|
On July 10 2009 07:10 daz wrote:Show nested quote +On July 10 2009 06:32 L wrote:
I looked at page one and assumed this would be an Aegraen troll fest at page 3.
I was right. yeah it started off as a debate with me and aegrean totally just hijacked this shit. i give the guy props for being so inflammatory
I only appear to be inflammatory when I'm surrounded by those on the left of the political aisle. Those over at Redstate, Michelle Malkin, HotAir, and those within the IC understand what it takes in a time of WAR to use every tool at our disposal to keep America safe.
Travis is the same type of person who would be shouting from the rooftoops to treat Nazi's like we would those under arrest at a police station. That type of thinking would have caused us to lose WWII.
We wouldn't have had to go through this prolonged Iraq situation, if Clinton had acted upon the INTELLIGENCE he received when Saudi Arabia had Bin Laden on a platter ready for us on multiple occasions.
I'm sure travis wouldn't be singing the same tune if it was his family's life that was extinguished. Morality has a time and place, just remember, these are the same people Obama let out of Gitmo who ended up going back and fighting for the same cells we captured them from.
It reminds me of the scene in Private Ryan where the wussy let the Nazi go naively thinking he was going to meander himself back to the Allies and surrender himself, instead he just takes the blindfold off and runs back to German lines where he later ends up fighting against that same platoon. War calls for tough decisions, everything isn't black and white as much as you would love it to be so.
|
On July 10 2009 07:29 Aegraen wrote:Show nested quote +On July 10 2009 07:10 daz wrote:On July 10 2009 06:32 L wrote:
I looked at page one and assumed this would be an Aegraen troll fest at page 3.
I was right. yeah it started off as a debate with me and aegrean totally just hijacked this shit. i give the guy props for being so inflammatory I only appear to be inflammatory when I'm surrounded by those on the left of the political aisle. Those over at Redstate, Michelle Malkin, HotAir, and those within the IC understand what it takes in a time of WAR to use every tool at our disposal to keep America safe. Travis is the same type of person who would be shouting from the rooftoops to treat Nazi's like we would those under arrest at a police station. That type of thinking would have caused us to lose WWII.
I would suggest we treat prisoners morally regardless of their actions or beliefs.
We wouldn't have had to go through this prolonged Iraq situation, if Clinton had acted upon the INTELLIGENCE he received when Saudi Arabia had Bin Laden on a platter ready for us on multiple occasions.
or if we didn't go into iraq in the first place
I'm sure travis wouldn't be singing the same tune if it was his family's life that was extinguished. Morality has a time and place, just remember, these are the same people Obama let out of Gitmo who ended up going back and fighting for the same cells we captured them from.
morality is not black and white and sometimes a seemingly evil deed can be done for the greater good, but that is an inherit part of morality. morality has a time and a place and that time and place is now and always.
It reminds me of the scene in Private Ryan where the wussy let the Nazi go naively thinking he was going to meander himself back to the Allies and surrender himself, instead he just takes the blindfold off and runs back to German lines where he later ends up fighting against that same platoon. War calls for tough decisions, everything isn't black and white as much as you would love it to be so.
and this makes it clear you don't know what my position is.
|
On July 10 2009 07:50 travis wrote:Show nested quote +On July 10 2009 07:29 Aegraen wrote:On July 10 2009 07:10 daz wrote:On July 10 2009 06:32 L wrote:
I looked at page one and assumed this would be an Aegraen troll fest at page 3.
