CDZ Would you support enhanced interrogation if:

[eagle1462010]

The interrogation of Khalid Sheikh Mohammed, shortly after the 9/11 attacks, seems to exemplify this conundrum. It has been credited with locating Osama bin Laden, the alleged mastermind of these attacks, and possibly thwarting other attacks. What if all interrogation techniques were not used and thousands of people died as a result? Would anyone be held responsible for not preventing this?

What information was gained? For example...one such claim was false...

Does torture work?
The situation is further clouded by the fact that members of the George W. Bush administration made claims for the effectiveness of torture that have later been proven to be untrue. One such claim was that the water-boarding (simulated drowning) of Khalid Shaikh Mohammed produced vital information that allowed them to break up a plot to attack the Liberty Tower in Los Angeles in 2002. Slight problem - in 2002 Shaikh Mohammed was busy evading capture in Pakistan.

And according to this...they concluded torture doesn’t work.

US report on 'enhanced interrogation' concludes: torture doesn't work
Report says that CIA detainees subjected to ‘enhanced interrogation techniques’ produced either faulty intelligence or no intelligence at all

That wasn't the scenario of the OP...............

WMD is known to exist.........this guy knows where it is............if you don't find the bomb an entire U.S. city is going to die...............

That was my understanding of the OP..............a WHAT IF thread.

It is still relevant.

No it is not..........You are not answering the Op.

 

[Coyote]

The interrogation of Khalid Sheikh Mohammed, shortly after the 9/11 attacks, seems to exemplify this conundrum. It has been credited with locating Osama bin Laden, the alleged mastermind of these attacks, and possibly thwarting other attacks. What if all interrogation techniques were not used and thousands of people died as a result? Would anyone be held responsible for not preventing this?

What information was gained? For example...one such claim was false...

Does torture work?
The situation is further clouded by the fact that members of the George W. Bush administration made claims for the effectiveness of torture that have later been proven to be untrue. One such claim was that the water-boarding (simulated drowning) of Khalid Shaikh Mohammed produced vital information that allowed them to break up a plot to attack the Liberty Tower in Los Angeles in 2002. Slight problem - in 2002 Shaikh Mohammed was busy evading capture in Pakistan.

And according to this...they concluded torture doesn’t work.

US report on 'enhanced interrogation' concludes: torture doesn't work
Report says that CIA detainees subjected to ‘enhanced interrogation techniques’ produced either faulty intelligence or no intelligence at all

That wasn't the scenario of the OP...............

WMD is known to exist.........this guy knows where it is............if you don't find the bomb an entire U.S. city is going to die...............

That was my understanding of the OP..............a WHAT IF thread.

It is still relevant.

No it is not..........You are not answering the Op.

The question of whether torture works is absolutely relevant to the question being asked, would you use it?

 

[eagle1462010]

The interrogation of Khalid Sheikh Mohammed, shortly after the 9/11 attacks, seems to exemplify this conundrum. It has been credited with locating Osama bin Laden, the alleged mastermind of these attacks, and possibly thwarting other attacks. What if all interrogation techniques were not used and thousands of people died as a result? Would anyone be held responsible for not preventing this?

What information was gained? For example...one such claim was false...

Does torture work?
The situation is further clouded by the fact that members of the George W. Bush administration made claims for the effectiveness of torture that have later been proven to be untrue. One such claim was that the water-boarding (simulated drowning) of Khalid Shaikh Mohammed produced vital information that allowed them to break up a plot to attack the Liberty Tower in Los Angeles in 2002. Slight problem - in 2002 Shaikh Mohammed was busy evading capture in Pakistan.

And according to this...they concluded torture doesn’t work.

US report on 'enhanced interrogation' concludes: torture doesn't work
Report says that CIA detainees subjected to ‘enhanced interrogation techniques’ produced either faulty intelligence or no intelligence at all

That wasn't the scenario of the OP...............

WMD is known to exist.........this guy knows where it is............if you don't find the bomb an entire U.S. city is going to die...............

That was my understanding of the OP..............a WHAT IF thread.

It is still relevant.

No it is not..........You are not answering the Op.

The question of whether torture works is absolutely relevant to the question being asked, would you use it?

Not letting you off the hook............You purposely changed the direction of this thread...............because you don't want to answer the scenario......

Here is the scenario..............

