SG Broadband Community

JBrazen wrote:Yes, but not all torture is the same. Do you agree?

I think ranking levels of torture is a bad idea. Whether it's something we consider minor or major it's still torture and it brings out the worst in us.

Roody wrote:I think ranking levels of torture is a bad idea. Whether it's something we consider minor or major it's still torture and it brings out the worst in us.

i would consider what we were doing interrogating, seriously, that's the level it was on

Brent wrote:i would consider what we were doing interrogating, seriously, that's the level it was on

Oh, our police should use it too then. They can use it to interrogate witnesses and suspects.

its like, enhanced interrogating

Brent wrote:i would consider what we were doing interrogating, seriously, that's the level it was on

That proves my point. Those who support such abuses against other people are constantly looking to justify their reasoning for doing so. Your comments are a perfect example of that.

JawZ wrote:the problem with an eye for an eye is that EVERYBODY winds up blind.

Which is why, as stated above, I return at least twofold. Other person will end up way worse than blind, that's what he gets for hurting me first. Deterrence.

JawZ wrote:the problem with an eye for an eye is that EVERYBODY winds up blind.

There's nothing God-like about "an eye for an eye."
And this is WHY our civilization is deteriorating and this is WHY all the discussion in the world won't change anything, we have "the blind leading the blind".

TonyT wrote:There's nothing God-like about "an eye for an eye."
And this is WHY our civilization is deteriorating and this is WHY all the discussion in the world won't change anything, we have "the blind leading the blind".

I agree with you 100% Tony.

Roody wrote:I think ranking levels of torture is a bad idea. Whether it's something we consider minor or major it's still torture and it brings out the worst in us.

Question for you Roody. Lets say that God forbid one of your kids was in danger, and someone that was being held captive had info on your kid but wasn't willing to talk. Would you be opposed to waterboarding the person in order to get the information you need so that your kid is no longer in danger? Would you consider yourself an animal for trying to protect a loved one?

The way I see it, if you're willing to waterboard someone to save someone you love, then you can't knock someone that approves of said methods that will possibly save the life of one of their loved ones.

JBrazen wrote:Question for you Roody. Lets say that God forbid one of your kids was in danger, and someone that was being held captive had info on your kid but wasn't willing to talk. Would you be opposed to waterboarding the person in order to get the information you need so that your kid is no longer in danger? Would you consider yourself an animal for trying to protect a loved one?

The way I see it, if you're willing to waterboard someone to save someone you love, then you can't knock someone that approves of said methods that will possibly save the life of one of their loved ones.

I wouldn't need to waterboard them man. If someone had taken my kids and I came across them it would be a straight up man to man fight. There would be no need to have someone else hold or tie them down while I poured water on them. Big difference between tying someone down and submitting them to cruel acts like that and two people going at it.

In answer to your other question no I wouldn't be an animal for protecting a loved one, but I would be an animal if I participated in torture which is exactly what waterboarding is.

Roody wrote:I wouldn't need to waterboard them man. If someone had taken my kids and I came across them it would be a straight up man to man fight. There would be no need to have someone else hold or tie them down while I poured water on them. Big difference between tying someone down and submitting them to cruel acts like that and two people going at it.

In answer to your other question no I wouldn't be an animal for protecting a loved one, but I would be an animal if I participated in torture which is exactly what waterboarding is.

Roody wrote:I think ranking levels of torture is a bad idea. Whether it's something we consider minor or major it's still torture and it brings out the worst in us.

Are you not applying a ranking level of torture? Is it OK to beat it out of him, but it is not OK to waterboard.

Jon wrote:Are you not applying a ranking level of torture? Is it OK to beat it out of him, but it is not OK to waterboard.

No i'm not applying a level of torture. Again there is a difference between two people fighting it out and one person abusing another while they are restricted in some way (Either by handcuffs, tied down etc..). They are two very different things.

Roody wrote:I wouldn't need to waterboard them man. If someone had taken my kids and I came across them it would be a straight up man to man fight. There would be no need to have someone else hold or tie them down while I poured water on them. Big difference between tying someone down and submitting them to cruel acts like that and two people going at it.

In answer to your other question no I wouldn't be an animal for protecting a loved one, but I would be an animal if I participated in torture which is exactly what waterboarding is.

