• Unsurprisingly, Donald Trump supports waterboarding and will move to end it's "status as a war crime
    455 replies, posted
[QUOTE=Zukriuchen;49700730]Are you trying to tell me that in the span of 37 minutes between my post and yours, you read through 6 articles, a Senate report, dozens of studies linked in the articles, and found not a single mention of torture in a case where they knew the desired info? And it's just a coincidence that you only addressed a single case? You just happened to miss the very first link, which says that [B]the investigators had a schizophrenic with a lengthy criminal record who was knocking on doors at the night of the murder[/B] but dismissed him because of personal conviction? Or that this is in line with what the brain research professor said in one of the links? You can pretend all you want, I ain't buying it[/QUOTE] You mean interrogating someone who is mentally unstable didn't yield good results? Bizarre. The second quote just sounds like there needs to be improvements in the torture process.
[QUOTE=Daysofwinter;49700532]What is the point you trying to make? I mean it was useful to finding witches and all sorts of heretics.[/QUOTE] Without trying to derail the thread to much, witch hunters finding witches through testimonies gathered through torture is [B]not[/B] a good thing. As elixwhitetail put well, it was used as a method of control and terror. Merely being accused of being a witch could have you thrown into a cell and tortured until you gave up and confessed to being a witch, even if you were 100% innocent. Hell, being in any way related to an accused witch could drag you down with them as well! Funnily enough, if you replace the word 'witch' with 'terrorist', you get an accurate representation of what's still going on today :v:
[QUOTE=EXPLOOOSIONS!;49700848]Without trying to derail the thread to much, witch hunters finding witches through testimonies gathered through torture is [B]not[/B] a good thing. As elixwhitetail put well, it was used as a method of control and terror. Merely being accused of being a witch could have you thrown into a cell and tortured until you gave up and confessed to being a witch, even if you were 100% innocent. Hell, being in any way related to an accused witch could drag you down with them as well! Funnily enough, if you replace the word 'witch' with 'terrorist', you get an accurate representation of what's still going on today :v:[/QUOTE] I know, I was being sarcastic. I wasn't trying to derail (sorry if I did), I was trying to bring up a point. Which you did.
[QUOTE=wystan;49700807]You mean interrogating someone who is mentally unstable didn't yield good results? Bizarre. The second quote just sounds like there needs to be improvements in the torture process.[/QUOTE] No, I mean they completely disregarded him as a suspect because of the focus on Crowe's brother. Which you would've known if you read it. But you didn't. [editline]8th February 2016[/editline] I'm tired of bringing up real data only for you to deflect and return to the same old, tired speech every time. Literally all you need to do is substantiate this claim (which you're never going to do) [QUOTE=wystan;49700557]These cases about torture not working all come from people who clearly don't know the information desired[/QUOTE] Otherwise, I'm done
[QUOTE=Zukriuchen;49700879]No, I mean they completely disregarded him as a suspect because of the focus on Crowe's brother. Which you would've known if you read it. But you didn't. [editline]8th February 2016[/editline] I'm tired of bringing up real data only for you to deflect and return to the same old, tired speech every time. Literally all you need to do is substantiate this claim (which you're never going to do) Otherwise, I'm done[/QUOTE] So you wanted to equate a false confession brought on by police interrogation as equivalent to being tortured? That's stupid.
[QUOTE=wystan;49700928]So you wanted to equate a false confession brought on by police interrogation as equivalent to being tortured? That's stupid.[/QUOTE] Why is it stupid? It's almost exactly the same situation, someone is coerced to the point where they'll say anything to stop the coercion. You honestly make my skin crawl. The fact that you don't see anything morally wrong with torture, and seem incapable of empathising with its victims, makes me think you are most likely a sociopath.
[QUOTE=Headhumpy;49699169]I find it hard to take anyone who unironically uses "intellectual masturbation" as a critique of an argument seriously. [editline]9th February 2016[/editline] What does that term even mean? Is it supposed to be a bad thing that hypotheticals are discussed as an intellectual exercise? And how does "liberal individualism" even come into play here?[/QUOTE] I'll play devil's advocate. He stated you have good ideas that work well in your head, but won't be effective outside. You're assuming that everyone else has the same mind, values, and culture as you do, which is mostly untrue for the extremists that partake in ISIS and Boko Haram. They do not only pose a threat to western people, they also kill and marginalize numerous Muslims as well. What you may perceive as peaceful or neutral gesture may be a weakness that they can exploit. It's shown with how they brag about killing off-duty Iraqi soldiers, beheading journalists, gunning down listeners at a french music concert, and kidnapping school children to serve as sex slaves. I don't wish to claim that people are objectively evil, but you can tell what people truly are from how they treat harmless individuals at their mercy. I do see your view though, aggressive action eventually gets misdirected at the incorrect target.