I was right. yeah it started off as a debate with me and aegrean totally just hijacked this shit. i give the guy props for being so inflammatory I only appear to be inflammatory when I'm surrounded by those on the left of the political aisle. Those over at Redstate, Michelle Malkin, HotAir, and those within the IC understand what it takes in a time of WAR to use every tool at our disposal to keep America safe. Travis is the same type of person who would be shouting from the rooftoops to treat Nazi's like we would those under arrest at a police station. That type of thinking would have caused us to lose WWII. I would suggest we treat prisoners morally regardless of their actions or beliefs. Show nested quote +
We wouldn't have had to go through this prolonged Iraq situation, if Clinton had acted upon the INTELLIGENCE he received when Saudi Arabia had Bin Laden on a platter ready for us on multiple occasions.
or if we didn't go into iraq in the first place Show nested quote +
I'm sure travis wouldn't be singing the same tune if it was his family's life that was extinguished. Morality has a time and place, just remember, these are the same people Obama let out of Gitmo who ended up going back and fighting for the same cells we captured them from.
morality is not black and white and sometimes a seemingly evil deed can be done for the greater good, but that is an inherit part of morality. morality has a time and a place and that time and place is now and always. Show nested quote +
It reminds me of the scene in Private Ryan where the wussy let the Nazi go naively thinking he was going to meander himself back to the Allies and surrender himself, instead he just takes the blindfold off and runs back to German lines where he later ends up fighting against that same platoon. War calls for tough decisions, everything isn't black and white as much as you would love it to be so.
and this makes it clear you don't know what my position is.
I know full well what your position is. You would have done the same thing as in the movie. You wouldn't have made the tough call to shoot him instead you would have let him return to his compatriots to fight another day and kill more of your fellow soldiers.
The whole point to the scenario is that in a time of war there is no morality. You do what you have to, to survive. There is no utopian morality to uphold. Morality matters not when you are dead. If you truly do not believe what disntinguishes ourselves from them then I would suggest looking up female genitalia mutilation, honor killings, patriachal society where women are subserviant, stonings to death, and many other abhorrent things. You see, what seperates ourselves in a time of war, is that we don't target civilians, we don't hide behind civilians, and we don't behead our adversaries and prance around with it.
Morality is a peacetime/civilian endeavor that everyone should strive to best live by. You also have no understanding of intelligence methods. You say there is a million other ways to obtain this information because of our highly advanced technology. That is patently false. If you knew anything about MASINT (Which is what mostly employs the latest and greatest), you would know that EACH method is used SPECIFICALLY for different types of information. For example, you can't expect to use Electronic Intelligence (ELINT) and gather information about the latest telemetry readings from the latest N.K. missle launches. You wouldn't expect to use Imagery Intelligence and obtain conversation recordings.
In order to extract the information that only top level operatives know you have to use methods that are very precise and specific. You have to evaluate each situation as being unique and tailor the needs to that situation. You wouldn't ever use those methods on low level operatives, or even mid-level. It is specifically used on the upper echelon members precisely because they hold the most valuable information. In fact, it would be the last method to employ after exhausting other routes.
It's abundantly clear that no one understands how the IC works, which is to be expected, there aren't that many of us. It is quite hilarious to see some absurd comments come out, but then again I guess that is the general thought of the civilian population when they have no idea how the Intelligence apparatus' work. Ignorance begets ignorance I suppose.
|
On July 10 2009 08:12 Aegraen wrote:Show nested quote +On July 10 2009 07:50 travis wrote:On July 10 2009 07:29 Aegraen wrote:On July 10 2009 07:10 daz wrote:On July 10 2009 06:32 L wrote:
I looked at page one and assumed this would be an Aegraen troll fest at page 3.
I was right. yeah it started off as a debate with me and aegrean totally just hijacked this shit. i give the guy props for being so inflammatory I only appear to be inflammatory when I'm surrounded by those on the left of the political aisle. Those over at Redstate, Michelle Malkin, HotAir, and those within the IC understand what it takes in a time of WAR to use every tool at our disposal to keep America safe. Travis is the same type of person who would be shouting from the rooftoops to treat Nazi's like we would those under arrest at a police station. That type of thinking would have caused us to lose WWII. I would suggest we treat prisoners morally regardless of their actions or beliefs.
