• 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 Raid Wasn't Based On CIA Torture Interrogations, Senators Say

Ugh. This simply did not happen. Everyone who was executed was executed for a stack of heinous crimes, well above and beyond "waterboarding."

... following World War II war crime trials were convened. The Japanese were tried and convicted and hung for war crimes committed against American POWs. Among those charges for which they were convicted was waterboarding."
John McCain on Thursday, November 29th, 2007 in a campaign event in St. Petersburg

History supports McCain's stance on waterboarding




The morning after the CNN/YouTube debate in St. Petersburg, John McCain remained firm in his stand against the use of an interrogation technique called "waterboarding." He cited solid history to buttress his position.

"I forgot to mention last night that following World War II war crime trials were convened. The Japanese were tried and convicted and hung for war crimes committed against American POWs. Among those charges for which they were convicted was waterboarding," he told reporters at a campaign event.

"If the United States is in another conflict ... and we have allowed that kind of torture to be inflicted upon people we hold captive, then there is nothing to prevent that enemy from also torturing American prisoners."

McCain is referencing the Tokyo Trials, officially known as the International Military Tribunal for the Far East. After World War II, an international coalition convened to prosecute Japanese soldiers charged with torture. At the top of the list of techniques was water-based interrogation, known variously then as "water cure," "water torture" and "waterboarding," according to the charging documents. It simulates drowning.

R. John Pritchard, a historian and lawyer who is a top scholar on the trials, said the Japanese felt the ends justified the means. "The rapid and effective collection of intelligence then, as now, was seen as vital to a successful struggle, and in addition, those who were engaged in torture often felt that whatever pain and anguish was suffered by the victims of torture was nothing less than the just deserts of the victims or people close to them," he said.

In a recent journal essay, Judge Evan Wallach, a member of the U.S. Court of International Trade and an adjunct professor in the law of war, writes that the testimony from American soldiers about this form of torture was gruesome and convincing. A number of the Japanese soldiers convicted by American judges were hanged, while others received lengthy prison sentences or time in labor camps.

We find McCain's retelling of history to be accurate, so we give him a True.
PolitiFact | History supports McCain's stance on waterboarding
 
The idea that interrogations led to Osama raid is Neo-Con revisionist history.

I think it was Cheney or a Bush advisor that claimed the Arab spring was due to the Iraqi invasion.

In their eyes they can do no wrong and are constantly on the look out to validate their decisions by any means necessary. Even blatant lying.
 
Yeah, the guy that destroyed the evidence....he doesn't have much to back anything he says, does he?

Neither apparently does the FBI, Dianne Feinstein or Carl Levin. I didn't read any facts stating otherwise.

"Had we handled some of these sources from the beginning, I would like to think that there’s a good chance that we would have gotten this information or other information," said Steven Kleinman, a longtime military intelligence officer who has extensively researched, practiced and taught interrogation techniques.

Torture May Have Slowed Hunt For Bin Laden, Not Hastened It

So this is Feinstein's and Levin's hard evidence?
 
Last edited:
The idea that interrogations led to Osama raid is Neo-Con revisionist history.

I think it was Cheney or a Bush advisor that claimed the Arab spring was due to the Iraqi invasion.

In their eyes they can do no wrong and are constantly on the look out to validate their decisions by any means necessary. Even blatant lying.

well sure... everybody shoots for validation in the political world.

but it's not revisionist history to say the Khalid Shiek Mohammed gave up information on the courier after waterboarding... that's just plain old fact.

it doesn't mean that they couldn't have gotten their hands on that information in other ways, though... it just saying it is what it is.
 
Μολὼν λαβέ;1060461209 said:
Sure, go ahead and believe Liberals Feinstein and Levin instead of the former head of CIA clandestine services, Jose Rodriguez.

View attachment 67126972

To me it doesn't matter very much how the CIA obtained the lead that ultimately led to OBL's death.

Feinstein and Levin are only bringing this matter up again because they want to ensure the public understands that EIT, though successful in revealing needed intel, didn't provide a concrete positive ID of the courier. It's samantics really.

"Oh, the EITs used by the GWBush Admin (which go against the Geneva Convention) really didn't yeild "direct" intel that led to OBL's secret compound. It wasn't until intelligence officials from the Obama Admin began combing through classified reports, testimony, etc., did we ping on the fact that OBL was using a courier to smuggle info/videos to and from his compound. Once "WE" were able to identify the courier, we were able to find OBL and kill him."

Again, samantics...

I really don't care whether the courier was identified by name or if it was learned early on that OBL used multiple couriers or sent info/video by courier pigeon. Bottom line is the World's #1 terrorist is now fish food....unless you believe the story that some fisherman hooked his body on some deepwater fishing expedition.
 
To me it doesn't matter very much how the CIA obtained the lead that ultimately led to OBL's death.

Feinstein and Levin are only bringing this matter up again because they want to ensure the public understands that EIT, though successful in revealing needed intel, didn't provide a concrete positive ID of the courier. It's samantics really.

"Oh, the EITs used by the GWBush Admin (which go against the Geneva Convention) really didn't yeild "direct" intel that led to OBL's secret compound. It wasn't until intelligence officials from the Obama Admin began combing through classified reports, testimony, etc., did we ping on the fact that OBL was using a courier to smuggle info/videos to and from his compound. Once "WE" were able to identify the courier, we were able to find OBL and kill him."

