Shmoooooo: FTFA: But Rodriguez points out it would have been even worse: if Nelson "had tragically died, his successor would have been appointed by . . . Jeb Bush, the president's brother. The conspiracy theorists would have gone wild."

Jeb Bush is Obama's brother?

Apparently you aren't up on the latest conspiracies.

/Aliens did it.

jaybeezey: Don't want to get waterboarded? Don't be a terrorist.

seems simple enough

you seem simple enough

Dr Dreidel: indarwinsshadow: Yes, because if they use their manners and say please and thank you the information will just come spilling out of these bad boys.

.
..
...

You know how we got intel out of Saddam after he was captured?

Froot Loops, Fritos and conversation.

Yeah, that's ultimately the best argument going, and one that should be made loudly. We got information out of die hard farking Nazis just by giving them a warm meal and chatting. Once you humanize an opponent they start being a lot less combative and a lot more conciliatory.

It's also why it's so easy to be an asshole to random people on the Internet and not so much in real life.

Dow Jones and the Temple of Doom: Look, I'm sure when Obama is elected, he'll hope and change our waterboarding policy. All er have to do is get to the polls in Nov- hmm? What's that? He's already been in office for almost a full term? Oh. Well both sides are bad, so vote democratic.


I like you.

/house, sister, etc.

Fark all you chucklefarks who support this farking technique of farked-up torture.

That is all.

Magorn: It worked for the FBI. You might really want to read some actual history sometime. The first interrogators at Gitmo were FBI agents and they used standard "rapport-building" interrogation techniques with the prisoners. And it worked incredibly well and they got Tons of useful info out of the prisoners until the CIA showed up and started abusing them. {Citation provided}

Bravo, sir. Bravo.

cameroncrazy1984: Psychology does not work that way.

It's not psychology so much as leverage, and not tipping your hand if you don't have to.

indarwinsshadow: Yes, because if they use their manners and say please and thank you the information will just come spilling out of these bad boys.

.
..
...

actually it has been proven that torture produces highly unrealible results. The adage you get more flies with honey than vinegar is very apropos when it comes to torture.

Also Field Manual (FM) 34-52 Intelligence Interrogation:

The use of force, mental torture, threats, insults, or exposure to unpleasant and inhumane treatment of any kind is prohibited by law and is neither authorized nor. condoned by the US Government.

Experience indicates that the use of force is not necessary to gain the cooperation of sources for interrogation. Therefore, the use of force is a poor technique, as it yields unreliable results, may damage subsequent collection efforts, and can induce the source to say whatever he thinks the interrogator wants to hear. However, the use of force is not to be confused with psychological ploys, verbal trickery, or other nonviolent and noncoercive ruses used by the interrogator in questioning hesitant or uncooperative sources.

Man. You waterboard three lousy terrorists in 2003, and you never hear the end of it.

Detinwolf: Noticeably F.A.T.: indarwinsshadow: Yes, because if they use their manners and say please and thank you the information will just come spilling out of these bad boys.

.
..
...

How can you trust the information produced by torture?

I would immediately tell my captors anything to get them to stop torturing me. Am I a huge puss? Probably, but that's how it works. Anyone who advocates torture as effective is misguided.

I remember a POW video I had to watch before going overseas as part of the military. It was of guys who had been captured by the North Koreans talking about their experiences in camps and being tortured. This old guy said that he clammed up when they first started beating on him, but by day two he was telling them the United States was led by the Great Yellow Loobie Bird and that the only reason we were in North Korea was that we got lost on the way home from Nagasaki.

Hitchens did it.

Link

Lunaville: "Even though we would have had medical personnel standing by, we wondered what would happen" if Nelson had a heart attack and died from the unpleasantness ..."

The above made the whole article for me.

When I was reading that, I kept thinking of the Castle Anthrax scene in Holy Grail...

It's pretty nuts that we were living under a torture regime in this country, and the segment of our political landscape that bills themselves as champions of "small government" ushered it in and long for its return.

Cheney's neck snapping at the Hague would sound like justice to me.

Torture is sooo yesterdays news.

Our government has moved on to extra-judicial killings, oversight free (target unknown) drone strikes, cluster bombs etc etc.

It so secret they can't talk about it in a court of law, but they feel free to discuss its success everywhere and anywhere.

Dr Dreidel: If we disabuse them of the notion that we're all Crusaders, he may disabuse himself of the notion that we deserve death, and so may provide the information necessary to prevent the death he had planned to deal.

The problem is that folks who join the military or CIA can have ego issues. That is, they need to feel superior somehow - and that's by making someone else inferior. Humane negotiation tactics don't sufficiently feed that ego need, and so the interrogator feels better about themselves if they're more cruel or humiliating.

