Torture and the war wrong or right?

#1
Fine Vol

Fine Vol

Go Vols
Joined
Sep 15, 2006
Messages
19,849
Likes
2
#1
How do you feel about getting info using torture. I will say this, if there was a man in front of me who knew where a missing kid was and torture was the only way to get that info, HAND ME THE BLOW TORCH. What about war situations, are you for it if it provides great info on the enemy?
 
#3
#3
Torture is tough to define - for me it is inflicting severe physical pain especially if there is lasting physical harm.

Psychological pain is much tougher to determine. Is scaring someone really causing damage?
 
#5
#5
depends on your definition of torture...

if you define torture as stuffing people into giant meatgrinders, cutting out their tongues, binding their hands behind them and then tossing off of a two story building then yeah, that's wrong.

however, if you define torture as having Lindy England laughing at you while you lay naked with a sand bag over your head, then you have self-esteem issues far beyond the scope of this topic.
 
#8
#8
Well when you have these soldiers charged under the UCMJ for what you mentioned, and then say thinking that is torture is a self esteem issue, what else could that mean?
 
#9
#9
MG1968 said:
however, if you define torture as having Lindy England laughing at you while you lay naked with a sand bag over your head, then you have self-esteem issues far beyond the scope of this topic.
Click to expand...
:eek:lol:
 
#10
#10
i honestly think we don't want to really know what goes on in regards to this topic. torture w/out purpose is one thing......interrogation to get specific vital information is another. and not to over simplify the matter, but once the individual is in this position, the torture part is really left up to that individual. tell us what you know, no worries. Don't and we'll go jack bauer on your butt. either way.....up to you.
 
#11
#11
I don't know guys we need to respect their feelings and see if we can have a round-table discussion and get our differences worked out peacefully.

Give me a break, we're America and we're better than you and you'll give the info we need or I'll.... still working on my tough guy talk.
 
#12
#12
If life was only like 24.....then we'd have to worry about presidential coups all the time as well.
 
#13
#13
First, torture needs to be defined. I would to include, in the definition of torture, an act that causes permanent physical scarring and/or damage. That to me is wrong. I however would have absolutely no problem with the controlled use of beatings, starvation, dehydration, water boarding, humiliation, etc. in order to extract useful information.

Herein arises the next problem though. How does one assure that the info they are obtaining is useful or even accurate?

Less focus needs to be applied to the interrogation of prisoners, especially in a war against religious radicals. More focus needs to be on extracting accurate and timely human intelligence in the areas of operation.

We need more agents, whether they are our own CIA agents or al-Qaeda or Mahdi double agents, covertly collecting real time intelligence in the field.
 
#14
#14
I agree completely. From a few guys I've talked to in Iraq they say that torture usually leads to little quality results. Most of the time the ones captured are not informed on anything besides the mission they were on when captured. If anything, they often lead to misdirection.

If we want quality info we really need better HUMINT assets. We've neglected this aspect for years.
 
#15
#15
therealUT said:
First, torture needs to be defined. I would to include, in the definition of torture, an act that causes permanent physical scarring and/or damage. That to me is wrong. I however would have absolutely no problem with the controlled use of beatings, starvation, dehydration, water boarding, humiliation, etc. in order to extract useful information.

Herein arises the next problem though. How does one assure that the info they are obtaining is useful or even accurate?

Less focus needs to be applied to the interrogation of prisoners, especially in a war against religious radicals. More focus needs to be on extracting accurate and timely human intelligence in the areas of operation.

We need more agents, whether they are our own CIA agents or al-Qaeda or Mahdi double agents, covertly collecting real time intelligence in the field.
Click to expand...
Well put.
 
#16
#16
Tenent suggests that tough interrogation was the most useful source of intel in thwarting attacks since 9/11.

This doesn't mean it always or even most times yield accurate information. Nor does it mean it is the best way. Human assets on the ground are likely better but we've been short in that area for awhile. Fixing this will reduce the need for such interrogations.
 
#17
#17
Right now Tenet's in this universe of people not really knowing whether what he says is worth anything. Richard Perle's already calling him out on some quotes in Tenet's book. So if Tenet says tough interrogation was the most useful, I'd rather hear it from those actually on the ground seeing the results firsthand. Tenet is in the same boat with Bush right now and neither seem to be improving in image and reputation.
 
#19
#19
And I've talked to some in Iraq who believe the opposite. Perhaps the CIA and the military or at least some within each feel the exact opposite. Good example of how different agencies and groups have their own opinions on how intel is working or not working for us.
 
#20
#20
It may not be a contradiction - what Tenent said was it was the most useful info in preventing specific attacks plan on American soil. This was from very high level targets. In these specific situations it was useful. As a general strategy it may not be that useful.
 
#21
#21
Geneva Convention:
"Prisoners of war must at all times be humanely treated. Any unlawful act or omission ... causing death or seriously endangering the health of a prisoner of war in its custody is prohibited, and will be regarded as a serious breach of the present Convention. Likewise, prisoners of war must at all times be protected, particularly against acts of violence or intimidation and against insults and public curiosity."

"No physical or mental torture, nor any other form of coercion, may be inflicted on prisoners of war to secure from them information of any kind whatever. Prisoners of war who refuse to answer may not be threatened, insulted, or exposed to any unpleasant or disadvantageous treatment of any kind."


"Prisoners of war shall enjoy complete latitude in the exercise of their religious duties, including attendance at the service of their faith, on condition that they comply with the disciplinary routine prescribed by the military authorities."

"The following acts are and shall remain prohibited ... cruel treatment and torture; ... Outrages upon personal dignity, in particular, humiliating and degrading treatment; "


"Individual or mass forcible transfers, as well as deportations of protected persons from occupied territory ... are prohibited, regardless of their motive."
(Geneva Convention, 1949)
 
#22
#22
Fine Vol said:
How do you feel about getting info using torture. I will say this, if there was a man in front of me who knew where a missing kid was and torture was the only way to get that info, HAND ME THE BLOW TORCH. What about war situations, are you for it if it provides great info on the enemy?
Click to expand...

If it saves American lives....I have no problem with it.
 
New posts
You must log in or register to reply here.

VN Store



Back
Top