Cheney, other top officials OK'd harsh interrogation techniques

The only person I know who received an apology from someone he just shot in the face, is the Dickster himself. Check his vacation photos here...http://www.whitehouse.gov/vicepresident/photoessays/outdoors/06.html The United States of Torture, with zero moral high-ground from which to lecture China or anyone else about human rights.

"The United States of Torture" blah blah blah

Yes, we must ensure that our worst enemies must be made as comfortable as possible.

CIA officers would demonstrate some of the tactics, or at least detail how they worked, to make sure the small group of “principals” fully understood what the al-Qaida detainees would undergo.

They "fully understood"? From personal experience? I think not. I would like to see a demonstration of the techniques they approved, with Cheney giving an personal account of what it feels like to be waterboarded.

Cheney, BUsh and Rumsfeld should all be charged with "high crimes & misdemeanours" in the U.S. or war crimes in The Hague.

Disgusting men who have damaged my former country immensely

Oops. My inner neo-con has just, um, misspoken.:

"I would like to see a demonstration of the techniques they approved, with Cheney giving an personal account of what it feels like to be waterboarded."

I thought the Terroristas No. 1 Recruiter George W. Bush said 'merica doesn't torture?

Isn't that right, Sarge?

If I were a foreigner living in a country that is one of America's closest allies and is actively involved in supporting the war in Iraq and I was opposed to the things (like waterboarding) that this article insinuates America does I would pack my bags and leave.

At once.

I can't imagine how intense and all-consuming the frustration must be, though sushi sake's posts do provide a glimpse...

The ONLY good thing about having these techniques approved is that they just might be used one day on Bush, Cheney, and their friends, to identify all those who are truly responsible for this mess, and then do what's right.

I take it that we should just pick up terror suspects, have coffee and tea with them, ask them politely to answer questions, shake their hands and let them go..

I wonder what many of you would do if you were in Daniel Pearl's position whose video is still online thanks to so many American haters.

Praise, understand, and forgive anything non-Americans may do

Sushi - Bush was talking about unlike our enemies, we don't do things like use cattle prods on genitals, burn flesh, cut off limbs, etc.

greenteaonsens - "my former country"

I'd bet a month's pay you still have a U.S. passport.

So, many of you are against "harsh" techniques as far as interrogations are concerned. These "people" don't just crack and tell us what their plans for killing us are if we do something like, oh I don't know, threaten to throw them in prison. "Would you mind very much, Mr Extremist, telling me what you plan on doing to us infidels? And when? And how? No, then we're gonna throw you in prison where your spiritual rights are protected and you can live a long life on the taxpayers dime." Or, we can get the info from them. This touchy feely stuff doesn't work on these people who have devoted their entire being to killing, maiming, and wiping out every last non-muslim in the world so they can force that crap on everyone around them. Some of you need to wake up.

Bush was talking about unlike our enemies, we don't do things like use cattle prods on genitals, burn flesh, cut off limbs, etc.

In other words, 'The Bush administration - we're not quite as bad as the Bad Guys, but we try.'

rtehead1 - Why did you put quotation marks around 'people'? Trying to suggest that they aren't? And who are 'these people'? People who have been duly tried and convicted of terrorist acts? People who might be bad people? People who look like the kind of people who do bad things? Swarthy people? Who are 'these people'? I ask because unless you have a clear-cut definition, you might wake up one day and find yourself mistaken for one of 'them' and being 'harshly' asked questions you don't know the answers to.

redacted - you seem happy that America's strategy to beat scum is to become scum.

If I was you, I would denouce being an American an migrate.

However, you seem quite happy to green light torture.

That's your perogative, but when another terrorist attack hits your country, don't be surprised.

I agree with torture. These are not some little inncoent poor things. these are men that would cut your head off in a second and blow up my kid on a bus. yes, and i agree that the only way to beat scum is to do what it takes.

cleo: You're basically taking a legal approach as though this is a court case. Your questions that were posed to rtehead1 where you basically accuse him of being racist in a sense.

"you might wake up one day and find yourself mistaken for one of 'them'" I have been asked if I was Middle Eastern on many occasions, what's your point?

Let me ask you this, did "those" people give the same amount of consideration to the people they accused of being Zionist, Jewish spy (when one was a Sokka Gakkai member).

As for the people who have been "tortured" have they lost limbs, had their torture sessions sent over the internet to raving fans, have their kids been threatened, have their finger nails been pulled off, or have any of their heads bee cut off? Simulating a drowning is a lot different than drowning.. perhaps they should put how to over come that in their next training video instead of gassing a dog.

Additionally, I don't consider flushing a book down the toilet as torture (I still would love to see how some could flush one down - its impossible unless they tore it up into pieces - but people here don't bother asking questions like that, just believe hype.

Lastly, I am sure, very sure the same techniques were used on the Nazis, if proved true, would you still raise a fit? I would hope not.

dano2002 - I understand your sentiment. What about all the kids on buses in Iraq? All the kids picking up cluster bomblets in Afghanistan? By your reasoning, the 'insurgents', the Taliban and everyone who has lost family to American bombs are perfectly within their rights to do 'what it takes' to kill as many American soldiers as they can.

An eye for an eye makes the whole world blind.

skip - My point is that you can't simply go around torturing 'these people' if you have no idea who 'these people' are. Yes, some people are scum. Some people do post torture sessions on the Internet, cut people's heads off, threaten children, fly planes into buildings. What's your point? That it doesn't matter what we do so long as it isn't quite as bad as the Bad Guys?

And if the same techniques were used on the nazis? (What do the nazis have to do with this?) After all the hype we've been fed about the pristine knights in shining armour who saved the world for freedom and democracy, I think I'd feel the same distain for them as I feel for the present-day warmongers who try to tell us war is peace, wrong is right, torture is only torture if the other guy does it.

I really don't see why people find this so difficult; if we would have a hissy-fit and scream 'torture' or 'war-crime' if it was done to one of ours, we shouldn't be doing it to any of theirs.

the Taliban and everyone who has lost family to American bombs are perfectly within their rights to do 'what it takes' to kill as many American soldiers as they can." They do have a right in a sense. Its called a war and wars are not fought, although they should be, with common sense. If they were, then it would be easy to end them.

However, don't you think the Taliban should have known that once they decided to hide and provide a sanctuary for OBL that something was going to happen? Kind of like helping a friend whose running from the cops - no one forced you to help him. All they had to do was give him up and nothing would have happened to them and they could have ruled the land with their ways forever. No one would have even blinked.

An eye for an eye makes the whole world blind." So does ignorance!

"I don't consider flushing a book down the toilet as torture"

Skip, that never happened. NEWSWEAK retracted the "story" (read that, bold-faced lie). But only after dozens were killed ober it, including the 84-year-old nun in Africa who was shot four times in the back by some "brave" Muslims.

Of course, in global liberal-o-vision, she got what she deserved.

RR

Cleo: two points, What do the nazis have to do with this?" We used torture on them.. and if you don't believe the hateful system filling up Islamic teachings then you really got a problem. If you are left, I can understand your distain for the US but not having any for Islam leaves me to believe you are confused. Bear in mind, the enemy of your enemy is not always your friend.

I really don't see why people find this so difficult; if we would have a hissy-fit and scream 'torture' or 'war-crime' if it was done to one of ours, we shouldn't be doing it to any of theirs." Really now. So when THEY bomb infidels, cut off their heads, basically proxy invade poor countries turn them into hell silence is ok because as long as its not the west doing? But when we bomb them BACK all hell breaks lose. You are becoming a product of your own hypocrisy. However, I'll agree with you that there are often times when we are all hypocrites and in this case basically the victor gets to decide. YOu need to decide which side you prefer to be on. The US has been losing wars since the 50's by playing by rules they instilled. It ain't working.

global liberal-o-vision"

RR, its time to call Webster

"We hold these truths to be self-evident, that ALL men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness."

