I waterboard!

Great Debates
241

[QUOTE=Mad Max]
So I’m waiting now for you to “simulate” having your wife, two children, and every one you care about that lives in your city murdered by a nuke set off by Islamofascists. How do you feel? Tell us.
[/quote]
It makes me feel that we shouldn’t have done everything we could to make that happen. And that we shouldn’t have done everything we could to make the rest of the world at most disinterested in stopping such a thing. By, among other things, torturing people.

And given the way were are acting, it’s questionable if that would be “murdered”, or “killed in an act of war”; given that we don’t seem to consider slaughtering large numbers of innocent people murder when WE do it. We are in no moral position to call someone else destroying an American city murder, unless and until we admit that it’s murder when we do it.

And “Islamofacsist” isn’t a meaningful term.

[QUOTE=Mad Max]
Questions about appropriate interrogation techniques in a 9/12 world are complicated,
[/quote]
No more than they have ever been.

242

[QUOTE=Hostile Dialect]
Thanks for the coloring book, Chouan. One problem, though: it has dialogue, but it seems to be missing illustrations. Can you send those over? Thanks.
[/QUOTE]
Sorry, don’t have access to those illustrations. There was a videotape, but I understand the CIA destroyed it.

In the meantime, here are some pictures of the kinds of things that enhanced interrogation techniques would prevent:

243

[QUOTE=Chouan]
But the truth of the matter is, we’re fighting against an enemy who isn’t bothered by the niceties of theoretical and ethical debates. Do you think the Islamists ever gave Daniel Pearl or Nick Berg the kind of moral consideration that we give to them? No!
[/quote]
And if we act no better than them, or worse, as we have, how can you condemn them ? And we are NOT fighting Al Qaeda to any great degree. We are fighting people who are fighting back against our war of agression, our unmitigated act of conquest.

[QUOTE=Chouan]
Sometimes, you have to fight fire with fire. And in the case of Al-Qaida, that means suspending our usual code of ethics in order to save our civilization.
[/quote]
Garbage. They don’t have the power to do more than irritate our civilization. We are not torturing people because in danger of being destroyed, but because we as a nation are evil. We torture them because we want to, because we get off on it, not because we need to or even because it’s useful; it’s neither.

[QUOTE=Chouan]
When you’re interrogating somebody like Khalid Sheik Mohammed–who cut off Daniel Pearl’s head with a knife and videotaped it–you need to be able to use every kind of persuasion possible to get something out of him.
[/quote]
Why ? And cutting off someones head with a knife is BETTER than the way we behave.

[QUOTE=Chouan]
If we used waterboarding on KSM, I’m fine with that. Hell, I wouldn’t care if we used thumbscrews or the strappado on that guy, or any of his ilk. We’re not talking about torturing innocent people.
[/quote]
Yes we are, and yes we have.

[QUOTE=Chouan]
We’re talking about people who we know are fighting a jihad against Western Civilization–whose professed aim is the destruction of our life and our way of life–and these are people who WILL talk if presented with persuasive tools of interrogation.
[/quote]
We are talking about torturing anyone who falls into our grasp.

[QUOTE=Chouan]
If we use methods that might be considered torture, does this make us like the Nazis?
[/quote]
Yes. It makes us monsters. It makes our culture something that should be destroyed.

[QUOTE=Chouan]
I’ll let you guys debate that. For now, I’m happy to know that no terrorist attacks have happened on US soil since 9/11–and that’s due in no small part to actionable intelligence gathered from interrogation rooms.
[/QUOTE]
And why should I believe that ? What motive does Al Qaeda have to attack us when we are doing exactly what they want ?

244

[QUOTE=Chouan]
In the meantime, here are some pictures of the kinds of things that enhanced interrogation techniques would prevent:
[/QUOTE]
Prove it.

245

[QUOTE=Der Trihs]
"It makes me feel that we shouldn’t have done everything we could to make that happen. And that we shouldn’t have done everything we could to make the rest of the world at most disinterested in stopping such a thing. "

I would tear these arguments down, but it’s irrelevant to the torture question.

"By, among other things, torturing people. "

So your position is that there are countries who would be capable of stopping a nuke attack on an American city, but would stand by and let it happen because we practiced aggressive interrogation on terrorists? Just making sure I have your argument straight.

“And given the way were are acting, it’s questionable if that would be “murdered”, or “killed in an act of war”; given that we don’t seem to consider slaughtering large numbers of innocent people murder when WE do it. We are in no moral position to call someone else destroying an American city murder, unless and until we admit that it’s murder when we do it.”

Again, incredibly flimsy arguments but irrelevant to the issue at hand, so I won’t bother to demolish them.

“And “Islamofacsist” isn’t a meaningful term.”

Well, let’s see what the definition of “fascist” is:

Main Entry:
fas·cism Listen to the pronunciation of fascism
Pronunciation:
\ˈfa-ˌshi-zəm also ˈfa-ˌsi-\
Function:
noun
Etymology:
Italian fascismo, from fascio bundle, fasces, group, from Latin fascis bundle & fasces fasces
Date:
1921

1often capitalized : a political philosophy, movement, or regime (as that of the Fascisti) that exalts nation and often race above the individual and that stands for a centralized autocratic government headed by a dictatorial leader, severe economic and social regimentation, and forcible suppression of opposition2: a tendency toward or actual exercise of strong autocratic or dictatorial control <early instances of army fascism and brutality — J. W. Aldridge>

So your argument is that the governments that Islamists seek to impose bear absolutely no resemblance to what’s described above?

“No more than they have ever been.”
[/QUOTE]

So your argument is that knowing definitively that we have an enemy with the means and desire to kill thousands of civilians in one fell swoop, on our mainland, should not have ANY impact at all on how we think about interrogation? None at all? That’s what “no more” means.

I just want to make sure I am understanding what you’re saying here.

246

[QUOTE=Der Trihs]
Prove it.
[/QUOTE]
You may as well ask a true believer for proof or the existence of God. This is a matter of faith.

247

sorry for formatting issues in previous reply

248

[QUOTE=Der Trihs]

Yes. It makes us monsters. It makes our culture something that should be destroyed.

[/QUOTE]

And, most importantly, since we have used tactics you consider torture, I assume you are saying our culture should be destroyed? If so, don’t bother replying to my previous email, because you are most certainly not worth my time.

249

[QUOTE=Mad Max]
So your position is that there are countries who would be capable of stopping a nuke attack on an American city, but would stand by and let it happen because we practiced aggressive interrogation on terrorists? Just making sure I have your argument straight.
[/QUOTE]
Yes. Why would they care ? We have been working quite hard to convince the world that we deserve anything that happens to us.

[QUOTE=Mad Max]
So your argument is that knowing definitively that we have an enemy with the means and desire to kill thousands of civilians in one fell swoop, on our mainland, should not have ANY impact at all on how we think about interrogation? None at all? That’s what “no more” means.
[/quote]
None. Would we say it was OK for a foreign country to torture Americans because we can kill millions, NOT just thousands ?

[QUOTE=Mad Max]
And, most importantly, since we have used tactics you consider torture, I assume you are saying our culture should be destroyed?
[/QUOTE]
Destroyed, or at the least broken as a world power. And torture is only one of the reasons.

250

[QUOTE=Mad Max]
So I’m waiting now for you to “simulate” having your wife, two children, and every one you care about that lives in your city murdered by a nuke set off by Islamofascists. How do you feel? Tell us.
[/QUOTE]
During the Cold War the danger of nuclear incineration was far greater than it is now, yet we managed to fight the evil of international Communism without resorting to such tactics.

The danger that Islamic fundamentalism currently poses to the United States is minor compared to some of the threats we’ve faced in the past. Yet the nervous nellies run around shrieking as though the Soviet warheads were already incoming over the ice cap. Our fathers were made of sterner stuff.

251

[QUOTE=Mad Max]
So your argument is that knowing definitively that we have an enemy with the means and desire to kill thousands of civilians in one fell swoop, on our mainland, should not have ANY impact at all on how we think about interrogation? None at all? That’s what “no more” means.

I just want to make sure I am understanding what you’re saying here.
[/QUOTE]

Out of curiosity, do you have any values at all that you hold more precious than your life and property? Or is keeping yourself alive your highest aspiration?

