• 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!

Do you think water boarding is torture?[W:453]

Do you think water boarding is torture?


  • Total voters
    128
Re: Do you think water boarding is torture?

You'd be wrong. Look up al Libi.

If it is so easy, just prove it.

Again, wrong. We have the from Canada with the wrong name, and the cab driver we killed in Afghanistan. verifiable, and not what we thought they were.

You can link that directly to the waterboarding, without doubt?

Again, the other was easily released. And they tried hard to throw out stuff that was shown false (that too is documented and easily verifiable - see both the Brooklyn Bridge blow torch terrorist and the 2nd wave 9/11)

You can link that directly to the waterboarding, without doubt?

And I suggest easy to say, harder to prove.

And I suggest the testimony from the senate intelligence committee qualifes as 'intelligence'. That the statements were not supported with documentation points to secret documents.
 
Last edited:
Re: Do you think water boarding is torture?

If it is so easy, just prove it.

I just did. al Libi

You can link that directly to the waterboarding, without doubt?

Wasn't the point. The point was torture. It is likely one or both faced waterbording, but my claim is about getting the wrong person. We did. It can and has happened. This addressing our ability to know.


You can link that directly to the waterboarding, without doubt?

Yes, these were used as examples by the administration of waterboardings effectiveness. They proved false. This is also old news and anyone entering into this discussion should be aware of these.

And I suggest the testimony from the senate intelligence committee qualifes as 'intelligence'. That the statements were not supported with documentation points to secret documents.

Like I said, this is what all governments do to cover their sins. We should demand more.
 
Re: Do you think water boarding is torture?

You'd be wrong. Look up al Libi.

Yea, a guy who was caught in Afghanistan fighting with the Taliban and al Qaeda. Who regularly corresponded with bin Laden, al Zarquawi, and many other prominant terrorists. Who escaped and then participated in further actions against Afghan forces, in addition to being a major player in the attacks against Pakistan.

Who has made such great videos as "The Libyan AIDS Children".



Yea, this is a great example you give us. Maybe why this type of thing is needed?
 
Re: Do you think water boarding is torture?

Yea, a guy who was caught in Afghanistan fighting with the Taliban and al Qaeda. Who regularly corresponded with bin Laden, al Zarquawi, and many other prominant terrorists. Who escaped and then participated in further actions against Afghan forces, in addition to being a major player in the attacks against Pakistan.

Who has made such great videos as "The Libyan AIDS Children".

Yea, this is a great example you give us. Maybe why this type of thing is needed?

SWOOOOSH! Over your head.

The point is he gave us misinformation, and we acted on it. Cost us, not him.
 
Re: Do you think water boarding is torture?

SWOOOOSH! Over your head.

The point is he gave us misinformation, and we acted on it. Cost us, not him.

The military is notorious for being full of yesmen (and I'm talking general grade officers here).
When their Commander in Chief comes out and says something like:

“Waterboarding is torture. It’s contrary to America’s traditions, it’s contrary to our ideals, it’s not who we are, it’s not how we operate,”
“We did the right thing by ending that practice.”

They are not going to come out and say "yeah its a great program and it works" even if they may think that.

So the fact that you can point out a bunch of people saying it isn't effective doesn't mean much to me.

It also doesn't mean much that they were given bad information, the same thing could happen for any other interrogation technique down to simple questioning. If you already knew the answers to the questions you were asking there would be no point in the interrogation. You don't know everything he knows so there is no way to know if what he is telling you is the truth with 100% certainty.

That is why when you do an interrogation you have to factor in what kind of placement and access to such information the guy might have, you can even cross check it with other sources to verify its accuracy. You can ask him simple questions (like on a polygraph) that you can verify to see if he is lying his face off. If he did know the information lying on purpose simply would not make sense, because as soon as your interrogators find out you lied your going to get interrogated again.

If the guy has the information you seek he will eventually talk. If you made a mistake and he doesn't have the information hes not going to die. There will always be a doctor of medic or some type there throughout the interrogation.
Also this is not something that would be done by a low level interrogator.

I did say yes it was torture in the poll simply because I think people generally consider it torture. I don't however thing it is anywhere in the same ball park as the things Hussein's regime was doing prior to OIF, things like pouring acid on people, hanging them on meat hooks, beating them with cables, electric shock, hacking and slashing and etc.

Unlike the previous mentioned methods you can walk away after being water boarded. Supposedly Khalid Sheik Mohammed has been water boarded more than 100 times and hes still around.
 
