|
Post by Evil Yoda on Dec 13, 2014 17:28:14 GMT -5
I understand you'd rather die than spend some time having something humiliating or painful done to you. Frankly, I find that strange. It's not as though we're talking about ripping out fingernails, or electrocuting genitals, or the rack, or the iron maiden. The kind of person who tortures escalates. The kind of society that tolerates gets worse as time goes by and it discovers that the tortures it tried aren't working. In the case of the government, they're not returning good intel; in the case of the torturer, they're not giving him the same thrill any more. If you think that people who want to hurt others are "normal" we'll have to disagree. If you don't mind falling into the clutches of evil men like that, we'll have to disagree.
|
|
|
Post by Ranger John on Dec 13, 2014 17:38:56 GMT -5
I understand you'd rather die than spend some time having something humiliating or painful done to you. Frankly, I find that strange. It's not as though we're talking about ripping out fingernails, or electrocuting genitals, or the rack, or the iron maiden. The kind of person who tortures escalates. The kind of society that tolerates gets worse as time goes by and it discovers that the tortures it tried aren't working. In the case of the government, they're not returning good intel; in the case of the torturer, they're not giving him the same thrill any more. If you think that people who want to hurt others are "normal" we'll have to disagree. If you don't mind falling into the clutches of evil men like that, we'll have to disagree. So you're back on the slippery slope fallacy then. There's no evidence this program was anything more than an extraordinary response to an extraordinary set of circumstances. Yes, I would rather be waterboarded than vaporized by a missile... I see it as even more preferable to having my family vaporized with me - something you seem to be just fine with. If you believe it is evil to waterboard someone but not to kill him and his family, you've got a really strange idea of evil.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Dec 13, 2014 17:45:26 GMT -5
The kind of person who tortures escalates. The kind of society that tolerates gets worse as time goes by and it discovers that the tortures it tried aren't working. In the case of the government, they're not returning good intel; in the case of the torturer, they're not giving him the same thrill any more. If you think that people who want to hurt others are "normal" we'll have to disagree. If you don't mind falling into the clutches of evil men like that, we'll have to disagree. So you're back on the slippery slope fallacy then. There's no evidence this program was anything more than an extraordinary response to an extraordinary set of circumstances. Yes, I would rather be waterboarded than vaporized by a missile... I see it as even more preferable to having my family vaporized with me - something you seem to be just fine with. If you believe it is evil to waterboard someone but not to kill him and his family, you've got a really strange idea of evil.Why does one have to choose? I'd prefer neither, and they are both evil.
|
|
|
Post by aponderer on Dec 13, 2014 17:49:42 GMT -5
First, define "torture". What was enumerated in that "report" comes no where near "torture". It's Liberals, again, defining things down to the point they have no meaning, just to win political points. Wonder why not a single operative, or even manager from the CIA was even spoken to in imagining this "report"? Sure. If I don't want it done to me because it's painful or humiliating, it's torture. I doubt the CIA would have much to add to this report. They lie for a living. They're certainly never going to tell the truth when doing so would cast them in a bad light. Sounds like the CIA is in a Catch-22 of sorts: damned if they do and damned if they don't. A number of intelligence people have said that EITs contributed to the knowledge that enabled bin Laden to meet his doom. Perhaps they are lying...
|
|
|
Post by Ranger John on Dec 13, 2014 17:52:38 GMT -5
Sure. If I don't want it done to me because it's painful or humiliating, it's torture. I doubt the CIA would have much to add to this report. They lie for a living. They're certainly never going to tell the truth when doing so would cast them in a bad light. Sounds like the CIA is in a Catch-22 of sorts: damned if they do and damned if they don't. A number of intelligence people have said that EITs contributed to the knowledge that enabled bin Laden to meet his doom. Perhaps they are lying... Support for the assertion that EITs generated important intelligence has been bi-partisan. It includes former and current CIA directors (both Bush and Obama administrations), as well as former Democrat members of this committee (Bob Kerrey). Opposition to that assertion is entirely partisan.
|
|
|
Post by stevez51 on Dec 13, 2014 19:23:39 GMT -5
81 year old Senator needs to go next election cycle. She has made her money, give someone else a chance. This report was strictly politics as usual. Obama will do nothing. It would implicate him.
