Jesse Ventura's take on torture

[guido911]

Essentially, you're saying we can do whatever we want to do with our prisoners because we know they're guilty, and because we're at war.  But you're wrong.  Even when we're at war, we're bound by laws.  Laws which we ourselves created.   

Bullcrap that's not what I'm saying at all. I was ONLY talking about high level AQ terrorists that have knowledge of an impending attack that would jeopardize American lives. Don't change the damn subject. Also, are you honestly trying to compare waterboarding and caterpillering the people responsible for killing 3000 plus Americans to Nazis gassing and killing 6 million Jews and putting their bodies in ovens? Do me a favor Mr. Moral Equivalence, watch/rewatch Shindler's List to get some freakin perspective. THREE "MEN" WERE WATERBOARDED AND ONE WAS CATERPILLERED.

You, RW, and others that want to treat these bastards like criminal suspects rather that terrorists captured on the field of battle (which is war by the way, ask any soldier) are in a pre-9/11 mindset. More interested in protecting their rights than the lives of Americans.

[Cats Cats Cats]

Bullcrap that's not what I'm saying at all. I was ONLY talking about high level AQ terrorists that have knowledge of an impending attack that would jeopardize American lives. Don't change the damn subject. Also, are you honestly trying to compare waterboarding and caterpillering the people responsible for killing 3000 plus Americans to Nazis gassing and killing 6 million Jews and putting their bodies in ovens? Do me a favor Mr. Moral Equivalence, watch/rewatch Shindler's List to get some freakin perspective. THREE "MEN" WERE WATERBOARDED AND ONE WAS CATERPILLERED.

You, RW, and others that want to treat these bastards like criminal suspects rather that terrorists captured on the field of battle (which is war by the way, ask any soldier) are in a pre-9/11 mindset. More interested in protecting their rights than the lives of Americans.

You are forgetting all the people who got glowsticks up their asses.

[we vs us]

You, RW, and others that want to treat these bastards like criminal suspects rather that terrorists captured on the field of battle (which is war by the way, ask any soldier) are in a pre-9/11 mindset.

What freaks me out is that you seem to be in a post-US mindset.

What I don't understand is why you want to throw out the system we've spent 250 hard years perfecting because of 9-11.  If we capture a soldier on a field of battle, there are rules of engagement that we have to follow that guarantee him his rights vis a vis the Geneva Conventions. You were a soldier, you should remember that part.  What you seem to be arguing, though, is that this isn't war, either.  You seem to be arguing that this is a special kind of conflict where because we were attacked we get to decide when torture is right and when it isn't.  

But you know what?  We don't get to.  High value detainee or not, we're bound by laws that we've explicitely fought for for decades.  This isn't changing the subject, this IS the heart of the subject.  

[guido911]

You are forgetting all the people who got glowsticks up their asses.

Wow, can't win the argument, change the subject. Your talking about the prisoner abuses at Abu Ghraib, for which soldiers were prosecuted and jailedand rightfully so. This discussion was about obtaining information to thwart a mass casualty attack.

Answer this question (from Schumer): If someone had information that a member of your family was in a location near where a dirty bomb/nuke was stashed, would you dump water on that person's face or if appropriate put a caterpiller in his room or even shove a glowstick up his donkey to get that information that would save that member of your family?

[rwarn17588]

And by the way, I do not "claim" to be a lawyer, I am one.
 

You've offered no proof that you're a lawyer. Until you do so, I will say that you claim to be a lawyer until it is so verified.

If if you were indeed a lawyer, you'd know that we're bound by the laws stemming from the Geneva Conventions. Your impotent rages don't change that. If you don't like the laws, then advocate for the U.S.'s withdrawal from the Geneva Conventions.

[we vs us]

Wow, can't win the argument, change the subject. Your talking about the prisoner abuses at Abu Ghraib, for which soldiers were prosecuted and jailedand rightfully so. This discussion was about obtaining information to thwart a mass casualty attack.

Answer this question (from Schumer): If someone had information that a member of your family was in a location near where a dirty bomb/nuke was stashed, would you dump water on that person's face or if appropriate put a caterpiller in his room or even shove a glowstick up his donkey to get that information that would save that member of your family?

How many angels can you fit on the head of a pin? 

There is no such thing as the ticking time bomb scenario, except on 24.  You will never have perfect enough information -- in the moment you need to decide to do the deed -- to know that you will need to torture the info out of the person.  That perfect knowledge exists only in hindsight and on TV.  And you know what?  What kind of gutless wonders are we?  If we know -- we absolutely know for sure in our gut -- that it's necessary, do you think fear of prosecution would stop us?  Fear of an assault and battery charge?  I can tell you this, if I was in that situation and I was going to save thousands of lives, I'd go straight for the waterboard, and devil take the hindmost.  No American jury would convict me.

[USRufnex]

Bullcrap that's not what I'm saying at all. I was ONLY talking about high level AQ terrorists that have knowledge of an impending attack that would jeopardize American lives. Don't change the damn subject. Also, are you honestly trying to compare waterboarding and caterpillering the people responsible for killing 3000 plus Americans to Nazis gassing and killing 6 million Jews and putting their bodies in ovens? Do me a favor Mr. Moral Equivalence, watch/rewatch Shindler's List to get some freakin perspective. THREE "MEN" WERE WATERBOARDED AND ONE WAS CATERPILLERED.

You, RW, and others that want to treat these bastards like criminal suspects rather that terrorists captured on the field of battle (which is war by the way, ask any soldier) are in a pre-9/11 mindset. More interested in protecting their rights than the lives of Americans.

NO.
Per usual, you're playing your little "conservatives are real Americans" bull mularkey.

