"Absolutely torture."

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Alric

That is just your opinion. You don't think the other methods will work, and you think torture will. I am not exactly sure what your opinion is based on. However I do know most experts believe that you are wrong, and that the other methods are far superior to torture and scaring the person half to death.

---

There are very specific individuals that they did not work on.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Alric

As for you nuclear bomb theory. There are serious flaws to it. The first being that the terrorists have no way to get a nuclear bomb. The second is they have no way to sneak it into the city, to arm it, or to deploy it. Even if you ignore all that, the most likely situation is a dirty nuke which only blows up a couple of blocks not the entire city. But the chances of that is even highly unlikely.

---

North Korea? Iran? Syria? Etc. A nuke is just one example of a WMD. Not all nukes that blow up cities are missiles. They are bombs that can be brought in by boat.

The questions I have been asking are completely relevant to reality.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nuclear_terrorism

Its funny that you use the wiki site for nuclear terrorism and claim its a real threat, but then you look at the wiki site for water boarding and claim that the entire thing is made up.

Though if you look through the link you gave, there are no signs of threat of nuclear attack any where on it. Only a couple of people who made claims that people planned attacks, yet none of them had any weapons to use.

Even if you can some how find a nuclear bomb and can sneak it into the country, the smaller ones do not do nearly as much damage as a normal nuclear bomb.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Alric

Its funny that you use the wiki site for nuclear terrorism and claim its a real threat, but then you look at the wiki site for water boarding and claim that the entire thing is made up.

---

When did I do that? I know "experts" claim American style waterboarding is "torture". I don't agree with them. Also, that issue is much more subjective than the issue of whether nuclear terrorism is a possibility.

I have said it, and I will say it again. You feel safe because you believe in our system of security. You know what large numbers of scum are trying to do, yet you feel safe any way.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Alric

Though if you look through the link you gave, there are no signs of threat of nuclear attack any where on it. Only a couple of people who made claims that people planned attacks, yet none of them had any weapons to use.

Even if you can some how find a nuclear bomb and can sneak it into the country, the smaller ones do not do nearly as much damage as a normal nuclear bomb.

---

It is a possibility that has to be dealt with. Again, nukes are not the only WMD's out there.

The wiki site says "water-boarding or mock drowning, where a prisoner is bound to an inclined board and water is poured over their face, inducing a terrifying fear of drowning clearly can result in immediate and long-term health consequences. As the prisoner gags and chokes, the terror of imminent death is pervasive, with all of the physiologic and psychological responses expected, including an intense stress response, manifested by tachycardia (rapid heart beat) and gasping for breath. There is a real risk of death from actually drowning or suffering a heart attack or damage to the lungs from inhalation of water. Long term effects include panic attacks, depression and PTSD. I remind you of the patient I described earlier who would panic and gasp for breath whenever it rained even years after his abuse"

All of which you claimed were untrue.

As for why I feel safe. It has nothing to do with our security. The reason I feel safe, is because I know I am not in any real danger. Terrorism just isn't a real threat. And even if there was an attack against us, the chances of me or anyone I know being hurt are extremely low.

Why should I worry over things which are so unlikely to happen, when there are thousands of things that are a greater risk to me?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Alric

The wiki site says "water-boarding or mock drowning, where a prisoner is bound to an inclined board and water is poured over their face, inducing a terrifying fear of drowning clearly can result in immediate and long-term health consequences. As the prisoner gags and chokes, the terror of imminent death is pervasive, with all of the physiologic and psychological responses expected, including an intense stress response, manifested by tachycardia (rapid heart beat) and gasping for breath. There is a real risk of death from actually drowning or suffering a heart attack or damage to the lungs from inhalation of water. Long term effects include panic attacks, depression and PTSD. I remind you of the patient I described earlier who would panic and gasp for breath whenever it rained even years after his abuse"

All of which you claimed were untrue.

---

Stop lying. Seriously. It is ridiculous. I know what responses happen, and I know what can happen if it is performed incorrectly, and I not only never said otherwise but also kept agreeing with it. This is stupid.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Alric

As for why I feel safe. It has nothing to do with our security. The reason I feel safe, is because I know I am not in any real danger. Terrorism just isn't a real threat. And even if there was an attack against us, the chances of me or anyone I know being hurt are extremely low.