|
|
|
Post by Evil Yoda on Dec 13, 2014 21:07:49 GMT -5
There's no evidence this program was anything more than an extraordinary response to an extraordinary set of circumstances. I regard it as an evil response, engineered by evil men. If you want to make excuses for them, that's your affair. Yes, I would rather be waterboarded than vaporized by a missile... I see it as even more preferable to having my family vaporized with me - something you seem to be just fine with. Moving the goalposts, are we? You asked if *I* preferred being killed to being tortured and I answered you. If you're now including my family in it, I'd have to give that some considerable thought. But I don't think I'd want them in the hands of men that evil, either. If you believe it is evil to waterboard someone but not to kill him and his family, you've got a really strange idea of evil. I believe that establishing and permitting a program of torture is an evil act, which by definition is committed by evil men. And I don't want such men anywhere near the levers of power. I've said that several times now and you seem unable to understand it, from your responses.
|
|
|
Post by Evil Yoda on Dec 13, 2014 21:09:41 GMT -5
Sounds like the CIA is in a Catch-22 of sorts: damned if they do and damned if they don't. A number of intelligence people have said that EITs contributed to the knowledge that enabled bin Laden to meet his doom. Perhaps they are lying... Would you expect them to say anything different? They'll say whatever they have to in order to convince people they aren't monsters.
|
|
|
Post by Ranger John on Dec 13, 2014 21:35:01 GMT -5
There's no evidence this program was anything more than an extraordinary response to an extraordinary set of circumstances. I regard it as an evil response, engineered by evil men. If you want to make excuses for them, that's your affair. Again, if you're ok with killing then it's silly to assert you've got a problem with making people uncomfortable. No. Not really. I'm sorry you didn't assume that the drone strikes weren't killing innocent people standing around their intended target, including families. But that is what's happening... and what you're apparently just fine with. Again, you're just fine with killing. Your squeamishness here seems unwarranted.
|
|
|
Post by Evil Yoda on Dec 13, 2014 21:52:42 GMT -5
Again, you're just fine with killing. Your squeamishness here seems unwarranted. I do draw a distinction between a soldier defending his country and the kind of sick-in-the-head (or plain evil) person who tortures, sure. Clearly, you do not. I wonder if you'd be as okay with it if it had happened on a Democrat's watch. Or, more precisely, how much of this is you defending torture and how much is you defending Bush/Cheney (which you have done elsewhere on this forum - one of the few remaining who will do so, in fact).
|
|
|
Post by Ranger John on Dec 13, 2014 21:56:43 GMT -5
Again, you're just fine with killing. Your squeamishness here seems unwarranted. I do draw a distinction between a soldier defending his country and the kind of sick-in-the-head (or plain evil) person who tortures, sure. Clearly, you do not. No. I don't. Not when the soldier or CIA agent obtains vital information necessary to defend his country with these techniques. Generally speaking, killing is more extreme than torture. Especially the "torture" we're talking about in this report. I would rather be waterboarded than shot with a hellfire missile. Therefore, when we waterboard someone it isn't as bad as when we shoot them with a hellfire missile (and maybe take out their family too).
|
|
|
Post by Evil Yoda on Dec 13, 2014 22:25:26 GMT -5
I would rather be waterboarded than shot with a hellfire missile. Therefore, when we waterboard someone it isn't as bad as when we shoot them with a hellfire missile (and maybe take out their family too). Well, we'll have to disagree. The kind of person who tortures is evil, as far as I'm concerned. Much worse than a soldier defending his country. They're either morally dead, or they actually delight in the suffering of others. Like Hussein's two evil children. Such people shouldn't be allowed in any position of power, and it says something very bad about a country and its leaders if they allow and encourage such behavior: it says they're evil people. That's Bush and Cheney.
