• 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!

Obama to speak on birth certificate

ptif219 said:
No I mean the information the CIA got during interrogations that happened during Bush Presidency
Click to expand...

The good info or the phoney information the terrorists gave up to stop the torture.
 
Dirty Harry said:
The good info or the phoney information the terrorists gave up to stop the torture.
Click to expand...

He doesn't understand the next question, "If Bush had the infromation of where Bin laden was, why didn't he get him?"
 
ptif219 said:
Correct but the information that led up to getting Bin Laden came during Bush you have shown no proof Obama did anything.
Click to expand...

No proof Obama did anything?!?!?!?!?!?

That is one of the most amazing things ever written on any message board by anyone on any topic ever.
 
ptif219 said:
From my link

Key intelligence over the identity of a courier -- among the few men bin Laden trusted -- who passed messages from the terror chief to commanders in the field ultimately led US agents to his secured compound in the Pakistani garrison town of Abbottabad.

Detainees held at secret CIA "black sites," or prisons, told interrogators after the September 11, 2001 attacks on the United States about the courier known as Abu Ahmed al-Kuwaiti.

Kuwaiti was identified as a protege of Khalid Sheikh Mohammed and an assistant of Abu Faraj al-Libbi, another key Qaeda operative.

The two senior Al-Qaeda leaders may have acknowledged knowing the courier after being subjected to waterboarding, or simulated drowning, and other so-called "enhanced interrogation techniques."
Click to expand...

Yes, the courier helped to lead us to Bin Laden, and the two senior leaders may have acknowledged knowing the courier.

It does not say that they led us to the courier as a result of being water boarded.

The raid on bin-Laden's compound a week ago "vindicates the Bush administration, whose intelligence architecture marked the path to bin Laden's door," former Justice Department lawyer John Yoo wrote in a Wall Street Journal opinion article.
Click to expand...

That was one man's opinion.
"It's disheartening to see conversation already turning to old, old debates about interrogation," said Deborah Pearlstein of Princeton University on the "Opinio Juris" blog, regretting what she called a "fruitless conversation."

"Put differently, for every 'maybe some guy in Gitmo said something useful' story, there's a 'some guy in Gitmo said something false that led us to war in Iraq' story."
Click to expand...

that was someone else's opinion, in the same article.

That's why it was entitled "Bin Laden death rekindles torture debate" instead of Bin Laden death supports waterboarding.
 
Dittohead not! said:
Yes, the courier helped to lead us to Bin Laden, and the two senior leaders may have acknowledged knowing the courier.

It does not say that they led us to the courier as a result of being water boarded.



That was one man's opinion.


that was someone else's opinion, in the same article.

That's why it was entitled "Bin Laden death rekindles torture debate" instead of Bin Laden death supports waterboarding.
Click to expand...

Correct but I have seen no other explanation for how we found Bin Laden. The Information helped us find the right people so we could watch and wait
 
ptif219 said:
The info that got us to Osama
Click to expand...

How many innocent names did the tortured terrorists give up before they gave up the right one? If they did at all. Torturing detainees creates mountains of phoney and unusable information. It wastes time and resources to follow up all the bad intel. If anything, torturing suspects wasted years of effort to get Bin Laden.
People under torture will say anything and everything to get the torture to stop. Most of what they say is what they think the torturers want to hear. And most of it is lies.
 
Dirty Harry said:
How many innocent names did the tortured terrorists give up before they gave up the right one? If they did at all. Torturing detainees creates mountains of phoney and unusable information. It wastes time and resources to follow up all the bad intel. If anything, torturing suspects wasted years of effort to get Bin Laden.
People under torture will say anything and everything to get the torture to stop. Most of what they say is what they think the torturers want to hear. And most of it is lies.
Click to expand...

That is true but they are leads and the authorities check them out and when they get a true one they move as is what happened to get Bin Laden. That is how investigative work is done.
 
ptif219 said:
That is true but they are leads and the authorities check them out and when they get a true one they move as is what happened to get Bin Laden. That is how investigative work is done.
Click to expand...

Torture wasted time and resources. Checking out thousands of bogus leads cost us years in finding Bin Laden. Had proper interrogation techniques been used Bin Laden would have been killed years ago. Bad information is worse than no information at all.
 