We wouldn't have had to go through this prolonged Iraq situation, if Clinton had acted upon the INTELLIGENCE he received when Saudi Arabia had Bin Laden on a platter ready for us on multiple occasions.
or if we didn't go into iraq in the first place
I'm sure travis wouldn't be singing the same tune if it was his family's life that was extinguished. Morality has a time and place, just remember, these are the same people Obama let out of Gitmo who ended up going back and fighting for the same cells we captured them from.
morality is not black and white and sometimes a seemingly evil deed can be done for the greater good, but that is an inherit part of morality. morality has a time and a place and that time and place is now and always.
It reminds me of the scene in Private Ryan where the wussy let the Nazi go naively thinking he was going to meander himself back to the Allies and surrender himself, instead he just takes the blindfold off and runs back to German lines where he later ends up fighting against that same platoon. War calls for tough decisions, everything isn't black and white as much as you would love it to be so.
and this makes it clear you don't know what my position is. It's abundantly clear that no one understands how the IC works, which is to be expected, there aren't that many of us. It is quite hilarious to see some absurd comments come out, but then again I guess that is the general thought of the civilian population when they have no idea how the Intelligence apparatus' work. Ignorance begets ignorance I suppose.
And instead of explaining it you come off as an elitist douchebag.
Just saying how it looks like. Calling people ignorant while not explaining a damn thing makes you look like a gigantic troll.
|
On July 10 2009 08:30 Jayme wrote:Show nested quote +On July 10 2009 08:12 Aegraen wrote:On July 10 2009 07:50 travis wrote:On July 10 2009 07:29 Aegraen wrote:On July 10 2009 07:10 daz wrote:On July 10 2009 06:32 L wrote:
I looked at page one and assumed this would be an Aegraen troll fest at page 3.
I was right. yeah it started off as a debate with me and aegrean totally just hijacked this shit. i give the guy props for being so inflammatory I only appear to be inflammatory when I'm surrounded by those on the left of the political aisle. Those over at Redstate, Michelle Malkin, HotAir, and those within the IC understand what it takes in a time of WAR to use every tool at our disposal to keep America safe. Travis is the same type of person who would be shouting from the rooftoops to treat Nazi's like we would those under arrest at a police station. That type of thinking would have caused us to lose WWII. I would suggest we treat prisoners morally regardless of their actions or beliefs.
We wouldn't have had to go through this prolonged Iraq situation, if Clinton had acted upon the INTELLIGENCE he received when Saudi Arabia had Bin Laden on a platter ready for us on multiple occasions.
or if we didn't go into iraq in the first place
I'm sure travis wouldn't be singing the same tune if it was his family's life that was extinguished. Morality has a time and place, just remember, these are the same people Obama let out of Gitmo who ended up going back and fighting for the same cells we captured them from.
morality is not black and white and sometimes a seemingly evil deed can be done for the greater good, but that is an inherit part of morality. morality has a time and a place and that time and place is now and always.
It reminds me of the scene in Private Ryan where the wussy let the Nazi go naively thinking he was going to meander himself back to the Allies and surrender himself, instead he just takes the blindfold off and runs back to German lines where he later ends up fighting against that same platoon. War calls for tough decisions, everything isn't black and white as much as you would love it to be so.
and this makes it clear you don't know what my position is. It's abundantly clear that no one understands how the IC works, which is to be expected, there aren't that many of us. It is quite hilarious to see some absurd comments come out, but then again I guess that is the general thought of the civilian population when they have no idea how the Intelligence apparatus' work. Ignorance begets ignorance I suppose. And instead of explaining it you come off as an elitist douchebag. Just saying how it looks like. Calling people ignorant while not explaining a damn thing makes you look like a gigantic troll.
I have explained it within this thread and in the thread last month. Over several occasions have I explained the methods used and when to use them and how effective each method is for specific cases. No one listens. Most drone on and on about morality this and that in wartime and then people spout off 'technology' and a million different ways to get information even when I explain that you just can't willy nilly go use telemetry techniques to probe the minds of leaders and obtain their plans.
|
On July 10 2009 07:29 Aegraen wrote:
I only appear to be inflammatory when I'm surrounded by those on the left of the political aisle. Those over at Redstate, Michelle Malkin, HotAir, and those within the IC understand what it takes in a time of WAR to use every tool at our disposal to keep America safe.