|
|
|
Post by Ranger John on Dec 13, 2014 22:40:56 GMT -5
I would rather be waterboarded than shot with a hellfire missile. Therefore, when we waterboard someone it isn't as bad as when we shoot them with a hellfire missile (and maybe take out their family too). Well, we'll have to disagree. The kind of person who tortures is evil, as far as I'm concerned. Much worse than a soldier defending his country. They're either morally dead, or they actually delight in the suffering of others. Like Hussein's two evil children. Such people shouldn't be allowed in any position of power, and it says something very bad about a country and its leaders if they allow and encourage such behavior: it says they're evil people. That's Bush and Cheney. Those CIA agents that waterboarded KSM did as much to defend their country as the SEAL that used the information they got to plant OBL. Your misplaced self-righteousness not withstanding. I got to this point by asking myself if I were faced with a choice between being waterboarded or droned to death, I'd really rather be waterboarded. I'd pick rectal hydration over the hellfire missile, too. Sure it's unpleasant and painful. Not not nearly so much as being killed. Perhaps I'd pick death if the CIA were electrocuting genitals, or pulling out fingernails... or perhaps not if it meant saving my family. But once I came to the realization that the victims of CIA's "torture" program probably aren't as bad off as the victims of the White House's drone program, this notion that the 'torture' program was somehow morally evil in relation to the drone program became obviously silly.
|
|
|
Post by aponderer on Dec 14, 2014 1:50:34 GMT -5
I would rather be waterboarded than shot with a hellfire missile. Therefore, when we waterboard someone it isn't as bad as when we shoot them with a hellfire missile (and maybe take out their family too). Well, we'll have to disagree. The kind of person who tortures is evil, as far as I'm concerned. Much worse than a soldier defending his country. They're either morally dead, or they actually delight in the suffering of others. Like Hussein's two evil children. Such people shouldn't be allowed in any position of power, and it says something very bad about a country and its leaders if they allow and encourage such behavior: it says they're evil people. That's Bush and Cheney. Are you seriously finding no difference between Hussein's two evil children and CIA agents who water boarded a couple of terrorists?
|
|
|
Post by rentedmule on Dec 14, 2014 7:18:37 GMT -5
Well, we'll have to disagree. The kind of person who tortures is evil, as far as I'm concerned. Much worse than a soldier defending his country. They're either morally dead, or they actually delight in the suffering of others. Like Hussein's two evil children. Such people shouldn't be allowed in any position of power, and it says something very bad about a country and its leaders if they allow and encourage such behavior: it says they're evil people. That's Bush and Cheney. Those CIA agents that waterboarded KSM did as much to defend their country as the SEAL that used the information they got to plant OBL. Your misplaced self-righteousness not withstanding. I got to this point by asking myself if I were faced with a choice between being waterboarded or droned to death, I'd really rather be waterboarded. I'd pick rectal hydration over the hellfire missile, too. Sure it's unpleasant and painful. Not not nearly so much as being killed. Perhaps I'd pick death if the CIA were electrocuting genitals, or pulling out fingernails... or perhaps not if it meant saving my family. But once I came to the realization that the victims of CIA's "torture" program probably aren't as bad off as the victims of the White House's drone program, this notion that the 'torture' program was somehow morally evil in relation to the drone program became obviously silly. A fair post. Most people in contemporary times no doubt agree. The SS and Stasi and KGB built enviable careers on that predictability. I suppose I concede. I am a helpless traditionalist, a child of chivalry and the cultural myths and heroes and poets handed down to me. Morality decides who the heroes of a society will endure; those who jab pointed sticks at chained bears are lost in history as clowns.
|
|
|
Post by Evil Yoda on Dec 14, 2014 10:38:56 GMT -5
Are you seriously finding no difference between Hussein's two evil children and CIA agents who water boarded a couple of terrorists? None. People who torture are mentally ill or just evil. It does not matter to me from what nation they come, or of what race or religion they are.
|
|
|
Post by aponderer on Dec 14, 2014 10:54:31 GMT -5
Are you seriously finding no difference between Hussein's two evil children and CIA agents who water boarded a couple of terrorists? None. People who torture are mentally ill or just evil. It does not matter to me from what nation they come, or of what race or religion they are. I guess we'll just have to disagree on what the definition of "torture" is. IMHO making someone feel "humiliated" is not torture. Posters attempt to humiliate other posters frequently on this forum, but I don't consider that torture. Do you consider those posters evil? My opinion is that torture involves physical injury (including death) and/or mayhem, as well as brainwashing.