With an intact sense of self-worth, and an objective eye, the interrogator who wants to do the best job would not stoop to torture, since it's less effective.

kindms: oversight free (target unknown) drone strikes

You sound like someone with a quagmire fetish

/giggity

Imagine your sons in the armed forces being captured by an enemy in a future war. If his captors know that we will be torturing our POWs, what do you think will happen to your son?

Magorn: darwin

As a general answer to everyone who commented on my short and to the point comment;

I have to agree. I think American intelligence should switch to back rubs, provide night lights, soft music, and treat them all to candlelit dinners. I've heard that also goes a long way to getting what you want.

Magorn: Anything that can cause such intense pain as to put you at risk of a heart attack IS torture. Period. For fark's sake why are we even having this argument any more?

And befor ethe first idiot pops up with "Well they do it SERE School to US troops" let me point out two things:

1) they do it during the time when they try to teach soldiers to resist TORTURE

2) I've strung someone up an used a bullwhip on her. Was that torture? No. Because she asked me nicely and knew I wasn't there to permanantly injure her, and most importantly she knew she could make it all stop by using a magic word. If I kidnapped you off the street and did the same thing to you? THAT would be torture and hopefully I'd go to jail for the rest of my life for doing it to you. See the difference?

So...for most Americans, simply being forced to walk down a street for a ways or shovel snow off their driveway?

j0ndas: Bill Nelson is a lot older than the normal subjects, last I checked. And even a tiny chance of death isn't worth applying to a US Senator. They probably wouldn't have him try base jumping either, and people do that voluntarily.

I'm for waterboarding any and all proponents of waterboarding. Congresscritters, military, Executive branch.. All of them. And if we lose a few Bill Nelson's along the way, all the better.

I'd also propose this be on pay per view and use the vast funds generated to pay down the national debt.

lazyguineapig33 Smartest
Funniest
2012-05-10 03:01:24 PM


Imagine your sons in the armed forces being captured by an enemy in a future war. If his captors know that we will be torturing our POWs, what do you think will happen to your son?


Why yes because we all know that if they know this, they will be fair and just and won't you know cut our soldiers heads off or anything................do you really believe that if we are 'nice' to the enemy they will be 'nice' back.

cameroncrazy1984: So on the other hand, if a detainee knew I wasn't going to torture him, he might be more apt to tell me things. But what does the FBI know. I'll believe some guy on the Internet!

I would rather the people doing the interrogation have the flexibility to do their job, and assume they want that too. Why take bluffing off the table if you don't have to?

weatherwitch666: Why yes because we all know that if they know this, they will be fair and just and won't you know cut our soldiers heads off or anything................do you really believe that if we are 'nice' to the enemy they will be 'nice' back.

So you figure it's just better to out-douchebag them...

ManRay: I do not object to us banning torture. I object to telling everyone we are not going to do it.

If a insurgent knows the worst we are going to do to him is tickle him with a feather, he might make the decision to take his chances and clam up. If he does not know what we have in our bag of tricks, he might spill the beans without us touching him. The mind is very good at filling in the blanks.

Sucks to be the good guys. But that's the thing, you don't get to wear the white hat if you shoot the guy in the back.

It is harder to live up to our ideals. We may not always do it, but it is our duty to try.

There is no rule that the right choice and the easy choice would always be the same. And we are defined by the choices we make.

It doesn't matter if torture always provided the correct answer on the first go or if it never does. We as the United States should not do it. The vile nature of such an act is compounded by the fact that we don't have to do it in the first place.

Magorn: indarwinsshadow: Yes, because if they use their manners and say please and thank you the information will just come spilling out of these bad boys.

.
..
...

It worked for the FBI. You might really want to read some actual history sometime. The first interrogators at Gitmo were FBI agents and they used standard "rapport-building" interrogation techniques with the prisoners. And it worked incredibly well and they got Tons of useful info out of the prisoners until the CIA showed up and started abusing them. {Citation provided}

Good post!

Carousel Beast: Dr Dreidel: indarwinsshadow: Yes, because if they use their manners and say please and thank you the information will just come spilling out of these bad boys.

.
..
...

You know how we got intel out of Saddam after he was captured?

Froot Loops, Fritos and conversation.

Yeah, that's ultimately the best argument going, and one that should be made loudly. We got information out of die hard farking Nazis just by giving them a warm meal and chatting. Once you humanize an opponent they start being a lot less combative and a lot more conciliatory.

It's also why it's so easy to be an asshole to random people on the Internet and not so much in real life.

The goal of torture is not to get intel. It is to punish and cause pain. Period. There is no upside. It's just evil and useless.

