Penis Cheney

I think that we should go back to what Clinton did. He didn't bother with all this bullshit about what is torture and what isn't. He just gave the suspected terrorists to Egypt, who tortured the bejeezus out of them. The solution is simple.

1. We can't torture. It's morally and ethically wrong

2. But the information we need cannot be gained through normal questioning.

Solution? Give them to a country that DOES torture prisoners, like Egypt. Let them get their hands dirty.

Actually, because of the brutality of the countries that we handed them over to, I would let each enemy combatant choose between being interrogated by us, which really nothing we did is really torture, or being handed over to a country that WILL for certain torture them. And not this dumb waterboarding half-measure ****. I'm talking about stuff that they can only show in a SAW movie.
 
I think that we should go back to what Clinton did. He didn't bother with all this bullshit about what is torture and what isn't. He just gave the suspected terrorists to Egypt, who tortured the bejeezus out of them. The solution is simple.

1. We can't torture. It's morally and ethically wrong

2. But the information we need cannot be gained through normal questioning.

Solution? Give them to a country that DOES torture prisoners, like Egypt. Let them get their hands dirty.

Actually, because of the brutality of the countries that we handed them over to, I would let each enemy combatant choose between being interrogated by us, which really nothing we did is really torture, or being handed over to a country that WILL for certain torture them. And not this dumb waterboarding half-measure ****. I'm talking about stuff that they can only show in a SAW movie.

So then you think waterboarding isn't torture?
 
not really, no. It's a mean thing to do to someone, but I wouldn't consider it torture.

Then lets see you go through it, or have one of your family go through it while you watch. I mean if it's not torture then you should be up for it to prove that it's not right?
 
King, don't go there man, thats not an argument thats just cruel.
For one you can't hope to put someone in that kind of position. Sandman is not a soldier, nor (I dont think) is any of his family. There would be no reason.

Anything that causes lasting bodily harm is considered torture in my book. Waterboarding itself does not.

Psychological stuff is not considered torture as far as I'm concerned.
 
King, don't go there man, thats not an argument thats just cruel.

Anything that causes bodily harm to another person for information is considered torture in my book.

Psychological stuff isnt.

He is the one that said it wasn't torture. If it's not then he would be fine with it happening to someone as a means of punishment.
 
Now, now. Waterboarding is torture. Allen Keller -and he's not my uncle, is the founder and director of the Bellevue/N.Y.U. Program for Survivors of Torture has had in treatment some tortured people. Abouth the waterboarding practice, he said to the New Yorker that it's certainly a form of torture and that some of the victims are still traumatized after years. Also, I dont think the infos you can obatin with it have all this importance. I mean, these people will say anything, literally anything to stop your torture.

There's more: a japanese soldier, back in 1947, was processed by the US [and condemned] cause he used waterboarding on an american civil. His method of torture were also kicks, smacks, cigarette burns, beatin people with a bat, etc etc. Waterboarding was defined as a war crime.

So, I can safely say that yes, waterboarding is a torture, even if someone here thinks otherwise. Probably he'll tell us that " a dive in the water" is not torture. Oh wait, these were Cheney's words.

And just to define this once and for all, waterboarding leads the victim to believe that death is imminent. IIRC, the US laws tell that threat of imminent death is torture. Also, the UN Report of the Committee Against Torture [2006], says that any interrogation practice (like waterboarding but not only) is cruel and every state of the union have to stop it. If it's not torture, I dont think the UN had released such document.

 
Then how do we suggest we get our intelligence from enemies? Some cocoa and a cuddle?

Look I'm not saying we put them on the wheel and shove screws under their thumbnails. But the threat of imminent death is gonna work better than saying pretty please.
 
Then how do we suggest we get our intelligence from enemies? Some cocoa and a cuddle?

Look I'm not saying we put them on the wheel and shove screws under their thumbnails. But the threat of imminent death is gonna work better than saying pretty please.

That it works better is what you say, I'm not so sure. And by the american laws, as I already said, threat of imminent death is torture. So, just say that you support torture. I for one cannot change your idea, but it would be nice to see some coherency, if you think that's ok, you think torture is ok. You're supportin torture. Good for you, what can i say?
:-)

Also, informations obtained under torture aren't so valuable. Because people [and I mean everyone, also me and you] will tell whatever you wanna hear to make you stop. You've already seen this happenin in your country. I don't know how to get intelligence, that's not my job. What I know is that a civilized country do not torture. Just like your ex-president once said.
 
Last edited:
So the american law says what torture is, that doesnt mean I agree with it.

We do have our own opinions ya know.

and in the case of false info, their going to give that one way or another, so threat of imminent death would probably give them dire circumstances to give proper information.

I'm not saying you kill them, but making them think that would scare them.

At the very least they wont be doing what they were doing anymore...
 

how to help support popgeeks, popgeeks, pop geeks

Latest News & Videos

Latest News

Back
Top