Carly Fiorina: Waterboarding Helped ‘Keep Our Nation Safe’

Can I also point out that during the Second World War the Japanese waterboarded people - and the US branded it as torture and then had people executed for it (and other crimes). Quite right as well, because it is torture. So when Cheney claimed that it was 'enhanced interrogation' and not torture I'm amazed that his nose didn't grow six feet.

a reply to: 200Plus

Jumping the gun is a common practice when one chooses to defend a lie and criminal actions. When defending crimes against humanity, jumping the gun is part of the territory.

a reply to: Salander

Derp, derp, derp.

Never left the couch, never saved a life, never had to make a choice.

Still knows everything about everything.

Precious.

a reply to: 200Plus

It doesn't take much effort to know that "torture is wrong", and also "illegal", slightly more effort to realise that "waterboarding is still torture," though I'm quite confused as you seem to share that viewpoint as well.

a reply to: Eilasvaleleyn

I agree that waterboarding is not really effective, as are most forms of physical questioning. People will give the anticipated response to end the inflicted pain.

Interrogation (even enhanced) does however have a time and place. It's just a matter of what is done and how. I know for a fact that the right pressure used in the right way will get good intel rapidly (which is what I care about). Just not physical interrogation.

That has nothing to do with canned responses that are fishing for stars.

What I find most extraordinary is the same people some posters are wanting to welcome with open arms "begin" an interrogation session with a 9mm round in each kidney (then start asking questions). Yet somehow Western soldiers that yell too loudly at prisoners are considered monsters. It's beyond me how some people sleep at night.

If you want to be reasonably tinfoil, it's likely that was the point. "Of course he was a terrorist, he said so! after we waterboarded him 183 times"

"Enhanced Interrogation" in the style of waterboarding i.e torture does indeed have a place and time, "Nowhere" and "Never".
What's the alternative that you're suggesting? Police-style questioning? Truth serums? Being a bit rough on the battlefield I can understand, but anything planned in advance is off the table as far as I'm concerned.

*shrug*

I don't think anyone here wants to welcome those people with open arms. Are you generalizing and inferring that all Muslims are terrorists or something?

We know through historical records and data that Torture never works. We know that waterboarding is Torture.

Enhanced interrogation techniques, like what the best police departments use to get confessions and some other phsycological stuff works, but torture never. It only causes more radicalism.

If someone tortured me, I'd get my revenge. Wouldn't you?

a reply to: Eilasvaleleyn

I've seen Iraqi police question suspects with a ball peen hammer and those are mild cases. I do not, nor do I believe I have ever (here), condoned the use of physical coercion to gain information.

I do however believe the you can strike such fear into the heart of a man using psychological methods that he has no means of resistance. Rapid, targeted, fear inducing trauma, will gain significant real world intel and does not need to leave the target with long lasting effects.

I will not go into the specifics here. I understand the mentality of "pics or it didn't happen" so believe what you will.

Just know that being "rough on the battlefield" is the first step down a very dark path. One i would caution everyone against. It can make a monster out of you very fast and will never win the support of the general populace.

a reply to: 200Plus

It is awesome to be in the presence, even cyber-presence, of such a real life hero as yourself.

So what's your take on bombing hospitals? As long as it's done to protect your men from some hypothetical harm, is it OK?

a reply to: 200Plus

So because the Iraqi's do it, it's somehow justified when America does..? I'm not quite sure what you're getting at here. I hate all instances of torture, it's kind of universal hatred, given that absolutely no circumstances can justify it.

It depends on what you mean by "rapid, targeted, fear inducing trauma."

I'm not sure what you're even responding to, here. I'm quite willing to believe that certain nations open up interrogation with two pistol shots.

So is torture. At least those being rough on the battlefield (not to the level of breaking prisoner's bones and stuff, that's ridiculous, I mean flinging them around or hitting them if they're saying stupid stuff) can be partially understood because chances are they just saw one of their friends get killed. I don't really think it's justifiable, but I think it's understandable. Torture, however, is not.

Question please, I know what WB is but can it kill a person?

And then...Donald Trump on waterboarding: "If it doesn't work, they deserve it anyway."

Gee wonder if he said that before or after she started getting some attention for her comment.I don't have the will to even look.

These people are shameless.

a reply to: wildb

Yes.

Anyone who says it's a "Safe technique" is either lying, saying so in comparison to more extreme torture techniques, or an idiot.

Theoretically, if it is done perfectly it is relatively harmless, but humans are prone to not doing things perfectly.

a reply to: Eilasvaleleyn

Thanks for the answer..

a reply to: Salander

When you and your friends use a hospital as a foxhole and civilians as sandbags........


All's fair in love and war.

a reply to: 200Plus

When you and your friends make things up about what happened and what didn't happen, well it makes you look rather desperate.

a reply to: introvert

That's it..in a nutshell. Stevie Wonder could see it, yet enough will gobble it up.

a reply to: neo96

Sounds like you're saying if the govt been doing it for a long time it must be great..what a load of horse#..from you?

a reply to: Salander

The topic is torture, your question was one of targeting a building, and now you are poo-poo faced I assume because you specifically meant the DWB that got hit recently.

You are comparing apples to Volkswagons, try to say what's on you mind.

I think DWB were hit because they were providing aid and comfort to the enemy of the United States. Can I prove it? No
Is is obvious? Yes Do I agree with it? I think the doctors knew the risks they were taking and should be remembered as the heroes they were.

originally posted by: 200Plus
a reply to: Salander

The topic is torture, your question was one of targeting a building, and now you are poo-poo faced I assume because you specifically meant the DWB that got hit recently.

You are comparing apples to Volkswagons, try to say what's on you mind.

I think DWB were hit because they were providing aid and comfort to the enemy of the United States. Can I prove it? No
Is is obvious? Yes Do I agree with it? I think the doctors knew the risks they were taking and should be remembered as the heroes they were.

Maybe you're new to internet fora, but what frequently happens is that threads tend to wander a bit, which is natural, assuming the goal is rational public dialogue. OP here is Carly's comments on torture, and I assert that similar behavior in the "crimes against humanity" idea would be our bombing a hospital. You seem to have participated in that thread wander, but now are objecting, and repeating the specious notion that MSF was somehow allowing warriors to use its facility to fire upon some target or the other, a desperate position IMO.