Doesn't say "Americans" only. Says "ALL"

GG: Well, why didn't someone beat us to the punch line? I don't know of any constitution at the time the US's was written that made that claim. Surely, no Islamic lead country even has an iota of that thought!

skip -

If you are left, I can understand your distain for the US but not having any for Islam leaves me to believe you are confused.

Who says I have no distain for Islam? I have no time for any religion. At the same time, I don't believe all Muslims (=Islam) are raring to cut infidel heads off willy-nilly, any more than I believe that all Christians/Americans/Westerners (the 'these people' definition is fuzzy enough to be meaningless) can't wait to start raping 14-year-old Iraqi girls and burning their families. Your slippage from 'these people' to 'Islam' suggests to me that you are confused.

So when THEY bomb infidels, cut off their heads, basically proxy invade poor countries turn them into hell silence is ok

No one's saying that, skip.

Cleo: your silence is saying that. I applaud the criticism against Cheney and others on this issue because all things need to have checks and balances, but none of you are condemning the actions of the other side and you guys are left leaning.. WTF, since when did a right winging male chauvinistic religion become acceptable? thus the usage of Nazi terms..

"can't wait to start raping 14-year-old Iraqi girls and burning their families" I can not believe you used that incident in this manner. At least those responsible were bought in front of the world.. if you want to go there, then what do you call a law that allows girls as young as 9 to be married off?

On the torture issue, when is it torture and when is it considered use of force? Where is your criticism of their use torture? Why so subtle on them but loud on us?

skip - If I read about a crime in the newspaper, I'll probably tut-tut over it but I'm not going to make a fuss. The police can deal with it. My 'silence' doesn't mean I approve of the crime. If I learn that the crime was committed by a member of my family, I'll be a lot more concerned. My standards for family behaviour are a lot higher than for outsiders.

I can not believe you used that incident in this manner. At least those responsible were bought in front of the world

My point exactly. Those responsible were brought to justice, not anybody and everybody they may once have spoken to, or had a drink with, or that has the same shoe size.

if you want to go there

I wasn't going where you seem to think I was going. For the record though, I think child marriage should be banned.

On the torture issue, when is it torture and when is it considered use of force? Where is your criticism of their use torture? Why so subtle on them but loud on us?

Like I said before, if we would scream 'torture' and 'war crime' if it was done to one of ours, then it's torture and a war crime when we do it. This is not rocket science. I think I've answered the other questions above. They're not family.

A question for dano2002, redacted, Sarge, etc. and all the other JT posters who embrace torture -

If you were captured by the Taliban or some other terrorist group, strapped to a board and waterboarded to within an inch of your life, would you complain?

Just curious.

sushi: You are getting wrong. Just like you said you do not embrace the actions of the Muslim Terrorist, neither are we embracing torture. Unfortunatley, in retrospect to Cleo's statements, the victor of a war does get to set the rules.. that is how it always has been and it should not be up to the US to change humanity's approach to war..

I would however offer you a different angle, let's say I am part of a group that makes this war a triangle... I have to fight both the US and The Muslims.... If I had a choice of whose POW I would be, I would say not only I but you too would choose the US's... or am I wrong... I think you would be much more willing to suffer the pain of simulated drownings than having your head cut off on placed on the net for your family to see...

Now to your question: complain my friend is a very immature way of putting it. If I decided to go and fight THEM and once caught, I would expect it which is why I would most likely put a bullet in my head.. I do not expect them to treat me the way you want the MUSLIM pows/captitives what ever you want to term them to be treated to cake and tea... I have capitalize on the people because I do not see none of you complaining about possible torture of Japanese POWs, Nazi POWs and I definately don't see you, not even once, of Muslim terrorist blowing up bombs in market squares, hospitals, etc.. killing or attempting there of. You guys only show your face if it is what America is doing...

Why do you feel American must be a separate cut of wood? Perhaps we are just as bad as they are, so it leaves you with a question, if your land was going to be invaded, which would you prefer? YOu are not going to stop war in any of our life times, so the question is real.

Heh, I'm guessing that dano2002, redacted, Sarge, etc. and all the other JT posters who embrace torture haven't actually been within 1,000 miles of the Iraq or Afghanistan battle spaces, and I also bet they don't contribute in any meaningful way at all to fighting the "War on Terror."

Except, of course, frantically typing insults on their PCs, which, let me be the first to admit, they are exceptional at :-

If I am off base here, please tell me what you have done and how you have contributed to your country's fight against terrorism.

Cheney and co. are only making things worse by dragging a once proud America down to below gutter level by authorizing torture.

Are they themselves any different from the terrorists they claim to be against?

No, Cheney and co. are one and the same with the terrorists.

It is going to take years for America to get over this.

When the bad guys want new recruits, all they'll have to do is hold up a picture of the inmate abuse at Gitmo, or mention that the U.S. tortures and abuses prisoners, (the vast majority of whom have not had any charges successfully laid against them), or mention the hatred and angst of Americans like dano2002, redacted, Sarge, etc., and they'll have new recruits signing up in droves.

It's funny - dano2002, redacted, Sarge, etc. STILL don't understand that they themselves are leading to the inciting of even more violence against their own people.

Heh, their attitude is almost as dumb as punching yourself in the head repeatedly for 6 years. :-)

Unfortunately, this Administration is living in the wrong country. There is great tradition to the US Constitution and the Bill of Rights. They know there is no chance of amending specific, long held clauses which reinforce the rights of the citizens, as well as how foreigners should be treated (human rights, UN Charter, etc....). Going into foreign countries forcing the natives to fight tooth and nail against a Superpower is going to get ugly and heartbreaking to see the results of nineteen year olds sent into a "meatgrinder". Whether the US stays in or not, the damage to the traditions of the US is dying.

Correction:

Whether the US stays in or not, the traditions of the US is dying.

The problem is those being tortured are not the bad guys.

sushi: you are both off base and on...your question to us is quite obviously the same question to you. What really have you done?

I know what I would like to do but it would be impossible. Oh, I have donated a lot of cash to causes in relation to troops..

Here is where you get me: "Cheney and co. are only making things worse by dragging a once proud America down to below gutter level by authorizing torture." I'll go with you that Cheney is an idiot but the "once proud America blah blah" Even before this war started, people were finding all sorts of ways to prove we are an evil society - The communists, the right, the left.. America is not a country that needs to be mirrored, but it does offer a whole lot in terms of many many societies living in one place. But, as far as it going down, it has been on the path even when GWB was in diapers.

Are they themselves any different from the terrorists they claim to be against?" So what are you saying? Who are the terrorists and who is not. Are you saying that the fanatics of Islam are not?

No, Cheney and co. are one and the same with the terrorists." So is half the world. The CIA has used torture long before this war, even when Kennedy was in office... why do you get hyped about it now?

Whether the US stays in or not, the traditions of the US is dying." true, and not true. The US was once a country whose laws were based on Christianity, that wasn't good enough. The became a country that made some of the most ridiculous laws in the history of man-kind, that isn't good enough.. So, please enlighten us, what do you want the US to be? and why JUST the US?

sabi: you are using an American idea that innocent until proving guilty.. Its an American idea, so don't use it. Use their laws, guilty and no chance of proving innocence. As Shiia law is always correct!

Skipthesong - thanks for your reply.

"your question to us is quite obviously the same question to you. What really have you done?"

I am against this war and therefore see zero reason why I should support it in any shape or form.

"Are they themselves any different from the terrorists they claim to be against?" So what are you saying? Who are the terrorists and who is not. Are you saying that the fanatics of Islam are not?"