Again, samantics...

I really don't care whether the courier was identified by name or if it was learned early on that OBL used multiple couriers or sent info/video by courier pigeon. Bottom line is the World's #1 terrorist is now fish food....unless you believe the story that some fisherman hooked his body on some deepwater fishing expedition.

Some of us think the ends does not always justify the means.
 
well sure... everybody shoots for validation in the political world.

but it's not revisionist history to say the Khalid Shiek Mohammed gave up information on the courier after waterboarding... that's just plain old fact.

it doesn't mean that they couldn't have gotten their hands on that information in other ways, though... it just saying it is what it is.

I can't find verifiable evidence that the courier was found as a result of tortue.
Most of the individuals that claim it led to the capture are generally Bush advisors.

CIA Director Leon Panetta told the Arizona senator that Khalid Sheik Mohammed, who was waterboarded 183 times, did not provide the information that eventually led to bin Laden.

“The first mention of Abu Ahmed al-Kuwaiti — the nickname of the al-Qaeda courier who ultimately led us to bin Laden — as well as a description of him as an important member of al-Qaeda, came from a detainee held in another country, who we believe was not tortured. None of the three detainees who were waterboarded provided Abu Ahmed’s real name, his whereabouts or an accurate description of his role in al-Qaeda,” McCain wrote.

“In fact, the use of ‘enhanced interrogation techniques’ on Khalid Sheik Mohammed produced false and misleading information.”

I believe even Senator McCain has said waterboarding led to the capture of the carrier is false.
 
Fair enough. And then there are those of us that do.

The ends justifying the means was a main premise of both Communism and Neoconservatism.
 
So true...the ends justifies the means opens virtually everything up to being possible. Morality doesn't exist under such an idea.

Sure it does, only it's the notion of "morality" held by the rulers.
 
Yet we're in a conversation where torture is considered kosher by conservatives....

Doesn't change the fact that much of leftism is premised on the end justifying the means, particularly when it comes to Constitutional justification.
 
Doesn't change the fact that much of leftism is premised on the end justifying the means, particularly when it comes to Constitutional justification.
But the point is, we are talking about rightwingers actually justifying the actions at hand, real events, not events (real or imagined) somewhere else.

You are trying to distract from the topic.
 
But the point is, we are talking about rightwingers actually justifying the actions at hand, real events, not events (real or imagined) somewhere else.

You are trying to distract from the topic.

Nope. Just playing off what others said.

If my views were prevalent, none of this would be an issue.
 
Doesn't change the fact that much of leftism is premised on the end justifying the means, particularly when it comes to Constitutional justification.

If you find where a Judge used that as justfication for his decision by all means provide it.

Your just sticking non-orgionalist thinking into a convenient box to demonize it.

The fact is...torture is a classic example of ends justifies the means. It was broadly supported on the right. The justification was the ends justifies the means.
 
Nope. Just playing off what others said.

If my views were prevalent, none of this would be an issue.
Prove to me that you are not distracting by actually getting back to the topic.

You can also prove to me that you are truly interested in history by acknowledging your error on the Japanese punishments.

Believer in historical fact, yes. :roll:
 
Last edited:
The ends justifying the means was a main premise of both Communism and Neoconservatism.

Not really. A careful study of Machiavelli showed that while the concept was not foreign to Machiavelli, he taught us that that certain means are better in accomplishing the same ends.
 
Not really. A careful study of Machiavelli showed that while the concept was not foreign to Machiavelli, he taught us that that certain means are better in accomplishing the same ends.
The Prince was a study on the dark side of rule, it is the antithesis of the Constitution.
 
The Prince was a study on the dark side of rule, it is the antithesis of the Constitution.

If you read it that way. Read his other works as well and you'll see why even further.
 
If you read it that way. Read his other works as well and you'll see why even further.
He wasn't "teaching" anything, it was a documentation of the methods of corrupt rule. It was a satire; "the general theme of accepting the aims of princes; such as glory, and indeed survival, can justify the use of immoral means to achieve those ends."

Any regime can become corrupt enough to use such means, but the whole point is that the US is not existentially threatened to the point where we have to resort to such ideologies. This is not "24", we did not have to lower ourselves to the level of tyrants.
 
Prove to me that you are not distracting by actually getting back to the topic.

:roll:

IF you had any authority to demand anything from me . . .

And IF I were to "get back to the topic" as you define it . . .

It would not be "proof" of anything, one way or the other, so this is full of fail.


You can also prove to me that you are truly interested in history by acknowledging your error on the Japanese punishments.

And which "error" was that?
 
If you find where a Judge used that as justfication for his decision by all means provide it.

Um, a "compelling state interest" is pretty much an end justifying a means. And that's just one manifestation.

Your just sticking non-orgionalist thinking into a convenient box to demonize it.

When did I say anything about "originalism"? There's also textual literalness to consider, as well as judicial conservatism. Besides, I believe I was referring to leftism.

The fact is...torture is a classic example of ends justifies the means. It was broadly supported on the right. The justification was the ends justifies the means.

Where did I say anything which disagreed with this?
 
Back
Top Bottom