• 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!

Osama Bin Laden is dead

The Prof said:
he became "cooperative," "to an extraordinary extent," he went thru "transformation" and "reversal" and became langley's "preeminent source" only after "his spirit was broken in the month after his capture" when he was subjected to extremely harsh eit's in east europe
Click to expand...

Cite the source for that statement.

The Prof said:
at this point, anyone who attempts to deny that eit's played an important role in the "transformation" of langley's preeminent source lacks credibility
Click to expand...

The ex-military interrogators disagreed. Are you saying they lack credibility?

The Prof said:
the road to the courier led thru ksm, zebaydah, ghul and al libi---all were eit'd

it also appears to have relied on warrantless wiretapping
Click to expand...

It's been suggested that bin Laden didn't use electronic communication. If that's true, how could be wiretapping have been relevant?

The Prof said:
col herrington concludes by anguishing over the execution instead of capture of ubl

col herrington certainly is

wise, that is

kinda like hamlet, herrington thinks a lot, and deeply

but assassinations are good and belly slaps are bad?

ever heard of good cop/bad cop?

herrington sounds to me like he'd make an outstanding good cop, and that's worth something

like i said, more power to him

either way, america owes great thanks to president obama for not dismantling the anti terror policies of his predecessor---gitmo, detention, the patriot act---thus allowing our agents and soldiers to make this happen
Click to expand...

Any terrorist worth his salt could easily circumvent all those annoying measures (i. e. thru 512-bit encryption, which the NSA cannot break, through custom coded signals, through not using electronic communication, . . .).

And the fact that Wikileaks is still up and running pretty much proves how ineffectual those measures are.
 
Al Qaeda plan from the start. This is phase 2 of the global insurgency.

Phase 1 is confronting the obstacles (the US government) and Phase 2 is the global insurgency against the supporters of the "apostate" governments ... it is a continuing insurgency.
 
solletica said:
And the bogus CIA propoganda falls down when confronted w/former insider experts who are able to speak freely. . .

Military interrogators: Waterboarding didn't yield tips that led to bin Laden - CSMonitor.com
Click to expand...

Harrington is a serial complainer against everything the military does and will always have a ready audience from the international Left and America's enemies.

Army Col. Stuart Herrington on American Interrogation Policy - By Tom Ricks | The Best Defense

He is wrong again.
 
It's also worthwhile to note that terror expert and author Marc Thiessen told Bill O’Reilly last night that Barack Obama eliminated the enhanced interrogation tool from US counter-terrorism arsenal his second day in office.

This means the advantage that got the information from KSM and two others and which led to Osama Bin Laden has been lost and is no longer in use. The US has not captured, detained or interrogated a single high level detainee since Barack Obama moved into office.
 
Simon W. Moon said:
Called him a name then said he was wrong. Not much of a rebuttal.
Panetta said that the waterboard yielded vital information?
Click to expand...

I posted a link wherein he is extremely critical of everything the US military does, including its obvious successes. He's the go-to guy for anyone who wants a quote critical of the US Military. You may as well ask Al Q their opinion.
 
Grant said:
This means the advantage that got the information from KSM and two others and which led to Osama Bin Laden has been lost and is no longer in use.
Click to expand...
According to the IG report that all of these articles are based on, it's not at all clear that EITs were necessary or more useful than other methods.

Grant said:
The US has not captured, detained or interrogated a single high level detainee since Barack Obama moved into office.
Click to expand...
Idk how true this is, or how high of a bar "high level" has to be for this to be true;however,


To be fair ObL was detained. and they may have asked him some questions.
 
Grant said:
I posted a link wherein he is extremely critical of everything the US military does, including its obvious successes.
Click to expand...
1st) To be honest, I was mistaken and though that was what you were railing against.
2nd) the article you linked to is not accurately described as "wherein he is extremely critical of everything the US military does, including its obvious successes."

Grant said:
He's the go-to guy for anyone who wants a quote critical of the US Military. You may as well ask Al Q their opinion.
Click to expand...
Calling him names isn't a very strong argument imho. ymmv
 
Simon W. Moon said:
So true. Before long we'll be giving up our American ideals and acting like them--attacking civilians, disregarding the laws of our land and cultural heritage, and things like that. There will even be some among us who try to cajole us into behaving as they do, claiming that it is a more 'manly' way, that it is a more safe way.
Click to expand...

During a war we have to be play a tougher game of hardball than the enemy, in order to protect our nation and our citizens. To do otherwise and knowingly cost American lives would be immoral.
 
apdst said:
During a war we have to be play a tougher game of hardball than the enemy, in order to protect our nation and our citizens.
Click to expand...
Perhaps. But it's better to play smartball. If smartball requires us to do some unpleasant things, then so be it. But doing unpleasant things when we can't justify it by the utility of the unpleasant things is merely counter-productive.
apdst said:
To do otherwise and knowingly cost American lives would be immoral.
Click to expand...
On that basis, since it is a very real possibility that EITs waste valuable time and resources, it is immoral to engage in them.
 
Simon W. Moon said:
Perhaps. But it's better to play smartball. If smartball requires us to do some unpleasant things, then so be it. But doing unpleasant things when we can't justify it by the utility of the unpleasant things is merely counter-productive.
On that basis, since it is a very real possibility that EITs waste valuable time and resources, it is immoral to engage in them.
Click to expand...

It goes without saying that when we do ugly things, that there should be an effective result and we shouldn't conduct such operations, just to be mean. However, if the time comes for such action, we are duty bound to perform them.

On that basis, since it is a very real possibility that EITs waste valuable time and resources, it is immoral to engage in them.
Click to expand...

We have thousands of years of history to prove that torture works.
 
apdst said:
We have thousands of years of history to prove that torture works.
Click to expand...
That's not enough. EITs are in competition with other methods. It has to work better than other methods for it to be justified.

