[excon]

People don't like the guys who do nasty stuff to protect them. Killing, torturing, blowing stuff up... it's all very nasty and not the type of thing you want to deal with in polite company.

Hello again, El:

Thank you Jack Nicholson and Clint Eastwood. Didja see the line I gave DC? We don't agree, but I do like your honesty.

Have you ever considered giving up your day job at the bank? You'd look terrific in your aviator sunglasses hanging out of a helicopter armed to the teeth, with your yarmulke on. Do they hire Jewish guys?

excon

[Dark_crow]

Isn't that how Gitmo got populated, by "scooping" whoever looked Middle Eastern and was in the wrong place at the wrong time?

from Wikipedia: War in Afghanistan (2001–present) 775 detainees who have been brought to Guantanamo, approximately 420 have been released. (Why?) As of August 09, 2007, approximately 355 detainees remained at Guantánamo Bay, Cuba. More than a fifth have been cleared for release but may have to wait months or years for their freedom because U.S. officials are finding it increasingly difficult to line up places to send them, according to Bush administration officials and defense lawyers. (They can't go home?) Of the roughly 355 still incarcerated, U.S. officials said they intend to eventually put 60 to 80 on trial and free the rest. (Why the delay for freeing the rest?)

So most of the detainees were illegally/incorrectly/unfairly incarcerated because they had been "scooped"?

And why can't the 420 who received justice go home?

[excon]

what is the alternative and you have not replied?

Hello again, DC:

What's the alternative to torture?? Your question assumes there IS an alternative. I don't make that assumption. I have not replied with an alternative, because there is none.

Your question NEEDS context - legal context. There is no law that allows us to "scoop" people up and "render" them to somewhere else. In fact, in all of civilization, that's called kidnapping. If you want to arrest someone for being a combatant, then there are laws, conventions and treaties for doing just that. If you wan’t to arrest someone for criminal acts, then there are laws and treaties for doing just that.

So, if you're going to be a cowboy in the world, and to hell with laws and treaties (which is exactly how we've acted), then torture away and who cares what I (or the world) say's about the law on the matter.

If you're looking for justification in the law for torture, you're not going to find it - unless you've got an attorney general who changes what the word torture means. Bush HAD one of those.

Back to your assumption that we need to torture because there isn't an alternative...

Having been in combat, I know that the average grunt doesn't know anything. MY assumption would bethat these grunts we pick up today don't know squat either.

You apparently DO think they know something, and would torture them to find out... Shame on you.

excon

[ETWolverine]

Have you ever considered giving up your day job at the bank? You'd look terrific in your aviator sunglasses hanging out of a helicopter armed to the teeth, with your yarmulke on. Do they hire Jewish guys?
excon

Yeah, but most of them are former IDF special forces guys. A typical Jewish guy from Brooklyn? Not so much.

Nah, I'd be much better at analyzing information and making strategic and tactical suggestions than in the field as an operative. I'm too effing old, my body is too broken up from 25+ years of martial arts training, and I can't run worth a damn. But give me data and a computer, and I can cross-reference it 6 ways from Sunday and spit out an analysis of it.

I did my time in uniform. That's a game for a much younger and fitter man than me.

Elliot

[ETWolverine]

Isn't that how Gitmo got populated, by "scooping" whoever looked Middle Eastern and was in the wrong place at the wrong time?

Uh... no. Despite how the media would like to portray us, WG, the fact is that we do not simply "scoop up" Middle Easterners who happen to be at the wrong place at the wrong time. The guys we have caught have been caught in the field, weapons in hand. They aren't the innocent civilians you think they are.

from Wikipedia: War in Afghanistan (2001–present) 775 detainees who have been brought to Guantanamo, approximately 420 have been released. (Why?)

Because of pressure from left-wing political leaders and organizations. That's why.

As of August 09, 2007, approximately 355 detainees remained at Guantánamo Bay, Cuba. More than a fifth have been cleared for release but may have to wait months or years for their freedom because U.S. officials are finding it increasingly difficult to line up places to send them, according to Bush administration officials and defense lawyers.(They can't go home?)

Apparently not. It seems that they are wanted criminals in their own homelads as well. Something about committing terrorist acts...

Of the roughly 355 still incarcerated, U.S. officials said they intend to eventually put 60 to 80 on trial and free the rest.(Why the delay for freeing the rest?)

Where do we send them? As mentioned above, their own countries don't want them back, because they are career terrorists. WE sure don't want them.

So most of the detainees were illegally/incorrectly/unfairly incarcerated because they had been "scooped"?

Again, no. They were correctly, legally, fairly captured and incarcerated during the commission of terorist acts or while fighting against soldiers. They are being freed only because of political pressure from the left.