|
|
|
Post by Evil Yoda on Dec 14, 2014 11:37:46 GMT -5
Do you consider those posters evil? My opinion is that torture involves physical injury (including death) and/or mayhem, as well as brainwashing. No. Well, maybe a few of them... More seriously, would you not agree that there are levels of humiliation? Would you not agree that there is some potential for injury in the kinds of things the right-wing considers "mild" (but would not if a Democratic administration had done them; then they'd be horrible). I believe that people willing to do things like that to others are, as I've said, evil or ill. I don't want them to have any kind of official sanction for their illness and/or evil. I think I'm on the record as not wanting government to have those kinds of powers. Others seem willing to grant the government such powers as long as they agree with how it uses them, but seem unwilling to see that once granted, such powers are hard to revoke.
|
|
|
Post by vosa on Dec 14, 2014 12:12:06 GMT -5
You all talk about torture as if there are no “degrees” of torture.
For those who still believe that words have meaning and those meanings can be found in a dictionary:
tor•ture - noun \ˈtȯr-chər\
: the act of causing severe physical pain as a form of punishment or as a way to force someone to do or say something
: something that causes mental or physical suffering : a very painful or unpleasant experience
I dare say there are very few teenagers in the world who, under the 2nd definition above, could not claim that their parents tortured them.
My point is there is a big difference between doing something to someone that has long term lasting effects and doing something that does not.
To really know where someone stands on this issue we must get away from the vague term “torture” and discuss the specific acts that one believes constitutes torture. For example: is waterboarding “torture” and if so why.
|
|
|
Post by Evil Yoda on Dec 14, 2014 12:27:40 GMT -5
Folks have addressed the severity of the torture as a way to justify it. My point has been, and remains, that it says something unpleasant about us as a people that we'd give the kind of man who is willing to torture government sanction to do so. And that it is very, very dangerous (based on what has happened in the past) to let government have that kind of power. First, it never gives it back, and second, its use steadily worsens until folks wake up in a morally flawed and probably repressive state.
|
|
|
Post by Ranger John on Dec 14, 2014 13:06:57 GMT -5
Folks have addressed the severity of the torture as a way to justify it. My point has been, and remains, that it says something unpleasant about us as a people that we'd give the kind of man who is willing to torture government sanction to do so. And that it is very, very dangerous (based on what has happened in the past) to let government have that kind of power. First, it never gives it back, and second, its use steadily worsens until folks wake up in a morally flawed and probably repressive state.The part in bold is obviously and logically incorrect. It is a textbook example of the slippery slope fallacy. Beyond that, I wonder just how many innocent lives you're willing to sacrifice on your altar of mistaken moral superiority? Without even going into what sort of intelligence has been gathered through this 'torture' (and how many lives have been saved by it) we know that there has been much collateral damage from the White House drone program - that you're just fine with. Frankly, I'd rather we capture some of these guys and find out what the hell they're up to. And yes, I'm Ok with our government getting their hands a little dirty to do it. You're an absolutist on this EY. You've drawn a line in the sand at some definition of "torture" that you haven't even really explained, and simply written off anyone who crosses it as evil. This isn't a reasonable position (absolutism rarely is). It's simply demonizing anyone who disagrees with your not-entirely-clear position.
|
|
|
Post by Ranger John on Dec 14, 2014 13:21:39 GMT -5
Those CIA agents that waterboarded KSM did as much to defend their country as the SEAL that used the information they got to plant OBL. Your misplaced self-righteousness not withstanding. I got to this point by asking myself if I were faced with a choice between being waterboarded or droned to death, I'd really rather be waterboarded. I'd pick rectal hydration over the hellfire missile, too. Sure it's unpleasant and painful. Not not nearly so much as being killed. Perhaps I'd pick death if the CIA were electrocuting genitals, or pulling out fingernails... or perhaps not if it meant saving my family. But once I came to the realization that the victims of CIA's "torture" program probably aren't as bad off as the victims of the White House's drone program, this notion that the 'torture' program was somehow morally evil in relation to the drone program became obviously silly. A fair post. Most people in contemporary times no doubt agree. The SS and Stasi and KGB built enviable careers on that predictability. I suppose I concede. I am a helpless traditionalist, a child of chivalry and the cultural myths and heroes and poets handed down to me. Morality decides who the heroes of a society will endure; those who jab pointed sticks at chained bears are lost in history as clowns. I'm not entirely sure it's appropriate to compare the SS, Stasi and KGB to the CIA here. vosa makes a very valid point above about the form that "torture" takes. It's not all created equal. If I were faced with a choice between spending a month on the rack and being blown to bits with a Hellfire missile, I'd probably pick the missile. Indeed, I'd pick the missile under any circumstance I can imagine where torture would lead to my death. But that's not what the CIA is known to have done here. In fact, that's why it's dangerous to talk about what the CIA has done as torture. When we use the word torture, it conjures an image of the Spanish Inquisition. Even based on Feinstein's report the CIA didn't do anything close to that. Comparing the Spanish Inquisition... or the Stasi, SS or KGB to this defines torture down to the point where we cheapen what the victims of the Inquisition, Stasi, SS and KGB suffered. And that is morally disgusting and evil in it's own way.