I am pointing out that Cheney and co. are totally hypocritical in their position. They imply they have a greater moral standing than the people they are fighting; they state their fight is a 'just cause' (even name operations after it) and they propage mistruths, untruths and everything inbetween.

All after they have wantonly invaded a sovereign nation that wasn't a threat, had no connection to 9/11, fire and drop thousands of tonnes of DU into Iraq (that will be killing Iraqis and Americans and their kids for years), kill innocents, and now - torture.

The bad guys do some of that too except they don't poison people with DU.

from sushisake:

"redacted - you seem happy that America's strategy to beat scum is to become scum. If I was [were] you, I would denouce being an American an migrate [emigrate]. However, you seem quite happy to green light torture. That's your perogative [prerogative], but when another terrorist attack hits your country, don't be surprised."

For starters, sushisake, I'm in Japan. Have been for a while. I like it, unlike you. I have no real problems with Japan's foreign policy or choice of allies. I think a lot about Japan - and of course my own country.

You, on the other hand, seem to think almost exclusively about my country.

But you don't really know much about it , do you?

The article and many in the media try to make it sound like "torture" has never been resorted to by US armed forces but a cursory check of even the most recent wars the US fought in dispels such desperate propaganda.

US forces waterboarded VietCong soldiers in the 60's and 70's.There are pics available online.

I have personally met here in Japan ex-Aussie special forces guys who boasted of the rep their predecessors had during that war, earned because of their particular ruthlessness in dealing with the same sort of enemy:they tossed them, sans parachutes, from interrogation "rooms" which just happened to be located in aircraft flying over the forests and oceans of that tragic country. Would such tactics qualify as "rendition" and "torture"?

For the record - I probably would have objected to such measures at the time.

But the waterboarding of subhuman scum like Khalid Mohammed, whose "torture" resulted in info that apparently saved American lives.

I have no problems with that.

"If you were captured by the Taliban or some other terrorist group, strapped to a board and waterboarded to within an inch of your life, would you complain?"

Is that an attempt at humor? The Taliban would waterboard an innocent, unarmed citizen like myself? To what end? To see if I voted for Bush in 2000? (I didn't.)

Where have you been since 9-11. They didn't waterboard the journalist Daniel Pearl.

They beheaded him and put the snuff film on the internet.

They didn't waterboard backpackers like Nick Berg.

They beheaded them and put the snuff film on the internet.

They didn't waterboard that poor Korean guy working in Iraq as a translator.

They beheaded him and put the snuff film on the internet.

It's time to make up your mind, sushisake.

Is militant Islam a threat or not?

You seem, when you also call the terrorists scum, to admit that militant Islam's foot soldiers are morally across from us on the divide that we in the West call Good and Evil.

That's a good start.

Bizarrely though, you also admit Al Qaeda and the Taliban are real by accusing Pres. Bush of helping them gain new members in numbers that we can't even count.

(Here I have to point out that you're being a tad bit ethnocentric - dare I say "racist" ? - by implying that AlQaeda and Taliban recruits have no free will of their and can only react to what "the White Man" says. I never thought I'd be saying this but you really should try to be a little more, you know, multicultural in your outlook. Arabs, Pakistanis, Yemenis, wayward young Brits - whoever might choose to join these militant groups they are human when they do so. Mmmmkay? I don't know what country it is you're from but I think the fretful, politically correct elites in the media and academia you undoubtedly get your pic of America from would be shocked to see the retrograde sort of Whitey-still-knows-best attitude you quite unconsciously still display here. )

To continue -

The next day you imply, by calling the likes of AQ and the Taliban "terroristas," that militant Islam is little more than the figment of imaginations exposed to too much Fox News and "cheerleading."

It's embarrassing and tiresome watching you try to work out your weird obsession with Bush, Republicans, and America.

Try and lift the level of your posts.

sabi: you are using an American idea that innocent until proving guilty.

No, I just happen to have caught on (as many others have as well) that Muslims are being framed for terrorist acts committed by others. If the goal is to torture the bad guys to save lives, then the torture should be applied to Bush, Cheney, the Neocons, Blair, the Mossad, the CIA,... That is the only way we can prevent another 9-11.

sushi: haven't you ever been with friends or family members and one of a few of them were hurt or have have a fight with a group of others? Of course you backed up your friends/family Its beyond right or wrong as to what started it, the fact is that it is happening. Many of the people fighting in the war, both US and Muslims, weren't even old enough when this started; they don't even understand why it started. The people of that part of the world have done what you need to do and that is to choose a side. Just OBL is evil and Cheney is evil, you need to decide which evil is going to work for you. For me its simple, Cheney will be gone, his ideas will be gone and in a few years 99% of Americans won't even know a thing about him. In contrast, OBL's ideas will be with us for a very long time, his disciples already have 500 year plans.. I know you don't believe that but OBL won't die, even if we stopped all sorts of torture, this war, accept defeat, bow down to them, or what ever.... I do believe this is a fight till the finish.. and unlike you, I was crazy enough to bring a kid into this world so I chose a side. You may think sarge and my kind are having fun with these torture accusations, or the deaths of innocents being bombed by our forces, but I do hope you can believe that is an absurd thought.

"No, I just happen to have caught on (as many others have as well) that Muslims are being framed for terrorist acts committed by others."

Yeah.

I've been struck by how often "Palestinian" and Al Qaeda in Europe operatives mention in their videotaped sendoffs to paradise that it is glorious to kill Infidels and by the way this was all a setup.

Every time we discuse a crime of a country. We see the same reactions.

1- Change the subject, by talking about others crimes.

2- Play down, by try to change the definition of the crime.

3- Justify, by saying that "the end justify the means".

Let's try to keep these calm and civilized.

1- Is not a defense at all.

2- Call a spade spade. Torture is "the act of inflicting excruciating pain, as punishment or revenge, as a means of getting a confession or information, or for sheer cruelty.". And there is no, not so bad torture.

3- These is a trial, your moral is being tested by sufferings. You can keep your faith in the high ideals of america or try to cheat your beliefs by make moral compromises. Openly drop human rights and use torture for protect their own people at any moral cost, is a betrayal to America's high ideals. A national shame that is going to stay in the history book for ever.

mareo2 : Well, ok, America is just like them. So, the world is finally equal. Where are you going to go now?

1- Is not a defense at all." So their fight is? If you say America should stay out of Iraq, than Iran, the Taliban, OBL, should stay out of the affairs of the Palestinian issue that some here like to say is the reason this whole thing got started...

2- Call a spade spade. Torture is "the act of inflicting excruciating pain, as punishment or revenge, as a means of getting a confession or information, or for sheer cruelty.". And there is no, not so bad torture." And how many people have you met from Gitmo? I can tell you this, the guys at Gitmo who are participating in any type of info pulling tactics are having a lot less fun than those how hate the Jews.....

Well, ok, America is just like them. So, the world is finally equal.

No, America is worst than them, much worst. I hope Americans smarten up before its too late.

No, America is worst than them, much worst. I hope Americans smarten up before its too late." Well, as I recall, they already said it was too late...

1- Again you are mixing the topics, that only confuse the readers:

a) No, no one say that terrorism is a right political mean, in fact any violence for political ends is wrong. But we are talking abut US torture, we all know that terrorism is bad. Why you change the subject and go back all the time in something that everyone agree?

b) Interventionism: No one say tha the US must to turn to isolationsm and let the world go to hell. What we say is that we think that from now on, is better for the US try to cooperate with other nations in the search for peace, in place of play the lone wolf. The world dont need a country saying that can use tactical nukes against Iran, based only on suspicions. In special after the Irak fiasco. The entire pre-emptive policy is freacking out european and muslim allies.