Yet your WAR(tm) rhetoric makes no sense whatsoever. You compare people on the left side to (amongst others) the intelligence community(if that's what IC means). Do you need to have a right wing view to get into the IC ?
Travis is the same type of person who would be shouting from the rooftoops to treat Nazi's like we would those under arrest at a police station. That type of thinking would have caused us to lose WWII.
Did you know that there was a German Wehrmacht run towards the west at the end of WWII. Especially by officers. Because western allies treated their POWs so much better than the Soviets. Good POW treatment leads to easier capture. At the eastern front, where German pows had very low life expectancy they fought to the last man. In the west it was like "I get captured, but i'll probably live" Most real POW suffering caused at the western front was caused by the logistic problems they had because they had so many damn POWs.
We wouldn't have had to go through this prolonged Iraq situation, if Clinton had acted upon the INTELLIGENCE he received when Saudi Arabia had Bin Laden on a platter ready for us on multiple occasions.
OSINT tells me that there is no connection between al qaida and Saddam. In fact there is pretty much consensus on there being no link whatsoever. But yeah opening up a second front in Iraq without cause makes strategic sense for sure. You're talking about getting things done, but I only saw a few conservatives making a mess out of things. You cannot tie the Iraq war to Clinton when Cheney/Bush are holding all the ropes.
I'm sure travis wouldn't be singing the same tune if it was his family's life that was extinguished. Morality has a time and place, just remember, these are the same people Obama let out of Gitmo who ended up going back and fighting for the same cells we captured them from.
Oh great, please don't just attack Travis, involve his family too. And I'm sure Travis' family have a much higher chance of dying of old age, heart attack, cancer, traffic, stuff falling down, tripping, sports accidents, mexican flu, other types of flu, hiv, random illnesses I cannot bother to name, stuff stuck in throat, falling of high places, accidental cuts, unintentional gunshot wounds, struck by lightning, airplane crash, infected wounds, slipping in the bath and breaking your neck or being hit by an asteroid than they would of dying in a terrorist attack. Let's keep this discussion out of obvious  fantasyland.
It reminds me of the scene in Private Ryan where the wussy let the Nazi go naively thinking he was going to meander himself back to the Allies and surrender himself, instead he just takes the blindfold off and runs back to German lines where he later ends up fighting against that same platoon. War calls for tough decisions, everything isn't black and white as much as you would love it to be so.
Are you high ? Where did we go from torture ro setting people free ? I think you took a wrong turn at Obama and just kept going right from there on.
In fantasy land, on July 10 2009 07:29 Travis wrote:
Don't torture these people, in fact I pity them so much that they should be set free
In the real world, this is not a quote.
|
On July 10 2009 08:12 Aegraen wrote:Show nested quote +On July 10 2009 07:50 travis wrote:On July 10 2009 07:29 Aegraen wrote:On July 10 2009 07:10 daz wrote:On July 10 2009 06:32 L wrote:
I looked at page one and assumed this would be an Aegraen troll fest at page 3.
I was right. yeah it started off as a debate with me and aegrean totally just hijacked this shit. i give the guy props for being so inflammatory I only appear to be inflammatory when I'm surrounded by those on the left of the political aisle. Those over at Redstate, Michelle Malkin, HotAir, and those within the IC understand what it takes in a time of WAR to use every tool at our disposal to keep America safe. Travis is the same type of person who would be shouting from the rooftoops to treat Nazi's like we would those under arrest at a police station. That type of thinking would have caused us to lose WWII. I would suggest we treat prisoners morally regardless of their actions or beliefs.
We wouldn't have had to go through this prolonged Iraq situation, if Clinton had acted upon the INTELLIGENCE he received when Saudi Arabia had Bin Laden on a platter ready for us on multiple occasions.
or if we didn't go into iraq in the first place
I'm sure travis wouldn't be singing the same tune if it was his family's life that was extinguished. Morality has a time and place, just remember, these are the same people Obama let out of Gitmo who ended up going back and fighting for the same cells we captured them from.
morality is not black and white and sometimes a seemingly evil deed can be done for the greater good, but that is an inherit part of morality. morality has a time and a place and that time and place is now and always.
It reminds me of the scene in Private Ryan where the wussy let the Nazi go naively thinking he was going to meander himself back to the Allies and surrender himself, instead he just takes the blindfold off and runs back to German lines where he later ends up fighting against that same platoon. War calls for tough decisions, everything isn't black and white as much as you would love it to be so.
and this makes it clear you don't know what my position is. I know full well what your position is. You would have done the same thing as in the movie. You wouldn't have made the tough call to shoot him instead you would have let him return to his compatriots to fight another day and kill more of your fellow soldiers. The whole point to the scenario is that in a time of war there is no morality. You do what you have to, to survive. There is no utopian morality to uphold. Morality matters not when you are dead. If you truly do not believe what disntinguishes ourselves from them then I would suggest looking up female genitalia mutilation, honor killings, patriachal society where women are subserviant, stonings to death, and many other abhorrent things. You see, what seperates ourselves in a time of war, is that we don't target civilians, we don't hide behind civilians, and we don't behead our adversaries and prance around with it.
time of war? you mean ALWAYS? that is your view isn't it? these people are terrorists and so when dealing with them we are always in a time of war? "you do what you have to to survive", what a fucking joke. pre-emptive strikes are not about survival, and that's what torture is. torture is offensive in nature, not defensive. you can twist it all you want, but to claim torture is defensive you have to ignore what it is that is actually happening when you torture a prisoner.
and yes you are correct about what I would have done were I soldier in that situation. but I wouldn't be in that situation in the first place.
Morality is a peacetime/civilian endeavor that everyone should strive to best live by.
that is so ignorant and disgusting, on so many levels.
it's views like this that lead to things like napalm, and land mines, and atomic bombs being dropped on cities, and torture.
You also have no understanding of intelligence methods. You say there is a million other ways to obtain this information because of our highly advanced technology. That is patently false. If you knew anything about MASINT (Which is what mostly employs the latest and greatest), you would know that EACH method is used SPECIFICALLY for different types of information. For example, you can't expect to use Electronic Intelligence (ELINT) and gather information about the latest telemetry readings from the latest N.K. missle launches. You wouldn't expect to use Imagery Intelligence and obtain conversation recordings.
How does this paragraph make what I said wrong?
In order to extract the information that only top level operatives know you have to use methods that are very precise and specific. You have to evaluate each situation as being unique and tailor the needs to that situation. You wouldn't ever use those methods on low level operatives, or even mid-level. It is specifically used on the upper echelon members precisely because they hold the most valuable information. In fact, it would be the last method to employ after exhausting other routes.
so waterboarding someone 100+ times is precise and specific? are you fucking kidding me?
you keep telling yourself this shit
It's abundantly clear that no one understands how the IC works, which is to be expected, there aren't that many of us. It is quite hilarious to see some absurd comments come out, but then again I guess that is the general thought of the civilian population when they have no idea how the Intelligence apparatus' work. Ignorance begets ignorance I suppose.
what you don't seem to realize is that torture is torture and no amount of twisting words justifies it. even when done with knowledge that it will save lives it's still wrong, though arguably justifiable. but clearly it was not being done with any more than speculations of possible information.
the IC does not get billions of tax payer dollars to torture people. that isn't why we fund it. torturing people IS NOT PART OF THEIR JOB
IC gets so much funding so we can get as much information as possible without doing shit like that!
|
aegraen the "wartime" you speak of goes on every hour of every day
|
We wouldn't have had to go through this prolonged Iraq situation, if Clinton had acted upon the INTELLIGENCE he received when Saudi Arabia had Bin Laden on a platter ready for us on multiple occasion
The fact that you connect the war in Iraq to Bin Laden deeply discredits your position. We could have avoided Iraq regardless of Bin Laden. For someone that supposedly works and studies the field of intelligence I am surprised you bother suggesting this.
