1. This site uses cookies. By continuing to use this site, you are agreeing to our use of cookies. Learn More.

Did Anybody Else Notice?

Discussion in 'Society and Culture' started by ShinyTop, Feb 1, 2018.

  1. ShinyTop

    ShinyTop I know what is right or wrong!

    ... that our Dear Leader, US variety, has endorsed enhanced interrogation techniques? That endorsement will lead to policies for the military and intelligence apparatuses. Those polices, if and when enacted, will lead to more world wide condemnation of our country. Those policies will lead to more US citizens condemning the military. We are so lucky.
  2. MemphisMark

    MemphisMark Old School Conservative

    You must have missed the part where he implied that the countries who voted to condemn the US for recognizing Jerusalem as the capitol of Israel might find our "foreign aid" tap to be turned off for them.
  3. ShinyTop

    ShinyTop I know what is right or wrong!

    No, I saw that. That's a big stick and should be saved for bigger issues than disagreeing about Israel's choice of their own capitol and our recognition of that.
    cmhbob likes this.
  4. Arc

    Arc Full Member

    Enhanced interrogation techniques IMO generally speaking fall under the following categories of debate, discussion, and effectiveness:



    Tactical rewards

    Overall effectiveness when taken as a collective

    Shiny, I would welcome you expanding upon your post regarding your position on enhanced interrogation covering whatever you want and if you are so inclined to toss in the categories above to further expand on what you will individually choose to cover or state above and beyond those I listed.
  5. ShinyTop

    ShinyTop I know what is right or wrong!

    I will leave legal to the lawyers. Although if enhanced interrogation were ok they would be the first I would put in line IMHO.

    My stand is mostly moral. The use of torture is not what I think our core values should be about. I would prefer our country lead the world through example. Look at what a democracy can accomplish. Look at our citizens leading a free life free of the worry about racism, free of a life of poverty, free of worrying about healthcare and free to worship anybody, anything, or nothing as they please. Are we there yet? No, and the current administration is racing backwards on most issues as fast as they can.

    So who gets tortured and who decides? Do we torture everybody of another religion who we pick up in a sweep of others yelling at our troops? Do we torture anybody who looks similar to one of the people on the deck of card we have of our enemies? They deny being that person, they deny shooting at our troops or planting IED's. Damn, that's what anybody would say who is in the deck of cards or planting IED's. But how can we be sure unless we torture them? And if torture does not get a confession then doesn't that just mean they are good at resisting torture. OMG, I slipped up and used the word "torture" instead of enhanced interrogation. My bad.

    Effectiveness has two sides. One side is that torturing somebody until you hear what you want or expect may just mean they are saying something just to get you to quit crushing their balls. The other side is that torturing of prisoners, especially the torture of groups with little assurance they know anything, only makes more terrorists.

    Now here is a little confession. I was a company commander in Vietnam. It never happened, but if I had a prisoner who I thought knew something that could save the lives of my men I would have probably done anything to get that information out of him. I suspect many leaders feel that way. And that is precisely the reason we have to have rules in place against such actions. And the rules have to be so clear cut, so unambiguous that all understand them. And we cannot have the Commander in Chief changing those rules or even implying it is okay to, wink, wink, look the other way. That wink wink will get somebody in jail and the Child in Chief will be first to say it was wrong.

    So, Arc, you got some expansion. At usual I can get long winded.
    Last edited: Feb 1, 2018
    Arc likes this.
  6. MemphisMark

    MemphisMark Old School Conservative

    Shiny, I agree with you. Torture, by whatever means or names it is called, is wrong.

    Also, spending the blood of our military and the treasure of our nation should never be done for trivial reasons.

    When we do go in, our biggest weapon should be anything and everything possible to break the will of the enemy to stand against us.

    There is a story (post 9/11, I'm pretty sure it has been debunked) about General "Black Jack" Pershing in the pre-Great War Philippines putting down a Muslim uprising. It is said he and his men captured 20 combatants. Pershing stood 19 of them in front of a firing squad while the 20th one watched. The 19 were executed, then their bodies were smeared with pigs blood and their mouths were filled with raw bacon before being buried. To explain, this desecration meant the souls of the executed men would never reach Heaven. The 20th fighter was released to go back to his forces with the message: "Fight against US troops and this will be your fate." It is said the uprising quickly died out after that.

    Then there was the time in the 80's in Lebanon when Hezbollah took 4 Soviet diplomatic attaches hostage. Hezbollah killed one when the Soviets did not meet their demands. The Soviets responded by delivering parts of a Hezbollah Leaders family member with the message, "release the Soviet hostages, or more of your family members will meet the same fate." The attaches were released quickly and no other Soviets were captured or used as hostages.

    I think carpet bombing Tehran every day until our hostages were released would have prevented that 444 day situation.

    The US should not be the world's policeman. We should not be nation building or mercenaries for hire either. I understand and wrote on my blog extensively that I understood Bush 43 wanted to install a stable freedom-oriented secular government in Iraq. By doing so and instilling a little free-market economy, he hoped to eliminate the pool of suicide bombers and insurgents by giving them jobs and the opportunity for families (i.e. something to live for, not die for). If he could have succeeded in that, it might have spread throughout the ME.

    The problem is they didn't ask for it, thus didn't want it. That's the biggest reason why it failed. Some people don't want freedom and free-markets. We shouldn't force it on them.

Share This Page