Why is so wrong to torture terrorists POWs?

[Pandora]

because we train them to have restraint? If you cant control your troops, you can't control anything. You think the Insurgency is bad in Iraq now? Just picture it with US troops going on Revenge missions of torture at will.

And you say you would do what ever it took to get info...and what makes you think anything they say is valid at all? Do Enough to anyone, and they will admit to anything. I am 100% I could get you , if I used all means, to confess to killing someone. Would it mean you did ? nope, but I can tell you now, you could be made to say it.

And if you want to help your Brother in Arms, you are much better keeping a cool head and not just lashing out. That's why we train them to do that.

You could be right. I have never been in the service and I have never been in a situation where I might have to kill someone to save someone.

But knowing I would do what ever I could, I would not be angry at at the military for doing what I am sure I would do.

 

[pocketfullofshells]

You could be right. I have never been in the service and I have never been in a situation where I might have to kill someone to save someone.

But knowing I would do what ever I could, I would not be angry at at the military for doing what I am sure I would do.

Think about a war, and think about both armies acting like that. No More POW's no more White Flags, just blood lust and torturer for Revenge....that's basically what your talking about. use to be the case, whole cities burned, woman and children killed almost as sport as revenage.War is ugly, but the mindset you are talking about can make it alot worse.

Don't forget, what you say our Troops can do, you say Others are free to do to our own troops.

Also one other reason you treat POW's with some respect and dignity, outside you would want your own treated the same....You have 200 armed troops trapped by your men. Would you rather them know they can wave a white flag and be treated well...or know they could be tortured and killed ..meaning they may as well fight to every last one is dead...killing even more of your own men. Think about Iraq I, and even II. Look how many Iraqi troops just gave up and turned himself in. If they thought they where going to be tortured a great deal, you know what they would have done? Fought 100 times as hard, and never give up the white Flag and we would have had a lot more US dead.

Actions today, that you may think may meet some short term goal, carry on to future wars as well, and could cost countless more lives.

 

[Pandora]

Think about a war, and think about both armies acting like that. No More POW's no more White Flags, just blood lust and torturer for Revenge....that's basically what your talking about. use to be the case, whole cities burned, woman and children killed almost as sport as revenage.War is ugly, but the mindset you are talking about can make it alot worse.

Don't forget, what you say our Troops can do, you say Others are free to do to our own troops.

Do you think the people we are fighting today, are civil compared to the enemys of the past?

Do you think our troops today treat the enemy as well as the enemy treats them in a captured situation?

 

[pocketfullofshells]

Do you think the people we are fighting today, are civil compared to the enemys of the past?

Do you think our troops today treat the enemy as well as the enemy treats them in a captured situation?

The People? You mean Muslims? yes

you Mean Al Queda. No

But like I said, you fight this war, be someone else fights the next and the next. And there is zero gain to treating prisoners of the US, the way they do. Not only is it Savage to the rest of the world, but to our self as well. And we are better then that. And also like I said, someone will fight the next war, and our actions in this war, will reflect in how they handle them self in the next.

You pick, Prisoners who turn wave the white flag, or those who fear what we would do if they did, and fight to the last man, killing more of our own...and having nothing to say if they torturer one of our people, because we did the same.

 

[XCALIDEM]

The People?
You pick, Prisoners who turn wave the white flag, or those who fear what we would do if they did, and fight to the last man, killing more of our own...and having nothing to say if they torturer one of our people, because we did the same.

I think that there's a huge dsitinction to be made with your comment. The people or soldiers that you're referring to WITH WHITE FLAGS AND wearing a combat uniforms are regular soldiers. I have no problem with that. Someone before mentioned the Geneva convention and it's rules of engagement. That is cool, if Al Qaeda played by those rules. However, they're a bunch of pussys that attack at ramdom and attacked our civilians and are attacking civilians in Iraq.

