Enhanced Interrogation- from a guy who did it, and saved a lot of lives

[HoughMade]

...If we really want to have a serious discussion about this, I suggest we dispense with the lie that this is something other than torture.

OK. Fine with me. People who "love it" would seem to me to be more than a little weird, but I'm among those who would tolerate it to get the results.

 

[Jludo]

Love it or hate it, let's call it what it is instead of this bs PC "enhanced interrogation" word game.

I am not necessarily diametrically opposed to it, but I am absolutely opposed to pretending it is one thing when we all know damn well what it really is.

If we really want to have a serious discussion about this, I suggest we dispense with the lie that this is something other than torture.

I agree, very orwellian

 

[GodFearinGunTotin]

Tagging for future listening...

I think we need a hot soccer moms with guns thread.

Those kinds of threads are typically pre-emptively closed. Someone always jumps the shark.

 

[jamil]

Love it or hate it, let's call it what it is instead of this bs PC "enhanced interrogation" word game.

I am not necessarily diametrically opposed to it, but I am absolutely opposed to pretending it is one thing when we all know damn well what it really is.

If we really want to have a serious discussion about this, I suggest we dispense with the lie that this is something other than torture.

Doesn't that imply a sort of false equivalence though? When there are wide variances of what you might want to classify as "torture", it seems there's room for different terms. Certainly amputating body parts is torture. Subjecting people to Britney Spears music 24/7, as horrible as it is, isn't in the same class as losing body parts. Things that cause physical harm; cutting, bruising, beating, amputations, and whatnot, there's no better word to use than torture.

It's my understanding that the so called "enhanced interrogations" aren't in the same class. Interrogators aren't drilling into their heads. Not lopping off toes. I'd like to see a way to differentiate that. Calling it enhanced interrogations sounds milder than torture, and appropriately so.

 

[jamil]

I agree, very orwellian

Really? I'm still skeptical, but Orwellian?

 

[1DOWN4UP]

If this IS torture,maybe we should stop it, and ask the animals to play nice too.

 

[Fargo]

Doesn't that imply a sort of false equivalence though? When there are wide variances of what you might want to classify as "torture", it seems there's room for different terms. Certainly amputating body parts is torture. Subjecting people to Britney Spears music 24/7, as horrible as it is, isn't in the same class as losing body parts. Things that cause physical harm; cutting, bruising, beating, amputations, and whatnot, there's no better word to use than torture.

It's my understanding that the so called "enhanced interrogations" aren't in the same class. Interrogators aren't drilling into their heads. Not lopping off toes. I'd like to see a way to differentiate that. Calling it enhanced interrogations sounds milder than torture, and appropriately so.

I don't think there is a false equivalency at all. Difference of degree does not equate to a difference of nature. Cutting someone's oxygen supply off by forcing water into their mouth and nose in no way falls within the definition of interrogation; i.e. to ask questions.

Once again, I am not saying that it is cut and dried that this can't be appropriate. I am saying that calling it enhanced interrogation is nothing more than a word game to pretend like something is what it is not.

Just because something is on the kinder and gentler end of tormenting someone for information doesn't make it something else. If it doesn't cause enough pain to get the answers you want out of dedicated people, then why bother with it?

 

[1DOWN4UP]

I don't think there is a false equivalency at all. Difference of degree does not equate to a difference of nature. Cutting someone's oxygen supply off by forcing water into their mouth and nose in no way falls within the definition of interrogation; i.e. to ask questions.

Once again, I am not saying that it is cut and dried that this can't be appropriate. I am saying that calling it enhanced interrogation is nothing more than a word game to pretend like something is what it is not.

Just because something is on the kinder and gentler end of tormenting someone for information doesn't make it something else. If it doesn't cause enough pain to get the answers you want out of dedicated people, then why bother with it?

How would you than obtain needed information?

 

[Fargo]

How would you than obtain needed information?

Where did I ever say these practices could not be appropriate? This is an issue I struggle with coming to a correct answer on. That said, I am absolutely opposed to the semantic gymnastics of pretending that you can **** up hardcore islamic terrorists badly enough to make them betray their cause without it being torture.