During this fight, would you not be physically beating him until you get the info that you need? Would you not continue to beat him until he confesses? What's the difference between "duking" it out and waterboarding? Constraints? Hand to hand combat isn't used to extract information for a reason. It's only used to disable/kill your enemy. You're not saving your kid by fighting man to man.

JBrazen wrote:During this fight, would you not be physically beating him until you get the info that you need? Would you not continue to beat him until he confesses? What's the difference between "duking" it out and waterboarding? Constraints? Hand to hand combat isn't used to extract information for a reason. It's only used to disable/kill your enemy. You're not saving your kid by fighting man to man.

I don't believe in torturing man. It's as simple as that. For every story I hear about how torture got intel I hear dozens where it led to bad intel.

I understand your opinion and I respect it 100%. I'm in the camp that believes when it comes to protecting your loved ones, or in this case, the country, we must be willing to get our hands a little dirty, and if that means making someone believe that they're going to drown in order for them to fess up, then so be it.

JBrazen wrote:I understand your opinion and I respect it 100%. I'm in the camp that believes when it comes to protecting your loved ones, or in this case, the country, we must be willing to get our hands a little dirty, and if that means making someone believe that they're going to drown in order for them to fess up, then so be it.

That's where I'm at. AFAIK, most of the so called torture that the US has condoned...has been what I call very light torture. As long as it's not gruesome, as long as it's not outright inhuman, flat out torturing such as what most would define real torture as...I'm for it. Honestly I don't consider waterboarding or tossing up against a wall to be actual torture at all..it's the most entry level kidnergarden grade torture. Barely above being forced to watch Snakes on a PLane, or Transformers movie.

If you don't want your guys tortured...you should not have sent them after me in the first place!!! Cuz guess what..payback is a b!t.h

JBrazen wrote:I understand your opinion and I respect it 100%. I'm in the camp that believes when it comes to protecting your loved ones, or in this case, the country, we must be willing to get our hands a little dirty, and if that means making someone believe that they're going to drown in order for them to fess up, then so be it.

I don't have a problem with getting your hands dirty to protect loved ones. That said I don't feel it's necessary to torture for a loved one. Of course that's not what we are talking about here. What the Bush Administration signed off on had nothing to do with protecting their loved ones.

YeOldeStonecat wrote: Honestly I don't consider waterboarding or tossing up against a wall to be actual torture at all..it's the most entry level kidnergarden grade torture. Barely above being forced to watch Snakes on a PLane, or Transformers movie.

Have you been waterboarded? I'm curious to know how you can rank it if you never experienced it?

America...our respect in the world is built upon the foundations that were laid out in the Constitution...the rule of law.

Obama is trying to give the folks a way out by suggesting that they believed that they were operating within the law. The deception here is that the law was circumvented in secrecy. That is why we must prosecute to the fullest extent of the law, because we are bound to do so...it's our foundation.

This is basically a Presidential pardon. Is a pardon appropriate at this time?

YeOldeStonecat wrote:That's where I'm at. AFAIK, most of the so called torture that the US has condoned...has been what I call very light torture. As long as it's not gruesome, as long as it's not outright inhuman, flat out torturing such as what most would define real torture as...I'm for it. Honestly I don't consider waterboarding or tossing up against a wall to be actual torture at all..it's the most entry level kidnergarden grade torture. Barely above being forced to watch Snakes on a PLane, or Transformers movie.

If you don't want your guys tortured...you should not have sent them after me in the first place!!! Cuz guess what..payback is a b!t.h

Payback comes at folks like me when we get hit by a roadside bomb.


It's emotionally gratifying to kill and to maim and to torture our enemy in response to an attack upon ourselves. But it only invites further attacks. Which reciprocates further responses and additional attacks...

Our enemy has no emotion, death is the gateway to paradise.

Well said Evan.

"An eye for an eye makes the whole world blind." - Mahatma Gandhi

Just giving credit where credit is due.

-

Here's another one of Gandhi's...

"Be the change you want to see in the world." - Mahatma Gandhi

JawZ wrote:Payback comes at folks like me when we get hit by a roadside bomb.


It's emotionally gratifying to kill and to maim and to torture our enemy in response to an attack upon ourselves. But it only invites further attacks. Which reciprocates further responses and additional attacks...