All you have to do is remember 9-11. Do you remember watching your TV and seeing all those people throwing themselves from a 100 + floors building? and all the 3,000 + people who died there. That is being a coward. If you're going to be in a war against us, get your army out there and fight our army.

 

[Andy]

Do you believe that torturing captured Al Qaeda's prisoners is the wrong method of interrogation?

I'm just wondering why congress and everyone who want to be so politically and moral correct what to make a big issue about this.

When our soldiers are captured, they sure don't get taken to a 5 star hotel and given a 3 course meal.

I remember watching the news, early in the Iraq war, how the AL-QAEDA would show our soldiers being be-headed, just to put fear on our troops.

Bieng this the case, why should they have every right and be treated as being a U.S. Citizen?

I believe it is morally wrong to cause pain and suffering without specific beneficial reason. If they are witholding information that could save American lives, and prevent terrorist attacks, or aid in the capture of known terrorists, then I support taking action to convince them to talk.

Otherwise, it's an immoral attempt to gain pleasure from others suffering. That's horrible.

 

[pocketfullofshells]

I think that there's a huge dsitinction to be made with your comment. The people or soldiers that you're referring to WITH WHITE FLAGS AND wearing a combat uniforms are regular soldiers. I have no problem with that. Someone before mentioned the Geneva convention and it's rules of engagement. That is cool, if Al Qaeda played by those rules. However, they're a bunch of pussys that attack at ramdom and attacked our civilians and are attacking civilians in Iraq.

All you have to do is remember 9-11. Do you remember watching your TV and seeing all those people throwing themselves from a 100 + floors building? and all the 3,000 + people who died there. That is being a coward. If you're going to be in a war against us, get your army out there and fight our army.

And our Conduct will be reflected in the Arab world , where it will be use to create converts to there warped ideas. Basically if you want to feed them Propaganda to use , then at least you better know that is really all you will get. The "info" you gain will be lies, not verifiable, quickly outdated as they adapt, and even if true, you would not know if it was. It could even be used to help there own cause, you get them torture them a bit, and they tell you of a fake plot...you react to it, and the nation goes into a panic again...and there is nothing....They just got another small victory.

Also just because you distinguish them as Al Qaeda, does not mean that when we catch them and then do what ever to them, that those images and views of what we do, would not carry over to a Army as well. If you watched the US cutting of fingers using drills on Taliban guys etc, and are in the Iraqi army ....do you really think they will be thinking...well I am sure they will not do that to me? Nope.

Also I think its time the US stoped this idea that we can fight wars, call them wars, use US troops...and then act like when you get some they are not POW's, but also not under US law, so therefor we are free to do what ever we want with them for as long as we wish. What Precedent does that set to the world...They are terrorist....why? well becuse we said so....its not a real good argument.

The IRA did not use Uniforms, but was after much pushing given POW Status by the UK. Random but just a point to be made.

 

[pocketfullofshells]

I believe it is morally wrong to cause pain and suffering without specific beneficial reason. If they are witholding information that could save American lives, and prevent terrorist attacks, or aid in the capture of known terrorists, then I support taking action to convince them to talk.

Otherwise, it's an immoral attempt to gain pleasure from others suffering. That's horrible.

Well how do you know if they have info that would save lives? who decideds? and even if they do, can you belive something they say when they would say anything to make you stop doing what you are doing.

There is a reason the CIA and Military for the most part say that it is not effective.

 

[Libsmasher]

Why is it that libs ridicule the torture suffered by John McCain for several years, but piss their pants with angst over supposed "torture" of islamofascist trash? Whatever happens, vietnam, cuba, nicaragua, venezuela, war on the IFs, you can bet libs sympathies will always lie with enemies of the US.

 

[Andy]

Well how do you know if they have info that would save lives? who decideds? and even if they do, can you belive something they say when they would say anything to make you stop doing what you are doing.

There is a reason the CIA and Military for the most part say that it is not effective.

Are we on two different planets or what?

How do we know if they have valuable informations? Well let's see...