The one thing that your Wikipedia article doesn't mention or ask about is how many of the 420 that have already been released have gone back to terrorist activities? How many former detainees have been found to be operating with al Qaeda or the Taliban some other terrorist organization? How many have been caught multiple times? How many dead enemies in Iraq or Afghanistan have been positively identified as former Gitmo detainees? Wouldn't that be an interesting statistic to find out about? How many of the "unfairly" and "incorrectly" incarcerated Gitmo detainees were really "unfair and incorrect" and how many are now back to their old Jihadist games?

Elliot

[Dark_crow]

excon

Seems pretty simple to me, the alternative is to not torture them, is that so difficult. Of course the alternative to not detaining the enemy on a battlefield is to let them shoot you…or would you just have the marines take their weapons and let them go.

Just what would you have us do with suspected terrorist? Since you were a grunt you tell me how the war ought to be fought.

[ETWolverine]

Dennis, good point. That's how you fight a war.

"They pull a knife, you pull a gun. He sends one of yours to the hospital, you send one of his to the morgue. That's the Chicago way!"

---Sean Connery as Jim Malone in The Untouchables, 1987, Paramount Pictures

Or from the same movie:

"I want him DEAD! I want his family DEAD! I want his house burned to the GROUND! I wanna go there in the middle of the night and I wanna PISS ON HIS ASHES!"

---Robert DeNiro as Al Capone.

[Skell]

I love these threads. Makes me glad I'm a long way away from where you cowboys are!

Elliot, you're an intelligent man. No doubt. But wow have you shown some colors here that are ugly and what most of the world finds sickening about people of your kind. How does one so intelligent become so blinded?? That fear mongering campaign in your country really is working isn't it. Its got hold of you and even has you spruiking it to the world.

I don't want compassion or sympathy for David Hicks. He trained with terrorists and he deserved to be punished. That was not my argument.

The point I was trying, and have tried to make in the past, was to display the USA's complete disrespect of justice and basic human rights. Torture is just another example.
Oh so you'll cry that the terrorists show no respect for human life or justice either so its OK for us to do it. Next you'll be telling me that because terrorists murder innocent women and children that its OK for us to do it too. Oops, that's right. You already do!!

Once again you twisted a point being made that you didn't like into silliness by twisting it to suit your own argument. You should become a politician.

Oh and please do the original author the courtesy of citing him when you use his / her material. What website did you copy and paste that spiel on Hicks from? Or was it off the top of your head?

[Dark_crow]

skell

Whoooo, that's a pretty broad brush you're painting with there. As much as I agree with what you say…if in fact the cowboys were serious you are referring to.

But you are dead wrong about America as a whole. While there has been plenty of injustice served out over the years there has also been plenty of justice served back on the perpetrators of those injustices, and by other Americans.

What America exports is Capitalism and all of the value associated with capitalism ---that is, a new culture introduced, encouraged, and rewarded by global capitalism. What are the values of this capitalist culture… the uniquely American ethics of individualism and liberty?

[ETWolverine]

Skell,

I find it amazing that you can say the things you do about the USA. America is the most free, most generous country in the history of the world, but YOU think that we are a bunch of imperialist war-mongers and torturers and baby killers.

Sorry, but that doesn't wash.

War has a different set of rules than peacetime. War requires different actions than simply fighting crime. If we tortured criminals, yes, that would be wrong. But these aren't criminals, they are enemy combatants. And no, they don't have the same rights as criminals. Even if we stick to the Geneva Conventions (which is ludicrous because no other country in the world does... it is a contract more honored in its breaking than its compliance) the GC itself states that enemy combatants cannot and should not be treated as criminals. Do you deny this basic premise of law? Enemy POWs are NOT criminals and cannot be treated as criminals.

But it goes a step further. The terrorists deliberately break the rules of war set down by the GC. They don't wear uniforms, they do not open carry their weapons, they attack civilian targets, they engage in war crimes, and they commit acts of torture... REAL torture. Ergo, they do not deserve or have the right to any protections under the law. NONE!!

But as I said, we are the most generous and most free nation in the world. So despite the fact that the terrorists deserve no protections under the law, they get them anyway. They get three hallal meals a day, they get religious items for worship, they get soccer fields, they get excersize equipment, they get bed and pillows and blankets, they are treated with basic respect and human dignity. If it were up to me, I'd kneecap every one of them. Even after they heal, they'd be walking with a painful limp for the rest of their lives. But Americans are generally good people, so they get treated pretty well for enemies who want to destroy us. That is how MOST of them get treated.