[QUOTE=CatFodder;49700970]Why is it stupid? It's almost exactly the same situation, someone is coerced to the point where they'll say anything to stop the coercion. You honestly make my skin crawl. The fact that you don't see anything morally wrong with torture, and seem incapable of empathising with its victims, makes me think you are most likely a sociopath.[/QUOTE] Asking questions in an aggressive manner is not the same as torturing someone, really now. I don't see the issue with torturing a person if it means I can save hundreds or thousands of American lives.
[QUOTE=wystan;49700986]Asking questions in an aggressive manner is not the same as torturing someone. I don't see the issue with torturing a person if it means I can save hundreds or thousands of American lives.[/QUOTE] But it doesn't and can't
Torture is officially referred to as "enhanced interrogation" for a reason
[QUOTE=HumanAbyss;49700991]But it doesn't and can't[/QUOTE] You and I have no way of knowing that for sure, but that doesn't mean there isn't a chance.
[QUOTE=CoolKingKaso;49700976]I'll play devil's advocate. He stated you have good ideas that work well in your head, but won't be effective outside. You're assuming that everyone else has the same mind, values, and culture as you do, which is mostly untrue for the extremists that partake in ISIS and Boko Haram. They do not only pose a threat to western people, they also kill and marginalize numerous Muslims as well. What you may perceive as peaceful or neutral gesture may be a weakness that they can exploit. It's shown with how they brag about killing off-duty Iraqi soldiers, beheading journalists, gunning down listeners at a french music concert, and kidnapping school children to serve as sex slaves. I don't wish to claim that people are objectively evil, but you can tell what people truly are from how they treat harmless individuals at their mercy. I do see your view though, aggressive action eventually gets misdirected at the incorrect target.[/QUOTE] Those people are not being deterred by being tortured or having their loved ones tortured. Their enraged and will direct that rage at the target they see as responsible. How does stooping to their level in the cycle help end the cycle?
[QUOTE=Zukriuchen;49700997]Torture is officially referred to as "enhanced interrogation" for a reason[/QUOTE] It's a euphemism, there is a very obvious line that is drawn between interrogation and torture. Are you guys against interrogations as well, since you all seem to deem them near equivalent.
[QUOTE=wystan;49701003]You and I have no way of knowing that for sure, but that doesn't mean there isn't a chance.[/QUOTE] Yeah and there's a 'chance' that nuking the entirety of the Middle East will prevent some future terrorist attack against American lives. Do you advocate that as well?
[QUOTE=wystan;49701003]You and I have no way of knowing that for sure, but that doesn't mean there isn't a chance.[/QUOTE] No you're the only one putting a very hypocritical lens to government and their reports and actions. You trust them enough to torture people for you, but not enough to trust them when they say "hey yeah this isn't working" It's ridiculous
[QUOTE=HumanAbyss;49701006]Those people are not being deterred by being tortured or having their loved ones tortured. Their enraged and will direct that rage at the target they see as responsible. How does stooping to their level in the cycle help end the cycle?[/QUOTE] The cycle ends with violence. [editline]8th February 2016[/editline] [QUOTE=CatFodder;49701017]Yeah and there's a 'chance' that nuking the entirety of the Middle East will prevent some future terrorist attack against American lives. Do you advocate that as well?[/QUOTE] Nuking an area an killing innocent millions is not the same as torturing a few people who just want to kill Americans.
[QUOTE=wystan;49701016]It's a euphemism, there is a very obvious line that is drawn between interrogation and torture. Are you guys against interrogations as well, since you all seem to deem them near equivalent.[/QUOTE] No one deemed them equivalent. They are not. They can both produce false confessions so I'm really struggling to see how you so readily trust torture. It's hardly a euphuism. It's a polite way of saying torture. They do it to lessen the impact of the term publicly. Must work because you don't seem to worry at all about government over reach or cruel and unusual punishment.