 

[dblack]

There was credible evidence that the person being interrogated had knowledge of an impending terrorist attack involving a weapon of mass destruction? What if that person was an American citizen?

I already support it for known terrorist leadership...and for select terrorist individuals. Wateboarding works, and doesn't harm the terrorist......

An American citizen has Rights under the Constitution so he can't be subjected to enhanced interrogation techniques.....

The Constitution protects the rights of everyone, not just citizens.

 

[Coyote]

What information was gained? For example...one such claim was false...

Does torture work?
The situation is further clouded by the fact that members of the George W. Bush administration made claims for the effectiveness of torture that have later been proven to be untrue. One such claim was that the water-boarding (simulated drowning) of Khalid Shaikh Mohammed produced vital information that allowed them to break up a plot to attack the Liberty Tower in Los Angeles in 2002. Slight problem - in 2002 Shaikh Mohammed was busy evading capture in Pakistan.

And according to this...they concluded torture doesn’t work.

US report on 'enhanced interrogation' concludes: torture doesn't work
Report says that CIA detainees subjected to ‘enhanced interrogation techniques’ produced either faulty intelligence or no intelligence at all

That wasn't the scenario of the OP...............

WMD is known to exist.........this guy knows where it is............if you don't find the bomb an entire U.S. city is going to die...............

That was my understanding of the OP..............a WHAT IF thread.

It is still relevant.

No it is not..........You are not answering the Op.

The question of whether torture works is absolutely relevant to the question being asked, would you use it?

Not letting you off the hook............You purposely changed the direction of this thread...............because you don't want to answer the scenario......

Here is the scenario..............

I gave my answer and all your pretty pictures, while offering an emotional distraction, don’t make for a rational argument.

All your assumptions are based on what the OP terms “credible evidence” but credible evidence (such as that leading the invasion of Iraq) has been wrong. You are assuming you have the right person, you assuming he has the information you want, and you are assuming torture is the only means of getting it and that it works. Lots of assumptions upon which to justify selling your soul and torturing another human being.

 

[Coyote]

If your daughter was picked up, based on credible evidence, as spelled out in the OP...would you allow her to be tortured?

 

[eagle1462010]

That wasn't the scenario of the OP...............

WMD is known to exist.........this guy knows where it is............if you don't find the bomb an entire U.S. city is going to die...............

That was my understanding of the OP..............a WHAT IF thread.

It is still relevant.

No it is not..........You are not answering the Op.

The question of whether torture works is absolutely relevant to the question being asked, would you use it?

Not letting you off the hook............You purposely changed the direction of this thread...............because you don't want to answer the scenario......

Here is the scenario..............

I gave my answer and all your pretty pictures, while offering an emotional distraction, don’t make for a rational

All your assumptions are based on what the OP terms “credible evidence” but credible evidence (such as that leading the invasion of Iraq) has been wrong. You are assuming you have the right person, you assuming he has the information you want, and you are assuming torture is the only means of getting it and that it works. Lots of assumptions upon which to justify selling your soul and torturing another human being.

Again you don't answer the question and Scenario of the OP.........You deflect...........you don't want to answer.

The Guy in front of you knows where the bomb in New York City is.............you can't find it...............there are 8.4 Million people in New York...........

What are you prepared to do............

Oh...........I KNOW..........REFUSE TO ANSWER.................

 

[Faun]

There was credible evidence that the person being interrogated had knowledge of an impending terrorist attack involving a weapon of mass destruction? What if that person was an American citizen?

This must be the latest nonsense bouncing off the walls of the rightwing echo chamber as there are several threads on that very question.

And you won’t answer

Because there is no answer. It’s a pointless discussion. You can argue torture them, but that likely doesn’t alter the outcome of the attack; or you can argue for alternative methods, but that also likely doesn’t alter the outcome of the attack. And there’s absolutely no lucid argument that one method is more effective than the other.

Still, I have no doubt this latest round of this nonsense blossomed from the rightwing echo chamber. Likely because of Trump’s position on torture. So how else do you defend it other than argument absurdum?

