Announcing your intention to torture, and then having crowd cheer it, is treasonous.

This the 3rd duplicate thread on this topic.

 

Why do you think torture doesn't work? It might not provide much in the way of valuable information, but it certainly works to scare people.

Are we better than that? No, we are not. You can be all love and hugs for the enemy, but love never won any wars.

What does "maintaining our humanity" mean? You think humans are some noble creation of a benevolent god who loves us all, and we should love as equally as he does? What do you mean by that?

 

The system our CIA used went this way.

A cloth is put on the prisoners face.
His body is tilted a bit so his head is lower
Water is poured on the cloth

Maximum time allowed was 30 seconds

Correct, but you can hold your breath for a half a minute.

Those terrorists are tougher than Democrats believe they are.

Compare that to a leg blown off where the soldier suffered. A piece of cake compared.

How often in the machine shop did you get hurt? Was you a baby about it?

 

You've read too much philosophy to get through to these people. Apparently, these are "advanced" concepts lol.

 

It works. Why do you think they caught up to Bin Laden?

Oh yessireebob, it sure works.

If it did not work, the CIA never would have done it. Our navy would not water board navy guys if it failed.

Why train if it fails?

 

I think they forget the innate capacity for ill that exists in humanity and is thus a part that same humanity. Perhaps they mean solidarity as a species, a concept that doesn't actually exist other than the fact we're all one species? Maybe? Torture has it's use when put in practice, hence its existence in the first place..

 

Not philosophy lately. I was thinking of Genghis Kahn's tactics. He scared the muslims and chinese so badly that they refused to even fight back when his troops showed up at their cities. Just opened the gates and let him in. He was quite nice about it and only took the hot chicks, and whatever guys looked like they could handle themselves in battle. Left the old folks alone and went about his way. If they fought, he would have every man, woman, child, and dog put to the sword. If half of them surrendered, he'd put them in charge of the battering rams in order to spare his troops.

 

Oh yeah, when I was 16 a guy picked on me and my friends, until one day, I got out of my car in front of half the school and beat him to a pulp with a shovel. I was surprised at how rather easy it was once that first blow hit the knee. I had no idea a guy could screech like that and the elbow has a very solid feel when it hits the shovel steel. Like when you get a good hit on a baseball. After that no one so much as even looked at me funny and its like that to this day. When you have to deal with a bully, you do it with absolute force so that they wont even think about doing it again. Overwhelming force is not the first choice but sometimes its the only choice.
So you've never lost a fight eh? How would you win if someone sucker punches you?

 

It is entirely inappropriate for a presidential candidate to run on a platform of torturing our enemies. Whether we torture them or not, torturing people is generally not acceptable as a "founding principle" for a radical change in our nations political landscape.

Never mind that the more our country saying things like this the more people we push into being radicalized.

 

That's exactly how I would approach war. Once you commit to battle, there can be no rules. We approach things with such stupidity sometimes...

I keep hearing that Dan Carlin has an awesome podcast about Ghengis Khan, but I haven't gotten around to listening to it, yet.

 

It works according to who? To you?

According to the Senate Intelligence Report on the capture of Bin Laden, their EIT consistently worked against them, generated false and misleading information, and was generally unreliable as has been documented and demonstrated across a wide range of uses, times, places, techniques, and applications.

http://www.cnn.com/2014/12/10/opinion/bergen-torture-path-to-bin-laden/

 

Once both sides have dehumanized themselves, there can be no winner.

 

Yeah, it's around 15 hours of incredible story telling. There's so little known about the mongols that he manages to cover what we do know quite well. I would call his other stuff great primers, but his wrath of the kahns episodes are about as in-depth as you are going to get.

 

I guess 'Whine' Boarding is okay then. (Sarc.)

​

 

His territories were also the safest to walk through unmolested by anyone. But if you went to war with him, be prepared to take massive losses, which is why so few risked it.

 

So if we're nice to the terrorists when we capture them the other terrorists will cut off people's heads in a much 'nicer' way?

You need to introduce yourself to reality.

Let me reword the premise of your post.

Trumps says he's willing to do what's necessary to protect the people of this country and they cheered him for it. That's normal.

 

So we are trying to scare them?

I don't think these people give a damn what we do. Which only bolsters my argument that we maintain our humanity as a country, our morality as a country by choosing not to torture people. We make that choice for ourselves, not for them. Propoganda-wise, they would probably love it if we started torturing people as an attempt to level some pointless imbalance.

What do I mean by "maintaining our humanity"?

By "our," I mean "American."

By "humanity," I mean what we aspire to be as a civilized society.

Civilization and barbarity do not co-exist well. We should hold ourselves and our country to far higher standard than ISIS. This you must concede. We don't need to torture.

Behaving like Ghengis Khan is not the answer.

 

If we aren't, we sure should give it a shot.

No, they don't co-exist well. Higher standards won't win any battles, and without winning any battles, we lose the war to the barbarians.

He would heartily approve of drone strikes.

 

And those Japanese and Germans that did torture were prosecuted for war crimes.

- - - Updated - - -

Unless Obama, like he is now, is using them. Then the right loses their minds over it.

 

Drone strikes would kill Ghengis Khan.

 

Not really. My thread is about getting our troops tortured.

 

Using torture is yet more conservative chest beating, playing well to the Internet Tough Guys Brigade and endangering real troops while accomplishing nothing. At least nothing insofar as achieving victory over anyone but that isn't what Republicans, particularly the higher ups in the Military Industrial complex, want anyway as anyone with even half a brain finds glaringly obvious. How else will they continue to throw money at themselves, robbing us blind by killing our children

As just one example of how much this should be clear to anyone I bring up the begged question of truth serum. It's generally been proven effective, very much unlike torture, yet conservatives seem to have never heard of it. Odd.

 

That's what we call military readiness.

- - - Updated - - -

THAT IS NOTTTT how we fought the revolutionary war. And a darn good thing we didn't. ON PURPOSE.

 

He's definitely one hell of a personality. I've watched 6 hours of him and Joe Rogan shooting the (*)(*)(*)(*), and I was pretty impressed. The guy boasted that he could double CNN's ratings immediately if they replaced Blitzer with him, and I tend to agree lol.

 

To the victors go the spoils of war. To the losers...

Like the democrats when Bush was using them.

I don't particularly care about democrats or republicans. They are two sides of the same coin. What I do care about is ending these eternal wars. There's the fast way to win them, and the long way to lose them. When fighting guys like ISIS, the long way is a guaranteed lose. We could wipe them all out now, and we would still lose simply because the damage done to our economy has been so devastating.

Since it doesn't appear that Obama or Hillary want to end these wars and are determined to continue killing muslims, and the democrats are happy with this state of affairs, what's wrong with being in favor of getting it over with as quickly as possible?