Should anybody be charged with a crime for torture?

[Excaliber]

Water boarding is torture, that is recognized by the last as well as the current administration. Some remain in denial over the issue, thankfully there not running the country!

The real question is: If someone you loved could die if you didn't take all reasonable steps to secure information from a person that knowingly had information that would save your loved one, would you use coercive interrogation techniques, such as waterboarding to secure the information?

If you believe in Machiavelli, the end justifies the means, then why stop at merely waterboarding to secure the information? Break his bones, kill him, whatever it takes.

I don't believe in Machiavelli, the are some things that are just so repugnant that death is preffered over dishonor.

On another topic, so VRM can't post on a CDC thread but CDC can post on a VRM thread? OOOkkkkkk...

Wikipedia
"In contrast to submerging the head face-forward in water, waterboarding precipitates a gag reflex almost immediately.[13] The technique does not inevitably cause lasting physical damage. It can cause extreme pain, dry drowning, damage to lungs, brain damage from oxygen deprivation, other physical injuries including broken bones due to struggling against restraints, lasting psychological damage or, ultimately, death.[4] Adverse physical consequences can start manifesting months after the event; psychological effects can last for years.[14]"

The matter should be considered for the potential of prosecution, I do hope prosecution does not happen. But the facts need to come out, some how, some way so we can avoid this issue in the future.

[Jamo]

CdC and VRM are now and forever joined at the hip...one gets suspended, they both do...even if they are on different threads.

It's my new bipartisan approach to moderation.

Ernie, on the other, is still entitled to singular attention.

All that being said...CdC, get the phuk off VRM's thread, and Ernie...STFU about our moderation protocols.

Thank you and have a nice day.

[Jamo]

...and who's the asshole who voted that only the lawyers should be prosecuted?

[Excaliber]

...wasn't me, honest, all though...

[Jamo]

Hehehehe....bite me.

[427 S/O]

The U.S. military waterboards hundreds of our soldiers every year? It is part of the conditioning troops undergo to prepare for battle and the possibility of capture by the enemy. In other words, it's OK for us to do this to America's best and brightest but it's too horrible for our worst enemies?....For those of you who don't understand, next time you see an army special forces or seal, stop them and ask. Nothing like getting it from the horses mouth. For you others who simply live in denial of facts, that's your problem....

[VRM]

So is it OK for our guys who are captured to be waterboarded?

Steve

[Dan40]

Originally Posted by Excaliber

Water boarding is torture, that is recognized by the last as well as the current administration. Some remain in denial over the issue, thankfully there not running the country!

The real question is: If someone you loved could die if you didn't take all reasonable steps to secure information from a person that knowingly had information that would save your loved one, would you use coercive interrogation techniques, such as waterboarding to secure the information?

If you believe in Machiavelli, the end justifies the means, then why stop at merely waterboarding to secure the information? Break his bones, kill him, whatever it takes.

I don't believe in Machiavelli, the are some things that are just so repugnant that death is preffered over dishonor.

On another topic, so VRM can't post on a CDC thread but CDC can post on a VRM thread? OOOkkkkkk...

Wikipedia
"In contrast to submerging the head face-forward in water, waterboarding precipitates a gag reflex almost immediately.[13] The technique does not inevitably cause lasting physical damage. It can cause extreme pain, dry drowning, damage to lungs, brain damage from oxygen deprivation, other physical injuries including broken bones due to struggling against restraints, lasting psychological damage or, ultimately, death.[4] Adverse physical consequences can start manifesting months after the event; psychological effects can last for years.[14]"

The matter should be considered for the potential of prosecution, I do hope prosecution does not happen. But the facts need to come out, some how, some way so we can avoid this issue in the future.

Copied from their own website:

Welcome to Wikipedia,
the free encyclopedia that anyone can edit.




So the above definition could have been placed there by moveon.dum or Al Qeada. Or the DNC. Perhaps a committee of all of them.

Liberals don't want "harsh", NOT TORTURE, methods used. They want us to use the Army Field Manual.

OK.

What does it say about people captured out of uniform. People KNOWN to be co-conspirators and/or killers of non-combatant women and children?

[Dan40]

Originally Posted by VRM

So is it OK for our guys who are captured to be waterboarded?

Steve

As opposed to beheading? YES!

[Excaliber]

So what part of the Wikipedia definition is inaccurate, in your opinion Dan40, or anyone else for that matter?

Is it the gag reflex you question? Lung damage? Brain damage due to lack of oxygen? Death? Broken bones? What part would you like removed so the women and children can more readily accept a definition that favors the torturer?

Strange, I don't see Cheney or his peer's editing the Wikipedia definition to make it more acceptable. Maybe someone here would like to step up to the plate and handle that right away, since it's SO EASY to edit.

[Jamo]

Wikipedia...mob research.

