something to say to america, "Hey, we are in this too. We want to protect this country." Which, IMO was very good. Our country right after 9/11 was strong and parties didnt matter. I guess that's the main point. You were pretty much saying it. Parties dont matter.
 
so basically what your saying is the Bush admin/the republicans in power at the time managed to scare america into betraying its basic morals and values for the sake of security. sounds vaguely like something from WWII... we threw a bunch of japanese americans in internment camps for no good reason. anyone remember that?
 
stunt, maybe. I really dont just think its the GOP on this one. There are dems that have called her out on this. its also an opportunity for the GOP.

I didnt say anything about me not needing to read her statement. I watched her entire press conference on friday. I was commenting on her body language and how SHE HAD to read her statement to respond to a question. If its the truth, you know it. You dont have to look dont and read your answer.
 
No. I really dont think it was a scare tactic. Everybody was already scared. We just had 3 buildings have planes crash into them, and another plane down in PA. People didnt need the government to scare them anymore. Just go back to the mindset after 9-11. This shit was fresh on their minds and the people in Congress wanted to do what they could to show they were strong on national security. My point was about the politicians doing whatever it took to increase safety. There were a few that didnt want torture that wrote a letter/petition stating that. It was offered to pelosi. she didnt sign it.

 
Robert Cerkanzky (no way in hell i spelled that last name correctly) did not have a heart problem or a pace maker and he died from being tasered. He was tasered 5 times though, and pinned down by police the entire time.
 
there are dems calling her out on it, but it seems to me to be a move to try and shift the focus AWAY from the torture investigation and towards here lying.

and i dont know shes guilty. i honestly do THINK she knew, and is trying to hide it, but i also believe in innocence until proven guilty, and so far she hasnt been proven to be. she says she has evidence that clears her, lets see it. theres been WAY to much selectivity on both sides as to what they are declassifying and what they arent.
 
pearl harbour was a good fucking reason.
its shit like this that scares me, immigration with spliced loyalties will eventually lead to the collapse of western society... They were put in camps so they could not spy and share information, leading to more deaths of more americans. I do not understand why we keep apologizing. They would do the same fucking thing its called protecting your country
 
ALSO, this is from a half Japanese American but they were let out, and many, almost ALL young Japanese men in the states at the time joined up in the US military and fought bravely in Africa, Italy, and in the push into Germany.
 
so your condoning putting an entire race in prison based entirely on... their race? fuck this country is doomed.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top