 

[Faun]

Be real, folks!
First, it is absolutely inadmissible that America, land of the free, etc., have as an approved policy that torture be not only tolerated, but approved. The image is too ugly to accept. The damage to U.S. reputation is too much to pay. We can't be a country like that.
Second, of course anyone, anywhere, would use whatever means it took to dislodge information of the imagined magnitude presented in this thread. It doesn't have to be said and discussed. That only makes it seem even more hypocritical if things ever come to that.
Third, short of some extreme, absurd situation imagined here, torture is out of the question. Nyet. Nichts. Non. Basta. It is something only the disgusting would be involved in, or encourage!

So what do you instead?

Secret WWII camp interrogators say torture wasn't needed

Depends on what you call "torture"

Locked in a room full of hard core liberals and let them talk..............

And yet, you voluntarily come here to post with us.

 

[Coyote]

There was credible evidence that the person being interrogated had knowledge of an impending terrorist attack involving a weapon of mass destruction? What if that person was an American citizen?

I already support it for known terrorist leadership...and for select terrorist individuals. Wateboarding works, and doesn't harm the terrorist......

An American citizen has Rights under the Constitution so he can't be subjected to enhanced interrogation techniques.....

It does not work. That is the problem. It just makes people feel good because they think it works and the

It is still relevant.

No it is not..........You are not answering the Op.

The question of whether torture works is absolutely relevant to the question being asked, would you use it?

Not letting you off the hook............You purposely changed the direction of this thread...............because you don't want to answer the scenario......

Here is the scenario..............

I gave my answer and all your pretty pictures, while offering an emotional distraction, don’t make for a rational

All your assumptions are based on what the OP terms “credible evidence” but credible evidence (such as that leading the invasion of Iraq) has been wrong. You are assuming you have the right person, you assuming he has the information you want, and you are assuming torture is the only means of getting it and that it works. Lots of assumptions upon which to justify selling your soul and torturing another human being.

Again you don't answer the question and Scenario of the OP.........You deflect...........you don't want to answer.

The Guy in front of you knows where the bomb in New York City is.............you can't find it...............there are 8.4 Million people in New York...........

What are you prepared to do............

Oh...........I KNOW..........REFUSE TO ANSWER.................

I answered. It is not my problem if you don’t like it.

 

[eagle1462010]

Be real, folks!
First, it is absolutely inadmissible that America, land of the free, etc., have as an approved policy that torture be not only tolerated, but approved. The image is too ugly to accept. The damage to U.S. reputation is too much to pay. We can't be a country like that.
Second, of course anyone, anywhere, would use whatever means it took to dislodge information of the imagined magnitude presented in this thread. It doesn't have to be said and discussed. That only makes it seem even more hypocritical if things ever come to that.
Third, short of some extreme, absurd situation imagined here, torture is out of the question. Nyet. Nichts. Non. Basta. It is something only the disgusting would be involved in, or encourage!

So what do you instead?

Secret WWII camp interrogators say torture wasn't needed

Depends on what you call "torture"

Locked in a room full of hard core liberals and let them talk..............

And yet, you voluntarily come here to post with us.

I don't have to hear your shrill voice when you type...........

 

[eagle1462010]

There was credible evidence that the person being interrogated had knowledge of an impending terrorist attack involving a weapon of mass destruction? What if that person was an American citizen?

I already support it for known terrorist leadership...and for select terrorist individuals. Wateboarding works, and doesn't harm the terrorist......

An American citizen has Rights under the Constitution so he can't be subjected to enhanced interrogation techniques.....

It does not work. That is the problem. It just makes people feel good because they think it works and the

No it is not..........You are not answering the Op.

The question of whether torture works is absolutely relevant to the question being asked, would you use it?

Not letting you off the hook............You purposely changed the direction of this thread...............because you don't want to answer the scenario......

Here is the scenario..............

I gave my answer and all your pretty pictures, while offering an emotional distraction, don’t make for a rational

All your assumptions are based on what the OP terms “credible evidence” but credible evidence (such as that leading the invasion of Iraq) has been wrong. You are assuming you have the right person, you assuming he has the information you want, and you are assuming torture is the only means of getting it and that it works. Lots of assumptions upon which to justify selling your soul and torturing another human being.

Again you don't answer the question and Scenario of the OP.........You deflect...........you don't want to answer.

The Guy in front of you knows where the bomb in New York City is.............you can't find it...............there are 8.4 Million people in New York...........

What are you prepared to do............

Oh...........I KNOW..........REFUSE TO ANSWER.................

I answered. It is not my problem if you don’t like it.

Whatever......................you refused to answer it...........you changed the question so you wouldn't have to answer it.............Then say you really answered it.

No you didn't.......you refuse to engage in the scenario posted.

 

[Coyote]

There was credible evidence that the person being interrogated had knowledge of an impending terrorist attack involving a weapon of mass destruction? What if that person was an American citizen?

I already support it for known terrorist leadership...and for select terrorist individuals. Wateboarding works, and doesn't harm the terrorist......

An American citizen has Rights under the Constitution so he can't be subjected to enhanced interrogation techniques.....

It does not work. That is the problem. It just makes people feel good because they think it works and the

The question of whether torture works is absolutely relevant to the question being asked, would you use it?

Not letting you off the hook............You purposely changed the direction of this thread...............because you don't want to answer the scenario......

Here is the scenario..............

I gave my answer and all your pretty pictures, while offering an emotional distraction, don’t make for a rational

All your assumptions are based on what the OP terms “credible evidence” but credible evidence (such as that leading the invasion of Iraq) has been wrong. You are assuming you have the right person, you assuming he has the information you want, and you are assuming torture is the only means of getting it and that it works. Lots of assumptions upon which to justify selling your soul and torturing another human being.

Again you don't answer the question and Scenario of the OP.........You deflect...........you don't want to answer.

The Guy in front of you knows where the bomb in New York City is.............you can't find it...............there are 8.4 Million people in New York...........

What are you prepared to do............

Oh...........I KNOW..........REFUSE TO ANSWER.................

I answered. It is not my problem if you don’t like it.

Whatever......................you refused to answer it...........you changed the question so you wouldn't have to answer it.............Then say you really answered it.

No you didn't.......you refuse to engage in the scenario posted.

You are trying to carefully align the goal posts to create an answer that pleases you rather than generate discussion. Won’t work. Good day.

 

[eagle1462010]

There was credible evidence that the person being interrogated had knowledge of an impending terrorist attack involving a weapon of mass destruction? What if that person was an American citizen?

I already support it for known terrorist leadership...and for select terrorist individuals. Wateboarding works, and doesn't harm the terrorist......

An American citizen has Rights under the Constitution so he can't be subjected to enhanced interrogation techniques.....

It does not work. That is the problem. It just makes people feel good because they think it works and the

Not letting you off the hook............You purposely changed the direction of this thread...............because you don't want to answer the scenario......

Here is the scenario..............

I gave my answer and all your pretty pictures, while offering an emotional distraction, don’t make for a rational

All your assumptions are based on what the OP terms “credible evidence” but credible evidence (such as that leading the invasion of Iraq) has been wrong. You are assuming you have the right person, you assuming he has the information you want, and you are assuming torture is the only means of getting it and that it works. Lots of assumptions upon which to justify selling your soul and torturing another human being.

Again you don't answer the question and Scenario of the OP.........You deflect...........you don't want to answer.

The Guy in front of you knows where the bomb in New York City is.............you can't find it...............there are 8.4 Million people in New York...........

What are you prepared to do............

Oh...........I KNOW..........REFUSE TO ANSWER.................

I answered. It is not my problem if you don’t like it.

Whatever......................you refused to answer it...........you changed the question so you wouldn't have to answer it.............Then say you really answered it.

No you didn't.......you refuse to engage in the scenario posted.

You are trying to carefully align the goal posts to create an answer that pleases you. Won’t work. Good day.

BYE..............I read the Op scenario clearly..........You not so much

 

[Faun]

The interrogation of Khalid Sheikh Mohammed, shortly after the 9/11 attacks, seems to exemplify this conundrum. It has been credited with locating Osama bin Laden, the alleged mastermind of these attacks, and possibly thwarting other attacks. What if all interrogation techniques were not used and thousands of people died as a result? Would anyone be held responsible for not preventing this?

What nut tried to establish a connection between Mohammed’s torture and finding Bin Laden?? Those two events were some 8 years apart.

Even funnier, applying that nonsense to this thread means a drone would find the nuclear device set off in NYC some 8 years after it was detonated.

 

[Coyote]

There was credible evidence that the person being interrogated had knowledge of an impending terrorist attack involving a weapon of mass destruction? What if that person was an American citizen?

I already support it for known terrorist leadership...and for select terrorist individuals. Wateboarding works, and doesn't harm the terrorist......

An American citizen has Rights under the Constitution so he can't be subjected to enhanced interrogation techniques.....

It does not work. That is the problem. It just makes people feel good because they think it works and the

I gave my answer and all your pretty pictures, while offering an emotional distraction, don’t make for a rational

All your assumptions are based on what the OP terms “credible evidence” but credible evidence (such as that leading the invasion of Iraq) has been wrong. You are assuming you have the right person, you assuming he has the information you want, and you are assuming torture is the only means of getting it and that it works. Lots of assumptions upon which to justify selling your soul and torturing another human being.

Again you don't answer the question and Scenario of the OP.........You deflect...........you don't want to answer.

The Guy in front of you knows where the bomb in New York City is.............you can't find it...............there are 8.4 Million people in New York...........

What are you prepared to do............

Oh...........I KNOW..........REFUSE TO ANSWER.................

I answered. It is not my problem if you don’t like it.

Whatever......................you refused to answer it...........you changed the question so you wouldn't have to answer it.............Then say you really answered it.

No you didn't.......you refuse to engage in the scenario posted.

You are trying to carefully align the goal posts to create an answer that pleases you. Won’t work. Good day.

BYE..............I read the Op scenario clearly..........You not so much

Did you miss the part about credible?

 

[eagle1462010]

I already support it for known terrorist leadership...and for select terrorist individuals. Wateboarding works, and doesn't harm the terrorist......

An American citizen has Rights under the Constitution so he can't be subjected to enhanced interrogation techniques.....

It does not work. That is the problem. It just makes people feel good because they think it works and the

Again you don't answer the question and Scenario of the OP.........You deflect...........you don't want to answer.

The Guy in front of you knows where the bomb in New York City is.............you can't find it...............there are 8.4 Million people in New York...........

What are you prepared to do............

Oh...........I KNOW..........REFUSE TO ANSWER.................

I answered. It is not my problem if you don’t like it.

Whatever......................you refused to answer it...........you changed the question so you wouldn't have to answer it.............Then say you really answered it.

No you didn't.......you refuse to engage in the scenario posted.

You are trying to carefully align the goal posts to create an answer that pleases you. Won’t work. Good day.

BYE..............I read the Op scenario clearly..........You not so much

Did you miss the part about credible?

You mean....................You have no credibility................Nope......didn't miss it.

 

[Faun]

Be real, folks!
First, it is absolutely inadmissible that America, land of the free, etc., have as an approved policy that torture be not only tolerated, but approved. The image is too ugly to accept. The damage to U.S. reputation is too much to pay. We can't be a country like that.
Second, of course anyone, anywhere, would use whatever means it took to dislodge information of the imagined magnitude presented in this thread. It doesn't have to be said and discussed. That only makes it seem even more hypocritical if things ever come to that.
Third, short of some extreme, absurd situation imagined here, torture is out of the question. Nyet. Nichts. Non. Basta. It is something only the disgusting would be involved in, or encourage!

waterboarding isn't torture.....we did it to our military personel....

Of course it’s torture. You should know this as even the U.S. officially called it torture when the Japanese did it to our servicemen in WWII. You don’t get to redefine words to suit your agenda. Torture is physical or mental abuse. Convincing someone they’re drowning is absolutely mental abuse.

 

[Pop23]

There was credible evidence that the person being interrogated had knowledge of an impending terrorist attack involving a weapon of mass destruction? What if that person was an American citizen?

This must be the latest nonsense bouncing off the walls of the rightwing echo chamber as there are several threads on that very question.

And you won’t answer

Because there is no answer. It’s a pointless discussion. You can argue torture them, but that likely doesn’t alter the outcome of the attack; or you can argue for alternative methods, but that also likely doesn’t alter the outcome of the attack. And there’s absolutely no lucid argument that one method is more effective than the other.

Still, I have no doubt this latest round of this nonsense blossomed from the rightwing echo chamber. Likely because of Trump’s position on torture. So how else do you defend it other than argument absurdum?

Can’t bring yourself to answer?

Got it

 

[Pop23]

There was credible evidence that the person being interrogated had knowledge of an impending terrorist attack involving a weapon of mass destruction? What if that person was an American citizen?

Never.

And while we are at it call it by it’s proper name: torture.

Got no problem calling it that, not applying such to a terrorist, should it ever be REQUIRED to save innocent life.