the blonde to the right is fucking hot.Wreckognize wrote:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wgarV13g6QM
And at that man... Holy fuck what a voice.
Poll
Would you submit to CIA waterboarding to reduce sentence?
| yes, but it is still torture | 31% | 31% - 14 | ||||
| yes, is it really torture if a person would volunteer? | 35% | 35% - 16 | ||||
| no, it is torture | 31% | 31% - 14 | ||||
| no, it is not torture but noway Jose' | 2% | 2% - 1 | ||||
| Total: 45 | ||||||
And at that man... Holy fuck what a voice.
Jesse is a fucking retard. We should waterboard US citizens if they belong to organizations that hijack plans and kill thousands of people. Why we haven't is because as US citizens they have rights under the constitution. The terrorists have no rights. They are ENEMY COMBATANTS. See, right there in the name E-N-E-M-Y C-O-M-B-A-T. Wise up Jesse and quit being such a pussy fuck squid.Jenspm wrote:
the blonde to the right is fucking hot.Wreckognize wrote:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wgarV13g6QM
And at that man... Holy fuck what a voice.
Yeah I saw a video of waterboarding, basically they just lean you back slightly and put a towel over your face, then poor water onto it around the nose. Once the water gets in the nose you feel like your drowning and your heart rate skyrockets, then you need oxygen so you gota stop.usmarine wrote:
it aint a big deal. if you ever had an older sibling hold your head under water in the pool to fuck with you, then you have done it. or you can go to sere school.Mekstizzle wrote:
if usmarine can do it i can do it
Heck at the moment I'm sure I would be all freaked but once it's over it's not like something permanent like if Saddam were pouring acid on your face or something.
I guess its like being dangled off the side of a bridge by some guy holding your ankle with one hand, letting go and catching you every so often.
You get a sore ankle, whats the harm?
You get a sore ankle, whats the harm?
Last edited by Dilbert_X (2009-05-26 00:23:21)
Русский военный корабль, иди на хуй!
Yet when a terrorist beheads a US soldier it's completely different, since the US soldiers do have rights?Lotta_Drool wrote:
The terrorists have no rights. They are ENEMY COMBATANTS. See, right there in the name E-N-E-M-Y C-O-M-B-A-T. Wise up Jesse and quit being such a pussy fuck squid.
Since US soldiers are US soldiers and not terrorists. See, it is right there in their name T-E-R-R-O-R-I-S-T.AussieReaper wrote:
Yet when a terrorist beheads a US soldier it's completely different, since the US soldiers do have rights?Lotta_Drool wrote:
The terrorists have no rights. They are ENEMY COMBATANTS. See, right there in the name E-N-E-M-Y C-O-M-B-A-T. Wise up Jesse and quit being such a pussy fuck squid.
Insert "freedom fighter" analogy.Lotta_Drool wrote:
Since US soldiers are US soldiers and not terrorists. See, it is right there in their name T-E-R-R-O-R-I-S-T.AussieReaper wrote:
Yet when a terrorist beheads a US soldier it's completely different, since the US soldiers do have rights?Lotta_Drool wrote:
The terrorists have no rights. They are ENEMY COMBATANTS. See, right there in the name E-N-E-M-Y C-O-M-B-A-T. Wise up Jesse and quit being such a pussy fuck squid.
OIC, you fear US soldiers and not the terrorists. Obviously you need to go live in the mountains of afganistan with your buddies.AussieReaper wrote:
Insert "freedom fighter" analogy.Lotta_Drool wrote:
Since US soldiers are US soldiers and not terrorists. See, it is right there in their name T-E-R-R-O-R-I-S-T.AussieReaper wrote:
Yet when a terrorist beheads a US soldier it's completely different, since the US soldiers do have rights?
It takes a real retard to equate US soldiers to terrorists.
Are you on drugs or something?Lotta_Drool wrote:
OIC, you fear US soldiers and not the terrorists. Obviously you need to go live in the mountains of afganistan with your buddies.AussieReaper wrote:
Insert "freedom fighter" analogy.Lotta_Drool wrote:
Since US soldiers are US soldiers and not terrorists. See, it is right there in their name T-E-R-R-O-R-I-S-T.
It takes a real retard to equate US soldiers to terrorists.
I guess because you "fear terrorists" it means that it's okay that they have no rights?
And to many in Afghanistan, the US are acting like terrorists. You aren't exactly winning the war in terms of hearts and minds, now are you?
But what happens when you can't prove it? Can you start doing it anyway on the justification that it is the only way to find out? When the punishment and the trial are the same process you're doing something wrong.Lotta_Drool wrote:
Jesse is a fucking retard. We should waterboard US citizens if they belong to organizations that hijack plans and kill thousands of people.Jenspm wrote:
the blonde to the right is fucking hot.Wreckognize wrote:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wgarV13g6QM
And at that man... Holy fuck what a voice.