Don't talk to me about pre-9/11 mindset.... after 9/11, our allies were solidly behind us.... after 9/11, George W. Bush had a golden opportunity to unite this country.... after the invasion of Afghanistan, instead of going after the terrorists and Bin Laden and the biggest exporter of 9/11 terrorists (Saudi Arabia), we gave the Saudis a pass and invaded Iraq.... he blew it, royally.

In the grand scheme of history, the waterboarding of a few terrorists is not going to be looked upon as much more than a mistake... and not as unjust as FDR's internment of Japanese Americans after Pearl Harbor...

[we vs us]

The interesting part in all of this is Cheney, and why he's come out of the woodwork so forcefully to defend the torture regime.  Especially when the sitting president (from the opposition party no less!) seems very very reluctant to pursue the issue any further and would really rather it just fade away. 

Why won't Cheney let this die?  I thought this was the guy who didn't give two smiles about his legacy.

[USRufnex]

How many angels can you fit on the head of a pin? 

There is no such thing as the ticking time bomb scenario, except on 24.  You will never have perfect enough information -- in the moment you need to decide to do the deed -- to know that you will need to torture the info out of the person.  That perfect knowledge exists only in hindsight and on TV.  And you know what?  What kind of gutless wonders are we?  If we know -- we absolutely know for sure in our gut -- that it's necessary, do you think fear of prosecution would stop us?  Fear of an assault and battery charge?  I can tell you this, if I was in that situation and I was going to save thousands of lives, I'd go straight for the waterboard, and devil take the hindmost.  No American jury would convict me.

There's a great few mins of "The Fog of War" in which Robert McNamera claims that Curtis LeMay tells him if the United States had lost WWII, that he and many others would have been prosecuted for war crimes....

McNamara: Okay. Any military commander who is honest with himself, or with those he's speaking to, will admit that he has made mistakes in the application of military power. He's killed people unnecessarily — his own troops or other troops — through mistakes, through errors of judgment. A hundred, or thousands, or tens of thousands, maybe even a hundred thousand. But, he hasn't destroyed nations.

And the conventional wisdom is don't make the same mistake twice, learn from your mistakes. And we all do. Maybe we make the same mistake three times, but hopefully not four or five. They'll be no learning period with nuclear weapons. You make one mistake and you're going to destroy nations.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------

McNamara: I think the issue is not so much incendiary bombs. I think the issue is: in order to win a war should you kill 100,000 people in one night, by firebombing or any other way? LeMay's answer would be clearly "Yes."

"McNamara, do you mean to say that instead of killing 100,000, burning to death 100,000 Japanese civilians in that one night, we should have burned to death a lesser number or none? And then had our soldiers cross the beaches in Tokyo and been slaughtered in the tens of thousands? Is that what you're proposing? Is that moral? Is that wise?"

Why was it necessary to drop the nuclear bomb if LeMay was burning up Japan? And he went on from Tokyo to firebomb other cities. 58% of Yokohama. Yokohama is roughly the size of Cleveland. 58% of Cleveland destroyed. Tokyo is roughly the size of New York. 51% percent of New York destroyed. 99% of the equivalent of Chattanooga, which was Toyama. 40% of the equivalent of Los Angeles, which was Nagoya. This was all done before the dropping of the nuclear bomb, which by the way was dropped by LeMay's command.

Proportionality should be a guideline in war. Killing 50% to 90% of the people of 67 Japanese cities and then bombing them with two nuclear bombs is not proportional, in the minds of some people, to the objectives we were trying to achieve.

I don't fault Truman for dropping the nuclear bomb. The U.S.—Japanese War was one of the most brutal wars in all of human history ? kamikaze pilots, suicide, unbelievable. What one can criticize is that the human race prior to that time ? and today ? has not really grappled with what are, I'll call it, "the rules of war." Was there a rule then that said you shouldn't bomb, shouldn't kill, shouldn't burn to death 100,000 civilians in one night?

LeMay said, "If we'd lost the war, we'd all have been prosecuted as war criminals." And I think he's right. He, and I'd say I, were behaving as war criminals. LeMay recognized that what he was doing would be thought immoral if his side had lost. But what makes it immoral if you lose and not immoral if you win?

[Conan71]

In the grand scheme of history, the waterboarding of a few terrorists is not going to be looked upon as much more than a mistake... and not as unjust as FDR's internment of Japanese Americans after Pearl Harbor...

Thank you Ruf, finally someone who gets it.

[guido911]

The interesting part in all of this is Cheney, and why he's come out of the woodwork so forcefully to defend the torture regime.  Especially when the sitting president (from the opposition party no less!) seems very very reluctant to pursue the issue any further and would really rather it just fade away. 

Why won't Cheney let this die?  I thought this was the guy who didn't give two smiles about his legacy.

Because Obama released the memos and his minions were pushing the truth commission. Hell, even today Pelosi is arguing that Bush tortured folks. Cheney is out there trying to set the record as he sees it and defending himself.

[Conan71]

Is Pelosi running for cover or is Panetta cooking the books of history at the CIA?

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20090514/ap_on_go_co/us_pelosi_torture

[guido911]

Is Pelosi running for cover or is Panetta cooking the books of history at the CIA?

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20090514/ap_on_go_co/us_pelosi_torture

Crowder destroys Pelosi:

My avatar is laughing at the video.

[FOTD]

Have your avatar watch Cheeney's treasonous remarks AGAIN today.

[Wilbur]

Most folks don't get it.

Enhanced interrogation has always happened and will continue to happen.

Blame Bush for bringing it out in the open and making it part of public debate.  At least he had the wayvoes to admit the U.S. actually does this, but bad policy to release.

Blame Obama for trying to hide behind an order that says it will no longer happen, when he knows darn well it will happen during his watch, too.