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.

Democrats are now saying they have not been informed on EIT.

Wait





Edit

Alex......even Penatta informed Pelosi

It's a political stunt meant to re-litigate Bush era policies and provide cover to outgoing Senate Intelligence Committee members.

So... following that line of thought, when will we see such report on Obama's Extra-Judicial Execution via Drones?

One policy makes captured terrorist extermely uncomfortable. But, are still alive

The other permanently makes 'em dead-dead, which has included innocent casualties.

Honestly, I don't like either to many civilian death for me. I'm OK with killing the millitants (it is a war after all), but the drone bombing remind me of WWII bombing runs, just a hell of a lot more accurate.

 whembly wrote:

So... following that line of thought, when will we see such report on Obama's Extra-Judicial Execution via Drones?

Why stop at Obama?

 whembly wrote:

One policy makes captured terrorist extermely uncomfortable. But, are still alive

The other permanently makes 'em dead-dead, which has included innocent casualties.

I don't believe the two policies are mutually exclusive.

 dogma wrote:

 whembly wrote:

So... following that line of thought, when will we see such report on Obama's Extra-Judicial Execution via Drones?

Why stop at Obama?

Cause he is the only President who has done such a thing, so far?

 whembly wrote:
One policy makes captured terrorist extermely uncomfortable. But, are still alive

The other permanently makes 'em dead-dead, which has included innocent casualties.

That's not really a fair comparison. Execution by drone has some practical value, even if it's in a legal gray area. Torture doesn't. It accomplishes nothing besides letting a bunch of sadistic s satisfy their need to hurt people.

 Peregrine wrote:

 whembly wrote:
One policy makes captured terrorist extermely uncomfortable. But, are still alive

The other permanently makes 'em dead-dead, which has included innocent casualties.

That's not really a fair comparison. Execution by drone has some practical value, even if it's in a legal gray area. Torture doesn't. It accomplishes nothing besides letting a bunch of sadistic s satisfy their need to hurt people.

Just so that we're clear... when you say "torture" you meant water-boarding... right?

 whembly wrote:

 Peregrine wrote:
That's not really a fair comparison. Execution by drone has some practical value, even if it's in a legal gray area. Torture doesn't. It accomplishes nothing besides letting a bunch of sadistic s satisfy their need to hurt people.

Just so that we're clear... when you say "torture" you meant water-boarding... right?

Have you read the report? When the CIA pretended that waterboarding was the worst of what they did, they were lying. Waterboarding was bad enough, but they were literally raping prisoners for trying to commit suicide.

 AlexHolker wrote:

 whembly wrote:

 Peregrine wrote:
That's not really a fair comparison. Execution by drone has some practical value, even if it's in a legal gray area. Torture doesn't. It accomplishes nothing besides letting a bunch of sadistic s satisfy their need to hurt people.

Just so that we're clear... when you say "torture" you meant water-boarding... right?

Have you read the report?

Yep.

When the CIA pretended that waterboarding was the worst of what they did, they were lying. Waterboarding was bad enough,

We're talking about those three detainees...right?

but they were literally raping prisoners for trying to commit suicide.

Wut? Can you show me where? I missed that....

Unless you're talking about the rectal feeding sessions?

If people are pretending that rectal "feedings" have anything to do with nutrition or that it is a legitimate medical procedure then they are truly beyond reasoning.

 d-usa wrote:
If people are pretending that rectal "feedings" have anything to do with nutrition or that it is a legitimate medical procedure then they are truly beyond reasoning.

I just don't consider it torture.

Vastly inappropirate? Absolutely. At the minimum, someone should lose their job.

EDIT: removed rest of text to put it in different thread.

 whembly wrote:

 d-usa wrote:
If people are pretending that rectal "feedings" have anything to do with nutrition or that it is a legitimate medical procedure then they are truly beyond reasoning.

I just don't consider it torture.

The CIA considers it torture, that's the whole reason why they did it. You can read their own statements to that effect: while IV rehydration is safe and effective, it doesn't have the same deterrent effect as raping them whenever they refuse to drink.

 whembly wrote:

 d-usa wrote:
If people are pretending that rectal "feedings" have anything to do with nutrition or that it is a legitimate medical procedure then they are truly beyond reasoning.

I just don't consider it torture.

Vastly inappropirate? Absolutely. At the minimum, someone should lose their job.

EDIT: removed rest of text to put it in different thread.

It is.

While I've never been a recipient of forced rectal feedings, I have been a victim of multiple rapes of a similar vein... It is torture Whembly.

Forced naso-gastric feedings are bad enough, I've had the procedure done to me (or at least attempted to be done a few times) during my training. But while we can argue about it being a violation of rights of self determination or torture or anything else at least it is a legitimate medical procedure which actually does provide nutrition.

Okay... I'll concede that it is.

So... should we stop talking about this here and go to the other thread?

 djones520 wrote:

Cause he is the only President who has done such a thing, so far?

With drones? Yeah, that might be true but it gets funny when you start considering the '93 cruise missile strikes.

 whembly wrote:
So... should we stop talking about this here and go to the other thread?

Yeah, that thread is better now IMO.

Agreed! (?)