Last edited:
Re: Do you think water boarding is torture?

The military is notorious for being full of yesmen (and I'm talking general grade officers here)..

Over generalization and not accurate, nor does it recognize the legal limitations placed on Military officers in regards to how they speak to and about (publicly) their Commander in Chief.
 
Re: Do you think water boarding is torture?

Of course water boarding is torture. There is nothing to argue here...it is pure torture.
 
Re: Do you think water boarding is torture?

Over generalization and not accurate, nor does it recognize the legal limitations placed on Military officers in regards to how they speak to and about (publicly) their Commander in Chief.

Actually military officers (and everybody else) has some pretty free rights when it comes to talking about their Commander in Chief. They still have a 1st Ammendment Right, just like everybody else.

However, several Presidents (Clinton comes to mind here) have limited our rights when it comes to making public statements against the President. However, in private and between each other, pretty much anything goes.

And if you question this, here is something to consider. Lately, a lot of people who were "former Special Operations forces" have come forward to speak out against many things in the Obama Administration. Wonder why none of them are currently in uniform? Why, a Presidential Gag Order put in place by President Clinton after Somalia and a few other titsup operations which some in the military spoke out against very publicly. I know many do not seem to remember that, but I clearly do. And that is still in effect to this day.

Which has created a great demand for retired officers to work as Talking Heads on TV News shows.
 
Re: Do you think water boarding is torture?

Actually military officers (and everybody else) has some pretty free rights when it comes to talking about their Commander in Chief. They still have a 1st Ammendment Right, just like everybody else.

However, several Presidents (Clinton comes to mind here) have limited our rights when it comes to making public statements against the President. However, in private and between each other, pretty much anything goes.

And if you question this, here is something to consider. Lately, a lot of people who were "former Special Operations forces" have come forward to speak out against many things in the Obama Administration. Wonder why none of them are currently in uniform? Why, a Presidential Gag Order put in place by President Clinton after Somalia and a few other titsup operations which some in the military spoke out against very publicly. I know many do not seem to remember that, but I clearly do. And that is still in effect to this day.

Which has created a great demand for retired officers to work as Talking Heads on TV News shows.

From Uniform Code of Military Justice

ART. 88. CONTEMPT TOWARD OFFICIALS
Any commissioned officer who uses contemptuous words against the President, the Vice President, Congress, the Secretary of Defense, the Secretary of a military department, the Secretary of Transportation, or the Governor or legislature of any State, Territory, Commonwealth, or possession in which he is on duty or present shall be punished as a court-martial may direct.

It says nothing about "private" conversations. Military members are always subject to the UCMJ while on active duty. Even if they make the comment at a Tuesday night poker game, an Obama loving moron could still turn them in and they could still face charges. At least if they are not on duty or present in a particular state they can call a Governor of other states an idiot, but not National Officials. So no, they do not have "pretty free rights when it comes to talking about their Commander in Chief".
 
Re: Do you think water boarding is torture?

From Uniform Code of Military Justice

ART. 88. CONTEMPT TOWARD OFFICIALS
Any commissioned officer who uses contemptuous words against the President, the Vice President, Congress, the Secretary of Defense, the Secretary of a military department, the Secretary of Transportation, or the Governor or legislature of any State, Territory, Commonwealth, or possession in which he is on duty or present shall be punished as a court-martial may direct.

It says nothing about "private" conversations. Military members are always subject to the UCMJ while on active duty. Even if they make the comment at a Tuesday night poker game, an Obama loving moron could still turn them in and they could still face charges. At least if they are not on duty or present in a particular state they can call a Governor of other states an idiot, but not National Officials. So no, they do not have "pretty free rights when it comes to talking about their Commander in Chief".

unless you are on active duty orders, this does not apply to members of the reserves or guard. little known fact that TPTB don't want to become common knowledge. try charging a member of the guard or reserves for violating UCMJ and see how hard it is. A reservist can go on national TV and say anything they want about CiC and unless he/she is currently activated they can't be charged under ART 88.
 
Re: Do you think water boarding is torture?

Wow, are we still discussing this topic? Didn't we have a handful of threads on this already?
 
Re: Do you think water boarding is torture?

From Uniform Code of Military Justice

ART. 88. CONTEMPT TOWARD OFFICIALS
Any commissioned officer who uses contemptuous words against the President, the Vice President, Congress, the Secretary of Defense, the Secretary of a military department, the Secretary of Transportation, or the Governor or legislature of any State, Territory, Commonwealth, or possession in which he is on duty or present shall be punished as a court-martial may direct.