As has been noted, EITs and torture have a tendency to increase the volume of info from detainees, but not necessarily the quality of information.
It has also been noted that chasing down false leads eats up resources and man-power.
 
Simon W. Moon said:
That's not enough. EITs are in competition with other methods. It has to work better than other methods for it to be justified.
Click to expand...

EIT's are thousands of years old. If it was less effective than other methods (whatever that means) someone would have figured it out several thousand years ago.

As has been noted, EITs and torture have a tendency to increase the volume of info from detainees, but not necessarily the quality of information.
It has also been noted that chasing down false leads eats up resources and man-power.
Click to expand...

What makes you think that putting a prisoner up in a 4 star prison cell and giving him a Coke and a smile is going to actually accomplish anything. Interrogating a prisoner is nothing more than coersion. Some prisoners have to be smacked around a little to be coerced into telling what they know. Of course EIT/torture isn't the Alpha and Omega of intel gathering, however it does have it's place in the grand scheme and in the right scenario will be the most effective method.
 
apdst said:
EIT's are thousands of years old. If it was less effective than other methods (whatever that means) someone would have figured it out several thousand years ago.
Click to expand...
It has been figured out.
1) Educing Information
Interrogation: Science and Art Foundations for the Future
Intelligence Science Board National Defense Intelligence College
Washington, DC December 2006
(in particular this section)
KUBARK Counterintelligence Interrogation Review: Observations of an Interrogator – Lessons Learned and Avenues for Further Research

2) KUBARK [CIA] Counterintelligence Interrogation
July 1963

3) Anything about Hanns Scharff
"hanns scharff" - Google Search

Hanns Scharff - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia​

apdst said:
What makes you think that putting a prisoner up in a 4 star prison cell and giving him a Coke and a smile is going to actually accomplish anything.
Click to expand...
What makes you think I would want to do this?
If you have to make up my argument for me, you should think about it.

apdst said:
Interrogating a prisoner is nothing more than coersion.
Click to expand...
Actually, trickery is quite effective I have read.

apdst said:
... and in the right scenario will be the most effective method.
Click to expand...
If this is true, then it so be it. However, it has yet to be demonstrated that it's more effective.
 
Simon W. Moon said:
1st) To be honest, I was mistaken and though that was what you were railing against.
2nd) the article you linked to is not accurately described as "wherein he is extremely critical of everything the US military does, including its obvious successes."

Calling him names isn't a very strong argument imho. ymmv
Click to expand...

I think if you read down, unless i gave the wrong link, he was critical of everything te US Military did and does. There are no exceptions.

What names did i call him? I just think he is an unreliable source, and indeed he is. There is no end to the number of people who will complain about the US Military, and often with justification, but this guy is a serial complainer and obviously harbors a beef of some sort. Or just likes the publicity.

He also wasn't involved and those who were directly involved says water boarding worked. And it obviously didn't do any long term damage because KSM is still around today.
 
Simon W. Moon said:
That's not enough. EITs are in competition with other methods. It has to work better than other methods for it to be justified.

As has been noted, EITs and torture have a tendency to increase the volume of info from detainees, but not necessarily the quality of information.
It has also been noted that chasing down false leads eats up resources and man-power.
Click to expand...

That is a common misconception. The CIA, as in this case, asks questions they know the answers to, as part of the interrogation process. if they lie or contradict another terrorist they will waterboard again until the truth comes out. Once the terrorist starts to talk freely there is seldom any need for further waterboarding.
 
Grant said:
You will be them. That's the part you just won't get.

You are defeating yourselves, and they know it. You've already abandoned a major part of your constitution and then try to make it look like a victory. Nobody is fooled by this.
Click to expand...

I guess I really am not following you. If we adopt their tactics, use their standards, then there really wouldn't be much difference. I certainly think we've come far too close without any real justification to their standard than we should. But we are not yet them.
 
Grant said:
That is a common misconception.
Click to expand...
If it's a misconception it's one that's held in professional circles. The IG report that's so under discussion repeats the assertion. The KUBARK manual warns against about it. And many other sources offer the same caution.

So even if it is a misconception, it's one that's held and reported by the people in the Intelligence Community.

To be honest, I think you are more likely to be mistaken about what changes EITs make to detainees' reporting than they are.
 
Boo Radley said:
If we adopt their tactics, use their standards, then there really wouldn't be much difference.
Click to expand...

Hmmm....we executed UBL. We are not that different

Check this out

They have killed your fellow Americans as well as your close personal friends, as a result you exist in a condition where you are looking for any ****ing excuse no matter how minor that could be used as justification for the use of deadly force and when that justification presents itself you commit the wholesale destruction of everyone that could possibly be connected with your razer thin paper justification.

Whats wrong with that?
 
ric27 said:
Hmmm....we executed UBL. We are not that different

Check this out

They have killed your fellow Americans as well as your close personal friends, as a result you exist in a condition where you are looking for any ****ing excuse no matter how minor that could be used as justification for the use of deadly force and when that justification presents itself you commit the wholesale destruction of everyone that could possibly be connected with your razer thin paper justification.

Whats wrong with that?
Click to expand...

Was there a firefight? Makes a difference. Still, that would not be equl to our enemy, just closer than i prefer (as I said), and not equal to torture and other more long lasting and invasive efforts.

As for justification, I really haven't commented on that much at all. The conversation has been on two fronts: 1) is he really dead (deathers) and 2) Did torture get the information and is torture justified. I have not entered into the deadly force conversation, if there has even been one, at all.

However, I would say it would depend on what happened. If they went with no other intent than to assisinate hime, then I would agree that is wrong. If they went in to get him and in the course of a firefight killed him, I would have no real problem with that.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom