waterboarding

In article ,
"Opus--Mark H. Bowen" wrote:

"Ray or Bobbi Adams" wrote in message
...

"rb608" wrote in message
news:%xsdj.6464$oh5.2546@trndny08...
"Dave LaCourse" wrote in message
If waterboarding would save the life of your wife, children, and
boyfriend, would you be in favor of it? Yeah, me too.

Turn that around. Suppose your wife or child was mistakenly taken
captive by a foreign government who thought they had valuable
information. Would it be okay if they were waterboarded? Hell no; and
that's the same outrage you should have when our country does it.

With all due respect, the false choice you posit is bull****. It assumes
that you *know* you have the right person, you *know* they possess the
information you seek, you *know* that information is valid and timely,
and you *know* they will give you the correct information under torture.
But, the fact is, you can know none of that with certainty before you
begin the torture. Further, even with information you glean in that
manner, you can't be certain it is truth or made up to stop the torture.
IOW, you're going on an inhuman fishing expedition (OBROFF).

Torture is one of those crimes that simply cannot be excused. There can
be no double standard. If we can do it to them, they can do it to us.
If we can do it to save our children, they can do it to our children with
the same moral authority. I cannot excuse or condone that.

Joe F.

sure beats beheading

Not necessarily.

Op

As a guy who got waterboarded at SERE let me assure you that beheading
(which I admit to not having endured) is likely worse.

"Allen" wrote in message
...
In article ,
"Opus--Mark H. Bowen" wrote:

"Ray or Bobbi Adams" wrote in message
...

"rb608" wrote in message
news:%xsdj.6464$oh5.2546@trndny08...
"Dave LaCourse" wrote in message
If waterboarding would save the life of your wife, children, and
boyfriend, would you be in favor of it? Yeah, me too.

Turn that around. Suppose your wife or child was mistakenly taken
captive by a foreign government who thought they had valuable
information. Would it be okay if they were waterboarded? Hell no;
and
that's the same outrage you should have when our country does it.

With all due respect, the false choice you posit is bull****. It
assumes
that you *know* you have the right person, you *know* they possess the
information you seek, you *know* that information is valid and timely,
and you *know* they will give you the correct information under
torture.
But, the fact is, you can know none of that with certainty before you
begin the torture. Further, even with information you glean in that
manner, you can't be certain it is truth or made up to stop the
torture.
IOW, you're going on an inhuman fishing expedition (OBROFF).

Torture is one of those crimes that simply cannot be excused. There
can
be no double standard. If we can do it to them, they can do it to us.
If we can do it to save our children, they can do it to our children
with
the same moral authority. I cannot excuse or condone that.

Joe F.

sure beats beheading

Not necessarily.

Op

As a guy who got waterboarded at SERE let me assure you that beheading
(which I admit to not having endured) is likely worse.

Are we assuming that everyone who is waterboarded survives?

If you were to know that you would not survive the torture, would you still
choose waterboarding?

Op

On Sat, 29 Dec 2007 19:28:34 -0500, "Opus--Mark H. Bowen"
wrote:

Are we assuming that everyone who is waterboarded survives?

If you were to know that you would not survive the torture, would you still
choose waterboarding?

There is no record of anyone dying from waterboarding. And, pray
tell, how the hell are you going to know whether you are going to live
or die during *real* torture. No one in the hell holes of Viet Nam
knew wether they were going to die, and they fought to survive.

Davie

"Dave LaCourse" wrote in message
...
On Sat, 29 Dec 2007 19:28:34 -0500, "Opus--Mark H. Bowen"
wrote:

Are we assuming that everyone who is waterboarded survives?

If you were to know that you would not survive the torture, would you
still
choose waterboarding?

There is no record of anyone dying from waterboarding.

Wrong again! You really should learn to do some basic research before you
make outrageous claims.

And, pray
tell, how the hell are you going to know whether you are going to live
or die during *real* torture.

What does knowing whether one is or is not going to survive torture have to
do with the question I asked Allen?

It was a very direct and specific question pertaining to the *real* torture
known as waterboarding and survivability was not assumed?

I know it's really more than anyone should ask of you, but attempt a
coherent thought once in a while.

The question to Allen was whether he'd rather die by waterboarding, or by
having his head severed from his shoulders, not whether he knew if he would
survive being tortured. People have actually died during waterboarding,
whether you want to believe it is irrelavant.

No one in the hell holes of Viet Nam
knew wether they were going to die, and they fought to survive.

And?

Davie

"Dave LaCourse" wrote in message
...

...No one in the hell holes of Viet Nam
knew wether they were going to die, and they fought to survive.

Even the Americans?

Wolfgang
to whom, admittedly, it seems plausible enough.

In article ,
"Opus--Mark H. Bowen" wrote:

As a guy who got waterboarded at SERE let me assure you that beheading
(which I admit to not having endured) is likely worse.

Are we assuming that everyone who is waterboarded survives?

If you were to know that you would not survive the torture, would you still
choose waterboarding?

Op

Well, I guess you're asking if I knew I was going to die which I prefer?

I'd have to say the beheading certainly.