2- a) So you say that because they blow civilians the US can torture suspects? Is not the same thing that you say in pont 1?

b) No I never meet a prisoner on Gitmo, even if I try I really doubt that the US gov let me see any of them for an interview. I only know what independient sources say and what the official papers say, that the White House aprobed torture and that torture was executed and video taped.

You never meet any freed Iraki? You can take an airplain to Irak any day and ask to them in person what they think about 9 years marriges and rapes by US soldiers. Maybe you can ask them what they think that a iraki suspected to be a terrorist can be tortured for the benefit of US protection.

Sorry, skip, but you dont say nothing new, just keep changing the subject for avoid to face the crime. There is no excuse for dirt the honor of America. Use Torture for defend Freedom is an inmoral idea.

Im thoroughly enjoying reading Mareo2's posts, very clear and logical. Alot of arguments fall apart when the political double speak and redirection is removed form the picture, (if only it could be). pots calling the kettles black always manage to fall back on something outside of the basic argument to try and prove why the pot is more black than them. I applaude Mareo2 for not trying to slander America as I have been guilty of, that also is a too-easy way of shifting the focus. Leaders need to lead by example, not by an iron fist. Smiting our enemies for centuries hasnt prevented anything.Premptive strikes are just preludes to retaliation. Around and around we go. Just adding more fuel to the fire. If taking the high road was easy everyone would take it, but someone has to start somewhere. Maybe America just doesnt want to rise to the occasion. notimpressed is not impressed with humanity in general.

Sad to see some of the usual suspect posters still saying "torture is bad ...but"

Is it wrong or is it not? Is your case that america is so morally superior that it is ok for them to commite torture? Does not america claim to be better than the "bad" people? And think about it - america in 2008 is giving the green light from the highest offices to torture people. To inflict incruiating pain on people, to simulate death experiences. This is what primitive people did.

John McCain, not my favorite person, had it right when speaking out against torture said: It's not about them - it is about us and who we are. Bush nodded in agreement and then signed a law with special addenmunts which said he could ignore it.

Think about it americans - don't bother me with your stories off how bad the others are - you have an admin which openly endorses the use of phyisical torture on other humans. This, from the same country that (eventually) abolished slave labour. So if america is the leading light etc, is it OK for all other countries to torture? And if not, why not?

The founding Fathers were setting forth a vision for a great country. Did they miss out a bit where they said torture was OK? Because torture was wrong then, it was wrong in the Middle Ages and it is wrong now. But america in 2008 want's to legalise it. A country in moral decline. And confirmation of that decline are posters here clinging to reasons why it is oK. So what about child rape? Surely in some circumstances that is OK - like if your buddies were in an IED attack?

Just hanging out waiting for the USA report on human rights around the world.

Do you have free trade unions? No? That is bad. Do you have free press? Well don't worry about that to much. Do you have torture? Cause we want to show you this great freedom tool. You just plug it in here, push this part in here (lube sometimes helps) turn this switch on i n 20 second bursts and they tell you everything you want to know.

simon: you have a good point. The US should not be putting together a report on human rights, however I still fail to see anyone coming up with an alternative to extract information that could save people's lives, on or off the battle field, whether you are the good guy or the bad guy.

Additionally, what is torture? I do not consider some of the things that have been reported as torture as in the Middle Ages and I refuse to believe the guys working in Gitomo are torturing out of enjoyment (I do believe the others Abu Garab deserved every punishment they got though).

On one web site I saw, it was said that a few prisoners were given a shot of truth serum, and that too is considered torture.

Also, stop with "this Admin" the CIA has been using torture for years, at the very least get uniform.

And, of all people, John "Bomb, bomb, bomb Iran" McCain should know, when people feel pain, they'll tell you anything you want to hear just to make it stop. The USSA has become everything it despises; an undemocratic, theocratic dictatorship. How DARE they lecture the world on human rights.

GG: John McCain says he is against torture and it is an issue he publicly voice opinions about.

And so what he is against it? I think the media has gotten the best of everyone lately. What torture is going on in Gitmo that has everyone proclaiming the US as the worse country on the planet and has pushed everyone to the side of Muslims who not only use torture against their enemies, but they use even at the street level.

As the man said, torture "is worse than a crime. It's a mistake."

After watching so many here shrug off crimes by North Korea, China, Iran, Saddam, Hamas, Al Queda, Castro, et al, you might find that some of us have trouble taking your outrage to heart. It's impossible for us to forget that we're talking to a group that by and large has nothing but sympathetic words for dictators and terrorists.

This website doesn't really have the culture to speak openly and honestly about such issues. Some messages I might actually agree with, but there's so much extra baggage attached that there is no credibility. Some say, "America shouldn't torture." which I can agree with. The problem is they usually say, "America shouldn't torture, and they're a dictatorship, and they have no freedom, and Al Queda has a reason to kill innocents, etc." That's when I tend to reject the message overall because it's coming from someone that I can't stand next to.

Today the topic is waterboarding so there is outrage. But I know tomorrow some radical terrorist will blow up a school and we'll get the opposite message from the same people. Perhaps if some of the anti-Americans would police and challenge their own a little bit more we could have more rational discussions. Your messages would be a lot more effective if they weren't poisoned by conspiracy theories, over-the-top characterizations, and sometimes just plain nutty comparisons. In the end I read the messages with a feeling that I don't have to justify anything to some people here.

SuperLib,

I think you misunderstand. I don't think it's the case that people shrug off the crimes committed by your list of strange bedfellows. I think it is the case that people have very little expectation of soon doing anything about those crimes. This would include a low expectation that war or sanctions would be effective in stopping them.

On the other hand, I think those same people have a rather higher expectation that in a free society the expression of opinion can work to influence the policies of that society. And, perhaps, they are likelier to believe that the best way to put an end to the crimes of others is to be sure not to commit crimes of one's own.

I agree that some people here are over the top, but I think those are a very few in number. As you say, today the topic is waterboarding. However, your post seems to divert from the topic by focusing on the excesses of a few.

The "excesses of a few" is your own way of dismissing my comments about the culture of the site overall. When the "few" are able to provide multiple posts and dominate a thread with their rhetoric then it goes well beyond the numbers. And when intelligent people such as yourself refuse to stand up to these people just because they are attacking those you disagree with it makes things even more difficult.

I do think that torture is a serious issue and needs to be addressed. But I don't think we need to be addressing it with people such as this. I stand by my comments.

Torture certainly "works." As the history of twentieth-century police states suggests, under extreme torture most people will say anything (including, sometimes, the truth). But to what end? Thanks to information extracted from terrorists under torture, the French army won the 1957 Battle of Algiers. Just over four years later the war was over, Algeria was independent, and the "terrorists" had won. But France still carries the stain and the memory of the crimes committed in its name. Torture really is no good, especially for republics. And as Aron noted many decades ago, "torture—and lies—[are] the accompaniment of war.... What needed to be done was end the war."

http://www.nybooks.com/articles/21311

"The USSA has become everything it despises; an undemocratic, theocratic dictatorship. How DARE they lecture the world on human rights."

I read comments like that and wish this site had html functions that would highlight in purple prose as silly as that.

Again, if I felt and really believed that I would never set foot in Japan, since it is America's closest ally in Asia and an integral partner in the crimes of multinational economic exploitation and development it, you know, goes out and invades harmless nations in. Right?

In particular, if I were an English teacher here I would pause to ponder what percentage of Japan's economy and therefore my income is made from J-citizens toiling for companies in an economy that's quite clearly heavily dependent on American consumers.

I mean, if you come here with such pointed accusations and feel so strongly about them why are posters like simon, grouchygaijin, sezwho etc still in this country?