Well times are changing. Back in the day of the constitutions a few terrorists couldn't kill 100,000+ people with one weapon in a day. The government needs the tools to fight terrorists. I feel waterboarding for information is the most civil option I have heard of. Like I said, the military is doing it for a reason. The military has released some of these prisoners they picked up on bad information. Most if not all the people waterboarded are KNOWN terrorists. There is no debate about it. What is more torture, waterboarding a few guys to stop terrorist attacks or thousands of people being burnt to death or falling from a building in a terrorist attack that could have been prevented if the government was will to waterboard a few known terrorists? How about being the greiving family member of someone who died in an attack that could have been prevented?Aries_37 wrote:
But what happens when you can't prove it? Can you start doing it anyway on the justification that it is the only way to find out? When the punishment and the trial are the same process you're doing something wrong.Lotta_Drool wrote:
Jesse is a fucking retard. We should waterboard US citizens if they belong to organizations that hijack plans and kill thousands of people.Jenspm wrote:
the blonde to the right is fucking hot.
And at that man... Holy fuck what a voice.
Former military interrogator says torture cost hundreds ‘if not thousands’ of American lives
http://rawstory.com/08/news/2009/05/26/ … can-lives/
http://rawstory.com/08/news/2009/05/26/ … can-lives/
A 14-year military interrogator has undercut one of the key arguments posited by Vice President Dick Cheney in favor of the Bush Administration’s torture techniques and alleged that the use of torture has cost “hundreds if not thousands” of American lives.
The interrogator, who uses the name “Matthew Alexander,” says he oversaw more than 1,000 interrogations, conducting more than 300 in Iraq personally. His statements are captured in a new video by Brave New Films (below).
“Torture does not save lives,” Alexander said in his interview. “And the reason why is that our enemies use it, number one, as a recruiting tool…These same foreign fighters who came to Iraq to fight because of torture and abuse….literally cost us hundreds if not thousands of American lives.”
Moreover, Alexander avers that many — as many as 90 percent — of those captured in Iraq said they joined the fight against the United States because of the torture conducted at Abu Ghraib and Guantanamo Bay.
“At the prison where I conducted interrogations,” Alexander said, “we heard day in and day out, foreign fighters who had been captured state that the number one reason that they had come to fight in Iraq was because of torture and abuse, what had happened at Guantanamo Bay and Abu Ghraib.”
“Cheney,’ said Alexander, ‘fundamentally misunderstands the way America is viewed around the world,” a reporter who reviewed the video wrote Tuesday. “The American principles of freedom and democracy are cherished in the Muslim world and the idea, at least, of America is still a seductive one. But it is the behavior of the Bush administration at Guantanamo Bay, Abu Ghraib and secret prisons around the globe that undercuts that image, allowing Al Qaeda to make the argument that America isn’t what it stands for.”
“One of Al Qaeda’s goals, it’s not just to attack the United States, it’s to prove that we’re hypocrites, that we don’t live up to American principles,” Alexander said. “So when we use torture and abuse, we’re playing directly into one of their stated goals.”
Vice President Cheney spoke out in defense of his administration’s so called “enhanced interrogation techniques” last week, including the waterboarding of key al Qaeda suspects.
“The point that is most absent is that our greatest success in this conflict was achieved without torture or abuse,” Alexander wrote in a blog post Sunday. “My interrogation team found Abu Musab Al Zarqawi, the former leader of Al Qaida in Iraq and murderer of tens of thousands. We did this using relationship-building approaches and non-coercive law enforcement techniques. These worked to great effect on the most hardened members of Al Qaida — spiritual leaders who had been behind the waves of suicide bombers and, hence, the sectarian violence that swept across Iraq. We convinced them to cooperate by applying our intellect. In essence, we worked smarter, not harsher.”
“The former vice president is confusing harshness with effectiveness,” he added. “An effective interrogation is one that yields useful, accurate intelligence, not one that is harsh. It speaks to a fundamental misunderstanding of interrogations, the goal of which is not to coerce information from a prisoner, but to convince a prisoner to cooperate.”
To be honest, if they didn't use us torturing as a reason for recruiting kids over there, they'd find something else to use.
Thanks Captain Obvious.Poseidon wrote:
To be honest, if they didn't use us torturing as a reason for recruiting kids over there, they'd find something else to use.
you're welcome Corporal Cuntrag.AussieReaper wrote:
Thanks Captain Obvious.Poseidon wrote:
To be honest, if they didn't use us torturing as a reason for recruiting kids over there, they'd find something else to use.