Dirty Harry said:
Torture wasted time and resources. Checking out thousands of bogus leads cost us years in finding Bin Laden. Had proper interrogation techniques been used Bin Laden would have been killed years ago. Bad information is worse than no information at all.
Click to expand...

So, is it wrong that Bush endorsed torture?? Is it ALSO wrong that Obama continued this approach?
 
Kali said:
In the video posted Bush clearly says he gave up on OBL. Guess some folks just cannot understand Bush Speak:2razz:
Click to expand...

Your video does not in any way have Bush clearly saying he gaveu p on searching for OBL. It has him stating that in terms of threat he was not that worried at that point about OBL, which was correct. Al-Qaeda as a whole by that point was more of a threat than OBL as an individual due to the fact that the United States actions and search for him had significantly hampered his operational ability.

Not focusing fully on a single individiual in terms of their threat to the United States is not the same as "giving up on them".

Sheik Yerbuti said:
He gave the order.

According to you, the information was gathered while Bush was president -- why didn't he give the order?
Click to expand...

Actually, according to numerous government sources including within the Obama Administration the string of information that led to Bin Laden's death began in 2004. I'll let you put together who was President at that time.

Let me inform you a bit about intelligence gathering, since you appear to be completely ignorant of it. It is not a situation where you recieve a piece of information and then bust in commando style like some movie. Various strands of intelligence are gathered over significant amount of time from various sources. As strands begin to be discovered in a repeating fashion then interrogation can be steered towards expanding upon those and the information can be floated past higher importance detainee's to see what comes up. Information is build upon layer by layer, with multiple verifications and redundancies in hopes of assuring that no action is being done on bad or faulty intel.

That's just mostly from interrogations, and not even getting into gathering the information from assets, ground intel, survellance, raids, etc. It all plays into it.

Bush likely didn't act in 2004 or 2006 because the intel was still loose, still in its infantile stages of being worked into the string that eventually brought him down. Something like an allias that comes up repeatedly that leads to another allias that leads to a connection to someone which leads to another connection which leads to a name for the first allias and so on and so forth, building and checking and verifying things.

Bush doesn't deserve all the credit, and to that extent neither does Obama. Most goes to the men and women of our intelligence fields and the military. But whatever credit you are going to give to Presidents for making this happen, it has to go to Bush as well as Obama...not just one of the other...because itw as the policies, actions, and men put in power by both that eventually led to this capture.
Click to expand...
 
Dirty Harry said:
Torture wasted time and resources. Checking out thousands of bogus leads cost us years in finding Bin Laden. Had proper interrogation techniques been used Bin Laden would have been killed years ago. Bad information is worse than no information at all.
Click to expand...

Show me proof. All police work involves following leads some good some bad.
 
ptif219 said:
Show me proof. All police work involves following leads some good some bad.
Click to expand...

It has been proven that most information obtained from torture is unreliable. Torture victims tend to tell the interrogators what they want to hear to stop the torture which leads to bad leads. Following mostly bad leads is a waste of resources and time. Bush's policies gave Bin Laden many years of life that he shouldn't have had. If that makes you feel good then so be it.
 
Dirty Harry said:
It has been proven that most information obtained from torture is unreliable. Torture victims tend to tell the interrogators what they want to hear to stop the torture which leads to bad leads. Following mostly bad leads is a waste of resources and time. Bush's policies gave Bin Laden many years of life that he shouldn't have had. If that makes you feel good then so be it.
Click to expand...

Proven by who? People who are against it?
JC-hysterical.gif
JC-LOL.gif
JC-ROFL.gif
 
Dirty Harry said:
It has been proven that most information obtained from torture is unreliable. Torture victims tend to tell the interrogators what they want to hear to stop the torture which leads to bad leads. Following mostly bad leads is a waste of resources and time. Bush's policies gave Bin Laden many years of life that he shouldn't have had. If that makes you feel good then so be it.
Click to expand...

Its a waste of band with Harry.:crazy3:
 
Dirty Harry said:
It has been proven that most information obtained from torture is unreliable. Torture victims tend to tell the interrogators what they want to hear to stop the torture which leads to bad leads. Following mostly bad leads is a waste of resources and time. Bush's policies gave Bin Laden many years of life that he shouldn't have had. If that makes you feel good then so be it.
Click to expand...

Its a waste of bandwidth Harry.:crazy3:
 
ptif219 said:
Proven by who? People who are against it?
JC-hysterical.gif
JC-LOL.gif
JC-ROFL.gif
Click to expand...

By people that have been tortured. Do you really want me to give you a name? It's one of you guys. If someone has your right nut in a vise you will tell them whatever they want to hear. You will give them names of anyone to make them stop. Torture is a horrible method of getting information. The information is unreliable.

It's almost like you are intellectually challenged. Of course most birthers are. Trump tells you torture is good and you believe him
Senator McCain stated that “information provided by torture is deliberately misleading. Mistreatment of enemy prisoners endangers our own troops, who might someday be held captive.”

C. Dixon Osburn, Director of Law & Security at Human Rights First, praised Senator McCain’s comments: “Interrogators and intelligence experts agree that torture is counterproductive, unreliable, illegal and immoral. Senator McCain knows from personal experience that no nation should ever condone torture.
Click to expand...
”

http://www.harpers.org/archive/2009/03/hbc-90004644

Information Secured Through Torture Proved Unreliable, CIA Concluded

By Scott Horton

Peter Finn and Joby Warrick at the Washington Post:

When CIA officials subjected their first high-value captive, Abu Zubaida, to waterboarding and other harsh interrogation methods, they were convinced that they had in their custody an al-Qaeda leader who knew details of operations yet to be unleashed, and they were facing increasing pressure from the White House to get those secrets out of him. The methods succeeded in breaking him, and the stories he told of al-Qaeda terrorism plots sent CIA officers around the globe chasing leads

In the end, though, not a single significant plot was foiled as a result of Abu Zubaida’s tortured confessions, according to former senior government officials who closely followed the interrogations. Nearly all of the leads attained through the harsh measures quickly evaporated, while most of the useful information from Abu Zubaida — chiefly names of al-Qaeda members and associates — was obtained before waterboarding was introduced, they said.
Click to expand...
 
Last edited:
BmanMcfly said:
So, is it wrong that Bush endorsed torture?? Is it ALSO wrong that Obama continued this approach?
Click to expand...

Torture is a horrible method of getting reliable information and should not be used.
 
Dirty Harry said:
By people that have been tortured. Do you really want me to give you a name? It's one of you guys. If someone has your right nut in a vise you will tell them whatever they want to hear. You will give them names of anyone to make them stop. Torture is a horrible method of getting information. The information is unreliable.

It's almost like you are intellectually challenged. Of course most birthers are. Trump tells you torture is good and you believe him
”

Information Secured Through Torture Proved Unreliable, CIA Concluded?By Scott Horton (Harper's Magazine)
Click to expand...

Thats credible a Bush bashing piece.
JC-hysterical.gif
 
Zyphlin said:
Actually, according to numerous government sources including within the Obama Administration the string of information that led to Bin Laden's death began in 2004. I'll let you put together who was President at that time.

Let me inform you a bit about intelligence gathering, since you appear to be completely ignorant of it. It is not a situation where you recieve a piece of information and then bust in commando style like some movie. Various strands of intelligence are gathered over significant amount of time from various sources. As strands begin to be discovered in a repeating fashion then interrogation can be steered towards expanding upon those and the information can be floated past higher importance detainee's to see what comes up. Information is build upon layer by layer, with multiple verifications and redundancies in hopes of assuring that no action is being done on bad or faulty intel.

That's just mostly from interrogations, and not even getting into gathering the information from assets, ground intel, survellance, raids, etc. It all plays into it.

Bush likely didn't act in 2004 or 2006 because the intel was still loose, still in its infantile stages of being worked into the string that eventually brought him down. Something like an allias that comes up repeatedly that leads to another allias that leads to a connection to someone which leads to another connection which leads to a name for the first allias and so on and so forth, building and checking and verifying things.

Bush doesn't deserve all the credit, and to that extent neither does Obama. Most goes to the men and women of our intelligence fields and the military. But whatever credit you are going to give to Presidents for making this happen, it has to go to Bush as well as Obama...not just one of the other...because itw as the policies, actions, and men put in power by both that eventually led to this capture.
Click to expand...
Riiiight ... Bush, the shmuck who couldn't capture bin Laden when he had him cornered in Tora Bora ... the putz who couldn't find the WMD he invaded Iraq over ... the yutz who couldn't eat a pretzel without passing out. Please, if Bush were still president, Osama bin Laden would still be alive.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom