• 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!

Guantánamo leaks lift lid on world's most controversial prison

Ron Mars said:
I mean no response from credible posters. Someone besides my tag along wipping boy.
Click to expand...

Tell yourself what you ahve to, but I notice you don't answer. :coffeepap
 
TheDemSocialist said:
Sure Iraq probably had small amounts of chemicals which has been revealed by WikiLeaks cables but "very small amount". Not close enough to start production again.
Click to expand...

You apparently are being obtuse or what?

Its called GWOT. Global War on Terrorism, not on GLOBAL WAR ON AL AQEADA.

Any nation which harbors or supports terrorists is an enemy (strong potential at least).Saddam had supported terrorists for years, allowing them to train in Iraq, supplying them with money and weapons, and openly paying the families of suicide bombers in Palestine $25,000 for every "martyr". Al Qaeda was a minor presence in Iraq and was never portrayed as anything else.

Iraq had violated 17 (I think it was that many) UN resolutions that he was required to follow after GW1. He would not verify that all WMDs had been accounted for and destroyed and the programs dismantled. He refused to allow inspectors to inspect where they wanted to.

The freakin math is simple. He had WMDs that he had used before. He refused to account for the ones he had after 1991 and there was evidence of ongoing weapons programs. He had previously supplied terrorists, had no reason to like us, and now that terrorist activity had stepped up against CONUS, the possibility of some of those unaccounted WMDs being given to terrorists was too great a risk.
 
Ron Mars said:
I mean no response from credible posters. Someone besides my tag along wipping boy.
Click to expand...

It looks to me as if you are the whipping boy. You don't answer, even when given the answer.
 
This information was not learned through waterboarding, let's first make that clear. Waterboarding has not been carried out since around 2003/2004. Though I am a liberal, I am no partisan person. My views go all over the place. I am willing to recognize the fact that methods of interrogations that are somewhat cruel, like forcing the detainee to take truth serum, sleep deprivation, sensory deprivation, etc, can be effective methods, because these cause the detainee to lose control of their actions and not think straight. Any method in which the detainee's only incentive for talking is stopping pain is not going to work. The suspect will say anything to stop the pain and that's it. Torture is not a good method of interrogation. Talk to any person who actually works on the ground and deals with these suspects. I know dozens of them, and I have seen first hand that using these types of methods are not effective (not in an anti terrorism situation, but I have seen regular police officers use brutal interrogation techniques and get no where, etc.) and you can look for yourself at tons of television interviews, opeds, etc. Look up Ali Soufan especially. They will tell you with 100% certainty that torture is not effective and that's it. In this case, if you actually look into the story, we learned about the courier because the two detainees lied under harsh methods. My guess is that since this happened in 2007, waterboarding was most certainly not used. I'm guessing it was stress positions, stomach smacks, etc. They said during the interrogation they heard of the courier but as far as they know he is not important. This led our intelligence community to work this lead out and realize, ok, they are lying to us. That's when we used simple espionage, and found Bin Laden. This has nothing to do with Jack Bauer cutting peoples' limbs off to get them to talk. This was a case of real intelligence and good old fashioned police work if you want to say that. As for the geneva convention, waterboarding is most certainly torture. Sleep deprivation, sensory deprivation, forced truth serums, I don't think so. If you want to argue those things are torture, then you'd have to say that turning up the heat in an interview room to "sweat" the target is torture.
 
RyrineaHaruno said:
Guantánamo leaks lift lid on world's most controversial prison | World news | The Guardian

Here is the file with the fifteen year old boy that was a kidnap victim

I'm not shocked that these people would "interrogate" children. People that supported in keeping this prison are sick and I hate that Obama is keeping it open. Yeah, lets keep open a prison were children were interrogated for being terrorist
Click to expand...

Is it impossible that a child could be a terrorist? And why is gitmo the worlds most cotroversial prison? What about Iranian Prisions where people are raped, beaten, tortured and murdered by Prision guards. I suggest you join Amnesty International and do some research if you think gitmo is bad. Gitmo is a country club compared to prisons in El Salvador.
 
Last edited:
Gargantuan said:
This information was not learned through waterboarding, let's first make that clear.
Click to expand...

That's as far as I could get. Where do you lefties come up with this BS?

Even Panetta admits EIT's gave us the info that led to OBL.

The CIA interrogators confirm that KSM was not cooperating until he was waterboarded. After that he sang like a baby. Same thing with the other two.
 
Ron Mars said:
That's as far as I could get. Where do you lefties come up with this BS?