[QUOTE=wystan;49701021]The cycle ends with violence.[/QUOTE] and yet again something I already covered: it doesn't [quote]Among the most notable victims of torture was Sayeed Qutb, the founding father of modern political jihadism. His 1964 book, “Milestones,” describes a journey towards radicalization that included rape and torture, sometimes with dogs, in an Egyptian prison. He left jail burning with the determination to wage transnational jihad to destroy these regimes and their backers, calling for war against all those who used these methods against Muslims.[/quote]
[QUOTE=HumanAbyss;49701018]No you're the only one putting a very hypocritical lens to government and their reports and actions. You trust them enough to torture people for you, but not enough to trust them when they say "hey yeah this isn't working" It's ridiculous[/QUOTE] Yea, I'm skeptical of information released by one of the most secretive organizations in the US. Their biggest mistake was making torture public.
[QUOTE=wystan;49701021]The cycle ends with violence. [editline]8th February 2016[/editline] Nuking an area an killing innocent millions is not the same as torturing a few people who just want to kill Americans.[/QUOTE] So you're saying "commit genocide" then? Because that's the option of you truly think violence will end violence and you won't have sore losers take up arms to attack you again and again
[QUOTE=wystan;49701021]The cycle ends with violence.[/QUOTE] You haul someone's Dad off the street and torture him until he can't feed himself any more, then (if he's lucky) send him home to his family. Congratulations, that man's family and friends now despise America (and would be justified to) and are at great risk of radicalisation. At what point here exactly does the cycle end?
[QUOTE=Zukriuchen;49701032]and yet again something I already covered: it doesn't[/QUOTE] I was more trying to imply you need to kill a lot of them.
[QUOTE=wystan;49701034]Yea, I'm skeptical of information released by one of the most secretive organizations in the US. Their biggest mistake was making torture public.[/QUOTE] Jeeze you really can't open your mind to the information that it doesn't work can you? A younger me might have agreed it works. I do not because info shows it doesn't.
[QUOTE=wystan;49701043]I was more trying to imply you need to kill a lot of them.[/QUOTE] So you are advocating genocide, then.
[QUOTE=CatFodder;49701038]You haul someone's Dad off the street and torture him until he can't feed himself any more, then (if he's lucky) send him home to his family. Congratulations, that man's family and friends now despise America (and would be justified to) and are at great risk of radicalisation. At what point here exactly does the cycle end?[/QUOTE] We shouldn't be abducting innocent people of the streets, I've been over this.
[QUOTE=wystan;49701034]Yea, I'm skeptical of information released by one of the most secretive organizations in the US. Their biggest mistake was making torture public.[/QUOTE] You contradicted yourself here in these two sentences alone. First you say you don't trust a secretive organization, then you immediately say you'd prefer them to keep things secret? What exactly do you want the CIA to do, since you seem opposed to both keeping secrets and revealing them?
[QUOTE=Starlight 456;49701051]So you are advocating genocide, then.[/QUOTE] No, I mean kill are enemies until they the cease being our enemies. [editline]8th February 2016[/editline] [QUOTE=BigJoeyLemons;49701057]You contradicted yourself here in these two sentences alone. First you say you don't trust a secretive organization, then you immediately say you'd prefer them to keep things secret? What exactly do you want the CIA to do, since you seem opposed to both keeping secrets and revealing them?[/QUOTE] I want them to be more competent, said this already.
[QUOTE=wystan;49701053]We shouldn't be abducting innocent people of the streets, I've been over this.[/QUOTE] You'll never have a perfect success rate at identifying the guilty, but more to the point I never said that the man in my example was innocent. I pointed out that, being a human being and not a robot programmed to destroy America, he'll have friends and family who will likely become the next generation of extremists who hate America. Who could blame them after what America did to them.
[QUOTE=wystan;49701064]No, I mean kill are enemies until they the cease being our enemies. [editline]8th February 2016[/editline] I want them to be more competent, said this already.[/QUOTE] You'd think a history of war beggetting war would teach you something but I know you're determined to let your emotions dictate historical events to you.
[QUOTE=CatFodder;49701075]You'll never have a perfect success rate at identifying the guilty, but more to the point I never said that the man in my example was innocent. I pointed out that, being a human being and not a robot programmed to destroy America, he'll have friends and family who will likely become the next generation of extremists who hate America. Who could blame them after what America did to them.[/QUOTE] If he isn't innocent and does want to destroy America prior to America even touching him, why we fretting over his abduction? He chose his side. [editline]8th February 2016[/editline] [QUOTE=HumanAbyss;49701077]You'd think a history of war beggetting war would teach you something but I know you're determined to let your emotions dictate historical events to you.[/QUOTE] I don't want to sound like an edge master, but humans will always be warring. They cast the first stone, and they only way to make them stop is violence.
Sorry, you need to Log In to post a reply to this thread.