• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Bin Laden film attacked for 'perpetuating torture myth'

Dwight said:
Speaking of being ‘beyond’ getting, here is a quite simple and straightforward answer to issues that lay in your position. Again. :roll:
Click to expand...

I'm not referring to movies, or cases that we lack information regarding. I'm not doin' the CT thing, or trying to claim that torture lead to info that caught Bin Laden. I'm cutting through all that political BS to a simple truth: Torture for verifiable information works. Denying reality for political purpose is sad.
 
Boo Radley said:
If it's ticking time, one only needs one lie and you've lost. See the link I gave above from those who actually dealt with ticking time situations and said torture was not the way.
Click to expand...

No, not one lie and you've lost. That's BS. Let's say we are looking for the location of the bomb. If it's not there, we up the torture. We WILL get the location of the bomb, eventually - that's really not up for debate.
 
ecofarm said:
No, not one lie and you've lost. That's BS. Let's say we are looking for the location of the bomb. If it's not there, we up the torture. We WILL get the location of the bomb, eventually - that's really not up for debate.
Click to expand...

If there is a ticking time bomb, the time you're checking it will go off with the lie. If you have time, there's no ticking. You'll get after it goes off. If you're serious, you want to use the most effective methods, not the least. And torture is shown time and again to be the least.
 
ecofarm said:
I'm not referring to movies, or cases that we lack information regarding. I'm not doin' the CT thing, or trying to claim that torture lead to info that caught Bin Laden. I'm cutting through all that political BS to a simple truth: Torture for verifiable information works. Denying reality for political purpose is sad.
Click to expand...
Option 1: Use torture and use the other information you have. Get the job done.
Option 2: Don’t use torture, use the other information you have. Get the job done.

When you choose Option 1 over the equivalent Option 2 that is that poor reasoning as identifying what is the root of accomplishing the task AND/OR you self-identifying as a sadist ****. It is sad that this does not occur to you.
 
Boo Radley said:
If there is a ticking time bomb, the time you're checking it will go off with the lie.
Click to expand...

Says who? You don't get to dictate the hypothetical.

Look, I'm not saying we should torture first or regularly, but when nothing else is working and the guy has the location and combination to the bomb... then one's gotta do what one's gotta do, that's a moral imperative.
 
ecofarm said:
Says who? You don't get to dictate the hypothetical.

Look, I'm not saying we should torture first or regularly, but when nothing else is working and the guy has the location and combination to the bomb... then one's gotta do what one's gotta do, that's a moral imperative.
Click to expand...

Logic always gets to enter into a hypothetical. And logically, the odds that you'd have the right person with the right information is nearly impossible to start with. Again, those who were actually in the situation (CP's unverified not withstanding), say differently than you above. There is much written on this. Torture is just not reliable for gathering information in any situation.
 
Boo Radley said:
And logically, the odds that you'd have the right person with the right information is nearly impossible to start with.
Click to expand...

While true, a global terror network being hunted by all of the free world's intelligence agencies, in the aftermath of the worst terror attack in history, just might produce a couple.

Torture is just not reliable for gathering information in any situation.
Click to expand...

Wrong. When the information is verifiable, it is very reliable, because one confirms before one re-initiates. I have provided real world, documented, examples of torture extracting accurate information, when that information was verifiable. You continue to deny this reality in your quest for absolutism. Give up the absolutism, accept the grey, see reality.
 
Last edited:
Dwight said:
It is sad that this does not occur to you.
Click to expand...

Really? You can't understand something and you mangle logic and reason... thus others should get tortured? This is why intellectuals fear leftists.
 
Dwight said:
w. T. F?
Click to expand...

What should occur to me?

Dwight said:
When you choose Option 1 over the equivalent Option 2 that is that poor reasoning as identifying what is the root of accomplishing the task AND/OR you self-identifying as a sadist ****. It is sad that this does not occur to you.
Click to expand...

You wish others would get tortured because their argument is beyond your comprehension. This is why intellectuals fear leftists.



