Political Hippo Circle Jerk - America, farg YEAH!

[Rome]

Um, I didn't post that, Dio.

Mr. Sha Na Na posted that garbage.

[bowzer]

Wrong or right, it's compromising to our intelligence agencies if we do so.

You don't need torture to be effective; using it reduces results in both short and long term.  Anyone who cannot see that shouldn't be surprised to be taken as bloodthirsty.

Also, you appear to have forgotten that they serve us, not the other way around.  We say no torture.  And we've said it for a very long time. 

Sounds like all the people saying no to the health care reforms proposed by the liberal congress members like Pelosi... we keep saying no.. and we keep getting it forced down our throat.

[ice grillin you]

Wrong or right, it's compromising to our intelligence agencies if we do so.

You don't need torture to be effective; using it reduces results in both short and long term.  Anyone who cannot see that shouldn't be surprised to be taken as bloodthirsty.

Also, you appear to have forgotten that they serve us, not the other way around.  We say no torture.  And we've said it for a very long time. 

Sounds like all the people saying no to the health care reforms proposed by the liberal congress members like Pelosi... we keep saying no.. and we keep getting it forced down our throat.

http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2009/09/24/opinion/polls/main5337843.shtml


Now, 47 percent of Americans approve of the job Mr. Obama is doing handling health care, up seven points from last month, while 45 percent disapprove. In a CBS News Poll conducted before the president's address to Congress on health care earlier this month, just 40 percent approved and 47 percent disapproved.

When asked whether they mostly favor or oppose the changes to the health care system proposed by the president, 46 percent say they don't know enough about those changes to have an opinion. But among those who do have an opinion, more support (30 percent) than oppose (23 percent) the reforms.

[Sgt PSN]

Also, you appear to have forgotten that they serve us, not the other way around.  We say no torture.  And we've said it for a very long time. 

the overwhelming majority of this country has forgotten that.  actually, i don't even think it's that they forgot it, it's that most people are either too lazy or simply too consumed by their own lives to care. 

[Diomedes]

Um, I didn't post that, Dio.

Mr. Sha Na Na posted that garbage.

Yeah, I know that.  I'm still having problems with seeing all the messages in a thread, so I resort to quoting to get a list view of the most recent messages, and when I quote, I tend to farg up.

[fansince61]

You don't need torture to be effective; using it reduces results in both short and long term.  Anyone who cannot see that shouldn't be surprised to be taken as bloodthirsty.

As discussed previously.  Pay attention little ones.  Torture can be highly effective and the only way to get the information that you need to SAVE LIVES.  BUT, you have to know a great deal about who is being interrogated and what their responsibilities are/were or it's a bloodthirsty waste of time.

[Diomedes]

No.

[Sgt PSN]

i don't think that torture is the only way to extract info from a suspect.  i think it's the lazy way.  there is always a better way of doing things.  history has proven that time and time again.  it's funny because as people, we are always seeking faster, more efficient ways of doing things.  how do you build a car faster?  invent the assembly line.  how do you communicate with someone 500 miles away?  invent the telephone.  it's basically a natural instinct for people to change and improve the way we do everything.  except when it comes to the way we treat terrorist suspects that we want to get info from. 

i get what 61 is saying about basically using it as a last resort.  but i think that as long as we maintain that mentallity, then it will never force us to explore newer and better ways.  the use of torture or even condoning it's use is one of the most hypocritical things this country (or it's citizens) can do because it goes against everything that we are supposed to stand for. 

[Diomedes]

plus, it doesn't work

[Sgt PSN]

plus, it doesn't work

lol.  it does work.  i have no idea what the "success rate" is.  but it could be 100% and it would still be wrong to do. 

[Diomedes]

It works at getting people to tell you what you want to hear, which is not intelligence gathering.  Go ask John McCain.

[Sgt PSN]

which is why it's not reliable in addition to being completely immoral.  but for every person like mccain who is able to withstand the punishment and still have the ability to think rationally and pacify their tortureres without divulging any vital info, there's another weak minded schmuck in the next room that will break after you pull out one fingernail.  like him or not, mccain is a tough sob. 

but i know what you're getting at though.  it's not 100% and its not even close to 100%.  if i had to guess, i would say that about 10% of all information extracted from tortured suspects is actually useful.  possibly even less when dealing with terrorist suspects who actually look forward to dying for their cause. 

[fansince61]

It works at getting people to tell you what you want to hear, which is not intelligence gathering.  Go ask John McCain.

Read my post again!  Getting people to say what you want them to is not intelligence gathering..it's propaganda or politics.  I have not seen torture used but have seen fear used as a motive to gather intelligence and it was mind boggling effective..tens of pages of high value intelligence gathered as fast as the prisoner could speak..saved lives, killed bad guys*

bad guys = communists   

[General_Failure]

And what if we run out of sadists to do the torturing? What then?

[Diomedes]

which is why it's not reliable in addition to being completely immoral.  but for every person like mccain who is able to withstand the punishment and still have the ability to think rationally and pacify their tortureres without divulging any vital info, there's another weak minded schmuck in the next room that will break after you pull out one fingernail.  like him or not, mccain is a tough sob. 

but i know what you're getting at though.  it's not 100% and its not even close to 100%.  if i had to guess, i would say that about 10% of all information extracted from tortured suspects is actually useful.  possibly even less when dealing with terrorist suspects who actually look forward to dying for their cause. 

McCain himself admits he was broken.  It's not about strength of will.  It's about intelligence, and you don't get it when you think you know what you're mining for.  You take abu terrorist farger who you think knows something about an IED maker, and you drill on him for days to get it....and you do.  Yay, good for you.  You can tell FOX news that you saved lives.  What you didn't get is him off handedly mentioning his brother in law, whose name pops, which leads you to someone, something else, which leads you to much bigger better information.  Worse, if you think you know something and you don't, but you get it out of him anyway because you've got him hanging wet naked for three days listening to Public Enemy, then yay you, you got nothing.

Nazis were just as evil as these fargers are and we had fantastic success interrogating them without torture.  You can make McCain admit America is evil, and you can get Al Queda icehole #2355 to blurt out some shtein, but once you torture, you cut yourself off at what it is you think you know.