It says nothing about "private" conversations. Military members are always subject to the UCMJ while on active duty. Even if they make the comment at a Tuesday night poker game, an Obama loving moron could still turn them in and they could still face charges. At least if they are not on duty or present in a particular state they can call a Governor of other states an idiot, but not National Officials. So no, they do not have "pretty free rights when it comes to talking about their Commander in Chief".

And if that is the case, I am sure that you should be able to provide lots of proof that this has happened.

The UCMJ is very interesting, and I love threatening people with Article 114. But you have to remember that a lot of the Punitive Articles have rarely if ever been used. The Military is not the Gestapo. I have heard many times Commanding Officers and other senior officers speak out publicly against Presidents, and not one was ever brought up on charges. In fact, even Generals who have spoken publicly against Presidents have not been charged under this.

Nice try, but since Article 88 is almost unheard of being used, I think this can be discounted. In fact, I have only been able to find 2 individuals ever charged with Article 88. And both instances involved individuals who participated in protests against the President (Lieutenant Howe in 1966 who held a sign calling President Johnson a Fascist, and Lieutenant Watada in 2006 for making statements publicly as a speaker at a rally).

I could find exactly 2 cases in the over 60 years that the UCMJ has been in effect.
 
Re: Do you think water boarding is torture?

Actually military officers (and everybody else) has some pretty free rights when it comes to talking about their Commander in Chief. They still have a 1st Ammendment Right, just like everybody else.

No, actually they don't except in that the can say whatever they want, but they can also be fired and or imprisoned for it.

However, several Presidents (Clinton comes to mind here) have limited our rights when it comes to making public statements against the President. However, in private and between each other, pretty much anything goes.

Yeah, that's why I caveated with "publicly".

And if you question this, here is something to consider. Lately, a lot of people who were "former Special Operations forces" have come forward to speak out against many things in the Obama Administration. Wonder why none of them are currently in uniform? Why, a Presidential Gag Order put in place by President Clinton after Somalia and a few other titsup operations which some in the military spoke out against very publicly. I know many do not seem to remember that, but I clearly do. And that is still in effect to this day.

no presidential gag order was required, it's part of the UCMJ and pertains more to officers then enlisted.

Which has created a great demand for retired officers to work as Talking Heads on TV News shows.

Well, once retired they can say what they like.
 
Re: Do you think water boarding is torture?

The military is notorious for being full of yesmen (and I'm talking general grade officers here).
When their Commander in Chief comes out and says something like:

“Waterboarding is torture. It’s contrary to America’s traditions, it’s contrary to our ideals, it’s not who we are, it’s not how we operate,”
“We did the right thing by ending that practice.”

They are not going to come out and say "yeah its a great program and it works" even if they may think that.

So the fact that you can point out a bunch of people saying it isn't effective doesn't mean much to me.

It also doesn't mean much that they were given bad information, the same thing could happen for any other interrogation technique down to simple questioning. If you already knew the answers to the questions you were asking there would be no point in the interrogation. You don't know everything he knows so there is no way to know if what he is telling you is the truth with 100% certainty.

That is why when you do an interrogation you have to factor in what kind of placement and access to such information the guy might have, you can even cross check it with other sources to verify its accuracy. You can ask him simple questions (like on a polygraph) that you can verify to see if he is lying his face off. If he did know the information lying on purpose simply would not make sense, because as soon as your interrogators find out you lied your going to get interrogated again.

If the guy has the information you seek he will eventually talk. If you made a mistake and he doesn't have the information hes not going to die. There will always be a doctor of medic or some type there throughout the interrogation.
Also this is not something that would be done by a low level interrogator.

I did say yes it was torture in the poll simply because I think people generally consider it torture. I don't however thing it is anywhere in the same ball park as the things Hussein's regime was doing prior to OIF, things like pouring acid on people, hanging them on meat hooks, beating them with cables, electric shock, hacking and slashing and etc.

Unlike the previous mentioned methods you can walk away after being water boarded. Supposedly Khalid Sheik Mohammed has been water boarded more than 100 times and hes still around.

The only trouble with that is that isn't how it happened. When Bush was saying it wasn't torture, that is when the military blew the whistle and complained. PBS did a pretty good job of documenting this. I linked that over the years a half dozen times.

And whether or not someone is still around or not, the fact is it has long term effects for most (nothing is universal). Our own manuels say this (I can no longer find the CIA handbook I used to link on this).
 
Back
Top Bottom