Why should I worry over things which are so unlikely to happen, when there are thousands of things that are a greater risk to me?

---

They would be happening every day if not for our security. Learn what is out there. It's not like there are just two toddlers out there trying to hurt the United States as much as possible. There are enormous organizations working on it.

You are in severe denial, and I don't know how to snap you out of it. Good luck. :roll:

Actually you made the argument many times that it wasn't at all true. Then when you found yourself losing the argument, you made the claim that its not the "US style" of water boarding they were talking about, even though it is.

As for terrorists attacks happening everyday, what a load of bull. We all know damn well the terrorists do not have the resources to do an attack every day. They can barely even pull off an attack once a year. And here in the US, they cant even pull off an attack twice in a decade.

Severe denial? Where is your proof to show, that there is any real risk? If we weren't in Iraq and Afghanistan, terrorism wouldn't even make the news. We have been over this before. Attacks of terrorism on US soil is extremely rare and almost non existent. Normal criminals pose a far greater risk than the terrorists. Most of the terrorism against us take place as kidnapping in foreign countries. You shouldn't buy into all the hype.

Universal Mind, are you willing to volounter yourself to be waterboarded for the sake of your arguement that waterboarding is not torture?

And are you willing to let me tape it? :D

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Alric

Actually you made the argument many times that it wasn't at all true. Then when you found yourself losing the argument, you made the claim that its not the "US style" of water boarding they were talking about, even though it is.

---

Bull shit. I never denied what waterboarding always involves, and I said you have no evidence that the woulds and coulds have actually happened during American waterboarding. Get it right.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Alric

As for terrorists attacks happening everyday, what a load of bull. We all know damn well the terrorists do not have the resources to do an attack every day. They can barely even pull off an attack once a year. And here in the US, they cant even pull off an attack twice in a decade.

---

They happen every day in Iraq. They can't pull them off twice in a decade here BECAUSE OF OUR EXCELLENT SECURITY.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Alric

Severe denial? Where is your proof to show, that there is any real risk? If we weren't in Iraq and Afghanistan, terrorism wouldn't even make the news. We have been over this before. Attacks of terrorism on US soil is extremely rare and almost non existent. Normal criminals pose a far greater risk than the terrorists. Most of the terrorism against us take place as kidnapping in foreign countries. You shouldn't buy into all the hype.

---

Security.

Okay, it's official. That is it with you. I am seriously suspecting you of being a troll.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Thief

Universal Mind, are you willing to volounter yourself to be waterboarded for the sake of your arguement that waterboarding is not torture?

And are you willing to let me tape it? :D

---

No. I am also not willing to let you film me sitting through my own murder trial, getting paddled, gettting tasered, going through boot camp that it is too late to get out of, getting tackled by a cop while I am running away from him, or getting shot by a cop when I am running at him with a weapon.

No it has nothing to do with security. Its because they live over there, and not over here. Its a lot easier to to plan attacks in your own country, and possibly into neighboring countries. Its far more difficult to do so in a country half a world away, in a country that doesn't even speak the same language as you.

So you need highly educated people who know how to speak English, with enough money to travel and live here in the US. Most people who follow into that group do not go for the whole suicide thing. Which is why you can find hundreds and thousands who may want to blow them self up over there, but its very rare to find such people over here.

Of course, if dying isn't part of your plan that makes things far more difficult. Added to that, that there simply isn't the support structure for terrorists here as there is overseas, it takes a lot of time and planning to make any attack.

So while they are fighting a war in their own countries, it simply isn't practical to do anything of the such here. They do not have the resources, or the man power.

This is a good read for those who seek to understand Al Qaeda.

http://www.globalsecurity.org/milita...a/al-qaida.htm

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Alric

it takes a lot of time and planning to make any attack.

---

Because of our security.

I find it amusing that you believe that the three people who withstood all other interrogation techniques told everything once they got a bit of water on their face.

I already understand them, and it doesn't take any understanding at all to realize that their not an actual threat. I mean even the link you just posted show they are not a real threat to us. Just read it over it. They list attacks but there isn't anything at all recent.

