In any case, you still have to deal with the fact that torture also gives false information to the ones doing the torture. That we found false justifications to invade Iraq should be enough to stop defending the ones that thought that it was a good idea.
The torture apologists are really plumbing the moral depths by trying to justify the CIA’s methods by making comparisons with the Kempeitai.
If we were to stipulate, for the record, that all of us who are to the left of Cavlin Coolidge are utter hypocrites, will that change anything?
I already pointed out they destroyed villages suspected of harboring Raiders. The number of people killed isn’t up for debate. Only you seem to have a hard-on for an exact number linked purely to the raid. You can’t seem to connect the dots with the time frame. The campaign lasted for 3 months. Not the entire war. 3 months. They came, they slaughtered, they left. It wasn’t an ongoing war campaign.
I propose that no one be allowed to refer to waterboarding or other “interrogation techniques” as “mildly discomforting” (or whatever other euphemisms that soulless shitbag Cheney is using lately) until they have undergone them personally.
When I see video footage of you being waterboarded, kept awake for days, etc. and shaking it off as no big deal, I’ll consider accepting your characterization of “mildly discomforting.” Until then, you— like so many other keyboard warriors— are just talking out of your feeding hole.
The problem with your silliness is that the operation was planned 2 days before the Doolitle raid and when they started they had their orders on what to do there and elsewhere in China. But it is better to dig deeper there so as to not deal with the Iraq invasion being justified in part thanks to false information obtained with torture, huh?
False information? If its false, it is not information, and vice versa. You have committed a level-one semantic error, therefore, your entire case is destroyed and Magiver wins the internet.
Rather a pity, actually, but the rules are the rules!
You mean the coming German invasion that never happened because the Germans recognised that it would be suicide? The one that relied on aerial and naval superiority the Germans didn’t have, and knew they didn’t have? The one that had been identified a year earlier as being impossible unless the war had already been won?
Please, try to justify this assertion that any information about Operation Sea Lion provided by these spies was “vital” in any circumstance that did not involve the entire Royal Navy and Royal Air Force committing ritual suicide.
3 specific high ranking terrorists during a time frame of unknown attacks were waterboarded through a legal vetting process. A technique done to thousands of soldiers.
This was a political witch hunt. Make no mistake it’s a Democratic Party show. It is focused on only one administration, has no agenda, and no discernible end game beyond feeding their voting base a sound bite. Nobody will be prosecuted because it was all done with legal vetting ahead of time. It’s a political stunt designed to get sheeple to whine about it on electronic media.
Oh and you can take your nonsense and put in in an enema bag and pick any hole you like.
[Moderator Hat ON]
Magiver, this is out of line. Cool it or take it to the pit.
[Moderator Hat OFF]
[Moderator Hat ON]
Vinyl Turnip, you also need to cool off here.
[Moderator Hat OFF]
Dick Cheney admits we tortured innocent people (he doesn’t use the word torture, of course), and he’s not that concerned about it. I wonder what his limits are… would he be okay with torturing a terrorist’s baby if that were the only way to get them to talk?
I’m shocked.
I hope so.
So if there’s a nuke in LA going off shortly, what should we do, evacuate people and do nothing else? Would still kill many thousands.
Sure, it’s an extremely unlikely scenario, but I’m not the one who came up with it.
As pointed in the other thread, the UK and USA administrations claimed that there was an urgency on taking care of the the WMDs from Iraq, what we got from that torture+urgency? It got us false information that led to an invasion and goose chases in the desert.
You are right that you are not the one that came up with that one. Both Al-qaeda and the past administrations had an interest on getting rid of Saddam and false information obtained with torture was one of the ways to do it.
To be more to the point of the extreme hypothetical of a terrorist nuke, it is really wishful thinking to think that at that level the terrorists will not be ready to mess with the torturers too and give us misleading or incomplete information.
We lost the war in Iraq? (Abu Ghraib.)
I believe the point is that only a few of the participants were brought to trial, (and none of the superior officers) and they were tried under the U.S.'s own Code of Military Justice and it was never treated as a War Crime.
What urgency? The decision to invade was made well prior to the torture – See the PNAC letter to Clinton in 1998: http://www.informationclearinghouse.info/article5527.htm
Or more likely just swallow cyanide pills or some how otherwise martyr themselves.