I'm sure that there are people that have died while/after waterboarding.
It's stressful and damn unpleasant and if there were pre-existing
medical condition it could well trigger a fatal event. It was used at
SERE to make certain hard cases (me being not bright enough to realize I
was about to get labeled such) that they enemy WILL get the info from
you and waterboarding was a pretty safe way to show you the mildest
thing they will do. It was a good lesson/ I learned it well.

100% of people who are beheaded die. (OK, I'll admit I didn't research
that but I'll take a shot at it being true

The point, I guess is that we're not going in and killing/maiming people
that are being questioned. If someone is reluctant and those in charge
believe there is time critical intelligence to be gained I'd say break
out the plank.

Allen wrote:



If someone is reluctant and those in charge
believe there is time critical intelligence to be gained I'd say break
out the plank.


not that i agree with you at all, but...um...you do know who is "in
charge", eh? the slippery slope is...well...slippery. and the
dumbasses in charge seem to enjoy the ride down way too much, imo.

jeff

"Allen" wrote in message
...
In article ,
"Opus--Mark H. Bowen" wrote:

As a guy who got waterboarded at SERE let me assure you that beheading
(which I admit to not having endured) is likely worse.

Are we assuming that everyone who is waterboarded survives?

If you were to know that you would not survive the torture, would you
still
choose waterboarding?

Op

Well, I guess you're asking if I knew I was going to die which I prefer?

I'd have to say the beheading certainly.

Yep, that is what I was askin'. My point was that I'd rather die quickly
than suffer for an extended period before death.

While I have never experienced waterboarding--the description of what takes
place is enough to let me know that I don't want to experience waterboarding
either.

I'm sure that there are people that have died while/after waterboarding.

There is a record of such.

It's stressful and damn unpleasant and if there were pre-existing
medical condition it could well trigger a fatal event. It was used at
SERE to make certain hard cases (me being not bright enough to realize I
was about to get labeled such) that they enemy WILL get the info from
you and waterboarding was a pretty safe way to show you the mildest
thing they will do. It was a good lesson/ I learned it well.

Not trying to be a smartass, but would you have considered waterboarding to
be a mild form of "Enhanced Interrogation Techniques"/torture, if you were
exposed to it over and over for many days or weeks?

100% of people who are beheaded die. (OK, I'll admit I didn't research
that but I'll take a shot at it being true

Seems a reasonable assumption.

The point, I guess is that we're not going in and killing/maiming people
that are being questioned. If someone is reluctant and those in charge
believe there is time critical intelligence to be gained I'd say break
out the plank.

Would you condone attaching electrical devises to one's genitals, or gouging
someone's eyes out as well? (These may be poor examples, but I have never
contemplated the various forms of "Enhanced Interrogation
Techniques"/torture, and I am sure that you are much better versed in
techniques that would not necessarily cause observable physical damage or
harm, having gone thru SERE training and whatnot) If so, my point is: Aren't
you distinguishing between forms of torture? I that the U.S. should never
condone torture and certainly not codify the forms of torture, as to those
that are grudingly acceptable and those that might be more questionable.
Jeff's slippery slope, ya know.

I am not so much worried about our enemies treatment--per se--but the
message that officially condoned torture sends to the world about us as a
people. I know that others nations practice torture as a matter of course,
but I'd like to think that we, as a nation, are better than that. I also
know that, during times of war, horrible things happen to individuals and
groups of individuals, which will alter their moral compasses. These
situations should be rare, I would hope, and certainly not encouraged by our
political and military leaders.

It is my opinion, that if we allow "Enhanced Interrogation
Techniques"/torture to become common place in our arsenal of intelligence
gathering, we have abandoned our constitutional beliefs and are no better
than those we call our enemies.

And what about those so-called enemy combatants that are handed over to us
by questionable allies. As we have seen, in Afghanistan, tribalism creates
strange bed-fellows. It is know that members of the Norther Alliance handed
over territorial rivals to us as enemy combatants, who were merely rivals to
a particular warlord and not an actual enemy combatant/Taliban, as we would
have difined them. If we put these people through "Enhanced Interrogation
Techniques"/torture techniques and they were actually friendly to us, what
harm have we done to our strategic objectives. It is my contention that we
would be creating an enemy out of a friend in such cases.

No matter how the words above appear to you, I am not criticizing you, or
trying to provoke you. I just want to understand your position, and make
certain that my position is understood.

Regards,

Op

"Opus--Mark H. Bowen" wrote in message
...

*Correction*

I *believe* that the U.S. should never condone torture and certainly not
codify the forms of torture, as to those that are grudingly acceptable and
those that might be more questionable. Jeff's slippery slope, ya know.

Op

Opus--Mark H. Bowen wrote:s.

It is my opinion, that if we allow "Enhanced Interrogation
Techniques"/torture to become common place in our arsenal of intelligence
gathering, we have abandoned our constitutional beliefs and are no better
than those we call our enemies.

For the most part, that's true. But the thing is, we *are* no
better than those we call our enemies and we never have been.
The myth of some inherent ethical or moral superiority adhering
to Americans because they're American is just that: a myth.
Which is exactly *why* the guiding principles of the
Constitution--and our ability (so far) to submit to them--are so
important.

The fact that so many are so ready and willing to find excuses
for throwing out them the moment the going gets rough only
underscores, to my mind, just *how* important it is to keep and
protect them at all cost--rather than rely on knee-jerk hubris
about our own personal specialness.

- JR