If you meant that other means can always accomplish what torture can. Well, that's just wishful BS in a blind quest for absolutism.
 
ecofarm said:
What should occur to me?
Click to expand...
That you are using poor reasoning AND/OR are self-identifying as a sadistic ****. :)

You wish others would get tortured because their argument is beyond your comprehension.
Click to expand...
W…T…Fffffuuuu? I made absolutely no such indication that I wish for someone to get tortured. :roll:
If you meant that other means can always accomplish what torture can. Well, that's just wishful BS in a blind quest for absolutism.
Click to expand...
You have provided evidence otherwise?

Because you keep hammering on things being “verifiable”. See, that means the info is out there! So rather than taking the lazy, morally bankrupt, [and oft ineffective] route I suggest putting in the effort and the thinking to get the job done.
 
ecofarm said:
While true, a global terror network being hunted by all of the free world's intelligence agencies, in the aftermath of the worst terror attack in history, just might produce a couple.

Wrong. When the information is verifiable, it is very reliable, because one confirms before one re-initiates. I have provided real world, documented, examples of torture extracting accurate information, when that information was verifiable. You continue to deny this reality in your quest for absolutism. Give up the absolutism, accept the grey, see reality.
Click to expand...

Torture as useful for engaging militarily with or without confirmation or not, the ones to do torture cannot use "I followed orders" in the court.
 
ecofarm said:
While true, a global terror network being hunted by all of the free world's intelligence agencies, in the aftermath of the worst terror attack in history, just might produce a couple.
Click to expand...

Not likely, not and we know who they are.

Wrong. When the information is verifiable, it is very reliable, because one confirms before one re-initiates. I have provided real world, documented, examples of torture extracting accurate information, when that information was verifiable. You continue to deny this reality in your quest for absolutism. Give up the absolutism, accept the grey, see reality.
Click to expand...

You mean like al Libi's intel?

No, you have to take steps to verify. This takes time. Once found not true, you have to start over, thus wasting that time. You may eventually get it, assuming all the improbable happens, the right person at the right time. But, he will be rested now, and ready to lie again. It all takes time, menaing that ticking bomb most likely went off.
 
Henry David said:
Why thank you!

Yes, I must stand corrected-- you merely POST as though you live in The World According to Dick & Dubya. I thought I was having flashbacks to 2003, hearing from Curveball's handler, or something.

The only thing that impresses is your condoning torture and military aggression, and claiming to be a libertarian. I have known for years that labels and categories, especially regarding politics, are utterly misleading. In the end, it is a person's character and moral stances that define them.

You have made it pefectly clear where you stand--on the side of torture and the fraud known as the Global War On Terror. :roll:
Click to expand...

Well, I was a misguided 20 year old when I voted for him. People learn as time goes on, you see. You haven't exhibited much here, aside from just random posts about nothing.
 
Hatuey said:
Lol ... what? The point of my post is that if you did all those things: I'll tell you whatever it is you want to hear regardless of whether it's the truth or not. That salient point couldn't have been clearer. So, as it stands, the 'deep interrogation techniques' are reliable in that I'll tell you something - true, false, make belief - to make it stop. Not that they'll get the truth and nothing but the truth.

Now please, tell me about the 24 style scenario where there is a nuclear bomb strapped with a clock counting down and we've just so happened to catch the guy who set it up 30 minutes before the bomb is set to go off. If it's good enough, I'll write a script and sell it to the writers of Criminal Minds. They tend to use corny make belief story lines like that these days.
Click to expand...

So, why is it that battered women stay with their husbands? For that matter, what do you know about Battered Women Syndrome? What do you know about Stockholm Syndrome? What do you know about Traumatic Bonding? What do you know about even basic psychology when the mind if threatened in traumatic situations?

Apparently, nothing.

You see, when asking only questions with known answers, a sense of omniscience grows in the subject for their captors. Hell, police use this tactic during routine interrogations. They'll ask a series of questions they already know with fair certainty to test the bounds of where the lies start, and then they'll ask the entire battery of questions multiple times, in different orders, just to try to trip up the subject. Add in a little mental anguish and some traumatic bonding, and you have a fairly good recipe for intel gathering. This **** works. You don't have to believe me, and it's pretty obvious you're not going to no matter what, but it does work. It's not just simply beating someone until they talk.

Henry David said:
Did you see the movie Argo?

Apparently the Iranians like to stage mock firing squad executions. They pull the trigger, but there is no round in the chamber. Yes, it causes fainting and the soiling of underwear, but that's about it.

So that's where you're at, eh Gonzo. :doh
Click to expand...