The whole point to the scenario is that in a time of war there is no morality
You site the Geneva conventions and then proclaim there is no morality in war? Was that not one of the biggest lessons of WWII? That statement 1) completely contradicts any earlier arguments siting the Geneva Conventions, 2) ignores the current counter-insurgent military strategy being used in Iraq and Afghanistan, 3) ignores the legal questions that have arisen about the use of torture by the US.
The obvious contradictions and lack of awareness of even mainstream issues makes me wonder if you are a complete troll. It really worries me that you supposedly work in the intelligence community. Maybe that is the problem...
|
|
|
My personal thoughts on this issue is that waterboarding is torture. You're being drowned and smothered at the same time, and I think we should stop the practice. When you're in that state, you'll say anything to get the experience to stop.
Waterboarding is good for getting information, but not getting the right information. When you put someone in the position to say anything it's not entirely credible or beneficial considering they will admit to anything. If I'm entirely certain you could waterboard anyone enough, you could get them to admit to whatever you want.
But that's just me.
|
You are correct. Not only was this guy referring to something that didn't exist rather than referring to John Yoo's unwise legal advise to Bush, he avoids the fact that the legal advice has been seriously discredited.
|
On July 10 2009 07:29 Aegraen wrote:Show nested quote +On July 10 2009 07:10 daz wrote:On July 10 2009 06:32 L wrote:
I looked at page one and assumed this would be an Aegraen troll fest at page 3.
I was right. yeah it started off as a debate with me and aegrean totally just hijacked this shit. i give the guy props for being so inflammatory ... I only appear to be inflammatory when I'm surrounded by those on the left of the political aisle. Those over at Redstate, Michelle Malkin, HotAir, and those within the IC understand ...
Lulz retard flag. If you're actually serious about what you're talking about, I don't know what to say.
|
Bosnia-Herzegovina1437 Posts
On July 09 2009 16:46 daz wrote:Show nested quote +On July 09 2009 16:38 HaXxorIzed wrote:On July 09 2009 15:48 daz wrote:
it wouldnt surprise me at all that most of these people have been brainwashed to believing ridiculous things, especially in the case of islamic terrorists since they are a religious group and religion is practically impossible without brainwashing, but i would be INCREDIBLY surprised if you could actually get any of these people to "realize" that the beliefs they've held strongly enough to kill people over for their entire lives aren't true. If you're willing to chase up pretty good examples (both casses and testimonials from interrogators) that your statements aren't wholly accurate, read on. Abu Jandal (as outlined by Ali Soufan and Ropert Mcfadden), Mohammad Ibahim (The key Baath Party Official who gave up Saddam's location as outlined by Eric Maddox in Mission:Black List #1) and an unnamed by key leader of the Sunni insurgency with connections to Al-Quaeda who was convinced to give up al-Zarqawi's location with soft-interrogation (as outlined by Matthew Alexander, one of the Authors of H ow to Break A Terrorist: The U.S Interrogators Who Used Brains, Not Brutality to Take Down the Deadliest Man in Iraq). All of those cover different figures with different loyalties, levels of fanatacism and indicates how much of it is brokered in real life concerns and/or stereotypes which are easiest broken by soft interrogation as opposed to torture. If anything, the fact their beleifs are so strongly hold makes the eventual breaking of the characters through soft means even more powerful - since there is no perceived bruality that can be seen as an injustice by the captive. With Abu Jandal in particular - he was a greatly feared man and hated the US captors ideologically on sight. That only meant however that when he was broken - and it was done through simple manipulation, that he was willing to give up even more information because of the shift in the foundations of his world view. i guess im willing to accept that this is possible but from my life experience and the things that i've read or heard ive found that people who hold beliefs especially religious beliefs at the fundamelist level are pretty much impervious to rational explanations and logical persuasion. i mean its pretty much a prerequisite that you are willing to ignore logic and ration to even get yourself to that point and i dont understand how to go about persuading someone who is impervious to logical thinking. I'll have to read up some of these examples that you've posted when i have more time because im seriously having a hard time imagining someone 'shifting the worldview' of a diehard religious fanatic
I'm getting the feeling that you think these ' terrorists ' are some bad people and their doing all this shit for their religion..