But a few have information on the next attack or the locations of major terrorist leaders, or operating procedures of the terrorist cells, or methods of contacting hidden cells. We need that information in order to keep the United Stated the most free and most generous nation in the world. They don't want to give us that information.

What would you do? Ask "pretty please" a few more times?

That's a great way to fight a war, Skell.

The part that you refuse to understand, Skell, is that this enemy wants to destroy you and your entire family and your entire way of life. This really is a fight to the death. Either Islamofascism will be beaten into submission, or Democracy will be. And if we lose, all that freedom and generosity will DISAPPEAR. It will cease to exist. Your hatred of torture won't matter then, because you won't even be able to protest against it. No freedom of speech. Your wife, your sister, your daughters can all be gang-raped summarily for any actions you take or words you speak against the regime. You can be tortured to death for saying that you are against the government torturing anyone. What will you do then?

I'm not saying that because the enemy does it that makes it okay for us to do it. I'm saying that we are in a war, and in a war you can't be a nice guy and still win the war. And we MUST win this war. There is no choice. I'm saying that we aren't torturing the enemy because we want to, or out of some sort of vengeance for them doing it to our guys. I'm saying we are doing it because we don't have a choice in the matter. There is no other way to win the war and protect the USA. And if we lose, we lose EVERYTHING.

As for the stuff about Hicks, I got it from several sources: old news articles, books written about him by other Gitmo inmates, various websites, etc. There is no one source. There are quite a few of them. The picture of Hicks with the RPG is from Wikipedia. Why? Do you dispute the facts I laid out about Hicks?

So here is my suggestion to you, Skell. If the stuff about torture bothers you, look away. Don't interfere. Because your interference gives aid and comfort to the enemy. And if that enemy wins, the torture of a few nasty POWs will be the least of your problems. Let the people with the stomach to fight the war get on with their jobs, and just say thank you at night before going to bed that there are such people around to allow you to go to bed in safety.

Elliot

[ordinaryguy]

Well, that's a mighty big assumption being made by a non-expert in the field of torture and interrogation. Or do you have some background in intelligence gathering that you haven't informed us about? How do you know it doesn't produce better intelligence? What is your basis for that claim? Did you just happen to hear it somewhere, or do you have clinical evidence to back it up.

I don't have any personal experience or expertise in intelligence gathering, but I have enough understanding of human behavior to believe that folks like these, who do have experience, are telling the truth about what works.

When I was in the officer's basic course, one of the instructors, only half-jokingly, proclaimed, "Beatings and drugs are for fun, not for information." His point was you can get anyone to say anything you want through torture. Good information came from psychology, interpersonal skills, and long hours with your prisoner. The best interrogators I've worked with tended to be very good at reading people and very good at using their understanding of the person and their culture to get them to talk -- no waterboarding required.. . Army Capt. Kyle Teamey, a current military intelligence officer

We ex-POWs don't look kindly on sadistic behavior, especially when it degenerates into torture. Kyle is right, it doesn't do much to get useful info, it only gives the sadist some thrills. Retired Air Force Col. Robert Certain, who was held as a prisoner of war after being shot down over North Vietnam

I have yet to speak with an experienced, successful interrogator who advocates mistreating their subjects. As personally satisfying as it may seem to beat the hell out of detainees, it doesn't usually get you what you want -- accurate, reliable information that you can trust and upon which you can act.

In Vietnam the Provincial Interrogation Centers routinely used skilled Vietnamese interrogators to obtain accurate, detailed information on the organization, personnel and structure of the Vietnamese Communist Infrastructure -- exactly the type of information Guantanamo should be producing by the pound on radical Islamic terrorism.

I think we make a major strategic error when we support such would-be macho men as we see in this administration showing their supposed toughness by advocating torture, when we know it doesn't work. Retired Army Lt. Col. Terry Daly, a veteran of military intelligence operations in the Vietnam War

Does Torture work? --Tom Ricks's Inbox

[Dark_crow]

Not sure what the circumstances might be but I'm fairly sure I would approve of torture in some case. But it would be sheer folly to legalize it.

[excon]

Hello again:

Those, whose standards are malleable, don't understand what a standard is.

excon

[Dark_crow]

Here's what's dangerous about absolutism: Absolutism causes people to act more drastically than they would otherwise, sometimes much more, as in suicide bombing.

[ETWolverine]

Ordinaryguy,

Yes, I'm sure they are ineffective. That is why officers are trained to resist torture... because it's so ineffective. That's why special forces guys are trained to resist it... because it doesn't work.

I suggest you ask Kindj, a former Navy SEAL, who has been through BUD/S and SERE training, whether torture works or not. He's been there, done that, got the trident. Unlike you or me he has actually survived torture. Ask him whether it works.