Ah, yes. A 25 second scene from a movie. You got me. I must not know a thing about anything. I guess I give up. How can I combat such a devastating technique like quoting movies?
 
Boo Radley said:
Logic always gets to enter into a hypothetical. And logically, the odds that you'd have the right person with the right information is nearly impossible to start with. Again, those who were actually in the situation (CP's unverified not withstanding), say differently than you above. There is much written on this. Torture is just not reliable for gathering information in any situation.
Click to expand...


OldWorldOrder already handed your arse to you about this....At that time you said that you never said torture was 100% unreliable, yet now you are....Try honesty friend.
 
ecofarm said:
What should occur to me?



You wish others would get tortured because their argument is beyond your comprehension. This is why intellectuals fear leftists.



If you meant that other means can always accomplish what torture can. Well, that's just wishful BS in a blind quest for absolutism.
Click to expand...

It appears that what is beyond YOUR comprehension is the difference between right and wrong. It appears that your moral standard is what some government bureaucrat tells you. A sad state of affairs.
 
Henry David said:
It appears that what is beyond YOUR comprehension is the difference between right and wrong. It appears that your moral standard is what some government bureaucrat tells you. A sad state of affairs.
Click to expand...

Ad homs will get you no where. Are you vegetarian?
 
ecofarm said:
Ad homs will get you no where. Are you vegetarian?
Click to expand...

It is not an ad hom sir, it is merely an observation of a series of posts you have made, in which you condone torture, which is an assault on humans. If the shoe fits, consider wearing.
 
Gonzo Rodeo said:
So, why is it that battered women stay with their husbands? For that matter, what do you know about Battered Women Syndrome? What do you know about Stockholm Syndrome? What do you know about Traumatic Bonding? What do you know about even basic psychology when the mind if threatened in traumatic situations?

Apparently, nothing.
Click to expand...

I tend to ignore red herrings. What does any of that have to do with what I said? Nothing.

You see, when asking only questions with known answers, a sense of omniscience grows in the subject for their captors. Hell, police use this tactic during routine interrogations. They'll ask a series of questions they already know with fair certainty to test the bounds of where the lies start, and then they'll ask the entire battery of questions multiple times, in different orders, just to try to trip up the subject. Add in a little mental anguish and some traumatic bonding, and you have a fairly good recipe for intel gathering. This **** works. You don't have to believe me, and it's pretty obvious you're not going to no matter what, but it does work. It's not just simply beating someone until they talk.
Click to expand...

Two words: False confessions. Quite common in interrogation rooms. Far more common with 'mental anguish'.
 
Henry David said:
It is not an ad hom sir, it is merely an observation of a series of posts you have made, in which you condone torture, which is an assault on humans. If the shoe fits, consider wearing.
Click to expand...


What was 9/11? a polite nudge?
 
j-mac said:
OldWorldOrder already handed your arse to you about this....At that time you said that you never said torture was 100% unreliable, yet now you are....Try honesty friend.
Click to expand...

J. nothing is 100%. You can be a % and still be ineffective. Noted a method not torture is 90% effective. That is an effective method. Something that is 1%, 10%, 20% cannot be called effective. Such a percentage would be ineffective. He also suggests something no one has stated, that there is a circumstance in which it is effective. No such circumstance has ever been identified by anyone to my knowledge. Not when it comes to information gathering. Now if we were talking confessions? Well, there is much showing you will get a confession from a large percentage of people tortured. But no identified circumstance. Sometimes just dumb luck. But you wouldn't want to depend on luck for effectiveness.

BTW, in this case the word effective means working as desired. What is desired is to good information most if not all the time. When it doesn't work that way, it is ineffective.
 
j-mac said:
:doh OMG, are you serious? Good grief. That's just doorknob dumb right there.
Click to expand...

I wouldn't say dumb, just not right.


Henry David said:
I gotta go right now, but suffice to say that if all the evidence is analyzed, the finger is pointed at Israeli Mossad operatives. Not being a member of that group I am not personally aware of their exact motives and goals, but I can speculate.

Bollyn's book exposes much of this, and I just finished it today.
Click to expand...

See also: http://www.debatepolitics.com/conspiracy-theories/140506-dancing-israelis-and-wtc-fbi-report.html
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom