• 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!

Should the Report on Torture Be Released Publicly?

Should The Torture Report be Released Publicly?


  • Total voters
    90
No. In my opinion things like anal feeding would be best dealt with internally.
 
As I have already said twice....I would not sell the integrity and morality of this country out to save lives. I'm sorry that people will die, but saving their lives at the expense of destroying the country is too high a price to pay.

Oh...and sorry....but a few self-serving statements from people who want to justify their actions stands counter to the vast amount of evidence that dispute the claim that torturing people saves lives.

I am truly grateful that you will never be in a position of authority regarding the security of my country
 
but that is the point
according to the torture report, NO actionable intelligence was gathered as a result of our torturous actions
none of our troops benefitted from the violation of the Geneva conventions

but now, when our troops are subjected to such treatment by an enemy what can we, as a nation, say in objection to their actions
and what do you say to the family of those Americans who would be subjected to torture like that we doled out

That particular statement on the report was already debunked by the director of the cia And several other cia chiefs. It absolutely led to actionable intel that saved lives
 
Under the law that existed at the time, the enhanced interrogations did not fit the legal definition of torture. Some of the senate report is outright laughable. One of the methods of torture listed was "forcing the terrorists to listen to loud rock music"

What the report does not say is that the prisoner who died of hypothermia was on a hunger strike also. His lack of nutrition obviously weakened him prior to his hypothermia.

Im sorry but to equate these acts with "torcher" is laughable. Torcher is cutting, shocking, mutilation, and other inducements of intense pain.

Sleep deprivation, loud music, uncomfortable sitting or standing. These things are merely a nuisance, causing such aggravation and discomfort they induce compliance. The mere mention of these acts in the same breath as "torture" is an insult to any one of our service men who were subjected to actual torcher. Dont water down the meaning of the word. It devalues it.

Waterboarding i would characterize as a form of torture. I accept that and do not care. I say waterboard them all if it leads to the exposure of future attacks or capture/kill of accomplices.
 
I am truly grateful that you will never be in a position of authority regarding the security of my country

And I will say the same. I am grateful that you will never be in a position to sell out the integrity and morality that has made America great.
 
And I will say the same. I am grateful that you will never be in a position to sell out the integrity and morality that has made America great.

What morality are u speaking of?
 
Where did I say that Americans use the exact torture as groups like ISIS? Please, humor me, because that is no where close that what I had written. I had asked you if you'd be okay with ISIS using the same torture methods as the American military used under Bush. Apart from the usual 'non-torture' (as YOU say) of water boarding and sleep deprivation, I ask again would YOU be okay with ISIS doing the following to American soldiers (including family members):



OR



Please answer my question and please stop deflecting.

I will be glad to answer you without deflecting.

First, let me repeat that I do not feel that waterboarding or sleep deprivation are torture.

Second, I will say that my posts prior to this one were written prior to the report being released, and that I also posted a list of things that would be torture (prior to the report being released) which were included in the report as being done by CIA agents that did not comply with the law and the or the policy or the knowledge of senior administration officials.

Now, for your non-deflecting answer - Yes. If my kids (24 and 21 y/o boys) had joined the military and chose to be put in a position to where they could be potentially subjected to such interrogation as waterboarding or sleep deprivation, they would have knowingly volunteered to do so... just as I did. That is why we were trained by being subjected to such techniques.

If my kids were civilians, then no, but as members of the military, they would have volunteered to be exposed to such things, and I would support that choice of theirs.

As for the specific items in the report that were in fact torture, then my answer would be no, even if my boys were in the military.

I hope that answers your question. Of not, I would be happy to try again, out of the respect that I have for you.
 
I will be glad to answer you without deflecting.

First, let me repeat that I do not feel that waterboarding or sleep deprivation are torture.

Second, I will say that my posts prior to this one were written prior to the report being released, and that I also posted a list of things that would be torture (prior to the report being released) which were included in the report as being done by CIA agents that did not comply with the law and the or the policy or the knowledge of senior administration officials.

Now, for your non-deflecting answer - Yes. If my kids (24 and 21 y/o boys) had joined the military and chose to be put in a position to where they could be potentially subjected to such interrogation as waterboarding or sleep deprivation, they would have knowingly volunteered to do so... just as I did. That is why we were trained by being subjected to such techniques.

If my kids were civilians, then no, but as members of the military, they would have volunteered to be exposed to such things, and I would support that choice of theirs.

As for the specific items in the report that were in fact torture, then my answer would be no, even if my boys were in the military.

I hope that answers your question. Of not, I would be happy to try again, out of the respect that I have for you.

I appreciate your honesty. Though I disagree about your opinion of waterboarding as not being a form of torture, I respect your opinion. Thank you.
 
From your previous response...it was already obvious that you don't have a clue. Its not something that I can educate you about.

So you have nothing. Figures. You speak without a basis of knowledge and your opinions are uneducated and worthless
 
Mornin' German Guy. :2wave: So are you saying you would not torture a terrorist in order to save a multitude of people?

:lol:
 
Gozales and Rummy too.
If we are not going to prosecute them they must be pardoned to acknowledge the fact that crimes were committed.
Doing nothing indicates tacit complicity with these criminals.

But then no crimes whatsoever were committed. Under the existing law at time, the enhanced interrogations were entirely legal,
 
What the report does not say is that the prisoner who died of hypothermia was on a hunger strike also. His lack of nutrition obviously weakened him prior to his hypothermia.

Im sorry but to equate these acts with "torcher" is laughable. Torcher is cutting, shocking, mutilation, and other inducements of intense pain.

Sleep deprivation, loud music, uncomfortable sitting or standing. These things are merely a nuisance, causing such aggravation and discomfort they induce compliance. The mere mention of these acts in the same breath as "torture" is an insult to any one of our service men who were subjected to actual torcher. Dont water down the meaning of the word. It devalues it.

Waterboarding i would characterize as a form of torture. I accept that and do not care. I say waterboard them all if it leads to the exposure of future attacks or capture/kill of accomplices.

Agreed. And when it was going one, Pelosi and Feinstein were briefed and were quite okay with it. The attitude at the time was: "Whatever it takes". We had just had 3000 Americans murdered in the space of a few hours.....with threats of more attacks....not to mention some nut job mailing anthrax around the country.
 
But then no crimes whatsoever were committed. Under the existing law at time, the enhanced interrogations were entirely legal,

let me make sure i understand what you are telling us

that because john yoo wrote the torture opinion memos as a DOJ representative, indicating enhanced interrogation was not really torture, that document provides legal cover for those who sanctioned the torture?
of course, if you were referring to some other provision which authorized torture, please share that
 
let me make sure i understand what you are telling us

that because john yoo wrote the torture opinion memos as a DOJ representative, indicating enhanced interrogation was not really torture, that document provides legal cover for those who sanctioned the torture?
of course, if you were referring to some other provision which authorized torture, please share that

Get back to me when you have something a bit more then conjecture.
 
Back
Top Bottom