Let us consider Abu Zubaydah. He was a well known terrorist. He had the death penalty in Jordan already. He was a recruiter for AQ, an AQ trainer, the lead attack strategist for AQ, personally picked by Osama B.L. and is known by 37 different aliases in a dozen different countries. He is known to have plotted the Millennium attacks, the attempted bombing of several large hotels with American citizens in them which resulted in 33 AQ members arrested, the bombing of the USS Cole, the US embassy in Paris, and the attempted bombing of several planes.

Further, Zubaydah was confirmed as being a major player by German intel, Israeli Intel, UK intel, and an AQ defector Omar Nasiri, as well as other AQ captured operatives. Finely, the way he was captured was a traced phone call in which he was directly recorded setting up a terrorist attack.

Lastly, he was specifically referred to in terrorist warnings issued by our own intelligence in the spring of 2001. We all know what happened after that.

So, there is no possible way a man who was active in all levels of AQ and terrorism for 20+ years, could somehow not know anything. Would you care to disagree?

This is the instance I'm saying makes sense to convince someone through waterboarding to talk. Because there is absolutely no question he clearly knows a lot.

Prior to waterboarding, he refused to cooperate... after, he answered all questions.

How do we know he'd answer correctly? Well, since we KNOW he has information... and since HE knows we know he has informations... and since we can VERIFY the information he gives us, clearly... it would be in his best interest to not lie. Because lying, would result in more waterboarding, since we KNOW he has information.

Think about it... if he says "person X will be at place Y, on day Z"... we can check that. If he made it all up, we would know, and he'd be sucking water again. Do you think he's going to do that, knowing that would be the result? Of course not.

And... the information we got from him was incredibly accurate.

For example, it was his information that a man named Mohamed Harkat was going to attempt to enter Canada, and then enter the US. There was, he did, and he was rejected entry. He also give specific information that allowed the capture of Khalid Sheikh Mohammed, and he was captured, and Omar al-Faruq alone with a number of others... All were captured.

...plus the preventing of a number of planned attacks, including: derail a train near Washington, D.C., plot to assassinate Pakistani president Pervez Musharraf, detonate U.S. gas stations / refineries, poison American water reservoirs, and a radioactive “dirty bomb” attack.

The information gathered was very accurate, down to the time, date, location, and names of specific individuals.

How do we know what we'll get from them will be accurate? Because we verified and it was.

Now since clearly the people we used waterboarding on, did know stuff, and the information gathered, was accurate, would you care to explain your opposition to saving peoples lives? Or maybe you would change your position?

BTW, just a fact, both political parties support waterboarding. The idea democraps do not, is false. They completely supported waterboarding in 2002 when they were briefed on it's use, complete with an in-room tour of where it would take place. Democraps only started to oppose waterboarding when they realized they cared about losing power then national security, and needed a political foot ball for support.

 

[Mare Tranquillity]

I'm intrigued by the fact that there is not a single Christian posting on this thread. I would have thought that since America is a Christian country and founded on the tenets of Christianity and the teachings of Jesus that our behavior might be at least slightly influenced by those things.

 

[Libsmasher]

I'm intrigued by the fact that there is not a single Christian posting on this thread. I would have thought that since America is a Christian country and founded on the tenets of Christianity and the teachings of Jesus that our behavior might be at least slightly influenced by those things.

In all the blather pushed around on this issue, I've never seen a single real discussion of ethics re torture. Eg, some branches of utilitarianism would support it.

 

[pocketfullofshells]

Why is it that libs ridicule the torture suffered by John McCain for several years, but piss their pants with angst over supposed "torture" of islamofascist trash? Whatever happens, vietnam, cuba, nicaragua, venezuela, war on the IFs, you can bet libs sympathies will always lie with enemies of the US.

because no libs ridicule his being tortured...STRAW MAN

 

[pocketfullofshells]

Are we on two different planets or what?