Elliot

[excon]

Hello again, Mr. Wolverine:

Why doncha ask me? I don't suggest that I've been “tortured”, but I have a story to relate. It involves less than stellar treatment by our men in uniform. As a Yid, you should relate.

In my profile, you'll see mention of my having been in a military prison. Actually, it was the brig on the Naval Base in Charleston, S.C. I was there for three days piss and punk (bread and water) for almost shooting my severely anti-Semitic chief petty officer between the eyes. I had him scoped out too, but that's another story.

So, there I was, in the brig. The Naval brig is run by Marines. Not five minutes after I landed there, I was confronted by two big guys who wanted to know if I was a Christian, all the while standing an inch from my face, spit flying away. No, I said, standing at attention, shaking a little bit. (Sorry, this isn't a hero story.)

They reached out and thumped me on the head and asked again. No, I said, and they thumped me again. I'm talking about a shot with straight fingers aimed on your forehead. It hurt. Now they started thumping me in the chest too, and that also hurt. I could see that they started to enjoy it. They spread the word to every Marine on every shift. They never asked what I was. They just wanted to know if I was a Christian. I was physically abused for three continuous days. (I could call it torture, but it would dishonor those who truly HAVE been tortured.)

It continued on, even though on day two, I told them that I was a Christian, just hoping they'd stop. They didn't.

Take what you will from this story. I was 18. I wish they'd try it now.

Interestingly enough, Hamden (or one of 'em) was kept at that very same brig, where they say they don't torture. Riiiiight.

excon

[ETWolverine]

Hey, Excon,

Sorry to hear that story. I'm not going to deny that abuse takes place in prison and even in military brigs. Again, I'll take it as a given.

But I'll bet if you had information that those Marines wanted, REAL information, you would have been spilling your guts after those three days, right? Who wouldn't? And that's without any waterboarding or shock treatment or truth-drugs.

Furthermore, real torture for an interrogation is methodical, designed to break the captive without giving him the ability to make up a story. He is kept completely off balance and unable to think of a falsehood or a "story", and eventually he breaks and gives up REAL information. It's a bit different from the abuse you suffered. They gave you time to make up a story, a lie that you hoped would end the abuse. In a real torture scenario, the subject isn't given that opportunity. Dennis could give you a bit more information than I can, since he's been through it and I haven't. I only know the technique as a theory I learned from books, he knows it from experience.

The botom line is that torture DOES work. It can break the subject very well. It broke YOUR will to resist, and it would have broken mine as well, and I suspect more quickly... you are a bigger guy than I am. There's certainly no shame in that. But to say that torture doesn't really work is not true. It clearly does.

Elliot

[ordinaryguy]

The botom line is that torture DOES work. It can break the subject very well.

I suppose it depends on what you mean by "work". If the purpose is to "break the subject", as you call it, then I'm sure it works, as you say, "very well". If the purpose is to get "accurate, reliable information that you can trust and upon which you can act", then no, it doesn't.

They gave you time to make up a story, a lie that you hoped would end the abuse. In a real torture scenario, the subject isn't given that opportunity.

So there are torture techniques that can prevent the subject from thinking of a lie, no matter how desperate he is to make it stop? Even when the subject knows that what the torturer wants to hear isn't the truth? The torturer will always get the answer he wants, whether it's the truth or not.

[kindj]

I suppose it depends on what you mean by "work". If the purpose is to "break the subject", as you call it, then I'm sure it works, as you say, "very well".

Indeedy it do.

If the purpose is to get "accurate, reliable information that you can trust and upon which you can act", then no, it doesn't.

Oh, but it does. Without actually giving away techniques, just think about it for a sec: What's the first step in getting someone to give up something they don't want to give up? Do you think they'll do it if they're nice, warm, and comfy, with a full belly and feeling good?

So there are torture techniques that can prevent the subject from thinking of a lie, no matter how desperate he is to make it stop?

Eventually, yes.

Even when the subject knows that what the torturer wants to hear isn't the truth? The torturer will always get the answer he wants, whether it's the truth or not.

That's true for an untrained goon. But an experienced, knowledgable interrogator will get the truth in time.


Had to edit, sorry. I can't quite get the hang of this whole quote thing.

[Dark_crow]

That's true for an untrained goon. But an experienced, knowledgable interrogator will get the truth in time.


Had to edit, sorry. I can't quite get the hang of this whole quote thing.

I agree, and often the one being interrogated was not even aware that they had given it up. The matter is not in the answer of only one question, but rather the piecing together the answer to hundreds of questions.