Comments on: Coercive Interrogation is not Torture

By: courtneyme109

courtneyme109 — Thu, 03 Jul 2008 06:16:49 +0000

Perhaps this should really be blown out of proportion - you know, make potential enemies think twice about falling into Great Satan’s clutches

And only 3 murderous creeps wb’d? Oh! The Humanity!

By: Eagle 6

Eagle 6 — Thu, 03 Jul 2008 04:25:39 +0000

Mark, You have provided a solid response. From my foxhole, the difference between torture and enhanced interrogation techniques is the willingness and/or propensity to take it further. In other words, we may be arrogant Americans by scaring suspected terrorists/criminals with these techniques, because we know what our limit is; while the “interrogee” will not - which is why the techniques are effective. On the other hand, I don’t believe the Communist Chinese had this self-imposed limit. Again, you have given far too logical arguments to be considered a fuzzy-headed liberal, but I am still in favor of using certain means to get information if it saves lives…it wouldn’t be the first time there has been a sacrifice of one for the benefit of the masses…(ok, maybe that one was a little over the top!)…smiley face doohicky thingie…

By: Mark In Irvine

Mark In Irvine — Wed, 02 Jul 2008 22:57:20 +0000

“fuzz-headed knee-jerk liberal” should have been “fuzzy-headed knee-jerk liberal”

By: Mark In Irvine

Mark In Irvine — Wed, 02 Jul 2008 22:55:57 +0000

When the military acknowledges that its program for enhanced interrogation comes from Communist China’s program in the Korean War, and when we then considered it to be torture, how can it not be torture now?

I haven’t “tried” waterboarding myself, so I have to go on what my common sense and intellect tell me about it. Hitchens is no fuzz-headed knee-jerk liberal (as I am) - he’s Mr. Gun Ho as far as the GWOT is concerned. If, after experiencing it, he says it is torture (when he heretofore has been in favor of enhanced interrogation techniques) my common sense and intellect tell me that there’s more than a good chance that any objective test as to what is torture would be met by waterboarding.

Maybe we should get a group of people (Senators, GWB, Cheney, you and me) all together somewhere and have whoever was administering waterboarding at Gitmo give it to us, so we can see. I don’t usually insist on “personal, empirically verifiable knowledge/proof” of everything I believe - none of us could live if we did, BTW - but maybe some of us would need this “first-hand” experience in order to decide whether WB is torture.

Of course, if it IS torture and we think it should be used in Gitmo and the GWOT, that raises other issues.

By: Micky 2

Micky 2 — Wed, 02 Jul 2008 22:46:43 +0000

“and Roosevelt didn’t play the Fear Card, because he was a great man, not a slobbola”

Yea right. I think locking up evey Japanese in sight , even American Japanese citizens was playing the fear card to most extreme I’ve ever seen.

I guess the only thing in your eyes that would make Bush a great man like Roosevelt would be to lock up everyone in America who looks middle eastern ?
I’m sure if people voiced their dissent in those days like they do today Roosevelt would of got a ear full of it.

Abu Gharaib to me was just a building in use that had a bad history on the part of Saddam.
Should we of kept them in tents untill we found a nice place for them ?
It was a convenient inanimate object. The atrocities would took place with or without it.

By: Eagle 6

Eagle 6 — Wed, 02 Jul 2008 21:19:36 +0000

Mark, Not sure the difference between Eric and my “opinions” versus the “evidence” you cite…I would suggest both are opinions, so torture may be in the eye of the beholder…or the beheader…I’ll opt for the former and leave true torture to the latter…

Jersey - I realize W is the commander in chief, but there are so darn many layers of responsibility between him and the many issues he’s accused of being irresponsible…like platoon sergeants, platoon leaders, company commanders, battalion commanders, brigade commanders, division commanders, corps commanders, area commanders, State Department, DA civilians, Congress, Sec Army, Sec Def, CoS, et al… the biggest difference between Roosevelt and Bush is the media in Roosevelt’s time was somewhat respectful and was unified in defeating the threat of Japanese and Nazi hordes… today, the media doesn’t recognize the threat and is complacent in their freedoms, which leads them to corrupt the core of our freedoms. The people who established our free country understoond responsibility and accountability. Our media do not.

By: Jersey McJones

Jersey McJones — Wed, 02 Jul 2008 20:53:00 +0000

I’m not “crying” about anything, and I’m nopt commending the Japanese internments - all I’m saying is that Abu Gharaib was stupid (and Roosevelt didn’t play the Fear Card, because he was a great man, not a slobbola). The people in charge of this stupid war have done a lousy job of it, and the buck stops with George W Bush.

JMJ

By: Micky 2

Micky 2 — Wed, 02 Jul 2008 20:45:48 +0000

Roosevelt and the enemies we had the time are a bad comparison.
The court recently only gave these guys the right to challenge the title and term of their custody and the right to contest it.
The SCOTUS did not say we should let them go or define what kind of enemy they are.
Hah, the post is about torture and you’re crying about Abu Gharaub and say you miss the president who opened all the Japanese re-location camps ?

By: Mark In Irvine

Mark In Irvine — Wed, 02 Jul 2008 20:41:58 +0000

“Coercive Interrogation is not Torture”

This is your opinion but evidence is to the contrary. See the two links I sent, one to Christopher Hitchens’ article and the other the the NYT article on the Air Force’s “enhanced interrogation” program.

By: Jersey McJones

Jersey McJones — Wed, 02 Jul 2008 19:47:30 +0000

I think I miss Molly a little more. Volume of protesters voiceboxes aside, I don’t want to live with a Muslim extremist any more than any other liberal, secular thinker. I wouldn’t want to be stuck with a Christian extremist either. I don’t care for extremists.

I’m glad you recognize, Eagle, the stupidity of Abu Abgrass (very funny, by the way). I would say that is a typical example of poor presidential stewardship of the “war on terror.” During WWII, there were spies and agents and saboteurs running around all over the place. Roosevelt, a great president, quietly and effectively took care of the problem. He never played the fear card - he was never stupid enough to parade prisoners for year after year for political gain. It’s disgusting and it’s stupid. Even today’s historically conservative SCOTUS realizes this.

JMJ