What you don't understand is these " terrorists " just want people from the US to gtfo of their country...
I've talked to many Iraqi men and women from my city and they tell me ALL they want is to deal with their own land and no interference.
|
Just because the USA won practically almost every it was involved in doesnt mean they were right all the time.
Yes, war is something horrible, and in war people lose their minds and do evil things, thats why war is horrible and if we can end these practices we will be walking a huge step toward ending them at all.
|
On July 10 2009 11:45 ZeaL. wrote:Show nested quote +On July 10 2009 07:29 Aegraen wrote:On July 10 2009 07:10 daz wrote:On July 10 2009 06:32 L wrote:
I looked at page one and assumed this would be an Aegraen troll fest at page 3.
I was right. yeah it started off as a debate with me and aegrean totally just hijacked this shit. i give the guy props for being so inflammatory ... I only appear to be inflammatory when I'm surrounded by those on the left of the political aisle. Those over at Redstate, Michelle Malkin, HotAir, and those within the IC understand ... Lulz retard flag. If you're actually serious about what you're talking about, I don't know what to say.
Yea I loled hard. Of all the names to drop..
|
On July 10 2009 14:32 Clasic wrote:Show nested quote +On July 09 2009 16:46 daz wrote:On July 09 2009 16:38 HaXxorIzed wrote:On July 09 2009 15:48 daz wrote:
it wouldnt surprise me at all that most of these people have been brainwashed to believing ridiculous things, especially in the case of islamic terrorists since they are a religious group and religion is practically impossible without brainwashing, but i would be INCREDIBLY surprised if you could actually get any of these people to "realize" that the beliefs they've held strongly enough to kill people over for their entire lives aren't true. If you're willing to chase up pretty good examples (both casses and testimonials from interrogators) that your statements aren't wholly accurate, read on. Abu Jandal (as outlined by Ali Soufan and Ropert Mcfadden), Mohammad Ibahim (The key Baath Party Official who gave up Saddam's location as outlined by Eric Maddox in Mission:Black List #1) and an unnamed by key leader of the Sunni insurgency with connections to Al-Quaeda who was convinced to give up al-Zarqawi's location with soft-interrogation (as outlined by Matthew Alexander, one of the Authors of H ow to Break A Terrorist: The U.S Interrogators Who Used Brains, Not Brutality to Take Down the Deadliest Man in Iraq). All of those cover different figures with different loyalties, levels of fanatacism and indicates how much of it is brokered in real life concerns and/or stereotypes which are easiest broken by soft interrogation as opposed to torture. If anything, the fact their beleifs are so strongly hold makes the eventual breaking of the characters through soft means even more powerful - since there is no perceived bruality that can be seen as an injustice by the captive. With Abu Jandal in particular - he was a greatly feared man and hated the US captors ideologically on sight. That only meant however that when he was broken - and it was done through simple manipulation, that he was willing to give up even more information because of the shift in the foundations of his world view. i guess im willing to accept that this is possible but from my life experience and the things that i've read or heard ive found that people who hold beliefs especially religious beliefs at the fundamelist level are pretty much impervious to rational explanations and logical persuasion. i mean its pretty much a prerequisite that you are willing to ignore logic and ration to even get yourself to that point and i dont understand how to go about persuading someone who is impervious to logical thinking. I'll have to read up some of these examples that you've posted when i have more time because im seriously having a hard time imagining someone 'shifting the worldview' of a diehard religious fanatic I'm getting the feeling that you think these ' terrorists ' are some bad people and their doing all this shit for their religion.. What you don't understand is these " terrorists " just want people from the US to gtfo of their country... I've talked to many Iraqi men and women from my city and they tell me ALL they want is to deal with their own land and no interference.
i think osama bin laden would disagree with you
|
Osama Bin Laden is not speaking for any country. He has(d) nothing to do with Iraq, at least not until the USA (and others) made that connection up/believed in that connection.
