US admits extreme 'interrogation' methods

[Mojlnir]

Playing the Devil's Advocate is amusing sometimes, especially when it evokes laughable responses.

 

To Malchik:

 

I don't find your response laughable, rather I find it well thought out and respectable. The comparatively few people who are resisting in Iraq are not the general citizenry but seem to be remants of Saddam's regime combined with religious radicals and foreign fighters coming to aid the fight against US occupation (much like mujahideen in 80's Afghanistan). Their methods, while differring tactically, are no more excusable morally than are US actions. They are after the same goal as US forces are, just the opposite outcome. You cannot justify their methods while at the same time condemning US actions. That is hypocritical.

 

As for torture having existed for thousands of years, I find that to be perfectly acceptable explaination. We have not really evolved all that much Malchik, despite what people want to beleive. We have increased our scientific knowledge and our technical abilities, but that does not equate to evolution. Humankind still engages in exactly the same behavior that has existed since we climbed out of the trees and started walking upright. The only difference is that we have gotten so good at it that not everyone needs to be involved. Therefore, people like us have the luxury to sit around, drink coffee and wax moralistic. Or spend their lives playing Ultima Online and looking for crack-pot conspiracy theories in their spare time.

 

As to Saddam, my defense of his personality is far from mealy mouthed. I have spent more time than I wish in his (albeit removed) company because the man fascinates me and I have spent the last two years of grad school researching him. I can gladly supply you with all the reference material you can handle concerning Saddam, his childhood, parentage, situation as a teen, political activities, speeches, interviews and psych profiles that you can handle. He is a narcissitic sociopath and a constant threat to his countrymen and neighbors as long as he remains in any position of power. As to our having put him there, that is not correct at all. That fault lies solely with Great Britain. British post-war division of the Middle East has resulted in every problem that exists in the region today. As a side, shall we discuss British colonial control policies? You see Malchik, history is often an uncomfortable double-edged sword.

 

I do agree with you that the unintended consiquence of US actions has been an increased rallying call for terrorists. I find it completely mind-boggling that the Bushies didn't realized what their actions would result it. However, we must deal with the situation at hand and the US must gather intelligence. I don't like it any more than you do, but until November there is little that can be done about it. Lets see what happens when the US attempts to hand off power to the new Iraqi government.

 

To Shakkara:

 

Your attempts at antagonizing people are contemptible. You actually wish that someone died? And that a 10 year old grew up tossing grenades at people? I find it amusing that you feel that your opinion is so iron-clad with truth that you fail to debate, making only sniping comments at people trying to discuss topics in a reasonable fashion.

 

You and I have crossed swords before, and if you want to actually debate rather than sling mud then I am ready. Until that time, I will not respond to your pathetic drivel.

[Dark0ne]

Dark0ne apparantly likes to pop in to show he's totally ignorant when it comes down to understanding my points of view.

 

The people of Iraq have sufficient means to get rid of the US themselves, it's not my fault that they do not make use of them. And what if I'd go there and attack some yanks? Wouldn't that make me a hypocrite when you take my previous posts into account? You seem to have no clue at all what I'm going on about, do you, but rather use strawman tactics to make some childish and inane post.

 

Haha...maybe, maybe, but for someone who gets worked up about these political issues - you do a lot of yapping, no actions ... like most politicians. Maybe you've found your career.

[Zmid]

Alright, enough. Yes, the war was initiated on somewhat questionable grounds...great job pointing it out! For the 1 billionth time.

Why should it not be pointed out for the 1 billionth time? Or 2 billionth? Or 10 billionth? Britain and America are supposed to be the champions of democracy and 'civilisation'. The fact their governments went to war on grounds that were questionable at best and non-existant at worst make those governments extremely hypocritical and this action is totally against the principles these countries are supposed to stand for.

 

The situation as it now presents itself is what must be dealt with, not hypothetical "revisionist" scenario's of what might have been. The fact of the matter is that we are currently at war, and though it might not really feel like it at home, people are dying every day on dusty streets 9,000 miles away.

 

Agreed. We don't have a time machine, so we can't turn back time. We just have to make sure that, at the next election, those responsible don't get the chance to repeat this.

 

And, guess what, the American military is not in Iraqi to pursecute its citizens wantonly for sh*ts and giggles, they are attempting to rebuild a once powerful nation that was held hostage by a sociopathic dictator.

 

But the American military (and there is some evidence that other countries militaries are involved as well) are persecuting Iraqi citizens. Whether it is 'for sh*ts and giggles' or not is largely irrelevant. The very fact this is happening, whatever the reasons behind it, is, again, against the very principles America is supposed to stand for.