Spoiler (highlight to read):
<3
US soldiers operate under accepted laws of war (generally). Terrorists don't...hence why they are terrorists.AussieReaper wrote:
Yet when a terrorist beheads a US soldier it's completely different, since the US soldiers do have rights?Lotta_Drool wrote:
The terrorists have no rights. They are ENEMY COMBATANTS. See, right there in the name E-N-E-M-Y C-O-M-B-A-T. Wise up Jesse and quit being such a pussy fuck squid.
“Everybody is a genius. But if you judge a fish by its ability to climb a tree, it will live its whole life believing that it is stupid.”
― Albert Einstein
Doing the popular thing is not always right. Doing the right thing is not always popular
― Albert Einstein
Doing the popular thing is not always right. Doing the right thing is not always popular
What rules of war would you have them operate under, the wearing of uniforms?FEOS wrote:
US soldiers operate under accepted laws of war (generally). Terrorists don't...hence why they are terrorists.AussieReaper wrote:
Yet when a terrorist beheads a US soldier it's completely different, since the US soldiers do have rights?Lotta_Drool wrote:
The terrorists have no rights. They are ENEMY COMBATANTS. See, right there in the name E-N-E-M-Y C-O-M-B-A-T. Wise up Jesse and quit being such a pussy fuck squid.
Which flag would you have them carry?
AQ has a flag, as do most terrorist organizations. Uniforms would be a good start. Abiding by established international laws (like the Geneva Conventions) would be another. They could easily follow these laws. They choose not to.AussieReaper wrote:
What rules of war would you have them operate under, the wearing of uniforms?FEOS wrote:
US soldiers operate under accepted laws of war (generally). Terrorists don't...hence why they are terrorists.AussieReaper wrote:
Yet when a terrorist beheads a US soldier it's completely different, since the US soldiers do have rights?
Which flag would you have them carry?
“Everybody is a genius. But if you judge a fish by its ability to climb a tree, it will live its whole life believing that it is stupid.”
― Albert Einstein
Doing the popular thing is not always right. Doing the right thing is not always popular
― Albert Einstein
Doing the popular thing is not always right. Doing the right thing is not always popular
Except you keep saying the enemy doesn't abide by the GC so the US doesn't have to either, to justify the use of torture etc.FEOS wrote:
US soldiers operate under accepted laws of war (generally). Terrorists don't...hence why they are terrorists.
Pick an angle and stick with it.
Русский военный корабль, иди на хуй!
It's the same angle.Dilbert_X wrote:
Except you keep saying the enemy doesn't abide by the GC so the US doesn't have to either, to justify the use of torture etc.FEOS wrote:
US soldiers operate under accepted laws of war (generally). Terrorists don't...hence why they are terrorists.
Pick an angle and stick with it.
And the US is abiding by the GC in spite of the other side not doing the same.
“Everybody is a genius. But if you judge a fish by its ability to climb a tree, it will live its whole life believing that it is stupid.”
― Albert Einstein
Doing the popular thing is not always right. Doing the right thing is not always popular
― Albert Einstein
Doing the popular thing is not always right. Doing the right thing is not always popular
Apart from the torture thing.FEOS wrote:
And the US is abiding by the GC in spite of the other side not doing the same.
Русский военный корабль, иди на хуй!
They're not violating the GC on torture. Just the UDHR.Dilbert_X wrote:
Apart from the torture thing.FEOS wrote:
And the US is abiding by the GC in spite of the other side not doing the same.
They are violating the GC and the International Convention on Torture also.Bertster wrote:
They're not violating the GC on torture. Just the UDHR.
Really without a specific UN resolution the whole Iraq invasion was illegal.
Русский военный корабль, иди на хуй!
You're right about the International Convention on Torture.Dilbert_X wrote:
They are violating the GC and the International Convention on Torture also.Bertster wrote:
They're not violating the GC on torture. Just the UDHR.
Really without a specific UN resolution the whole Iraq invasion was illegal.
Which bit of the GC have they broken?
Every person in enemy hands must be either a prisoner of war and, as such, be covered by the Third Convention; or a civilian covered by the Fourth Convention. Furthermore, "There is no intermediate status; nobody in enemy hands can be outside the law,"
POWs and civilians are both not to be tortured.
"No physical or mental torture, nor any other form of coercion"
According to the Nuremburg principles torture is a war crime.
POWs and civilians are both not to be tortured.
"No physical or mental torture, nor any other form of coercion"
According to the Nuremburg principles torture is a war crime.
Last edited by Dilbert_X (2009-06-08 07:01:06)
Русский военный корабль, иди на хуй!