[VRM]

Originally Posted by Excaliber

So what part of the Wikipedia definition is inaccurate, in your opinion Dan40, or anyone else for that matter?

Is it the gag reflex you question? Lung damage? Brain damage due to lack of oxygen? Death? Broken bones? What part would you like removed so the women and children can more readily accept a definition that favors the torturer?

Strange, I don't see Cheney or his peer's editing the Wikipedia definition to make it more acceptable. Maybe someone here would like to step up to the plate and handle that right away, since it's SO EASY to edit.

Wikipedia is not really the best source to use. Sometimes you find an article that is well researched, but most of it seems to be written by people with an agenda on one or the other side on the aisle.

Steve

[VRM]

Originally Posted by Dan40

As opposed to beheading? YES!

So is there a difference between waterboarding a SEAL-in-training (who knows that this is just training) and locking a guy up for 5 years and waterboarding him regularly?

John McCain seemed to think so - and he had a bit more experience with it than any of us.

Steve

[Dan40]

Originally Posted by Excaliber

So what part of the Wikipedia definition is inaccurate, in your opinion Dan40, or anyone else for that matter?

Is it the gag reflex you question? Lung damage? Brain damage due to lack of oxygen? Death? Broken bones? What part would you like removed so the women and children can more readily accept a definition that favors the torturer?

Strange, I don't see Cheney or his peer's editing the Wikipedia definition to make it more acceptable. Maybe someone here would like to step up to the plate and handle that right away, since it's SO EASY to edit.

Once again, FROM their website:

Welcome to Wikipedia,
the free encyclopedia that anyone can edit.


That means, it is NOT a source of reliable information. Therefore it is useless, unless you prefer its propaganda.

Lung damage? Cite one case. To my knowledge, NO liberals HAVE or attempted to cite a single case.

Brain damage due to lack of oxygen? Same as above. If it were a liberal, how would one determine that "brain" damage had occurred?

Death? No cases cited, even by far left liberals

Broken bones? Same as above.

Water boarding is NOT intended to harm anyone. It is a more physical method of sleep deprivation. Both are used to exhaust and disorient the subject, so that his thought processes and reasoning are TEMPORARILY disrupted. [makes the terrorist think as logically as a liberal]

[cobra de capell]

It all comes back to - would anyone posting here not take special steps to save a loved one from almost certain harm or death by subjecting a specific person or persons that are known to have information that may prevent that from happening to aggressive methods of interrogation.

All the high-horse elitist - several steps removed from having to make a decision views posted here would surely disappear if the potential victim was a son or daughter, wife, husband, etc. When the rubber meets the road, each one of us would step up and save those that we love, period. The POTUS's of the past have done that on several occasions in the past - for the love of country and its citizens.

All the bloviating on this thread will not change doing the right thing in a time of war.

[427 S/O]

John McCain ..broke..

Originally Posted by VRM

So is there a difference between waterboarding a SEAL-in-training (who knows that this is just training) and locking a guy up for 5 years and waterboarding him regularly?

John McCain seemed to think so - and he had a bit more experience with it than any of us.

Steve

[Excaliber]

If you don't accept the potential for injury from water boarding your not certainly not qualified to define the limits of it's use! Wikipedia's definition stands, in all it's horror, when waterboarding is done without guidelines.

The argument would be better served by stating the benevolent CIA carried it out to limits carefully prescribed by the Government and the 'torture' was surpervised by a doctor to assure the torturee was not seriously injured, or was just 'slightly injured'. Did they cross the line? THATS why we need an investigation, not necessarily a prosecution.

At any rate, the Government does not support waterboarding at the present time, for multiple and various reasons. I don't have a position on that. But I'm not going to bury my head in the sand and justify waterboarding as little more than a swimming exercise either! Just trying to keep the facts straight.

[VRM]

Originally Posted by 427 S/O

John McCain ..broke..

Everybody breaks.

[cobra bill]

I know what conservatives are screaming into their computers right now: "But he didn't die! None of them died. So, your question is an absurd hypothetical." Well, here's the problem with that. In fact, many of them did die.

About one hundred of our detainees died when we were holding them. Of these, 34 are suspected or confirmed homicides. We beat people to death at Bagram Airbase and Abu Ghraib using some of the same techniques authorized by the Pentagon and the Bush administration. Military lawyers told the Bush officials that it would be illegal, inhumane and immoral. And they did it any way. Everyone suffered and some died. That's what happens when you torture people.

[VRM]

Originally Posted by Jamo

CdC and VRM are now and forever joined at the hip...one gets suspended, they both do...even if they are on different threads.

It's my new bipartisan approach to moderation.

Ernie, on the other, is still entitled to singular attention.

All that being said...CdC, get the phuk off VRM's thread, and Ernie...STFU about our moderation protocols.

Thank you and have a nice day.

CdC - get off my thread - you are going to get us both booted.