|
Post by craiglamson on Jan 25, 2009 16:35:52 GMT -4
Ok...how about this for an example... You are being tortured for information, your interrogator asks for the location of "joe". Now it just so happens that you have no idea where "joe" is and you tell him that... But no, he says that he knows that you know the location of "joe" and you will continue to be tortured until you reveal that location. Do ya see what I'm getting at here?? I fully understand. But do YOU understand that good information MAY also spoken? Are you WILLING to throw away a CHANCE at good information that could save MANY lives for some misguided sense of "principal"? That appears to be the crux of your position. If I have it wrong please tell us why.
|
|
Al Johnston
"Cheer up!" they said, "It could be worse!" So I did, and it was.
Posts: 1,453
|
Post by Al Johnston on Jan 25, 2009 16:41:13 GMT -4
Bad information can be a lot worse than no information.
|
|
|
Post by craiglamson on Jan 25, 2009 16:46:29 GMT -4
Bad information can be a lot worse than no information. And good information beats no information. How can you know what the information IS if you don't have ANY? You willing to risk your family and friends?
|
|
|
Post by RAF on Jan 25, 2009 17:05:44 GMT -4
Craig...by what criteria do you determine what is "good" information, and what is "bad" information??
|
|
|
Post by gillianren on Jan 25, 2009 17:12:45 GMT -4
Is it? IMO thats what got us 9/11. I'm surprised no one called you on this one. The fact is, we had most of the information necessary to have prevented 9/11 before it happened. Had the pieces been put together properly, which they never were, we might have been able to stop it. And that was without torturing anyone. In fact, who would we have tortured? We didn't have anyone in custody who had any relevant information. That's the way these groups work, you know--they share as little information as possible so that, if one person is caught, they can't really tell anything. So okay. You torture them anyway, because they've got to know something. And they talk all right. They tell you plenty. How do you distinguish what's real from what they're just telling you to make you stop torturing them?
|
|
|
Post by Ginnie on Jan 25, 2009 18:29:15 GMT -4
Bad information can be a lot worse than no information. And good information beats no information. How can you know what the information IS if you don't have ANY? You willing to risk your family and friends? Is it also acceptable then for your own family and friends that might be in enemy hands to be tortured?
|
|
|
Post by RAF on Jan 25, 2009 18:32:42 GMT -4
Is it? IMO thats what got us 9/11. I'm surprised no one called you on this one. Had to leave some "meat on the bone" for you. What is it they say about great minds?
|
|
|
Post by Ginnie on Jan 25, 2009 19:00:09 GMT -4
I'm surprised no one called you on this one. Had to leave some "meat on the bone" for you. What is it they say about great minds? Great minds discuss ideas; Average minds discuss events; Small minds discuss peopleā
|
|
|
Post by craiglamson on Jan 25, 2009 19:00:47 GMT -4
Craig...by what criteria do you determine what is "good" information, and what is "bad" information?? Its quite simple you check it out.
|
|
|
Post by craiglamson on Jan 25, 2009 19:10:18 GMT -4
Is it? IMO thats what got us 9/11. I'm surprised no one called you on this one. The fact is, we had most of the information necessary to have prevented 9/11 before it happened. Had the pieces been put together properly, which they never were, we might have been able to stop it. And that was without torturing anyone. In fact, who would we have tortured? We didn't have anyone in custody who had any relevant information. That's the way these groups work, you know--they share as little information as possible so that, if one person is caught, they can't really tell anything. So okay. You torture them anyway, because they've got to know something. And they talk all right. They tell you plenty. How do you distinguish what's real from what they're just telling you to make you stop torturing them? Did we? Did we have the flight numbers, and an exact date? Sure there was LOTS of talk and less than specfic evidecne and yes a decided lack of interest by the US. , And after the fact LOTS of armchair quarterbacks saying if we had only done this or that. We did not use all the tools in the toolbox and it cost us 3000 people. Are you ready to take tools away that MIGHT help stop the next 9/11 or are you willing to perhaps trade US lives for a stand on principal? How do you distinguish intel gathered from other sources as to what real and what is not? You check it out. You guys are ALL still dancing around thre real issue and thats the conquences of your stand on "principal".
|
|
|
Post by craiglamson on Jan 25, 2009 19:11:43 GMT -4
I'm surprised no one called you on this one. Had to leave some "meat on the bone" for you. What is it they say about great minds? Bring it on RAF, you are drowning and just can't man up and admit your position jusat might cost lives ofr the sake of some "misguided principal"
|
|
Jason
Pluto
May all your hits be crits
Posts: 5,579
|
Post by Jason on Jan 25, 2009 19:14:49 GMT -4
Waterboarding IS torture. Torture doesn't work, therefore waterboarding doesn't work. Circular.
|
|
|
Post by craiglamson on Jan 25, 2009 19:15:33 GMT -4
And good information beats no information. How can you know what the information IS if you don't have ANY? You willing to risk your family and friends? Is it also acceptable then for your own family and friends that might be in enemy hands to be tortured? If thats what happens I'm sure not going to be happy , but whats to stop it? Some silly idea that if WE don't waterboard or worse THEY won't? Please! These guys flew airliners into buildings full of people and have no problem cutting off a head to make a point. Why do you think the SERE program trains using waterboarding? You need to step into the real world dude.
|
|
|
Post by gillianren on Jan 25, 2009 19:43:27 GMT -4
Did we? Did we have the flight numbers, and an exact date? Sure there was LOTS of talk and less than specfic evidecne and yes a decided lack of interest by the US. , And after the fact LOTS of armchair quarterbacks saying if we had only done this or that. We did not use all the tools in the toolbox and it cost us 3000 people. Are you ready to take tools away that MIGHT help stop the next 9/11 or are you willing to perhaps trade US lives for a stand on principal? Who would we have tortured? Who did we have in custody who had any information along those lines? Can you answer that question? Are you going to bother? And, in fact, yes. Even if the life lost is my own, I will stand on that principle. Even if the life lost is my daughter. Torture isn't right. It's not "torture isn't right unless we really, really think we'll get information that way." It's not "we think something bad is going to happen, so we'll torture people until we figure it out." Torture isn't right. Torture doesn't work. We simply shouldn't do it. But I thought the reason it was okay to torture people was that we didn't have time to figure things out other ways. That was Bush's line. How would you have checked out the exact flights the terrorists were going to take, especially if, oh, they found out someone from their group had been taken and changed the plans?But, to me, principle is the real issue. If we're going to justify things because they make us safer, how safe are we from ourselves?
|
|
|
Post by RAF on Jan 25, 2009 19:48:10 GMT -4
Craig...by what criteria do you determine what is "good" information, and what is "bad" information?? Its quite simple you check it out. Your continued failure to answer even simplest of questions is most telling. Why should anyone waste their time attempting to have a rational discussion with you when you refuse to respond to the simplest of inquires??
|
|