Even Panetta admits EIT's gave us the info that led to OBL.

The CIA interrogators confirm that KSM was not cooperating until he was waterboarded. After that he sang like a baby. Same thing with the other two.
Click to expand...

please show us panetta's quote that you are referencing
 
TheDemSocialist said:
This might be i sign that you do not have a source for this...
Click to expand...

We both know that you and Bubba wouldn't believe it even if Panetta said it to your faces.

For the link dependent who don't pay attention to current events:

Brian Williams: I’d like to ask you about the sourcing on the intel that ultimately led to this successful attack. Can you confirm that it was as a result of waterboarding that we learned what we needed to learn to go after Bin Laden?

Leon Panetta: You know, Brian, in the intelligence business you work from a lot of sources of information, and that was true here. We had a multiple series of sources that provided information with regards to this situation. Clearly, some of it came from detainees and the interrogation of detainees, but we also had information from other sources as well. So it’s a little difficult to say it was due just to one source of information that we got.

Williams: Turned around the other way, are you denying that waterboarding was in part among the tactics used to extract the intelligence that led to this successful mission?

Panetta: No, I think some of the detainees clearly were — you know, they used these enhanced interrogation techniques against some of these detainees. But I’m also saying that the debate about whether we would have gotten the same information through other approaches I think is always going to be an open question.

Williams: So, final point, one final time: enhanced interrogation techniques, which has always been kind of a handy euphemism in these post-9/11 years, that includes waterboarding.

Panetta: That’s correct.

If you’re determined to believe waterboarding had nothing to do with tracking down Bin Laden, don’t listen to Leon Panetta | The Daily Caller
 
Ron Mars said:
Please pay attention to current events.

Yet another link dependent poster.
Click to expand...

so, you are unable to cite the statement you insist was made

thanks for evidencing your posts are without credibility; that you think it is ok to make **** up
 
justabubba said:
so, you are unable to cite the statement you insist was made

thanks for evidencing your posts are without credibility; that you think it is ok to make **** up
Click to expand...

See below. Pay attention to current events or do your own homework before asking someone to do it for you.

Did you have someone else do your homework in school?
 
Bubba, I'm still waiting for you to address article 4 and 5 of the GC.

You shot your mouth off on that one as well without knowing WTF you were talking about.

Did you think I forgot? That was right here in this very thread. Remember?
 
Ron Mars said:
Damn you are thick. If you refuse to read the ISG report why bother to talk about it?

These two paragraphs are irrefutable and put the nail in your coffin whether you realize it or not.

Saddam wanted to recreate Iraq’s WMD capability—which was essentially destroyed in 1991—after sanctions
were removed and Iraq’s economy stabilized, but probably with a different mix of capabilities to that
which previously existed. Saddam aspired to develop a nuclear capability—in an incremental fashion,
irrespective of international pressure and the resulting economic risks—but he intended to focus on ballistic
missile and tactical chemical warfare (CW) capabilities.

ISG uncovered Iraqi plans or designs for three long-range ballistic missiles with ranges from 400 to 1,000
km and for a 1,000-km-range cruise missile, although none of these systems progressed to production and
only one reportedly passed the design phase. ISG assesses that these plans demonstrate Saddam’s continuing
desire—up to the beginning of Operation Iraqi Freedom (OIF)—for a long-range delivery capability.
Click to expand...

Reasons for going to war with Iraq: Iraq had WMD's.
The report you are stating from the ISG was the Duelfer Report i believe. It was released in late September of 2004. It also states that "Saddam ended his nuclear program in 1991. ISG found no evidence of concerted efforts to restart the program, and Iraq’s ability to reconstitute a nuclear weapons program progressively decayed after 1991." Also "Iraq destroyed its chemical weapons stockpile in 1991, and only a small number of old, abandoned chemical munitions were discovered by the ISG." Also it states "Saddam's regime abandoned its biological weapons program and its ambition to obtain advanced biological weapons in 1995. While it could have re-established an elementary BW program within weeks, ISG discovered no indications it was pursuing such a course." Also it states what you have been repeating and repeating over and over again. I get that..
In March of 2005 the ISG released another report entitled Addenda. In the report it stated "any remaining chemical munitions in Iraq do not pose a militarily significant threat." Also "Iraq’s remaining chemical and biological physical infrastructure does not pose a proliferation concern".
 
Ron Mars said:
Bubba, I'm still waiting for you to address article 4 and 5 of the GC.

You shot your mouth off on that one as well without knowing WTF you were talking about.

Did you think I forgot? That was right here in this very thread. Remember?
Click to expand...

