What Is "Torture"?

[Nosmo King]

Waterboarding sure ain't torture.

If waterboarding was torture during World War II and the United States of America cited waterboarding as a technique of torture in indictments against Japanese war criminals, why is water boarding suddenly NOT torture in the 21st century?

If the signatories of the Geneva Conventions cited water boarding as torture, and the United States was a signatory to that treaty, how can the same technique of torture become to be regarded as benign?

The fact of the matter is: Right Wingers will rationalize ANYTHING to burnish the image of their political heroes. The Right Wingers are not interested in gathering actionable intelligence by torture because so many experts in interrogation have proven that torture produces little or no accurate intelligence. Rather, Right Wingers are trying to justify Sadism and revenge, hardly American virtues.

But then consider, when has the Right Wing ever espoused anything like an American virtue?

 

[cnm]

I don't know what waterboarding is----I have an impression that a person is kinda underwater and cannot breathe for
awhile------feels like he is drowning. Not at all pleasant----
------the people who did it should pay a fine.

It isn't holding people under water....it is essentially tilting someone back with a cloth over their face...you put water on the cloth and it trickles in filling the sinus cavity and dribbles down the throat...it feels like drowning ....but you aren't...you aren't even in danger of drowning...and the way the CIA did it.....that had strict rules on how many times they could pour the water and how much could be used....after being water boarded...no lasting harm, no injury, and all the terrorist had to do was dry off...and they were fine....not something that you get with real torture....

I see you haven't bothered to read the US code definition of torture either. Nor have you read the accounts of what actually went on. Another dead ender clinging to denial.

 

[cnm]

If waterboarding was torture during World War II and the United States of America cited waterboarding as a technique of torture in indictments against Japanese war criminals, why is water boarding suddenly NOT torture in the 21st century?

Supporters of the Bush administration cannot bear the stigma of supporting war criminals, they'll deny it to the end.

 

[The Rabbi]

Nice dodge.
Obama wanted to make Bush look bad and discredit him so changed the definition unilaterally. That does not mean the definitions propounded under Bush were wrong.
There was no torture. There were no war crimes.
Only brain dead asshole partisan hacks would use terms like that.

Bullshit. The US Code hasn't changed. The legal dodges of the Bush administration have been discarded and the whole justice system is too embarrassed to talk about them.

Still, it's nothing to me that you want to cling to your denials so you don't have to admit you supported war crimes. I understand. It may take a while but you might get over it.

So your argument is "I'm right and the legal experts in the Bush Administration didnt know anything because I'm right. And if that isnt good enough Obama made a politically motivated unilateral decision saying I was right."
Serioysly? Why do you think you have any credibility here whatsoever?

 

[The Rabbi]

So the Dems, using the only vehicle they have left, are trotting out allegations of torture against the Bush Administration. We've been here before. In 2008 the administration released the "Torture Memos", papers detailing the Bush Administration's legal reasoning for their policies (similar papers for Obama's illegal amnesty are lacking).
Jay Bybee wrote the memo and :

It concludes that torture is only: extreme acts according to the Convention Against Torture; that severe pain (a requisite for this definition of torture) is "serious physical injury, such as organ failure, impairment of bodily function, or even death"; that prolonged mental harm is harm that must last for "months or even years";

So merely inflicting pain is not torture. Merely threatning someone is not torture.
The Bush Administration and the US did not torture anyone. There were legal guidelines in place based on statute.
As usual the Bush-haters toss all that aside and rely on their own flawed reasoning.

I'd be happy to subject you to some short term excruciating pain without any organ failures or worse. I bet I could get you to tell me you're a serial murderer in 5 minutes or less. Regardless of truth. You up for the challenge?

Whne we're done, you let me know if you felt torture is the appropriate term to use for what I did to you.

If I were a terrorist I would expect no less.
How about you start by sticking your head up your ass and taking a deep breath?

Right. So your argument is based on some flimsy JD description of what constitutes torture. I suppose being a terrorist is also auto-fueled by who says they are one. Then its time to get to brass tacks.

The dry cleaner called. Your Wookie suit is ready.

 

[The Rabbi]

I don't know what waterboarding is----I have an impression that a person is kinda underwater and cannot breathe for
awhile------feels like he is drowning. Not at all pleasant----
------the people who did it should pay a fine.

It isn't holding people under water....it is essentially tilting someone back with a cloth over their face...you put water on the cloth and it trickles in filling the sinus cavity and dribbles down the throat...it feels like drowning ....but you aren't...you aren't even in danger of drowning...and the way the CIA did it.....that had strict rules on how many times they could pour the water and how much could be used....after being water boarded...no lasting harm, no injury, and all the terrorist had to do was dry off...and they were fine....not something that you get with real torture....

I see you haven't bothered to read the US code definition of torture either. Nor have you read the accounts of what actually went on. Another dead ender clinging to denial.

That would appear to be you, based on your posts. Go read the memos and then come back and tell us about them.

 

[The Rabbi]

Waterboarding sure ain't torture.

If waterboarding was torture during World War II and the United States of America cited waterboarding as a technique of torture in indictments against Japanese war criminals, why is water boarding suddenly NOT torture in the 21st century?

If the signatories of the Geneva Conventions cited water boarding as torture, and the United States was a signatory to that treaty, how can the same technique of torture become to be regarded as benign?

The fact of the matter is: Right Wingers will rationalize ANYTHING to burnish the image of their political heroes. The Right Wingers are not interested in gathering actionable intelligence by torture because so many experts in interrogation have proven that torture produces little or no accurate intelligence. Rather, Right Wingers are trying to justify Sadism and revenge, hardly American virtues.

But then consider, when has the Right Wing ever espoused anything like an American virtue?

You didnt bother reading the excellent post laying out why "waterboarding" under the Japanese was not remotely the same as what the CIA did, did you?

 

[TakeAStepBack]

Defend away, Rabbi. It isnt shocking to watch you neo-cons do it. I'm embarrassed for you. I will give you this - the release of this shit is politically fueled and you're playing right into Diane and her "friends" hand.

congrats.

 

[ClosedCaption]

OK----so where was the intentional infliction of severe
physical pain?

For gods' sakes.

(2) “severe mental pain or suffering” means the prolonged mental harm caused by or resulting from—
(A) the intentional infliction or threatened infliction of severe physical pain or suffering;

Waterboarding is severe suffering.

(C) the threat of imminent death; or

Waterboarding is the threat of imminent death by drowning.

Waterboarding is not severe suffering. Had you bothered to read the memos or even part of them you might understand the distinction between severe suffering and suffering.
Waterboarding is also not the imminent threat of death, esp as no one has died from it.
You're just racking up the shit points here, arent you?

No one has died from water boarding so that means you cant die from it?

If you can die from it you're saying there isnt any threat of death?

And last...You dont believe that someone else, not yourself, being waterboarded is suffering but not "severe" suffering? LOL...How about more than "enhanced" suffering? How bout "extra suffering"?

 

[cnm]

So your argument is "I'm right and the legal experts in the Bush Administration didnt know anything because I'm right. And if that isnt good enough Obama made a politically motivated unilateral decision saying I was right."
Serioysly? Why do you think you have any credibility here whatsoever?

If my arguments are incorrect the Bush administration legal arguments for torture would still hold sway. Instead they've been buried so deep they'll never see the light of day again.

I understand you have to ignore or deny that in order to not regard yourself as a supporter of war crimes, but it makes to difference to what has happened in reality.

 

[The Rabbi]

So your argument is "I'm right and the legal experts in the Bush Administration didnt know anything because I'm right. And if that isnt good enough Obama made a politically motivated unilateral decision saying I was right."
Serioysly? Why do you think you have any credibility here whatsoever?

If my arguments are incorrect the Bush administration legal arguments for torture would still hold sway. Instead they've been buried so deep they'll never see the light of day again.

I understand you have to ignore or deny that in order to not regard yourself as a supporter of war crimes, but it makes to difference to what has happened in reality.

OK your first sentence is a fallacy. And a mere restatement of your previously discredited argument.
Obama unilaterally changed the definition for political purposes. What is hard to undestand about that?

 

[The Rabbi]

Defend away, Rabbi. It isnt shocking to watch you neo-cons do it. I'm embarrassed for you. I will give you this - the release of this shit is politically fueled and you're playing right into Diane and her "friends" hand.

congrats.

Ive always thought libertarians were just small government liberals. Here you are to prove it.

 

[Dogmaphobe]

This:

 

[TakeAStepBack]

Defend away, Rabbi. It isnt shocking to watch you neo-cons do it. I'm embarrassed for you. I will give you this - the release of this shit is politically fueled and you're playing right into Diane and her "friends" hand.

congrats.

Ive always thought libertarians were just small government liberals. Here you are to prove it.

Oh, sure. And Rick Perry will win the presidential election too.

 

[The Rabbi]

Defend away, Rabbi. It isnt shocking to watch you neo-cons do it. I'm embarrassed for you. I will give you this - the release of this shit is politically fueled and you're playing right into Diane and her "friends" hand.

congrats.

Ive always thought libertarians were just small government liberals. Here you are to prove it.

Oh, sure. And Rick Perry will win the presidential election too.

Are you certain he wont?

 

[cnm]

Obama unilaterally changed the definition for political purposes. What is hard to undestand about that?

The US Code hasn't changed, deny it though you will. It's in the same black and white as it was in the Bush administration. The courts will not uphold the Bush administration's legal argument for torture, they've been buried, they're bogus, they're out of here.

I understand you can't accept that as it means you've supported war crimes but that is the case.

 

[Uncensored2008]

More zoo noises from the right....Claudine, why don't you subject yourself to waterboarding and give us an expert opinion instead of an ex-spurt oh-pin-yawn?

Right after you subject yourself to a drone strike by your god, and tell us how THAT is not torture, Comrade.

 

[boedicca]

This situation is a classic case of the Perfect being the enemy of the Good, while providing aid and comfort to the Bad.

 

[The Rabbi]

Obama unilaterally changed the definition for political purposes. What is hard to undestand about that?

The US Code hasn't changed, deny it though you will. It's in the same black and white as it was in the Bush administration. The courts will not uphold the Bush administration's legal argument for torture, they've been buried, they're bogus, they're out of here.

I understand you can't accept that as it means you've supported war crimes but that is the case.

Repeating the same failed arguments makes you look stupid. OK, itmakes you look MORE stupid, because your arguments are nonsense.

 

[cnm]

This:

No one expects the comfy chair.