Our enemy has no emotion, death is the gateway to paradise.

So your view is to be the kid that runs home crying to mommy? I remember those kids as common prey at the school playground....they got a daily beating on the schoolbus and in the halls.

The kid on the school playground that could hit the hardest...was rarely picked on, other kids feared getting pummeled.

YeOldeStonecat wrote:Me too to a degree.
All this stuff making a big deal out of light torture..it's not like we're severing genitals or cramming wooden toothpicks deep under their fingernails. Look at some historical torture methods used in recent years by other terrorists or even armies of other countries. Heck..go to some areas in Africa and see how the women of some villages are tortured.

Quick question Scat. If they were actually doing what you mention above would you oppose torture under those circumstances?

Roody wrote:Quick question Scat. If they were actually doing what you mention above would you oppose torture under those circumstances?

If by "they" you mean our Ops? If so...to be honest....I'd have to think about it for a minute. Depends the level of heinousness done against us. Ex...if we knew we had someone who had top level knowledge about the 9-11 attacks, or if we knew we had someone with knowledge of Obamas whereabouts....that's something I could probably look the other way over.

Goes back to my creed....if you do something bad to me, you'll get a > amount of it back....I'll never have guilt for that...because I didn't ask to be attacked in the first place.

YeOldeStonecat wrote:If by "they" you mean our Ops? If so...to be honest....I'd have to think about it for a minute. Depends the level of heinousness done against us. Ex...if we knew we had someone who had top level knowledge about the 9-11 attacks, or if we knew we had someone with knowledge of Obamas whereabouts....that's something I could probably look the other way over.

Goes back to my creed....if you do something bad to me, you'll get a > amount of it back....I'll never have guilt for that...because I didn't ask to be attacked in the first place.

Ok, I was just curious to what extent you felt that way.

YeOldeStonecat wrote:So your view is to be the kid that runs home crying to mommy? I remember those kids as common prey at the school playground....they got a daily beating on the schoolbus and in the halls.

The kid on the school playground that could hit the hardest...was rarely picked on, other kids feared getting pummeled.

No, my view is that you can't kill an idea. The idea of a nation built on liberty can not be conquered but it can be destroyed from within when we allow ourselves to be compromised and our ideals diminished to that of our enemies.

Now if you want our nation to devolve into that of Iraq, Afghanistan, Pakistan...then keep on promoting torture. We are a land of laws, not of the lawless. How in the hell do we differentiate our nation from theirs when we use the same tactics?

Torture has nothing to do with warfare so your playground bully scenario is moot. Keep in mind the political constraints placed on us to wage war effectively. We don't torture threats, we eliminate them.

JawZ wrote: How in the hell do we differentiate our nation from theirs when we use the same tactics?

IMO we've never stooped to the same tactics. IMO the methods we've employed don't even begin to compare to the cruelty of the methods others have used...not by a long shot.

Warfare is what gave birth to this whole recent spotlighting of torture, and it's there the majority of "employing methods of eliciting information" is used.

They shoot at us, we shoot back
They bomb us, we bomb back
They send their navy to our shores, we defend our shores with our navy
They threaten us with nukes, we threaten back

Now....do people complain that we "stoop to their level" when we fight back in the above points? Well, OK, some do. But the majority don't have a problem with defense.

I'm not considering myself compromised or stooping to their level when I fight back. Matter of fact, I'm proud to fight back..and give hurt back 10x fold. That's not diminishing my ideals at all....."If you can't stand the heat, well...stay the flying Fv*% out of my kitchen!" Nothing wrong with that motto.

Again, their torture is a whole lot more hideous than methods we've employed...I'm sure you are aware of some of it..for those who haven't, it doesn't take long to find out the brutality and cruelty of the methods used by Saddams guys.

Unfortunately, we decided to instigate war during the last Administration. With that in mind we went from being known as a country who only fired when fired upon to being the one initiating the shots.

Had we not done that Scat I could probably understand your point better. Unfortunately, we went after something that had nothing to do with 9/11 and in doing that we sacrificed the morals of which this country used to live by.

Roody wrote:we went after something that had nothing to do with 9/11

That's the opinion of some...yes.

YeOldeStonecat wrote:That's the opinion of some...yes.