The term Terrorist is used way to broad and would need further specification. Some are actually *resistance fighters* while others are really just terorists that just want to wreak havoc.
|
Bosnia-Herzegovina1437 Posts
On July 10 2009 16:59 daz wrote:Show nested quote +On July 10 2009 14:32 Clasic wrote:On July 09 2009 16:46 daz wrote:On July 09 2009 16:38 HaXxorIzed wrote:On July 09 2009 15:48 daz wrote:
it wouldnt surprise me at all that most of these people have been brainwashed to believing ridiculous things, especially in the case of islamic terrorists since they are a religious group and religion is practically impossible without brainwashing, but i would be INCREDIBLY surprised if you could actually get any of these people to "realize" that the beliefs they've held strongly enough to kill people over for their entire lives aren't true. If you're willing to chase up pretty good examples (both casses and testimonials from interrogators) that your statements aren't wholly accurate, read on. Abu Jandal (as outlined by Ali Soufan and Ropert Mcfadden), Mohammad Ibahim (The key Baath Party Official who gave up Saddam's location as outlined by Eric Maddox in Mission:Black List #1) and an unnamed by key leader of the Sunni insurgency with connections to Al-Quaeda who was convinced to give up al-Zarqawi's location with soft-interrogation (as outlined by Matthew Alexander, one of the Authors of H ow to Break A Terrorist: The U.S Interrogators Who Used Brains, Not Brutality to Take Down the Deadliest Man in Iraq). All of those cover different figures with different loyalties, levels of fanatacism and indicates how much of it is brokered in real life concerns and/or stereotypes which are easiest broken by soft interrogation as opposed to torture. If anything, the fact their beleifs are so strongly hold makes the eventual breaking of the characters through soft means even more powerful - since there is no perceived bruality that can be seen as an injustice by the captive. With Abu Jandal in particular - he was a greatly feared man and hated the US captors ideologically on sight. That only meant however that when he was broken - and it was done through simple manipulation, that he was willing to give up even more information because of the shift in the foundations of his world view. i guess im willing to accept that this is possible but from my life experience and the things that i've read or heard ive found that people who hold beliefs especially religious beliefs at the fundamelist level are pretty much impervious to rational explanations and logical persuasion. i mean its pretty much a prerequisite that you are willing to ignore logic and ration to even get yourself to that point and i dont understand how to go about persuading someone who is impervious to logical thinking. I'll have to read up some of these examples that you've posted when i have more time because im seriously having a hard time imagining someone 'shifting the worldview' of a diehard religious fanatic I'm getting the feeling that you think these ' terrorists ' are some bad people and their doing all this shit for their religion.. What you don't understand is these " terrorists " just want people from the US to gtfo of their country... I've talked to many Iraqi men and women from my city and they tell me ALL they want is to deal with their own land and no interference. i think osama bin laden would disagree with you
You think Bin Laden did this just for the fun of it? Because he hates the US for no reason?
lol..
It was in between the Afghan/Russian war were the US started wanting to " help " and get involved as usual..
and most of the people said " get out of our country we can handle our own problems " and of course.. the US doesn't listen and now we have the " War Against Terror " which is failing hard, just like every other US war.
|
On July 09 2009 15:16 daz wrote:
but it doesnt do any actual physical damage amirite? thats really what i meant. tbh if it isnt doing any actual physical harm i really dont see the problem. I mean like what are the alternatives to waterboarding? Like if you capture some terrorist and you need to extract information from him, what are your options? 1. real torture 2. waterboarding 3. asking politely.
I think waterboarding is a clear winner there
Waterboarding is real torture. The worst part about torture is the psycological scars. People getting tortured can never live a normal life again because they are messed up in their heads. Exactly this also applies to waterboarding. Yes its true, you wont die or loose an arm or something, but you sure will have mental issues afterwards.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