If you truly and passionately believe that the waterboarding of 3 terrorists by US forces proves the country has somehow lost its way (I doubt any of you believed in the first place that the US ever was acting in accord with ideals you claim it has recently forsaken...) why is it your actions never progress beyond repetitive and not very creative attacks upon American foreign policy?

redacted, Regarding your last post, I really have to wonder if you could stand up to the same level of scrutiny you give others. When has your true and passionate support for this war in Iraq progressed further than posting on the internet?

I don't think it is in your best interests to point that finger. You are extremely vulnerable to your own (heh) tortured logic.

Taka

taka313 - Nowhere have I scrutinized another poster here. I'm really not that eager to know most of them. I have simply asked why, if they believe what they do about the US, do they continue to live in and support America's closest ally.

And conversely, why, can you believe so passionately in the necessity of the Iraq war, yet do nothing to actually support it?

Nice try. But if this was dodgeball, you would be headed for the bench with a welt on your thigh.

Taka

You miss the point, redacted. Taka simply redirected your own question back at you to ask, "Well, what sacrifices are you personally willing to make to advance the causes you so self-righteously promote?" I'm not singling you out; the same question could be put to superlib. Frankly, both of your posts share strong similiarites to those of the posters, both real and imagined, you hold in such contempt.

Your argument, as I read it, is something along the lines of, "US consumption keeps Japan's economy humming so why bite the hand that feeds you by complaining about a little torture?"

Well put, Taka. It's tiresome to be lectured to by those whose passion for righting the wrongs of the world never seems to prompt them to do anything beyond posting on the internet.

You know, betzee and taka313, the trouble with the Chickenhawk Argument you so lamely attempt to make is that it's based on the basically Lefty notion that the military is the US, so anyone who supports the War on Terror needs to get in uniform.

The military serves the people of the US and "the system" - as your average Lefty might call it - which in my opinion runs best when individual choice is given precedence over gov't controls.

We have a volunteer army full of folks who believe they can do the job better than others. They choose to serve.

I imagine most of them are aware of that.

Surely, after they finished playing dodgeball in jr high and went on to high school - and even university - they learned to think for themselves,

I pity the ones who didn't.

I imagine they must make things rough on those they serve with.

the trouble with the Chickenhawk Argument you so lamely attempt to make is that it's based on the basically Lefty notion that the military is the US, so anyone who supports the War on Terror needs to get in uniform.

Simply pointed out the similiarity to your assertion that "Japan is America's best ally" and therefore anyone with any criticism of the US should be asked why they choose to live there under these circumstances?

Here's a better suggestion: if you and superlib are dissatisfied with the quality of the posts on US sanctioning the use of torture, then meet them head on rather than changing the subject....

redacted - I don't think anyone is asking 'Why aren't you in the military if you support the war?' The question is, if you're so desperate to win this war you'll even give a nod and a wink to torture carried out in your name, when has your true and passionate support for this war in Iraq progressed further than posting on the internet?

As for your last post, I think it can be translated as 'Why should I put on a uniform and go somewhere dangerous when there are plenty of other fools willing to 'serve' me by going instead.'

"...if you're so desperate to win this war you'll even give a nod and a wink to torture carried out in your name, when has your true and passionate support for this war in Iraq progressed further than posting on the internet?"

Quite a leap there, cleo. From waterboarding to Iraq. The article is about the use of waterboarding approved for interrogation against Al Qaeda members in 2002 and 2003, as far as I can tell. And of course since I was never able to actually vote on the decision my support for it is yes, limited to what I post online. I still have no problem with waterboarding Khalid Mohammed. And as I pointed out he is reported to have provided info that saved lives.

"As for your last post, I think it can be translated as 'Why should I put on a uniform and go somewhere dangerous when there are plenty of other fools willing to 'serve' me by going instead.'"

You may think what you'd like. I'd be insulting members of my own family and their relatives and ancestors in saying such things, people who fought and died to quite literally save the country you left for Japan.

I am starting to believe had the terror suspects in question been say from the UK and not from some poor non-western country, you wouldn't hear a peep out of most of these posters..

I've noticed your selective disapproval.

Cleo - "As for your last post, I think it can be translated as 'Why should I put on a uniform and go somewhere dangerous when there are plenty of other fools willing to 'serve' me by going instead.'"

redacted - "You may think what you'd like. I'd be insulting members of my own family and their relatives and ancestors in saying such things, people who fought and died to quite literally save the country you left for Japan."

Good dodge.

Another good dodge was the dodge you made yesterday when I asked you -

"If you were captured by the Taliban or some other terrorist group, strapped to a board and waterboarded to within an inch of your life, would you complain?"

That's not an attempt at humor - it's a question to test how seriously you support waterboarding.

Quit the dodges - answers please.

Hey kids, look! A poorly constructed man made of straw. If you want to get a picture, do so quick, because a well aimed sneeze will knock it down. No redacted, I DON'T want you to be on the front lines in Iraq. You would get good men killed. However, for someone who tries to portray mental superiority, the State Dept. test should be a breeze. You could support the cause via the State Dept. And if your intellect isn't all you make it out to be, there's also AAFES within the Green Zone. You see, from my perspective, and anyone personally familiar with the concept of accountability, if you cannot handle your own argument and have to retreat to victim status (i.e. your frequent, anyone who disagrees with me wants me to go to the front rant) whenever you are called out on it, it's an argument you shouldn't make because, getting back to that insulting your ancestor thing, well...too late hoss. You've already checked that box.

Taka

About the chickenhawk argument. I think that some of us is not understanding the moral concept behind the words. The idea is "if you support these whit so much pasion, are you ready to do that yourself whit the same pasion in place of try to convinve others to do it for you?"

That in the topic of torture means: "if you support torture, are you ready to torture suspects yourself in place of asking others to do that for you?"

I think that asking someone else to do something that can bring shame to he's country, he's organization, he's family and he's own person, is asking for a really huge personal sacrifice. And I doubt that people is going to call him hero, feel proud of him and say that they wish to be like him.

Here's a test for supporters of this war: Next time you post, please add a brief list of actions you have personally taken - beyond typing on websites - to support your troops and your nation's war effort.

In addition, my challenge to redacted above is a good first step related to this thread and I would like to make the same challenge to other war supporters:

"If you were captured by the Taliban or some other terrorist group, strapped to a board and waterboarded to within an inch of your life, would you complain?"

"I DON'T want you to be on the front lines in Iraq. You would get good men killed."

redacted, FYI: the "good men" getting killed that 13 means are his buddies whom the coalition is fighting since he has posted that the only terrorists in Iraq are the U.S. military.

RR

redacted -

I'd be insulting members of my own family and their relatives and ancestors in saying such things

Quite likely you would. I read it that you were certainly insulting the military in Iraq, with the snide comment that you imagine most of them are 'aware' of what they're doing. Not a very high level of intellect you're imagining the people who 'serve' you have.

people who fought and died to quite literally save the country you left for Japan

Quite literally, huh? Not the old 'we saved the world single-handed' stuff again. >Yawn< You lot didn't even join in until it was nearly all over. And you didn't join in to 'save the country I left for Japan' - you joined in for your own reasons. It doesn't suit a proponent of torture to come over all self-righteous.

There is people that support the war, but dont' support torture and there is people that dont support the war but support torture. McCain is a good example of a war supporter that is against torture. So, please dont mix topics and let's try to keep a calm and rational discussion or we risk alienate the readers.

I can't support "torture" as a formal policy. I can't believe the strange reactions I am receiving locally from this post and others. Is US policy that fragile that counterarguments can not be considered. I stated before that alot of people might be reading the discusssion boards and the US is struggling w/ sooooo many opinions. It's almost as if some policymakers read JT and can't tolerate dissenting opinions. It's so weird.

cleo -

" I read it that you were certainly insulting the military in Iraq, with the snide comment that you imagine most of them are 'aware' of what they're doing. Not a very high level of intellect you're imagining the people who 'serve' you have."

My response was crafted in reply to taka313, tired and defeated chickenHawk "logic." What you need is to read a bit more carefully.

"You lot didn't even join in [WW2] until it was nearly all over."

Ah yes, we were supposed to, in the midst of the Great Depression, completely remake an ailing civilian economy into a military one solely to help preserve your overextended empire and remedy your diplomatic errors and policies of appeasement with Hitler?

I can't wait to read the reasoning they used in teaching you that.

sushisake again asks:

"If you were captured by the Taliban or some other terrorist group, strapped to a board and waterboarded to within an inch of your life, would you complain?"

If it's a little waterboarding you think the Taliban (which you seem to grant political validity equal to that of the democratically elected gov't in the US...) does to its enemies I'm not surprised you're gullible enough to proclaim that "global warming" is the greatest threat we face.

SuperLib,

In my opinion, the excesses of the few you have singled out are quite well balanced by the excesses of a few others--for example those who are so steeped in American mythology that they cannot tolerate a finding of fault in US actions or those who bring nothing to the party but a rabid and distorted view of Islam, and so on.

Also, in my opinion, the best way to counter excess is not to complain about it or those who indulge in it but to rather patiently deconstruct it and show it up for the error that it is. I may have missed it, but I do not see you deploring the excesses of those on the other side who also tend to an over-the-topness.

So, yes, that was my way of dismissing your comment about the culture of this forum. You see, I don't think the culture of this forum is the issue here. The issue is "harsh interrogation techniques". If you don't want to discuss the issue, that's fine, but there is as little point in discussing the culture of this forum as you claim there to be in discussing torture with people you deem to be unworthy.

Skipthesong..

A Gakkai got tortured?

CIA agent: "Waterboarding Saved Lives"

That about settles it for me.

http://edition.cnn.com/2007/POLITICS/12/11/agent.tapes/index.html

Sushi... "Heh, I'm guessing that dano2002, redacted, Sarge, etc. and all the other JT posters who embrace torture haven't actually been within 1,000 miles of the Iraq or Afghanistan battle spaces, and I also bet they don't contribute in any meaningful way at all to fighting the "War on Terror."

As I'm one of the "all" your talking about, I'll take that bet. When should we get together for you to hand me whatever winnings that are coming to me?

Has it not occured to you that some people may support those things BECAUSE they've been within the "battle space"? Those that have spent time in the AOR can tell you, and often prove quite easily, how the MSM reports are either inaccurate, incomplete, and often flat out wrong. And those reports are what YOU base your information on. So why, pray tell, would those of use with experience in theater, listen to those whose experience tends to be entirely "frantically typing insults on their PCs"?

And your offbase. WAY off base.

redacted - "If it's a little waterboarding you think the Taliban (which you seem to grant political validity equal to that of the democratically elected gov't in the US...) does to its enemies I'm not surprised you're gullible enough to proclaim that "global warming" is the greatest threat we face."

If your ability to answer questions was as good as your verbal dexterity, you might be a winner.

Unfortunately, it's not, and you dodged answering my question for the second day in a row.

Dodge it again and I'll think up a prize to give you.

Again - "If you were captured by the Taliban or some other terrorist group, strapped to a board and waterboarded to within an inch of your life, would you complain?"

If you can't formulate a clear answer, just say so. Evading answering this question just points to the fact you're nothing more than talk. I think your country needs more than that, and it seems you can't provide it.

"I'm not surprised you're gullible enough to proclaim that "global warming" is the greatest threat we face."

Actually, I do, and it is becoming more obvious by the month that the individuals who support the "war on terror" and who think extremist Islam is a problem are the same bunch of reality holdouts who think climate change is a lesser problem.

But that's for another thread.

redacted,

I believe that my main contribution here was to borrow from Talleyrand and to assert that torture is a mistake and worse than a crime. I don't see how that is a pointed accusation, but, if it is, it is certainly not one that you counter by suggesting that I should get out of Japan.

Just for curiosity's sake, I'm wondering where you would have me go. I'm guessing it would be somewhere where you would not be troubled by those with whom you disagree but are unable to either refute or silence. But where exactly would that be?

In case you actually want to discuss the issue, I will expand on my earlier comment. We have made a huge mistake in giving official countenance to torture. Given that a majority of the intelligence community believes torture to be ineffective in information gathering, our use of it seems more vindictive than practical. It has resulted in a lessening of American prestige and a diminution of American moral authority.

And this is not to mention the essential absurdity of torture. We assume people have valuable information and torture them to extract it. Torture is more akin to the dunking of witches than to anything else. In case you aren't familiar with that custom, suspected witches are immersed in water and then taken out to be given an opportunity to confess. If they confess, they get to be burned or pressed. If they don't, it's back into the water with them and the process is repeated until they either confess or drown.

But what any of this has to do with Japan being dependent on ill-advised consumerism is a mystery to me.

"If you were captured by the Taliban or some other terrorist group, strapped to a board and waterboarded to within an inch of your life, would you complain?"

Hell yes, I'd complain. I'd also tell them anything I knew that would stop it from continuing. THAT IS THE POINT. And it works.

Lying, to get them to stop, does no good. Information that is lies tends to not get collaberated, or is obvioius when combined with other information. It may stop the torture NOW, but when it resumes, it's gonna be much worse.

One point. The current "war" we are in is not something the framers could have possibily predicted and been prepared for. THAT DOES NOT MEAN THAT WE CAN DO ANYTHING WE WANT. What it does mean is that there needs to be some flexiblity, installed by the courts (warrantless wiretapping WITH VERY GOOD OVERSIGHT), the administration taking some steps to protect the population, and the politicians pointing to a goal and then staying the hell out of the militarys way to obtain that goal. And for our representatives to either support the military entirely, or shut up.

/rant

sorry.... couldn't help myself

redacted -

Ah yes, we were supposed to, in the midst of the Great Depression, completely remake an ailing civilian economy into a military one solely to help preserve your overextended empire and remedy your diplomatic errors and policies of appeasement with Hitler?

No, you were supposed to do what your democratically-elected leaders judged was best for your country at the time. I've no squabble with that. Just don't come swaggering along afterwards claiming that you saved the world single-handed. (We all know it was John Wayne with one hand tied behind his back, anyway. :-))

And don't expect the rest of the world to bow down to present-day Americans for the actions of your grandparents. In the US, UK, Japan and Germany, those people were a totally different breed from today's crop.

"We have made a huge mistake in giving official countenance to torture. Given that a majority of the intelligence community believes torture to be ineffective in information gathering, our use of it seems more vindictive than practical. It has resulted in a lessening of American prestige and a diminution of American moral authority."

Yeah. Like it did after Vietnam, where we also "tortured" Viet Cong by waterboarding them.

Weak argument from you.

"...you counter by suggesting that I should get out of Japan."

sezwho - I don't suggest or demand you leave. As I have said before, I'm pleased that the taxes you and grouchyGaijin pay in part help to fund Japan's role in assisting the US in the global War on Terrror. I'm puzzled, in light of your views on US foreign policy and capitalism, as to why you (and posters like sushisake3) remain.

redacted - U.S. foreign policy in relation to Japan and the reasons various foreigners have for living in Japan are completely unrelated and your attempt to try to marry them is wasting everybody's time.

You still haven't answered my question.

sushisake3 - you're boring me here. Your question is absurd. The Taliban does not waterboard its enemies, they behead them. They shoot them in the head. They blow them up. They blow up your compatriots in Afghanistan. Videos of such incidences are all over the net.

Can you find me a video of the Taliban waterboarding some unfortunate soul? I'd settle for an article. Or, since you seem to believe they are a legitimate political entity on par with the democratically-elected gov't in the US maybe you can get us a declaration from their media spokesman as he explains their position on torture.

Loki520

"If you were captured by the Taliban or some other terrorist group, strapped to a board and waterboarded to within an inch of your life, would you complain?" Hell yes, I'd complain. I'd also tell them anything I knew that would stop it from continuing. THAT IS THE POINT. And it works. Lying, to get them to stop, does no good. Information that is lies tends to not get collaberated, or is obvioius when combined with other information. It may stop the torture NOW, but when it resumes, it's gonna be much worse. One point. The current "war" we are in is not something the framers could have possibily predicted and been prepared for. THAT DOES NOT MEAN THAT WE CAN DO ANYTHING WE WANT. What it does mean is that there needs to be some flexiblity, installed by the courts (warrantless wiretapping WITH VERY GOOD OVERSIGHT), the administration taking some steps to protect the population, and the politicians pointing to a goal and then staying the hell out of the militarys way to obtain that goal. And for our representatives to either support the military entirely, or shut up.

What you say is incorrect and there is undeniable evidence, these is just a very good example.

Ibn al-Shaykh al-Libi (ابن الشیخ اللبّی) was a Libyan paramilitary trainer for Al-Qaeda. After being captured and interrogated by American and Egyptian forces, the information he gave under torture was cited by the Bush Administration in the months preceding the 2003 invasion of Iraq as evidence of a connection between Saddam Hussein and al-Qaeda. That information was frequently repeated by members of the Bush Administration even though then-classified reports from both the Central Intelligence Agency and the Defense Intelligence Agency strongly questioned its credibility, suggesting that al-Libi was "intentionally misleading" interrogators.

Torture is not a 100% sure, lies-proof interrogation metod. Anyone that think that there is a 100% efective metod is being unrealistic. The worst part of all these, is that is like we have no memorie for the mistakes, we only like to remember the success, so we dont learn from our mistakes no matter how painful they are.

Informative little snippet there, mareo. I can see why you didn't provide the link (to wikipedia) since this is also there:

"In April 2007 former Director of Central Intelligence George Tenet released his memoir titled At the Center of the Storm: My Years at the CIA. With regard to al-Libi, Tenet writes the following: "We believed that al-Libi was withholding critical threat information at the time, so we transferred him to a third country for further debriefing. Allegations were made that we did so knowing that he would be tortured, but this is false. The country in question understood and agreed that they would hold al-Libi for a limited period. In the course of questioning while he was in U.S. custody in Afghanistan, al-Libi made initial references to possible al-Qa'ida training in Iraq. He offered up information that a militant known as Abu Abdullah had told him that at least three times between 1997 and 2000, the now-deceased al-Qa'ida leader Mohammad Atef had sent Abu Abdullah to Iraq to seek training in poisons and mustard gas. Another senior al-Qa'ida detainee told us that Mohammad Atef was interested in expanding al-Qa-ida's ties to Iraq, which, in our eyes, added credibility to the reporting. Then, shortly after the Iraq war got under way, al-Libi recanted his story. Now, suddenly, he was saying that there was no such cooperative training. Inside the CIA, there was sharp division on his recantation. It led us to recall his reporting, and here is where the mystery begins. Al-Libi's story will no doubt be that he decided to fabricate in order to get better treatment and avoid harsh punishment. He clearly lied. We just don't know when. Did he lie when he first said that al-Qa'ida members received training in Iraq or did he lie when he said they did not? In my mind, either case might still be true. Perhaps, early on, he was under pressure, assumed his interrogators already knew the story, and sang away. After time passed and it became clear that he would not be harmed, he might have changed his story to cloud the minds of his captors. Al-Qa'ida operatives are trained to do just that. A recantation would restore his stature as someone who had successfully counfounded the enemy. The fact is, we don't know which story is true, and since we don't know, we can assume nothing."[8]

If we dont know what history is true, can you say whit absolute 100%, that under force the interrogator cant end hearing only what the interrogator want to hear?

redacted - "You're boring me here. The Taliban does not waterboard its enemies, they behead them. They shoot them in the head."

You're getting good. You made yet another dodge in an attempt to evade answering the question. I didn't specifically mention the Taliban.

You wouldn't be getting so bored if you made an effort to stop dodging and start answering the question.

Why am I asking? Because this thread is about waterboarding, you seem to support it, yet I doubt you really would if it were applied to you.

As I said before, if you can't formulate a clear answer, just say so. Evading answering this question just points to the fact you're nothing more than talk.

And not surprisingly, you also dodged this one - Next time you post, please add a brief list of actions you have personally taken - beyond typing on websites - to support your troops and your nation's war effort.

I sense a faker.

Prove me wrong.

redacted,

Calling an argument weak does not make it so. This thread is not about Vietnam. It is about the officially vetted policy of torture that we have undertaken commensurate with our war on terror.

Our policy has lowered American prestige and, in combination with our tendency to adopt muscular--as opposed to thoughtful--solutions, our moral authority has diminished. It has diminished to the point that the citizens of many of our allies now see us as the greatest threat to world peace. It was a mistake to put ourselves in this position. And it was a greater mistake to risk recapturing our standing on the slender thread of hope that we can pacify Iraq any time soon.

I can only assume, however, that you have capitulated to the other parts of the argument--that our policy is vindictive rather than effective, that torture has been widely repudiated by the intelligence community and that it is absurd to torture anyone unless you are absolutely sure that they have worthwhile information.

I don't know what you think my views on US foreign policy or capitalism are. As far as I can see you're shooting with a scatter gun and missing badly. I do know, though, that if I were to leave Japan I would probably return to the United States and, strangely enough, I think I would find a lot of resonance with my views. Perhaps, though, you are of the "America--love it or leave it" school.

redacted -

Yeah. Like it did after Vietnam, where we also "tortured" Viet Cong by waterboarding them.

You would suggest Vietnam as an example of how America should act?? The same Vietnam that was such a resounding victory for The American Way?

Let me state unequivocally, that this policy of "harsh interrogations" sucks big time.

"It [our "moral authority"] has diminished to the point that the citizens of many of our allies now see us as the greatest threat to world peace."

Ah yes, back to popularity polls again. The Lefty media elites at Reuters and BBC hate America. We already knew that. But I don't see voters in France, Germany, the UK, Japan, Australia, Canada, South Korea, Denmark etc. electing leaders whose victories could, by any stretch, be called a rebuke of the alliance any of these countries have with the US.

Actually, America's allies know exactly what America does. In fact, they assist whenever possible. The only difference is the media coverage.

Wow! its like a big Lib Dem vs. Conserv Rep debte here. Moving on......

Where are they now?

The cast of characters includes legal scholar John Yoo, author of the notorious 2003 Justice Department memo rationalizing the use of torture. He has returned to his tenured sinecure as a law professor at UC, Berkeley.

Lynndie England. Having been paroled for her role in abusing prisoners at Abu Graib, the single mother faces difficulty in finding any type of job given her criminal record and bad discharge.

Waterboarding is torture. Torture is WRONG, because it is BRUTAL & INHUMANE. US administration policy re: waterboarding violates the UN resolution re treatment of political prisoners. .......:)

redacted,

You know, don't you, that people tend to vote on local issues and not on global ones? They will vote for a criminal who they believe can keep bread on their tables in preference to an upstanding public servant who they believe cannot. Leadership in foreign countries is not elected on the basis of its affinities to the United States. We aren't that important.

Nonetheless, our ally Spain did vote in a leader who gave rebuke to the war effort. Our ally England did see a change in leadership in favor of a politician who distanced himself from our war effort and who has drawn down troops, notably in Basra. Our ally Australia saw a change in leadership in favor of a politician who disagreed with our war effort but does not wish to provide combat support for it. And our new-found ally Pakistan has a leader who has been most likely terminally weakened by his support for our war effort.

If you look at any of the countries you have named, I think it would be difficult for you to find a leader who was elected because of their support for our war efforts and for the policies that have accompanied them. And ultimately this is not about what the leaders do or think. After all, we have a leader who has practically doubled our national debt, displaced about 3 million Iraqis and Afghanis, killed hundreds of thousands more along with 4,000 or so US troops. I don't think we voted for that.

SuperLib,

Yes our allies do assist us whenever possible. That brings to mind Mark Twain's definition of patriotism. He said:

Patriotism is supporting your country all the time, and your government when it deserves it.

You know, sezwho, to me (and maybe only me) in many of your posts it's like you try to come off as somewhat neutral or sort of commenting from a disinterested position on many of the issues discussed in the world section.

And on those rare occasions when news out of Iraq is good you are quick to play down the positive and get the perception back to quagmire or total disaster.

Maybe I'm reading too much into your personal style but on threads such as this one it's like you have a perspective - "internationalist" I'm guessing - you believe you can't openly disclose and must, usually by sort of deconstructing others' opinions or illuminating what you regard as ironies more than arguing, advance by some other way your ideas on US policy.

Which is why in your above post the frequency of "our ally" and phrases like "we have a leader" and "We aren't that important" seem oddly out of character when contrasted with your other posts.

By gum, there are times when I do believe you are not what you say you are.

But to get to your post -

" Nonetheless, our ally Spain did vote in a leader who gave rebuke to the war effort."

There was that gentle nudge from Al Qaeda days before the election. Only 200 innocents killed...

"Our ally England did see a change in leadership in favor of a politician who distanced himself from our war effort and who has drawn down troops, notably in Basra. "

If so, where is the love these days?

"The latest YouGov poll in the Sunday Times showed the resurgent Conservatives on 44 percent with Labour on 28 percent and the centrist Liberal Democrats on 17 percent." http://uk.reuters.com/article/domesticNews/idUKL1269734320080413

"Our ally Australia saw a change in leadership in favor of a politician who disagreed with our war effort but does not wish to provide combat support for it."

Is that what you really meant to say?

redacted,

I'm totally unconcerned with your opinion of me. I'm much more interested in your opinion on the issues. But just to swap personal opinions for a moment, you appear to be someone who cannot talk about issues without attempting to throw mud at those who disagree with you and you tend to confuse "left" and "right" with meaningful constructs. But enough personal nonsense.

Yes, Spain was nudged by al Qaeda. However, the point was that when nudged the people repudiated the policies of the US. The people were already leaning to oust the existing government and that government compounded its problems by trying to blame the Basques.

As for England, it doesn't seem to me to be particularly informative that the Conservatives are resurgent unless you can show that their resurgence is based on a grass roots feeling that what England really needs to do is to support the US policy against terrorism. This gets back to issues which you either agree with or are unable to comment upon--namely that people vote for local issues not for international ones.

As for Australia, yes, that is what I really meant to say. As far as I know, Rudd is supportive of the need to bring order to Iraq and supports the US in the goal of achieving that. However, as I understand it, he is not thrilled with the idea of using Australian troops to support that mission and I have never seen anything to the effect that he believes torture is a good idea.

"I have never seen anything to the effect that he [Rudd] believes torture is a good idea."

I have never seen anything to the effect that he thinks waterboarding is torture.

In the article it is termed a "harsh interrogation technique."

No permanent organ damage.

To date it has been used on three individuals. The Islamofascist Khalid Mohammed sang like a little bird.

The info he provided saved lives, by gum.

American lives.

I don't know about you, but that is good enough for me.

redacted,

I think it would be more accurate were you to say that the claim that it saved lives is good enough for you.

Yes, the article calls this a "harsh interrogation technique" and it does so because it is considering the administration's own terminology. Others consider this technique to be torture. The claim that it causes no permanent organ damage is a false one as it can cause brain damage from lack of air.

The CIA has admitted to using this technique on three people. We don't know how many the US has actually subjected to this treatment.

As far as Rudd is concerned, my original contention was that Australia has elected someone who does not support American policy to the extent that he wishes to have Australian boots on the ground. If you are now conceding that is true, fine. If you are avoiding this by quibbling about whether Rudd supports waterboarding or not, show me something that says he does.

America and Australia are miles apart when it comes to things like torture, human rights and social justice. There is no way in hell that Kevin Rudd would agree with water boarding or any form of torture for that matter. It is just not consistent with Australian culture or values, and any standing Australian Prime Minister that became a party to such measures would be committing political suicide.

"The claim that it causes no permanent organ damage is a false one as it can cause brain damage from lack of air."

I'm inclined to think Sheik Kalid Mohammed's brain damage occurred long before the CIA stuck a rag in his mouth and spent two and a half minutes pouring water over his face.

redacted,

I'm inclined to wonder when other people's brain damage occurred.

sez who wrote:"I'm inclined to wonder when other people's brain damage occurred."

Surely one as politically correct as you dutifully are knows that discussing the disastrous medical, social and financial consequences of consanguineous marriages, shockingly widespread even among Khalid Shaikh Mohammed's fellow kinsmen who have come to the West, is something "progressives" like you have tacitly agreed among yourselves not to do.

Don't make others here the keeper of your bad faith.

It's embarrassing.

redacted,

That is quite irrelevant to the discussion at hand. You continue to stretch to divert from the point and to conceal your lack of argument.

"You continue to stretch to divert from the point and to conceal your lack of argument."

What lack of argument? I have repeatedly written: 3 Al Qaeda murderers got waterboarded. The info extracted saved lives. American lives. I have no problem with that.

I've read that the waterboarding that we conducted revealed nothing of value. None of the information received saved any lives at all. I believe that my sourses and the articles I've read are at least as truthful as any report that says the different.

Just as george bush and dick cheney were running around screaming WMD and nuclear programs and dual use vehicles; their information and reports are full of untruths.

I would like to add to the discussion (besides the fact that waterboarding IS TORTURE), I find it highly ironic and disgusting that one of the most notable cases of waterboarding occured during the world war 2 era where a Japanese Imperial soldier was accused of waterboarding an American.

redacted,

Repetition is not an argument--especially when it does not address challenges. I have no problem with your repeating yourself. My problem is in the host of things you have either left unanswered or have run from.

Here's a partial list:

(1) It was a mistake to give official countenance to torture;

(2) Torture is widely acknowledged to be ineffective;

(3) Torture is absurd in that it presumes the existence of that of which the existence is not known;

(4) Torture has diminished American prestige and moral authority;

(5) Citizens of our allies and a good number of governments have repudiated our policies vis-a-vis the war on terror;

(6) Citizens of some of our allies have actually put into office governments which do not favor our policies;

(7) New governments which happen to favor our policies have come into power largely on local issues and not on issues touching upon us;

(8) We do not know how many people we have subjected to waterboarding;

(9) We have only the government's word for it that the procedure has saved lives;

(10) Waterboarding can cause organ damage and thus under the government's own policy it should be classified as torture; and,

(11) A majority of experts consider it to be torture.

You have tried to deal with these through snideness and sarcasm and not through patient exploration. That's what I mean by lack of argument.

A former chief interrogation officer for the US is shown rebuking Cheney's notion that torture has kept America safe.

According to this senior interrogator, Cheney's style of mistreatment has cost Americans hundreds if not thousands of lives.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SfYov5o5_2s