|
interrogation tecniques or forms of torture are these:
1. are we performing these things on known terrorists and killers we know can provide us with good information and not just doing it to everyone we have captive in an attempt to troll for information?
2. are these tecniques effective in getting good information useful in preventing terrorist attacks?
if you answer "no" to the questions above then the US should get out of the business of interrogation and let someone who knows what they're doing take over.
i watched the film. it wasn't that disturbing, mainly because i knew that the guy being waterboarded was willfully exposing himself to the treatment in a controlled environment and that no physical harm was going to be done to him. if he started having problems, the experiment would have ceased immediately. before they subjected him to the waterboarding they said that a person can usually only take about 2 minutes of it. this guy lasted for 24 minutes.
that said, i don't ever want to be subjected to it. but, i will have to be honest with you...if, hypothetically speaking, someone kidnapped my child and the kidnapper was apprehended but my child was still missing, you can bet your ass i'd personally waterboard him, and do whatever else necessary, to find out where my kid was. in fact, waterboarding would be too humane in a situation like that. and, i'm not a violent person.
is torture good? no. we don't want it happening to our soldiers should they be captured, so we should not be doing it either. but, is it possible that you can find scenarios where an individual in captivity has information (the date and location of a terror attack, the location of one of their victims, etc) and a normal interview isn't efective in getting that information? if so, what do you do, especially if that information is vital in saving tens of thousands of human lives? or what if the information is vital in saving only one human life? what if the life it could save is a loved one of yours?
torture for torture's sake is hideous and a crime against nature. we all know that. and none of us want a dope like bush or cheney deciding what constitutes torture and who should be tortured. we need to fight against abu grehbs and gitmos and other secret prisons where torture and secret detentions are happening. i strongly feel this way. but at the same time, my heart doesn't bleed for terrorists, child molesters, dictators, killers, rapists, etc. so there's a conflict there, and i'm sure if everyone here thought about it they would find the same conflict. that's what differentiates us from freepers. they believe it's ok to torture every brown skinned person until you find the one that can give you information...and if you can't get any information from any of them keep torturing more. we are more compassionate than that and we care about how we are treating people that have been indiscriminately detained. that's why it's harder and harder to distinguish a terrorist from a freeper. and that's why watching a film of a freeper getting waterboarded would be even less disturbing than watching a journalist willfully subject himself to waterboarding.
be honest now...who here would be against the waterboarding of karl rove in order to find out who leaked valerie plame's name and who authorized the leak?
|
Printer-friendly format
Email this thread to a friend
Bookmark this thread
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