 

[Kutnupe14]

Where did I ever say these practices could not be appropriate? This is an issue I struggle with coming to a correct answer on. That said, I am absolutely opposed to the semantic gymnastics of pretending that you can **** up hardcore islamic terrorists badly enough to make them betray their cause without it being torture.

Let's say it's our troops are captured and have to undergo this advanced interrogation, and lets say we subsequently win the conflict. Are the persons who participated in these acts simply treated like other defeated soldiers, or do the get "enhanced" punishments?

 

[1DOWN4UP]

Where did I ever say these practices could not be appropriate? This is an issue I struggle with coming to a correct answer on. That said, I am absolutely opposed to the semantic gymnastics of pretending that you can **** up hardcore islamic terrorists badly enough to make them betray their cause without it being torture.

I apologise.I am for winning ASAP.Some times someone will have to loose a fingernail......And sometimes it will be us.

 

[Jludo]

Really? I'm still skeptical, but Orwellian?

I must have a looser definition for the word, I believe lots of things are. The patriot act, the defense department, wmd, etc.

 

[gregr]

Torture is simply unacceptable, period. When one becomes what a monster, in order to "protect" themselves from monsters, they`ve lost all moral standing. The ends do NOT justify the means.

 

[1DOWN4UP]

Torture is simply unacceptable, period. When one becomes what a monster, in order to "protect" themselves from monsters, they`ve lost all moral standing. The ends do NOT justify the means.

I think we could save time and moneyjust by threatening the islamic enemy with bacon ,pork, bullet/gun lube.A few years back,buses were regularly blowing up in Israel,and they hid vials of pig fat on all buses.Just them knowing it was on the buses eliminated the problem. Would this too be the moral lowground?

 

[Woobie]

Well, it's good to see everyone is nice and comfortable. Since we are channeling Orwell:

"People sleep peaceably in their beds at night only because rough men stand ready to do violence on their behalf."

I'm sure in INGO's twisted morality we're OK with sending a 19 year old to his death, and shooting as many people as he can in the process, but dang it, if he gets somebody's sinuses wet in the process someone needs to pay. Hellfire on a wedding reception? No big deal. Slap someone in the face? We've become just like the people we're fighting.

As to whether it works or not, I'll just say this from someone whose honesty I trust implicitly: everyone cracks in SERE. Everyone. And those guys come out just fine (as long as they went in fine).

So if we have a good enough reason to go to war, we have a good enough reason to use legal forms of torture to shorten that war. Or did you know your squishy feelings were responsible for endangering American troops and civilians?

 

[jamil]

Well, it's good to see everyone is nice and comfortable. Since we are channeling Orwell:

"People sleep peaceably in their beds at night only because rough men stand ready to do violence on their behalf."

I'm sure in INGO's twisted morality we're OK with sending a 19 year old to his death, and shooting as many people as he can in the process, but dang it, if he gets somebody's sinuses wet in the process someone needs to pay. Hellfire on a wedding reception? No big deal. Slap someone in the face? We've become just like the people we're fighting.

As to whether it works or not, I'll just say this from someone whose honesty I trust implicitly: everyone cracks in SERE. Everyone. And those guys come out just fine (as long as they went in fine =) ).

So if we have a good enough reason to go to war, we have a good enough reason to use legal forms of torture to shorten that war. Or did you know your squishy feelings were responsible for endangering American troops and civilians?

Let's look at the body of posts the people who are mostly opposed the ideas of "enhanced interrogation". INGO, if taken as a monolith, may seem inconsistent on about any given topic if the individuality of its posters is ignored.

I think Fargo and others have been pretty consistently against the kinds of things you listed. I don't think they are all that fond of Hellfiring a wedding reception. Or, simply sending a 19 year old to his death, making him shoot as many people as he can in the process. That's certainly a lot more complicated than that description can account for. And I don't think they view waterboarding as simply wetting someone's sinuses either.