What is your whole point on the Geneva Convention especially articles 4 and 5? What is your argument here?
 
Ron Mars said:
That's as far as I could get. Where do you lefties come up with this BS?

Even Panetta admits EIT's gave us the info that led to OBL.

The CIA interrogators confirm that KSM was not cooperating until he was waterboarded. After that he sang like a baby. Same
thing with the other two.
Click to expand...
Wrong. Please look up Ali Soufan. FBI interrogator who got KSM talking with normal methods. NYT op Ed "my tortured decision."


Also, note that even though he may start talking under torture to stop the pain, that does not by any measure mean that hes giving good information. Infact, if he didn't talk under normal methods and suddenly talks under torture, you can pretty much
assume it's just to stop the pain.

I come up with this BS by not only working in federal law enforcement, but by doing my research, which you my friend, have not done.

By the way, it was not CIA. These were private contractors who were contracted by the CIA. Another thing you can learn with research on your own, not on Hannity.
 
Last edited:
Gargantuan said:
Wrong. Please look up Ali Soufan. FBI interrogator who got KSM talking with normal methods. NYT op Ed "my tortured decision."
Click to expand...

KSM did not cooperate until he was waterboarded. That's an irrefutable fact. Nice try.

NYT op Ed

:lamo
 
Last edited:
TheDemSocialist said:
Reasons for going to war with Iraq: Iraq had WMD's.
The report you are stating from the ISG was the Duelfer Report i believe. It was released in late September of 2004. It also states that "Saddam ended his nuclear program in 1991. ISG found no evidence of concerted efforts to restart the program, and Iraq’s ability to reconstitute a nuclear weapons program progressively decayed after 1991." Also "Iraq destroyed its chemical weapons stockpile in 1991, and only a small number of old, abandoned chemical munitions were discovered by the ISG." Also it states "Saddam's regime abandoned its biological weapons program and its ambition to obtain advanced biological weapons in 1995. While it could have re-established an elementary BW program within weeks, ISG discovered no indications it was pursuing such a course." Also it states what you have been repeating and repeating over and over again. I get that..
In March of 2005 the ISG released another report entitled Addenda. In the report it stated "any remaining chemical munitions in Iraq do not pose a militarily significant threat." Also "Iraq’s remaining chemical and biological physical infrastructure does not pose a proliferation concern".
Click to expand...

For the love.

What part of "Saddam aspired to develop a nuclear capability" do you not understand.

You lefties always stop reading once you find something you like. Read the whole report before making a conclusion.

The ISG also said this about Saddam's Nuclear program. You must have missed it.

Baghdad undertook a variety of measures to conceal key elements of its nuclear program from successive
UN inspectors, including specifi c direction by Saddam Husayn to hide and preserve documentation associated
with Iraq’s nuclear program.

ISG, for example, uncovered two specifi c instances in which scientists involved in uranium enrichment kept
documents and technology. Although apparently acting on their own, they did so with the belief and anticipation
of resuming uranium enrichment efforts in the future.

Starting around 1992, in a bid to retain the intellectual core of the former weapons program, Baghdad
transferred many nuclear scientists to related jobs in the Military Industrial Commission (MIC). The work
undertaken by these scientists at the MIC helped them maintain their weapons knowledge base.

ISG found a limited number of post-1995 activities that would have aided the reconstitution of the
nuclear weapons program once sanctions were lifted.

The Regime prevented scientists from the former nuclear weapons program from leaving either their jobs or
Iraq. Moreover, in the late 1990s, personnel from both MIC and the IAEC received signifi cant pay raises in
a bid to retain them, and the Regime undertook new investments in university research in a bid to ensure that
Iraq retained technical knowledge.
 
Just in case you forgot Bubba.


justabubba said:
you are the one who has insisted the Geneva Conventions do not apply to those imprisoned at guantanamo
and you have been asked to provide the language of the GC which excludes those prisoners from the provisions of the GC - to document your position has a valid premise
you have been unable/unwilling to do so

but let me offer you a second chance, so that you are not recognized as cowardly slinking away from the challenge to prove your assertion

and to help you, here is a cite
Common Article 3 of the Geneva Conventions - New York Times
Click to expand...
 
Ron Mars said:
KSM did not cooperate until he was waterboarded. That's an irrefutable fact. Nice try.