252

[QUOTE=Miller]
Out of curiosity, do you have any values at all that you hold more precious than your life and property? Or is keeping yourself alive your highest aspiration?
[/QUOTE]

There are many things I value above my life, and even more above my property.

253

[QUOTE=Mad Max]
There are many things I value above my life, and even more above my property.
[/QUOTE]
But you are not willing to risk your life to preserve the ideals of the United States? You would prefer that men be tortured to purchase a tiny increase in your own safety?

Thank God our fathers and grandfathers did not make such a bargain.

254

[QUOTE=Pochacco]
But you are not willing to risk your life to preserve the ideals of the United States? You would prefer that men be tortured to purchase a tiny increase in your own safety?
[/QUOTE]
Worse; on the unfounded assumption that it will.

And believing that torture will make us safer is silly. There are few better ways to make us more hated, and to make actions against us look more justified.

255

[QUOTE=Pochacco]
But you are not willing to risk your life to preserve the ideals of the United States?
[/QUOTE]

You’re making an unwarranted assumption – I’ve never said I would not. Yes, there are many of “the ideals of the United States” (depending on how that term is defined) that I would be willing to die for.

[QUOTE=Pochacco]
You would prefer that men be tortured to purchase a tiny increase in your own safety?
[/QUOTE]

Again – a completely unwarranted assumption, as I have never said I would prefer that.

Does this board actually engage in constructive dialogue, or is it all just mudslinging without any attempt to address one another’s actual points?

256

[QUOTE=Der Trihs]
Worse; on the unfounded assumption that it will.

And believing that torture will make us safer is silly. There are few better ways to make us more hated, and to make actions against us look more justified.
[/QUOTE]

And that in a nutshell, is why our military has maintained the tradition of no torture. We want to take the higher ground. We want to wear the white hats. When we sink to torture and the torture is supported all the way to the top of our government, we have made a mockery of America and the millions of brave servicemen that have and still do serve her as honorably and bravely as they can.

Jim (Nice to be in agreement with you on a political / military issue for a change Der Trihs)

257

[QUOTE=Mad Max]
Again – a completely unwarranted assumption, as I have never said I would prefer that.
[/QUOTE]
Hardly unwarranted. If you don’t then why are you defending torture in interrogation ? And implying that if we don’t we are doooomed ?

258

[QUOTE=Mad Max]
Does this board actually engage in constructive dialogue, or is it all just mudslinging without any attempt to address one another’s actual points?
[/QUOTE]
Funny, I was about to ask you the same thing:

Be sure to get absolutely no closer to any personal insults in this thread (or in this Forum), they are not permitted. (Sarcasm, ad hominem arguments, casual dismissals, leading questions, and such, unfortunately are, but insults are prohibited.)

[ /Moderating ]

259

[QUOTE=Der Trihs]
Hardly unwarranted. If you don’t then why are you defending torture in interrogation ? And implying that if we don’t we are doooomed ?
[/QUOTE]

I don’t recall doing either of those things, but I’m open to you pointing them out to me.

What I do recall doing is:

  1. offering a counter-example to the original simulation
  2. suggesting that the issue was more compliocated than many were acknowledging, and that there were plenty of good arguments on both sides
  3. trying to clarify some points a poster made
  4. answering a couple of unwarranted assumptions about my own position

I’m not trying to be difficult here; I’m just trying to be precise and productive.

260

[QUOTE=Mad Max]
Does this board actually engage in constructive dialogue, or is it all just mudslinging without any attempt to address one another’s actual points?
[/QUOTE]
Okay, here’s a specific point. Do you believe that the danger posed to the United States by Islamic fundamentalism is greater than the danger that was posed by Soviet Communism? Remember that the Soviet Union was a sovereign nation with thousands of warheads targeted at American cities and American military bases. At any moment the leaders of the Soviet Union could have vaporized millions of our citizens. Nikita Krushchev was quite blunt about it: “We will bury you.”

And yet, during the entire Cold War we never adopted a policy of torture.

Are you seriously arguing that we should now change that policy because of a handful of religious nuts living in some caves in Afghanistan?