Any yea we have security, that is strong enough that we do not need to torture people to find stuff out. I am not sure how you can make the claim we have a good security that has stopped nearly all attacks, yet at the same time believe its critical to torture people to get the information.

Once again, we never tortured anyone.

You've said yourself that attacks have not happened because of our security. Part of that is waterboarding for information.

They've done much worse than spray water on people's faces, and you're supporting them by saying "Oh it's okay that you've killed innocent men,women and children. Oh it's okay that you've trtured my own people. I think it's wrong that some water got sprayed on your face. I am soooo on your side."

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Universal Mind

I don't know the details, but I do know waterboarding can be performed in a way that it doesn't damage the lungs, make the brain suffocate, or result in years of psychological disturbance. However it is being performed on U.S. special forces is the right way. They are not having those problems. Are any of the three terrorist leaders we have performed waterboarding on so far having any of those problems?

---

Are the terrorist leaders having problems? I can give no real answer besides "I don't know". If you have access to any documentation or studies that have been performed to examine the long term effects of waterboarding, please share it with us. If you've already posted a link to any source for this specific information then I apologize in advance for missing it, as this thread has grown quickly and I have not kept up with every response. I'd also like to point out that U.S. special forces are like another breed of human beings entirely, at least as far as physical and mental stress endurance goes. Because of this I cannot say that I'm convinced that they'd work as an adequate measure of how safe waterboarding is for any other military personnel, whether they be friendly or hostile.

Quote:

---

You want prisoners to stop coming in contact with other prisoners? That is what it would take to make them not be around people with malicious intentions.

---

Prisons should double as rehabilitation centers. That is all.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Universal Mind

You're joking, right? If not, then why haven't you been reading my posts before arguing with me? I went over it a bunch of times and got nothing but sneers, snickers, and bows. Do you have a counter now?

---

Now who's joking? I've seen your "explanation" plenty of times and not only have I countered it, but I've provided documentation that counters it. So far as I can tell, you've only given your opinion on it, while stating the affects in the most minimal terms - actually giving no acknowledgement to what's really documented as happening when being waterboarded, as opposed to just what would happen if it was as tame a procedure as you seem to think it is.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Wikipedia

Waterboarding is a form of torture that consists of immobilizing the victim on his or her back with the head inclined downwards, and then pouring water over the face and into the breathing passages. By forced suffocation and inhalation of water, the subject experiences drowning and is caused to believe they are about to die.[1] It is considered a form of torture by legal experts,[2][3] politicians, war veterans,[4][5] medical experts in the treatment of torture victims,[6][7] intelligence officials,[8] military judges,[9] and human rights organizations.[10][11] As early as the Spanish Inquisition it was used for interrogation purposes, to punish and intimidate, and to force confessions.[12]
In contrast to submerging the head face-forward in water, waterboarding precipitates an almost immediate gag reflex.[13] The technique does not inevitably cause lasting physical damage. It can cause extreme pain, dry drowning, damage to lungs, brain damage from oxygen deprivation, other physical injuries including broken bones due to struggling against restraints, lasting psychological damage or, if uninterrupted, death.[2] Adverse physical consequences can start manifesting months after the event; psychological effects can last for years.[6]

---

What about that is analogous to a court trial? I ask the question again only because your perspective so far takes none of the above into consideration.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by [SomeGuy]

Once again, we never tortured anyone.

---

once again, you're wrong. here's why;

US General confirms Iraq photos show torture.

Torture and prison abuse in Iraq

also, 9/11 was the fault of some guy named Richard Clarke (let's get him!)

these reports are all very easy to find, and sometimes they come with pictures!

e; forgot to add Mancow getting waterboarded to prove a point.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Oneironaut

Now who's joking? I've seen your "explanation" plenty of times and not only have I countered it, but I've provided documentation that counters it. So far as I can tell, you've only given your opinion on it, while stating the affects in the most minimal terms - actually giving no acknowledgement to what's really documented as happening when being waterboarded, as opposed to just what would happen if it was as tame a procedure as you seem to think it is.


What about that is analogous to a court trial? I ask the question again only because your perspective so far takes none of the above into consideration.