If there are problems with someone's actual arguments, then let's address those. I think Fargo sees waterboarding harsher than I do. I admit I don't know a lot about it, though I did watch Steven Crowder get waterboarded over the holidays. I wouldn't classify that as torture in the most literal sense--certainly not in the same class of interrogation techniques as pulling fingernails. And I've said my peace about that.

But I'm not going to call them out for things they're not saying.

 

[Woobie]

Let's look at the body of posts the people who are mostly opposed the ideas of "enhanced interrogation". INGO, if taken as a monolith, may seem inconsistent on about any given topic if the individuality of its posters is ignored.

I think Fargo and others have been pretty consistently against the kinds of things you listed. I don't think they are all that fond of Hellfiring a wedding reception. Or, simply sending a 19 year old to his death, making him shoot as many people as he can in the process. That's certainly a lot more complicated than that description can account for. And I don't think they view waterboarding as simply wetting someone's sinuses either.

If there are problems with someone's actual arguments, then let's address those. I think Fargo sees waterboarding harsher than I do. I admit I don't know a lot about it, though I did watch Steven Crowder get waterboarded over the holidays. I wouldn't classify that as torture in the most literal sense--certainly not in the same class of interrogation techniques as pulling fingernails. And I've said my peace about that.

But I'm not going to call them out for things they're not saying.

The monolithic INGO is a commonly used literary device. It is a form of satire. Also there is more than just one person on INGO opposing EIT, torture, what have you. And Mrj is probably signing up a shill account right now to join this thread.

Of course they aren't saying the things I did. But that's because they haven't acknowledged the truth of their own position. To send people to war is precisely as I described. Now it often doesn't wind up that the 19 year old dies, but we have accepted that as possible. And if not, he may come back mentally or physically maimed. And we certainly aren't clamoring for an end to the drone strikes, even though we know many innocents are killed as collateral damage or through bad intel. That is war. And people accept that. But they won't accept something less violent as a means to shorten that war? Someone has to point out the hypocrisy.

And yes, water boarding as practiced by the U.S. is a psychological tool. The physical impact is wet sinuses and elevated heart rate. They decide they don't like it, and when faced with the possibility of doing it again, they weigh their options again, and find their priorities have shifted. And water boarding is one of only 10, by the way. It's just the lightning rod.

 

[Fargo]

The monolithic INGO is a commonly used literary device. It is a form of satire.

Of course they aren't saying the things I did. But that's because they haven't acknowledged the truth of their own position. To send people to war is precisely as I described. Now it often doesn't wind up that the 19 year old dies, but we have accepted that as possible. And if not, he may come back mentally or physically maimed. And we certainly aren't clamoring for an end to the drone strikes, even though we know many innocents are killed as collateral damage or through bad intel. That is war. And people accept that. But they won't accept something less violent as a means to shorten that war? Someone has to point out the hypocrisy.

And yes, water boarding as practiced by the U.S. is a psychological tool. The physical impact is wet sinuses and elevated heart rate. They decide they don't like it, and when faced with the possibility of doing it again, they weigh their options again, and find their priorities have shifted. And water boarding is one of only 10, by the way. It's just the lightning rod.

I believe I said at least three times in this thread that I wasn't necessarily condemning the practice. I don't claim to know the answer to when or if it is appropriate, I see valid points on both sides. My issue is with the word games where it is claimed that causing physical discomfort to a point that Islamic terrorists crack is somehow not torture.

 

[Woobie]

I believe I said at least three times in this thread that I wasn't necessarily condemning the practice. I don't claim to know the answer to when or if it is appropriate, I see valid points on both sides. My issue is with the word games where it is claimed that causing physical discomfort to a point that Islamic terrorists crack is somehow not torture.

Well, that's why you weren't being quoted. I must have said something to make both you and Jamil think I was replying to you. I wasn't.

I can accept your position as long as you can acknowledge that by your definition we also torture our own service members.

 

[Fargo]

Well, that's why you weren't being quoted. I must have said something to make both you and Jamil think I was replying to you. I wasn't.

I can accept your position as long as you can acknowledge that by your definition we also torture our own service members.

My understanding is that they definitely get a good taste in SERE.