A large majority actually. Even the Pentagon themselves conceeded as much.

http://www.cnn.com/2008/US/03/13/alqaeda.saddam/

Roody wrote:That proves my point. Those who support such abuses against other people are constantly looking to justify their reasoning for doing so. Your comments are a perfect example of that.

I think your definition of Torture is incorrect. What we were doing wasn't that bad in the grand scheme of things.

YeOldeStonecat wrote:IMO we've never stooped to the same tactics. IMO the methods we've employed don't even begin to compare to the cruelty of the methods others have used...not by a long shot.

Warfare is what gave birth to this whole recent spotlighting of torture, and it's there the majority of "employing methods of eliciting information" is used.

They shoot at us, we shoot back
They bomb us, we bomb back
They send their navy to our shores, we defend our shores with our navy
They threaten us with nukes, we threaten back

Now....do people complain that we "stoop to their level" when we fight back in the above points? Well, OK, some do. But the majority don't have a problem with defense.

I'm not considering myself compromised or stooping to their level when I fight back. Matter of fact, I'm proud to fight back..and give hurt back 10x fold. That's not diminishing my ideals at all....."If you can't stand the heat, well...stay the flying Fv*% out of my kitchen!" Nothing wrong with that motto.

Again, their torture is a whole lot more hideous than methods we've employed...I'm sure you are aware of some of it..for those who haven't, it doesn't take long to find out the brutality and cruelty of the methods used by Saddams guys.

Well, the problem is this: Being that you aren't in the military or in the intelligence community, you really only have hearsay to go on. So in reality, you have no idea what methods we use.

Did you know that at a distance of six feet, a 12ga blast of rubber pellets to the eye socket of a prisoner will result in instant death? Well, almost instant. Would that make the person who pulled the trigger a murderer?

Also, you mention multiple times about our enemies use of torture. What Americans have been tortured by Al Qaeda or any other terrorist organization since 9/11?

I know you won't read this next link but for the other folks reading this thread:

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/co ... 02242.html

Brent wrote:I think your definition of Torture is incorrect. What we were doing wasn't that bad in the grand scheme of things.

Ronald Reagan signed us on to the UN charter banning torture. So Roody doesn't have a definition of torture. And it isn't a matter of bad, not so bad, or not so good...is torture legal?

Have you ever seen a detainee vomit their own feces?

YeOldeStonecat wrote:I honestly believe any techniques the US uses is faaaaaaaaar from comparable to what others do. Go check out some of the methods employed by Somalis or what some of Saddams guys did.

Our guys did a little bit of mind games, but barely crossed the physical barrier. Whoop-dee-doo. Their guys...ugh. A holding cell with blood cast-off on the walls worse than a Jackson Pollock painting. And lets not even begin to discuss what some of them do to captured women.

Are those governments that the rest of the world looks up too?


We have laws.....we should uphold them. EOS..

[YOUTUBE]sJSXbA9j0Js[/YOUTUBE]

Another FBI agent steps forward to assert that torture doesn't gain us any actionable intel.

http://www.nytimes.com/2009/04/23/opini ... ef=opinion


And oh boy gee whiz look at that...he claims that it wasn't even the CIA that continued the torture...it was contractors. Hmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmm...now who could that be??????????????????????????????????????????????????????





We have private banks that rule our economy (Federal Reserve), we have private mercenaries that run amok in Iraq (Blackwater), and we have private contractors that perform torture.

People, we are freely handing over our nation, the greatest country on the planet, over to private corporate institutions/interests that can't be held accountable.

Are you ever going to be able to see the pieces of the puzzle for what they really are?

Shepard Smith Uncensored: "We Are America, We Do Not F**king Torture!" (VIDEO)


http://digg.com/d1pPLI


[YOUTUBE]hCWN9UWtWkc[/YOUTUBE]

JawZ wrote:What Americans have been tortured by Al Qaeda or any other terrorist organization since 9/11?

Ask Dan Pearls family.

JawZ wrote:Well, the problem is this: Being that you aren't in the military or in the intelligence community, you really only have hearsay to go on. So in reality, you have no idea what methods we use.

And in reality you could be going by hearsay too...even if you're in the military, depending upon your job in the mil. We only have your claims to go by of what you are and stuff you're privvy too...we can take that we a grain of salt too. Heck, it's the internet.