 

Do you guys know why tactics like torture are employed? Because at some point along the way, there was a 10 year old kid that walked up to a soldier and threw a grenade into his truck.

 

Unless you're trying to say that this means all 10 year old kids should be arrested and tortured for information, which is plainly ridiculous, I fail to see your point here.

 

I have a friend who was in a Marine counter terrorist unit that was stationed in Saudi during the 90's and listening to him talk made me understand that while the tactics are abhorrent, they serve a purpose. Torture (as Dark has pointed out) is an intensely effective method of collecting critical information.

 

So us arresting people on the slightest excuse and torturing them is 'efficiently gathering intelligence', and is therefore OK, but Saddam doing it is 'being an evil *******', and therefore isn't? That is hypocritical in the extreme.

 

"Do you know where the weapons cache is?" "Nope"

 

Sounds familiar.

 

*Looks at sig*

 

Torture has existed for as long as man has gone to war and any nation that has previously been at war has employed it. There are no clean hands here. NONE.

 

True. The only thing that makes this war different is that we are torturing the very people we are supposed to have liberated.

 

Things are going to get a lot worse in the world before they get any better. Divergent groups are at such loggerheads that there is little chance that a radically anti-Western group is simply going to turn tail and sign on to globalization.

 

And by beginning this war in Iraq, we have made this much worse. By the torturing of Iraqis, we are continuing to make it worse.

 

Disagreement breeds conflict and conflict breeds war. And to be sucessfull in war you need intelligence. Intelligence comes from several sources: satellite imagery, signals and humint (human intelligence). A satellite cannot tell you when the next meeting will be held or where. Signals can be avoided or encrypted. People are excellent sources of information, but they tend not to talk if they believe that the punishment inflicted on them by their comrades will be greater than that of their captors.  Hence torture. Talk to any military servicee person who has gone through POW training and watch them shudder. Its not fun. Its not nice to talk about and its hard to find justification when you're standing on the sidelines making comments based on network news.

 

First of all, this assumes that everybody who is arrested and tortured is a terrorist. This is simply not true. Secondly, even if that were true, the very fact they were tortured can, and does, make the West seem hypocritical, and thus totally defeats the larger purpose of promoting and spreading democracy.

 

War is here to stay. Torture is here to stay. Terrorism is here to stay.  Learn to deal with it. Until then keep making all the witty remarks you want.

 

I must have missed something. I thought people were making serious points, hence 'debate'.

 

Or try to invade the US, cause thats such a great plan.

 

To be perfectly frank, there is more justification to invade the US than there was to invade Iraq, at least as regards WMD, anyway.

 

EDIT:

 

PS:

And if it doesn't work' date=' I may move to Britain.[/quote']

 

I wouldn't bother. Britain is slowly but surely becoming the 51st state of America anyway.

[pharzon]

You're making some very good points there, White Wolf.

And Mojlnir, while I understand that you are being protective about your country, I fail to see many of your points. But your points help create a debate, so much appreciated anyway! (although I don't agree with you in the slightest)

 

You talk about torture being here to stay - and apparently you find that okay.

But don't you think it hypocritical that the US actually signed the Geneva convention, which prohibits any kind of torture?

Okay, if your country wants to torture PoW's, then go ahead. But a prerequisite for doing this would be: admit it. Allow this world's citizens and countries to judge you for what you really are, instead of claiming: we fight for democracy and are the standard bearer of all free countries in the world. Well if democracy is including torture, then my definition must be all wrong.

This hypocritical behaviour is even worse than admitting to torture civilians - of whom some aren't guilty.

Okay, so deny that the US has any responsibilty whatsoever concerning Iraq? Who sold them the weapons in the first place?

Furthermore, you certainly can't deny - unless you haven't got the slightest clue what you are talking about - that the US has had a major part to play in the inauguration of many dictators in South America as well as in Central America.

If you don't agree with me here, do your homework.. (Nicaragua anyone?)

 

 

pharzon..

[Dark0ne]

The paradox that is American foreign policy, in its simplicity, is forcing democracy on nations whose current leaders are not to their liking. This just is. As one documentary put it - the USA is an empire in denial of actually being an empire.

 

The USA is the current super power - and I'm sure China will do things just as bad as the American's when their turn comes - except it'll be in a different language of course ... so whining "they'll be gone soon" is denial and niavety in full appearance.

 

You can all whine about it as much as you want, but if you're not an American voter then there's little you can do (and speculatively there's little you can do even if you are a voter). I myself am surprised that you're all suprised by this apparently "new" revelation that the US isn't everything it says it is, is two-faced, hypocritical, low and what not. Are you all niave to think that the US has ever been civilised...or any of the great nations are?

 

History has a tendency to repeat itself - in the 18th century the British thought they were civilised. In the 2nd century the Romans thought they were civilised. In the 20th century BC the Egyptians thought they were civilised. What the hell is civilised for god's sake?

 

We all seem to raise ourselves to plateu's of high moral esteem - "Oh, I don't like they way they've done this" - "I wouldn't have done it like that" - "You call that civilised" - and quite frankly, its pathetic. Its not a matter of one nation's arrogance, its a matter of human nature.

 

A famous writer once wrote ... Shut up and stop whining.

 

I concur.

[dunmer_jediknight]

lol@ Dark0ne great comment and I agree if all you can do is whine SHUT UP. I am an american and a patriot at that. I hate Bush and didn't vote for him ( voted for Nader and will stand by that vote) and I will not vote for him this time. Yes there is a chance that he will get elected agine (does anyone know if he has any family members as gov. in any states other then florida? ^_^ ). And I didn't agree that we should have gone to Iraq, if Saddam really had the weapons he would have used them (he did in the first war) but I have heard many times by different news agencys that on a whole the Iraqi people are glad that we are there and after the 30th thay hope that a SMALL number of troops will stay to help TRAIN the new Iraqi army.If anything else happens on the 30th the world will stop supporting the US and we may see something worst then a invassion of the US ( lol no nation ,or group of nations, would be stupid enough to do that) a ban of US goods and services. Yes there have been mistakes on the treatment of POW's but the individuals involed have been removed and corrections have been made. Yes there have been attemts at changing the treatment of POW's and I seriouly doubt that the UN will let the US change those policies, even thou Bush will make the attemt.

[Zmid]

The paradox that is American foreign policy, in its simplicity, is forcing democracy on nations whose current leaders are not to their liking. This just is.

Essentially the thing America is supposed to stand against.

 

As one documentary put it - the USA is an empire in denial of actually being an empire.

 

Spot on. Extremely well put.

 

The USA is the current super power - and I'm sure China will do things just as bad as the American's when their turn comes - except it'll be in a different language of course ... so whining "they'll be gone soon" is denial and niavety in full appearance.

 

If the history of the last 100 years or so is anything to go by, America will be the dominant country for quite some time to come. My only hope is that the current administration gets voted out and someone who actually knows what they're doing gets in.

 

You can all whine about it as much as you want, but if you're not an American voter then there's little you can do (and speculatively there's little you can do even if you are a voter). I myself am surprised that you're all suprised by this apparently "new" revelation that the US isn't everything it says it is, is two-faced, hypocritical, low and what not. Are you all niave to think that the US has ever been civilised...or any of the great nations are?

 

I'm glad to see that you agree with me.

 

History has a tendency to repeat itself - in the 18th century the British thought they were civilised. In the 2nd century the Romans thought they were civilised. In the 20th century BC the Egyptians thought they were civilised. What the hell is civilised for god's sake?

 

This could spark off a whole new debate, but, in essence, 'civilised' is having morals and values and sticking to them.

 

We all seem to raise ourselves to plateu's of high moral esteem - "Oh, I don't like they way they've done this" - "I wouldn't have done it like that" - "You call that civilised" - and quite frankly, its pathetic. Its not a matter of one nation's arrogance, its a matter of human nature.

 

No. The British and American governments have raised themselves to plateaus of high morality, then totally abandoned these morals with the Iraq War.

 

A famous writer once wrote ... Shut up and stop whining.

 

I concur.

 

Why should we shut up? If we just keep talking about it, and therefore keep refreshing people's memories about it, both ourselves and them don't forget about it (as Tony Blair seems to want us to), so, come general election time, we remember about it when we're voting. If you look at the results of the recent local elections in the UK, this has already had an effect. Massive losses for Labour, massive gains for the Tories and Lib Dems, and what was the reason that came up again and again when former Labour voters were asked why they didn't vote Labour? Iraq.

[cactoblasta]

The problem with elections though is that it assumes that the opposition will do things any differently. Any reasonably in-depth analysis of domestic politics in just about any western nation will show that there are considerable similarities in foreign policy between both of the major parties. For example with the US the Democrats were responsible for the bombing of the Balkans while the Republicans invaded Iraq. There's no guarantee that the Democrats will not continue the same policies in Iraq (consider that Kerry has refused to say that he will withdraw any troops).

 

It doesn't matter who you vote for because the candidates tend to act in a similar way regardless of party or promises.

 

The greatest benefit of the democratic system is that it allows the populace/peasants an illusion of power whilst still keeping that power firmly in the hands of the rulers. In addition because membership of the elite isn't hereditary the system can survive almost anything without ever radically changing ideologies or plans.

 

Torture occurs because we put our faith in the system rather than in other people.

[pharzon]

The paradox that is American foreign policy, in its simplicity, is forcing democracy on nations whose current leaders are not to their liking. This just is. As one documentary put it - the USA is an empire in denial of actually being an empire.

 

The USA is the current super power - and I'm sure China will do things just as bad as the American's when their turn comes - except it'll be in a different language of course ... so whining "they'll be gone soon" is denial and niavety in full appearance.

 

You can all whine about it as much as you want, but if you're not an American voter then there's little you can do (and speculatively there's little you can do even if you are a voter). I myself am surprised that you're all suprised by this apparently "new" revelation that the US isn't everything it says it is, is two-faced, hypocritical, low and what not. Are you all niave to think that the US has ever been civilised...or any of the great nations are?

 

History has a tendency to repeat itself - in the 18th century the British thought they were civilised. In the 2nd century the Romans thought they were civilised. In the 20th century BC the Egyptians thought they were civilised. What the hell is civilised for god's sake?

 

We all seem to raise ourselves to plateu's of high moral esteem - "Oh, I don't like they way they've done this" - "I wouldn't have done it like that" - "You call that civilised" - and quite frankly, its pathetic. Its not a matter of one nation's arrogance, its a matter of human nature.

 

A famous writer once wrote ... Shut up and stop whining.

 

I concur.

Tsk tsk. This "whining" comment is comical to the extreme. Just because you don't agree with us, there is no need to try to add weight to your words with such a stupid comment about us whining.

And NO, I'm not surprised in any way that the US are behaving like that. This situation is just yet another in a long series of hypocritical Ameircan actions.

But this is supposed to be a forum for debate, and thus I will debate the sitaution at hand.

Yes, China might do the same when they became a superpower, but that hardly justifies the American actions.

Your comment about "The paradox that is American foreign policy, in its simplicity, is forcing democracy on nations whose current leaders are not to their liking."

No, the US are NOT forcing democracy down on such nations in most cases - like Venezuela, Chile etc. etc. They are replacing a democratically elected leader with a pro-American dictator. As easy as that.

Once again, your conclusion about any critics of the US should just stop whining is laughable. One of the good things about democracy is that you have the freedom of speech, and thus can critizise and discuss every action any country makes. Without this right, democracy doesn't exist and the majority of people would be ignorant of many important things.

And dunmer_jediknight, good for you that you have seen that the Iraqies are glad because of your occupation. Either that was long time ago when SH was just brought down or you're seeing the typical American agitation-channels.

 

To comment on what cactoblasta said: I agree. That is a problem that all the greater parties have almost identical polictics. But nonetheless I refuse to believe that Kerry could lead America worse than Bush.

 

 

 

pharzon..

[Dark0ne]

Tsk tsk. This "whining" comment is comical to the extreme. Just because you don't agree with us, there is no need to try to add weight to your words with such a stupid comment about us whining.

 

Ok...in your words, what are you doing? This is not debating, this is stating. There's quite a difference.

 

whine

v. whined, whin·ing, whines

v. intr.

 

To complain or protest in a childish fashion.

 

de·bate

v. de·bat·ed, de·bat·ing, de·bates

v. intr.

 

To consider something; deliberate.

To engage in argument by discussing opposing points.

 

You're not considering anything, you are stating what you believe to be the truth. I trust the Dutch media like the American media - not at all. Both are extremes of one another, and both are the faces of Propaganda, not unbiased representations of the stories at hand. People are foolish to take word for truth in this day and age.

 

Your comment about "The paradox that is American foreign policy, in its simplicity, is forcing democracy on nations whose current leaders are not to their liking."

No, the US are NOT forcing democracy down on such nations in most cases - like Venezuela, Chile etc. etc. They are replacing a democratically elected leader with a pro-American dictator. As easy as that.

 

*Looks at whats happening in Iraq*..nice one.

 

Once again, your conclusion about any critics of the US should just stop whining is laughable. One of the good things about democracy is that you have the freedom of speech, and thus can critizise and discuss every action any country makes. Without this right, democracy doesn't exist and the majority of people would be ignorant of many important things.

 

It's called acceptance of one's fate...the fate of not having a voice in the age of false democracy. I grow to live with it because there's nothing I can do about it.