Forum adverts like this one are shown to any user who is not logged in. Join us by filling out a tiny 3 field form and you will get your own, free, dakka user account which gives a good range of benefits to you: No adverts like this in the forums anymore. Times and dates in your local timezone. Full tracking of what you have read so you can skip to your first unread post, easily see what has changed since you last logged in, and easily see what is new at a glance. Email notifications for threads you want to watch closely. Being a part of the oldest wargaming community on the net. If you are already a member then feel free to login now.

A really interesting article about three top CIA officials talking about the use and thought process around EIT and detainees after 9/11.

http://www.slate.com/articles/health_and_science/human_nature/2013/01/the_case_for_torture_ex_cia_officials_explain_enhanced_interrogations.html

It is far too long to quote here, but it has some interesting quotes from the three officials that highligh the thinking process that went intot he program.

I will leave this here as a teaser:
[qote[
Hayden acknowledged that prisoners might say anything to stop their suffering. (Like the other panelists, he insisted EITs weren't torture.) That’s why “we never asked anybody anything we didn’t know the answer to, while they were undergoing the enhanced interrogation techniques. The techniques were not designed to elicit truth in the moment.” Instead, EITs were used in a controlled setting, in which interrogators knew the answers and could be sure they were inflicting misery only when the prisoner said something false. The point was to create an illusion of godlike omniscience and omnipotence so that the prisoner would infer, falsely, that his captors always knew when he was lying or withholding information.

Wow. Is that supposed to make it better, or worse?

Also:

"THERE. ARE. FIVE. LIGHTS!"

Of course these guys are going to justify what they did. What are they going to do, admit to unprosecuted war crimes?

None of these are really good arguments. That torturing people was exigent wasn't really in dispute, that standing up for your countries principles is difficult - yes, we know. That's why they're worth something.

I can't believe no one went to jail over this, especially the guy who torched the tapes after the oversight committee asked for them. It's worse then the lack of Wall Street prosecutions, really.

 Ouze wrote:
Of course these guys are going to justify what they did. What are they going to do, admit to unprosecuted war crimes?

None of these are really good arguments. That torturing people was exigent wasn't really in dispute, that standing up for your countries principles is difficult - yes, we know. That's why they're worth something.

I can't believe no one went to jail over this, especially the guy who torched the tapes after the oversight committee asked for them. It's worse then the lack of Wall Street prosecutions, really.

I have two tangents on this...

1) If you consider EIT "torture"... so what? Listening to Nickelback is far more egregious . I just find the whole arguement that "we're better than that" tiring...

2) I did find that whomever destroyed those tapes was all sorts of wrong... not because I think that the EIT was wrong, but more that it smacks of 'obstruction of justice'.

 whembly wrote:
1) If you consider EIT "torture"... so what?

So what? We hung Japanese for waterboarding in WW2. Lets not hand-wave it away.

 Ouze wrote:

 whembly wrote:
1) If you consider EIT "torture"... so what?

So what? We hung Japanese for waterboarding in WW2. Lets not hand-wave it away.

No, we hung Japanese for the use of water cure in WW2, and entirely differant thing, that is only superficially similar in the sense that water is involved.

Or they DID waterboard...

From wikipedia:
Chase J. Nielsen, one of the U.S. airmen who flew in the Doolittle raid following the attack on Pearl Harbor, was subjected to waterboarding by his Japanese captors.[115] At their trial for war crimes following the war, he testified "Well, I was put on my back on the floor with my arms and legs stretched out, one guard holding each limb. The towel was wrapped around my face and put across my face and water poured on. They poured water on this towel until I was almost unconscious from strangulation, then they would let up until I'd get my breath, then they'd start over again... I felt more or less like I was drowning, just gasping between life and death."[35] The United States hanged Japanese soldiers for waterboarding American prisoners of war.[9]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Waterboarding#World_War_II

 daedalus wrote:
Or they DID waterboard...

From wikipedia:
Chase J. Nielsen, one of the U.S. airmen who flew in the Doolittle raid following the attack on Pearl Harbor, was subjected to waterboarding by his Japanese captors.[115] At their trial for war crimes following the war, he testified "Well, I was put on my back on the floor with my arms and legs stretched out, one guard holding each limb. The towel was wrapped around my face and put across my face and water poured on. They poured water on this towel until I was almost unconscious from strangulation, then they would let up until I'd get my breath, then they'd start over again... I felt more or less like I was drowning, just gasping between life and death."[35] The United States hanged Japanese soldiers for waterboarding American prisoners of war.[9]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Waterboarding#World_War_II

They did just about everything...

They did both. They weren't all hung, one Japanese guy convicted of waterboarding got 15 years hard labor for their war crimes.

Edit:ninja'd touché.

 Ouze wrote:
They did both. They weren't all hung, one Japanese guy convicted of waterboarding got 15 years hard labor for their war crimes.

Okay... but so what?

Just so that we're on the same page (and you're google-fu is rocking) how many were reportedly waterboarded?

Chancetragedy wrote:
Did you really jus make an argument with Wikipedia? Hasn't the Internet learned yet? Show me legit sources for that story and ill buy it.

From my point of view:

Wikipedia > "random forum dude saying otherwise"


If you struggle hard enough, you can discredit any source.

Ok, so, now that we're on the same page , and lets not be cute - when we say "enhanced interrogation techniques", we're just playing cute with what we damn well all know that means - I'm not sure if you expect the people who ordered it to ever say anything other then they thought it was OK when any thinking person knows that throughout history we've always considered it torture. These guys will never admit to what they did, not would I expect them to.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

Chancetragedy wrote:
Did you really jus make an argument with Wikipedia? Hasn't the Internet learned yet? Show me legit sources for that story and ill buy it.

Debunking a source for being biased while bringing absolutely nothing to the table to counter it is the lamest way of arguing possible; and I don't think we should play that foolish game. I can't speak for anyone else but I know I won't.

 Ouze wrote:
Ok, so, now that we're on the same page , and lets not be cute - when we say "enhanced interrogation techniques", we're just playing cute with what we damn well all know that means - I'm not sure if you expect the people who ordered it to ever say anything other then they thought it was OK when any thinking person knows that throughout history we've always considered it torture. These guys will never admit to what they did, not would I expect them to.

Sure... we all knew what they were doing. All this linguistic-judo was done to mitigate any legal challenge.

It's good that it's being questioned, as it ought to keep "us" honest. (I also think the initial angst was the media's zeal to make Bush look bad in any way... and this was a layup).

Do I feel ashamed or that we're somehow inferior because this was done by "our" people?

Nope.

I don't feel ashamed that it happened, I feel ashamed we never tried to right it. We never prosecuted it, we never even really investigated it, and we don't shun the people such as the ones in the article who try to rationalize it.

When that's how we handle something that you agree is wrong, how does it "keep us honest"?

 Ouze wrote:
I don't feel ashamed that it happened, I feel ashamed we never tried to right it. We never prosecuted it, we never even really investigated it, and we don't shun the people such as the ones in the article who try to rationalize it.

When that's how we handle something that you agree is wrong, how does it "keep us honest"?

I don't agree that it's wrong though. Are we sawing their heads off and broadcasting it to the world? Nope. As far as I'm concerned, we are still the better people.

 djones520 wrote:
Are we sawing their heads off and broadcasting it to the world? Nope. As far as I'm concerned, we are still the better people.

You're happy your country use slightly less violent/damaging acts than some fundamentalist terrorists? Not really sure I would be happy than that...

 SilverMK2 wrote:

 djones520 wrote:
Are we sawing their heads off and broadcasting it to the world? Nope. As far as I'm concerned, we are still the better people.

You're happy your country use slightly less violent/damaging acts than some fundamentalist terrorists? Not really sure I would be happy than that...

Less violent and damaging? No physical harm comes from waterboarding. It's purely a psychological thing that lasts for seconds at a time. And yes, I am happy with my country doing it. These people are the worse type of people on the earth. The folks who stone women to death for being raped. Who commit unspeakable torture on their own prisoners. Who were instrumental in killing 3,000 innocent civilians 12 years ago, and have perpetrated countless atrocities on other civilians in Iraq and Afghanistan since then.

Personally, I'd be fine busting out the medieval torture playbook on these people, because if any deserve it, they do.

 SilverMK2 wrote:
You're happy your country use slightly less violent/damaging acts than some fundamentalist terrorists? Not really sure I would be happy than that...

I consider waterboarding considerably less violent/damaging than decapitation, but then I'm not trying to make the usual bleeding heart argument.

 djones520 wrote:

 SilverMK2 wrote:

 djones520 wrote:
Are we sawing their heads off and broadcasting it to the world? Nope. As far as I'm concerned, we are still the better people.

You're happy your country use slightly less violent/damaging acts than some fundamentalist terrorists? Not really sure I would be happy than that...

Less violent and damaging? No physical harm comes from waterboarding. It's purely a psychological thing that lasts for seconds at a time. And yes, I am happy with my country doing it. These people are the worse type of people on the earth. The folks who stone women to death for being raped. Who commit unspeakable torture on their own prisoners. Who were instrumental in killing 3,000 innocent civilians 12 years ago, and have perpetrated countless atrocities on other civilians in Iraq and Afghanistan since then.

Personally, I'd be fine busting out the medieval torture playbook on these people, because if any deserve it, they do.

Everyone tortured was a terrorist or had links?

I'm pro-EIT when used properly (lime the manner described in the initial post), but even I have to admit its damaging. Waterboardings psychological stresses and traumas last far more than for "just a few seconds at a time", if you do it enough you can permanently break someones mind, some of the people subjected to those techniques [by our government] are not quite as sane as they used to be.

 Mr. Burning wrote:

 djones520 wrote:

 SilverMK2 wrote:

 djones520 wrote:
Are we sawing their heads off and broadcasting it to the world? Nope. As far as I'm concerned, we are still the better people.

You're happy your country use slightly less violent/damaging acts than some fundamentalist terrorists? Not really sure I would be happy than that...

Less violent and damaging? No physical harm comes from waterboarding. It's purely a psychological thing that lasts for seconds at a time. And yes, I am happy with my country doing it. These people are the worse type of people on the earth. The folks who stone women to death for being raped. Who commit unspeakable torture on their own prisoners. Who were instrumental in killing 3,000 innocent civilians 12 years ago, and have perpetrated countless atrocities on other civilians in Iraq and Afghanistan since then.

Personally, I'd be fine busting out the medieval torture playbook on these people, because if any deserve it, they do.

Everyone tortured was a terrorist or had links?

They weren't?

 djones520 wrote:
Who commit unspeakable torture on their own prisoners.

You're only comfortable with the more speakable tortures we do on our prisoners, I get it.

 djones520 wrote:
Personally, I'd be fine busting out the medieval torture playbook on these people, because if any deserve it, they do.

That kind of mindset is a great way of rationalizing any atrocity.

 whembly wrote:

1) If you consider EIT "torture"... so what? Listening to Nickelback is far more egregious . I just find the whole arguement that "we're better than that" tiring...

Do you find it tiring when people use the same argument to justify the use of waterboarding?

 Ouze wrote:

 djones520 wrote:
Personally, I'd be fine busting out the medieval torture playbook on these people, because if any deserve it, they do.

That kind of mindset is a great way of rationalizing any atrocity.

No, it really isn't. That's like saying us executing prisoners whove committed murder rationalizes any atrocity.

 djones520 wrote:
As far as I'm concerned, we are still the better people.

I didn't realize there was some kind of "best large group of people" contest going on

 dogma wrote:

 djones520 wrote:
As far as I'm concerned, we are still the better people.

I didn't realize there was some kind of "best large group of people" contest going on

Well, the argument against doing that usually entails our running in that contest.

 djones520 wrote:

No, it really isn't. That's like saying us executing prisoners whove committed murder rationalizes any atrocity.

There is a difference between the execution of a prisoner in order to remove a threat from society, and the infliction of suffering as a matter of desert. One is arguably necessary in a clinical sense, while the other is little better than vindictive barbarism.

The people in question weren't waterboarded in order to punish them, or cause suffering for its own sake, but in order to extract information.

 dogma wrote:

 djones520 wrote:

No, it really isn't. That's like saying us executing prisoners whove committed murder rationalizes any atrocity.

There is a difference between the execution of a prisoner in order to remove a threat from society, and the infliction of suffering as a matter of desert. One is arguably necessary in a clinical sense, while the other is little better than vindictive barbarism.

The people in question weren't waterboarded in order to punish them, or cause suffering for its own sake, but in order to extract information.

Yeah, I didn't say we should be needlessly pulling finger nails. I am not a barbarian. But I also just have to laugh at people who think that these people are anything resembling human beings and deserving of being treated with kid gloves when they have info we need.

 djones520 wrote:

Well, the argument against doing that usually entails our running in that contest.

You missed the point. What is "best" in this case is not an objective decision, but a subjective one predicated on value. As such, drawing comparisons to others is essentially meaningless, as the only person capable of determining superiority is the one drawing the comparison. Given this no society should be concerned with its superiority to another society, but only with the degree with which it is satisfied with itself. Particularly if one is simultaneously claiming superiority while denouncing the other as something akin to the bottom of the barrel.

 djones520 wrote:

Yeah, I didn't say we should be needlessly pulling finger nails. I am not a barbarian. But I also just have to laugh at people who think that these people are anything resembling human beings and deserving of being treated with kid gloves when they have info we need.

So you're a Greek who dismisses the humanity of anyone that isn't Greek?