Excepts from the 4th Geneva Convention of which the U.S is a signatory:

"Although one of the Powers in conflict may not be
a party to the present Convention, the Powers who
are parties thereto shall remain bound by it in their
mutual relations. They shall furthermore be bound
by the Convention in relation to the said Power, if
the latter accepts and applies the provisions
thereof."

"Persons taking no active part in the
hostilities, including members of armed forces
who have laid down their arms and those placed
hors de combat by sickness, wounds, detention, or
any other cause, shall in all circumstances be
treated humanely, without any adverse distinction
founded on race, colour, religion or faith, sex,
birth or wealth, or any other similar criteria."

"To this end the following acts are and shall
remain prohibited at any time and in any place
whatsoever with respect to the above-mentioned
persons:
(a) violence to life and person, in
particular murder of all kinds, mutilation, cruel
treatment and torture;
(b) taking of hostages;
(c) outrages upon personal dignity, in
particular humiliating and degrading treatment;"

http://mineaction.org/downloads/Emine%20Policy%20Pages/Geneva%20Conv en tions/Geneva%20Convention%20IV.pdf

weatherwitch666: lazyguineapig33 Smartest
Funniest
2012-05-10 03:01:24 PM


Imagine your sons in the armed forces being captured by an enemy in a future war. If his captors know that we will be torturing our POWs, what do you think will happen to your son?


Why yes because we all know that if they know this, they will be fair and just and won't you know cut our soldiers heads off or anything................do you really believe that if we are 'nice' to the enemy they will be 'nice' back.

Yes, actually and it does work. And even if they aren't 'nice'. We are supposed to be.

Do you think our positioned is strengthened by taking out some revenge fantasy on a defeated opponent? We lose more, gain little, and prove enemy propaganda correct.

If you become that which you claim to oppose, why are you deserving of support?

It's always better to trick your interviewee into giving up the info freely, like facebook.

lazyguineapig33: Imagine your sons in the armed forces being captured by an enemy in a future war. If his captors know that we will be torturing our POWs, what do you think will happen to your son?

Make no mistake, we not using water boarding because of our morals, not because we expect our enemies to do the same. That's wishful thinking.

indarwinsshadow: Magorn: darwin

As a general answer to everyone who commented on my short and to the point comment;

I have to agree. I think American intelligence should switch to back rubs, provide night lights, soft music, and treat them all to candlelit dinners. I've heard that also goes a long way to getting what you want.

Your post kinda got me to thinking. Women are about as uncooperative as enemy insurgents sometimes. Maybe we should start treating enemy insurgents like a women on a date.

So treat the enemy to a meal, give him what he wants but then behave like a jerk and make a slight about his appearance or something he says. Keep working on that subtle dance of compliment/insult/compliment, slowly making him pissed off with you but desperately wanting your validation.

Then finally you slip your hand on his thigh and... wait, where the hell was I going with this again?

Egoy3k: indarwinsshadow: Yes, because if they use their manners and say please and thank you the information will just come spilling out of these bad boys.

.
..
...

That is usually how the FBI does it, and they usually get the info they need.

It's also specifically why the FBI (arguably the best interrogators on Earth) refused to participate in these kinds of shenanigans.

kim jong-un: There is no rule that the right choice and the easy choice would always be the same. And we are defined by the choices we make.



I'm Commander Shepard, and this is my favorite post on Fark.

cameroncrazy1984: Because we've proven that we don't need "bluffing" to get information out of people? I don't see why this is so hard to understand. Maybe you should take issue with the guys who wrote the military, FBI and CIA handbooks on torture. Apparently you know more than they do.

I know that everyone in the broad spectrum from beat cops to CIA interrogators absolutely use bluffing when dealing with hostile prisoners or suspects. You think they don't? They use whatever they can to get good information.

jaybeezey: Don't want to get waterboarded? Don't be a terrorist.

seems simple enough

Yes. Who cares about Due Process anyway?

ManRay: I do not object to us banning torture. I object to telling everyone we are not going to do it.

If a insurgent knows the worst we are going to do to him is tickle him with a feather, he might make the decision to take his chances and clam up. If he does not know what we have in our bag of tricks, he might spill the beans without us touching him. The mind is very good at filling in the blanks.

You're an idiot.

The FBI got good information from Osama's bodyguard and Abu Zubaydah after 911 using standard interrogation techniques. The moment the CIA started waterboarding them, though, they clammed the hell up.

Link

So, yeah. You're stupid, and so is anyone who supports "enhanced interrogation".

MythDragon: I don't see what the big deal is with water boarding.

[www.allwakeboardproducts.com image 283x425]
It looks pretty damn fun to me.

I can't believe the government spends my tax dollars on taking terrorists out on boats.

I don't know about that man. I sunburn pretty easily.

I had a proff who said he ran a CIA interrogation camp in Korea. He said he got best results by promising to get visas for the interviewee's family.