How do we know if they have valuable informations? Well let's see...

Let us consider Abu Zubaydah. He was a well known terrorist. He had the death penalty in Jordan already. He was a recruiter for AQ, an AQ trainer, the lead attack strategist for AQ, personally picked by Osama B.L. and is known by 37 different aliases in a dozen different countries. He is known to have plotted the Millennium attacks, the attempted bombing of several large hotels with American citizens in them which resulted in 33 AQ members arrested, the bombing of the USS Cole, the US embassy in Paris, and the attempted bombing of several planes.

Further, Zubaydah was confirmed as being a major player by German intel, Israeli Intel, UK intel, and an AQ defector Omar Nasiri, as well as other AQ captured operatives. Finely, the way he was captured was a traced phone call in which he was directly recorded setting up a terrorist attack.

Lastly, he was specifically referred to in terrorist warnings issued by our own intelligence in the spring of 2001. We all know what happened after that.

So, there is no possible way a man who was active in all levels of AQ and terrorism for 20+ years, could somehow not know anything. Would you care to disagree?

This is the instance I'm saying makes sense to convince someone through waterboarding to talk. Because there is absolutely no question he clearly knows a lot.

Prior to waterboarding, he refused to cooperate... after, he answered all questions.

How do we know he'd answer correctly? Well, since we KNOW he has information... and since HE knows we know he has informations... and since we can VERIFY the information he gives us, clearly... it would be in his best interest to not lie. Because lying, would result in more waterboarding, since we KNOW he has information.

Think about it... if he says "person X will be at place Y, on day Z"... we can check that. If he made it all up, we would know, and he'd be sucking water again. Do you think he's going to do that, knowing that would be the result? Of course not.

And... the information we got from him was incredibly accurate.

For example, it was his information that a man named Mohamed Harkat was going to attempt to enter Canada, and then enter the US. There was, he did, and he was rejected entry. He also give specific information that allowed the capture of Khalid Sheikh Mohammed, and he was captured, and Omar al-Faruq alone with a number of others... All were captured.

...plus the preventing of a number of planned attacks, including: derail a train near Washington, D.C., plot to assassinate Pakistani president Pervez Musharraf, detonate U.S. gas stations / refineries, poison American water reservoirs, and a radioactive “dirty bomb” attack.

The information gathered was very accurate, down to the time, date, location, and names of specific individuals.

How do we know what we'll get from them will be accurate? Because we verified and it was.

Now since clearly the people we used waterboarding on, did know stuff, and the information gathered, was accurate, would you care to explain your opposition to saving peoples lives? Or maybe you would change your position?

BTW, just a fact, both political parties support waterboarding. The idea democraps do not, is false. They completely supported waterboarding in 2002 when they were briefed on it's use, complete with an in-room tour of where it would take place. Democraps only started to oppose waterboarding when they realized they cared about losing power then national security, and needed a political foot ball for support.

My point was more on the other side...say you catch a lowe leval guy, it does not mean he may not have info as well. He could just as well give you very valuble intel ...My point is that, anyone could have info....yes of course a top guy will have more, but it does not mean the rest have no info...so do just toruture them all and find out?

Again they will like, tell you what you want, what ever they do say will be hard to verify, you will not know the motive to why they told you, and they may still not say anything as they may be trained. Though Anyone can be broken ...McCain is a good example do you belive the things he signed or what ever as a POW...no I am guessing, but he still said/signed it...thats basicly what you get with those tactics...

 

[pocketfullofshells]

I'm intrigued by the fact that there is not a single Christian posting on this thread. I would have thought that since America is a Christian country and founded on the tenets of Christianity and the teachings of Jesus that our behavior might be at least slightly influenced by those things.

Jesus said, love they neighbor...unless you suspect him of terror...then cut of his fingers, stick a hot metal rod up his..... and make him think you are killing him to make him talk....come to think of it, you could say he got Tortured pretty good, so I am sure he would be fine with doing it to others.