|
|
|
Post by redleg on Dec 14, 2014 22:13:14 GMT -5
There's no evidence this program was anything more than an extraordinary response to an extraordinary set of circumstances. I regard it as an evil response, engineered by evil men. If you want to make excuses for them, that's your affair. Yes, I would rather be waterboarded than vaporized by a missile... I see it as even more preferable to having my family vaporized with me - something you seem to be just fine with. Moving the goalposts, are we? You asked if *I* preferred being killed to being tortured and I answered you. If you're now including my family in it, I'd have to give that some considerable thought. But I don't think I'd want them in the hands of men that evil, either. If you believe it is evil to waterboard someone but not to kill him and his family, you've got a really strange idea of evil. I believe that establishing and permitting a program of torture is an evil act, which by definition is committed by evil men. And I don't want such men anywhere near the levers of power. I've said that several times now and you seem unable to understand it, from your responses. Nothing in that report can be honestly described as torture. US soldiers go through most of that during SERE training. What you advocate is asking them nicely "would you please tell us where you intend to attack next?", and when they say "no", simply moving on to the next situation.
|
|
|
Post by redleg on Dec 14, 2014 22:14:40 GMT -5
Folks have addressed the severity of the torture as a way to justify it. My point has been, and remains, that it says something unpleasant about us as a people that we'd give the kind of man who is willing to torture government sanction to do so. And that it is very, very dangerous (based on what has happened in the past) to let government have that kind of power. First, it never gives it back, and second, its use steadily worsens until folks wake up in a morally flawed and probably repressive state. And for those that don't, the only thing that can be said is "they USED to exist..."
|
|
|
Post by rentedmule on Dec 15, 2014 5:46:43 GMT -5
A fair post. Most people in contemporary times no doubt agree. The SS and Stasi and KGB built enviable careers on that predictability. I suppose I concede. I am a helpless traditionalist, a child of chivalry and the cultural myths and heroes and poets handed down to me. Morality decides who the heroes of a society will endure; those who jab pointed sticks at chained bears are lost in history as clowns. I'm not entirely sure it's appropriate to compare the SS, Stasi and KGB to the CIA here. vosa makes a very valid point above about the form that "torture" takes. It's not all created equal. If I were faced with a choice between spending a month on the rack and being blown to bits with a Hellfire missile, I'd probably pick the missile. Indeed, I'd pick the missile under any circumstance I can imagine where torture would lead to my death. But that's not what the CIA is known to have done here. In fact, that's why it's dangerous to talk about what the CIA has done as torture. When we use the word torture, it conjures an image of the Spanish Inquisition. Even based on Feinstein's report the CIA didn't do anything close to that. Comparing the Spanish Inquisition... or the Stasi, SS or KGB to this defines torture down to the point where we cheapen what the victims of the Inquisition, Stasi, SS and KGB suffered. And that is morally disgusting and evil in it's own way. When a society engages in activities that must be done in 'secret'; when that activity must be couched in terms by some wordsmith; it makes me as a citizen wonder...... When it becomes dangerous to even talk about our government activities...... it's just way too late. When a society supports a government that can't operate in the light of day, it sends a message that the citizens are best served by also becoming 'secret' and forming their own shadow society.
|
|