NYT op Ed

:lamo
Click to expand...
Op-Ed Contributor - My Tortured Decision - NYTimes.com

Ali Soufan said:
One of the worst consequences of the use of these harsh techniques was that it reintroduced the so-called Chinese wall between the C.I.A. and F.B.I., similar to the communications obstacles that prevented us from working together to stop the 9/11 attacks. Because the bureau would not employ these problematic techniques, our agents who knew the most about the terrorists could have no part in the investigation. An F.B.I. colleague of mine who knew more about Khalid Shaikh Mohammed than anyone in the government was not allowed to speak to him.
Click to expand...

Do your research. The general buzz is that he answered questions after torture only to have the pain stop. You can find this out anywhere on the internet by doing research on the matter. As far as we know, the information he gave did not pan out to anything. Why else do you think the videos of his waterboarding were destroyed? Why is it that when asked about what information we learned from him, all we hear is "a boatload" from high ranking officials, but when you speak to an actual agent, they will tell you that torture is ineffective and pans out to nothing? Because it's politics. A high ranking republican CIA official will say that it works, but then if you talk to a democratic official, they will say it doesn't. Trust the agents on the ground. Trust the law enforcement officers who know how to interrogate people. Coercive methods work for one thing and one thing only, forcing people to answer things with false statements. Torture itself was first used to get people to confess to random crimes. Regarding what you're saying, I have heard the same stuff. Oh! a boatload of information. alright, so what is that information? What did we learn? And it can't be that it's classified, because when an interrogation is successful, we know all of the details within days (perfect example is this Bin Laden case). They told us that it saved Los Angelos, to give a specific answer of divulging interrogation secrets. Do you really think that Bush Cheney, the same people who exposed Valerie Plame, would not release secret information if it helped them prove torture works?

Regarding the topic here where people are talking about that LA terror attack, that was planned for 2002 which was stopped by waterboarding him, wrong. He wasn't captured until 2003. So, false.

About Bin Laden, waterboarding was not why he was found. The name of the courier was learned from other suspects, then KSM was asked about him. KSM then lied, which suspects will always do under torture, and said that the guy was unimportant and he had no idea. That's how we started this. It had nothing to do with beating the **** out of him then he suddenly decided to confess where Bin Laden is.

Ron, let me be clear again - we went to war with Iraq because we thought they had nuclear weapons, not because we thought they had the capability. A lot of nations have the capability. Right now Iran is a perfect example. Let's go invade Iran since they have the capability.

I don't think it's lefties that selectively ignore facets of debates, I'm pretty sure it's you, because I made a few points in my post, and the only thing you responded to was one of them, and also by insulting me for posting an article by an FBI Agent who served his country with honor and interrogated numerous terrorists, effectively.
 
Last edited:
Ron Mars said:
For the love.

What part of "Saddam aspired to develop a nuclear capability" do you not understand.

You lefties always stop reading once you find something you like. Read the whole report before making a conclusion.

The ISG also said this about Saddam's Nuclear program. You must have missed it.

Baghdad undertook a variety of measures to conceal key elements of its nuclear program from successive
UN inspectors, including specifi c direction by Saddam Husayn to hide and preserve documentation associated
with Iraq’s nuclear program.

ISG, for example, uncovered two specifi c instances in which scientists involved in uranium enrichment kept
documents and technology. Although apparently acting on their own, they did so with the belief and anticipation
of resuming uranium enrichment efforts in the future.

Starting around 1992, in a bid to retain the intellectual core of the former weapons program, Baghdad
transferred many nuclear scientists to related jobs in the Military Industrial Commission (MIC). The work
undertaken by these scientists at the MIC helped them maintain their weapons knowledge base.

ISG found a limited number of post-1995 activities that would have aided the reconstitution of the
nuclear weapons program once sanctions were lifted.

The Regime prevented scientists from the former nuclear weapons program from leaving either their jobs or
Iraq. Moreover, in the late 1990s, personnel from both MIC and the IAEC received signifi cant pay raises in
a bid to retain them, and the Regime undertook new investments in university research in a bid to ensure that
Iraq retained technical knowledge.
Click to expand...

Bottomline: Aspirations don't equal having. Things that COULD do anything in the furture doesn't equal doing them. You own reports showw that Saddam did not meet what Bush claimed. There were no active, groing programs.
 
Gargantuan said:
[Do your research.
Click to expand...

I have done my homework. Many years ago. I've been reading about the info gained from EIT's for some time. I know that actionable intelligence was gained that definately prevented further terrorist attacks and saved innocent lives.

I'm not really surprised that we tracked down OBL from the info obtained from the EIT's'. I'm sure there is more info we still don't know about that was obtained by them.

I'm glad the fact that we knew the identity OBL's currier was never leaked to the NYT.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom