Torture ineffective

[Lurker]

Great point, Kulaf.

Make sure to factor in whether the same information could have been obtained with morally acceptable interrogation methods. Also include the known instances where torture victims lied so the torture would stop, and those lies were used to bolster the case for war with Iraq. And don't leave out the recruitment value for terrorist organizations or our loss of moral standing on the world stage.

We certainly don't want to leap to conclusions on whether state sponsored torture was effective or not.

[Fallakin Kuvari]

I don't know Lurker... Do you believe that "morally acceptable" interrogation could've prevented a 9/11 style attack on Los Angeles?

[Lurker]

Even if we believe the leaked details, the information we got by torturing KSM didn't "prevent" any attacks. The attacks against LA were planned for the same day as 9/11 but were called off by Bin Laden, and attacks involving hijacking airplanes and flying them into buildings became impossible as of 9/12. Passengers weren't going to sit around anymore. And yeah, I think we could have gotten the same information without torture.

[Kulaf]

And yeah, I think we could have gotten the same information without torture.

How?

[Ddrak]

I don't know Lurker... Do you believe that "morally acceptable" interrogation could've prevented a 9/11 style attack on Los Angeles?

Strawman. Torture didn't prevent it either.

While Americans continue to defend torture, there's no other nation in the world that will stop any of their human rights abuses because they'll happily point to the US and say "if they can do what they like then so can we".

And yes, Obama has released contradictory statements on a bunch of stuff like this. It's very disappointing.

As for what is torture and what isn't - there's not even a question. It's been spelled out for a long time in the Geneva Conventions, the UCMJ and all sorts of other places. I'm perfectly comfortable to say anything you can legally do to a US citizen in prison is fair game to a non-US citizen and anything you can't should put the torturer in prison.

Dd

[Embar Angylwrath]

Another dodge? Oh... you must mean your attempts to divert the conversation with hypothetical questions and bad analogies.

Sorry. If you think we just made some people "uncomfortable" then you are ignorant about what we did, and if we can't agree on basic facts about what we did there's not much point delving into hypotheticals.

Let me ask you again, just so I can see you run away from the question.

Yes or no.. are those techniques in and of themselves torture?

[Lurker]

Yes, some of the techniques used are, in and of themselves, torture. Now can you stop projecting that I'm the one running from questions and respond to the substance?

We tortured people. That's a fact. The wilfully ignorant laugh it off as us "making people uncomfortable" or make idiotic statements like, "sleep deprivation? I stayed up all night lots of time in college!" or make moronic comparisons between boot camp and torture.

And no... I'm not going to list which techniques were torture in isolation until you agree that the use of multiple techniques for weeks, months, and years was state sponsored torture of prisoners. Read the Armed Services report if you need some actual information.

[Lurker]

Here's an op-ed by an FBI special agent that speaks to Kulaf's "how can we get info without torture" question.

[Embar Angylwrath]

And no... I'm not going to list which techniques were torture in isolation until you agree that the use of multiple techniques for weeks, months, and years was state sponsored torture of prisoners. Read the Armed Services report if you need some actual information.

And here again, off you go on a dishonest road, making your answer dependent on an agreement from me. Your opinion should stand on its own, and not be dependent on the opinion of another person. Its cowardly and dishonest. I don't know why you're so reluctant to say which of those techniques are torture and which aren't. What are you so afraid of?

[Lurker]

My answer wasn't dependent on your agreement. I gave my answer.

Further debate, on the other hand, is dependent on you agreeing that facts are facts. I see no point in debating whether tactic A or tactic B is torture in isolation when you won't agree to the obvious fact that rotating tactic A,B,C etc. for weeks, months and years was torture. We tortured people in our custody. If you won't agree to the obvious what's the point in debating hypotheticals?

[Partha]

He doesn't believe any of it's torture or even bad, obviously. Even the innocent ones obviously had it coming for being in a warzone while Muslim.

I'm pretty sure if he lived in the Chicagoland area he'd also tell you all about how poor Jon Burge keeps getting picked on.

[Kulaf]

Here's an op-ed by an FBI special agent that speaks to Kulaf's "how can we get info without torture" question.

He stated he did not attend any of the special interrogation sessions.....therefore he was not privy to any actionable information that might have been gained because as he said the CIA and FBI were no longer communicating about the issue.

[Rsak]

Further debate, on the other hand, is dependent on you agreeing that facts are facts.
...
If you won't agree to the obvious what's the point in debating hypotheticals?

Word of Advice, Don't believe it.

Lurker has no intention of an honest discussion. He picks and chooses when he wants to be true to his words and this type of intellectual honesty. Whether its because he knows he will be proven wrong or because its personal the capacity for intellectual honesty does not exist.

[Lurker]

Kulaf,
You asked how we could get actionable intelligence without torturing people. The article spoke to that.

=====

Rsak,
Seek help.

[Embar Angylwrath]

My answer wasn't dependent on your agreement. I gave my answer.

Further debate, on the other hand, is dependent on you agreeing that facts are facts. I see no point in debating whether tactic A or tactic B is torture in isolation when you won't agree to the obvious fact that rotating tactic A,B,C etc. for weeks, months and years was torture. We tortured people in our custody. If you won't agree to the obvious what's the point in debating hypotheticals?

You're confusing fact with opinion. It is your opinion that the techniques you mentioned, when applied together over a period of time is torture. Which implies that if they were not apllied together over time, those acts aren't torture. That makes your definition of torture entirely dependednt on your opinion of when enough is enough. You set yourself up to be tghe sole arbiter of the definition of torture.

You realized this, and saw how tenuous your argument became, and are now refusing to define your own position further unless I agree that your opinion is fact.

Coward.

[Partha]

He doesn't believe any of it's torture or even bad, obviously. Even the innocent ones obviously had it coming for being in a warzone while Muslim.

I repeat this because it's obvious. After all, when the Geneva Convention defines these actions as torture, and he disagrees....

[Embar Angylwrath]

Show me where the Geneva Convention even mentions "sleep deprivation", "stress positions", or any other of the terms Lurker used. I don't think you'll find them specifcially mentioned there.

[Lurker]

Too funny. You have this exactly backwards.

I've said that some of the techniques are torture even in isolation. I've said that techniques that don't cross the line on their own are torture when used as part of a rotation.

Repeating again because you are either the densest substance in existance or are just being obtuse... What I refuse to do is debate whether tactic A or tactic B is torture in isolation when you won't agree to the obvious fact that rotating tactic A,B,C etc. for weeks, months and years was torture.

You want to talk cowardice? Cowardice is glibly describing what our country did as "making people uncomfortable". We tortured people.

I've defined my position clearly. And Partha defined your position clearly because, to use your words, you were too much of a coward to do it yourself.

[Embar Angylwrath]

Requiring my agreement to a position is not a debate. Refusing to identify your own position is not a debate. Why are you so reluctant to identify what techniques, when used in isolation, are torture?

[Partha]

Okay, let's say you're right, Embar.

Now what about the UN Convention Against Torture, which we are a party to?

Article 1
1. For the purposes of this Convention, the term "torture" means any act by which severe pain or suffering, whether physical or mental, is intentionally inflicted on a person for such purposes as obtaining from him or a third person information or a confession, punishing him for an act he or a third person has committed or is suspected of having committed, or intimidating or coercing him or a third person, or for any reason based on discrimination of any kind, when such pain or suffering is inflicted by or at the instigation of or with the consent or acquiescence of a public official or other person acting in an official capacity. It does not include pain or suffering arising only from, inherent in or incidental to lawful sanctions.
2. This article is without prejudice to any international instrument or national legislation which does or may contain provisions of wider application

Now, it's on you to tell us why you're right and the world is wrong.