---

I've already talked about that. The passage covers what always sucks about waterboarding (parallel to a criminal trial, getting tasered, getting shot in the leg while resisting arrest, etc.) along with a bunch of extra horrific coulds. I keep asking if any of those coulds have actually occurred in American waterboarding, and nobody has mentioned any yet. Do you know of any such incidents?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Universal Mind

I've already talked about that. The passage covers what always sucks about waterboarding (parallel to a criminal trial, getting tasered, getting shot in the leg while resisting arrest, etc.) along with a bunch of extra horrific coulds. I keep asking if any of those coulds have actually occurred in American waterboarding, and nobody has mentioned any yet. Do you know of any such incidents?

---

If you're talking about any coulds such as those listed in the wikipedia entry, I've already listed them, and they are bad enough to be deemed torture. If you're being literal, such as an explanation of how 'getting shot in the leg is not analogous to water boarding', then I'm afraid I have nothing for you - merely for the fact that I won't explain that which I believe you already know.

You're looking for someone to tell you if any of your coulds have happened in American water-boarding, all the while ignoring the fact that that doesn't matter. If someone does the "1000 cuts" torture on one person in America, and they prove to withstand the procedure with only a small amount of visible pain, it does not dismiss the procedure as 'not torture'. You were trying to torture that person, and it just didn't work.

Regardless - as in the case of waterboarding - you would still be guilty of torture.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Oneironaut

If you're talking about any coulds such as those listed in the wikipedia entry, I've already listed them, and they are bad enough to be deemed torture.

---

... if they happen. As far as all of us in here are aware, the coulds (broken bones, brain damage, lung damage, death, etc.) have not happened in American waterboarding.

And no, I don't know how getting shot in the leg is not analogous to waterboarding, aside from the fact that getting shot in the leg is guaranteed to cause injury, hurts a lot more, and always causes lasting injury. Both are used for self-defense.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Universal Mind

Both are used for self-defense.

---

this has been your stance all along (not; waterboarding is not torture). you should be aware that no one (anywhere) is claiming (successfully) waterboarding isn't torture. (see SadlyNo! for deconstructions of common arguments) now, you can use self-defense to say you had to torture (like our funny bomb/hostage stories), but the fact remains that you tortured.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by sleepingdog

this has been your stance all along (not; waterboarding is not torture). you should be aware that no one (anywhere) is claiming (successfully) waterboarding isn't torture. (see SadlyNo! for deconstructions of common arguments) now, you can use self-defense to say you had to torture (like our funny bomb/hostage stories), but the fact remains that you tortured.

---

You have a lot of arguments to counter before you can legitimately make that claim.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Universal Mind

You have a lot of arguments to counter before you can legitimately make that claim.

---

sure. i'll do it right now;

argument #1; US style of waterboarding is not torture.

legal consensus; clear violation of geneva conventions, classified as torture. case is pending, and arguments will be heard.

your argument for it not being torture is something like this;
there's no physical damage, spectrums dont hurt or whatever etc.

torture, as the rest of the world understands it, is like this;
i make you hurt so you talk. ('yea! but they're trying to hurt us!')

therefore, the only way i can see where you are coming from is this;
(not torture because) we need torture to protect ourselves.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Universal Mind

Both are used for self-defense.

---

the rest are excuses.

I am the only one think that this thread has become a negative turmoil?

Ask yourself, have this thread been productive? Have it set us apart of closer?

I think we all should take some steps back, reevaluate what one have said, and then get back some days later.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by sleepingdog

sure. i'll do it right now;

argument #1; US style of waterboarding is not torture.

legal consensus; clear violation of geneva conventions, classified as torture. case is pending, and arguments will be heard.

---

I don't care about "consensus". It is not proof. The "consensus" used to be that the world is flat. The "consensus" in the world presently is that ghosts are real. Does that settle the issue?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by sleepingdog

your argument for it not being torture is something like this;
there's no physical damage, spectrums dont hurt or whatever etc.

---

You receive an F on that report.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by sleepingdog

torture, as the rest of the world understands it, is like this;
i make you hurt so you talk.

---

That is what the law says to witnesses in court. Tasering: "Stop resisting arrest, or hurt like Hell."

:yawn: