Barrel of Fun
Abort, retry, fail
The Americans are very much coming across as 'Do as we say, not as we do'. The fact that Guantanamo still has prisoners is a testament to that.
Got something to say or just want fewer pesky ads? Join us... 😊
CIA
- Thread starter Vegas Seagull
- Start date
The Fifth Column
Lazy mug
As fun as this debate is, whether the CIA tortured any number of terror suspects doesnt even register on my giveashitometer. Mind you if they start parading their prisoners on the TV and forcing them to renounce Islam before brutally slicing off their heads then I might get a tad offended.
At least ISIS are open and happy to publicize their Islamic punishments :-
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/art...mages-brutal-execution-man-guilty-sodomy.html
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/art...mages-brutal-execution-man-guilty-sodomy.html
BBassic
I changed this.
- Jul 28, 2011
- 13,054
So, one form of barbaric treatment is ok and the other is not?
BBassic
I changed this.
- Jul 28, 2011
- 13,054
"Attention! Attention! This is your Government! We will do whatever we can to protect you! We will step on the rights of others to ensure you can be sanctimonious towards others! We will judge others when they do the same! Fear not! We are in control! Watch the X-Factor! There is nothing wrong! We are in control!"
The Fifth Column
Lazy mug
You cant compare waterboarding and treating suspects with proven links to terrorism a bit shit without killing them to get some information out of them and decapitating charity aid workers just for being westerners.
I could almost agree with this, except that you didn't need proven links to terrorism to get swept up in the net. You merely needed to be a suspect.
BBassic
I changed this.
- Jul 28, 2011
- 13,054
Information that, according to the report, had zero impact in their efforts to stop the enemy. Information that, if attained under duress, was likely shit and only said to stop the pain.
What, even if you were one of ones held illegally ? You condone torture ?
Agreed accept the USA are second ..... coming in first would be Israel.
OzMike
Well-known member
I really don't know why they release this type of info if don't want the flack that comes with it.
It never ceases to amaze me how many programs have been aired showing their ineptitude in situations.
It just tells the world how crap they are.
It never ceases to amaze me how many programs have been aired showing their ineptitude in situations.
It just tells the world how crap they are.
OzMike
Well-known member
I don't remember seeing any aid worker on trial before a beheading, or did I miss something.
AlastairWatts
Active member
Oh really. Next you'll be saying that they blew up the twin towers themselves. And they probably had a hand in Princess Diana's car accident. That they've got that Malaysian missing airliner hidden away at area 51.
I don't remember anyone from the USA or Israel beheading innocent aid workers on video. At worst they're incompetent and stupid if the Americans believe that torture will get 'em anything except a dubious 'confession'. At best they're a real power for freedom and democracy in the world. And Israel? - try and imagine living in Brighton with a bunch of crazies lobbing explosive rockets from Portslade, or creeping through the drains to enable suicide bombers to commit the murder of innocent people, sometimes Palestinians.
JCL666
absurdism
- Sep 23, 2011
- 2,190
Wow
Most of the people defending the torture seem to come from the perspective of;
"Well other people acted like c**ts, so it's ok for the CIA to act like c**ts"
I guess I just don't think that treating people in a degrading and inhumane way, which serves absolutely no purpose (there is NO evidence that torture has successfully extracted vital information, or makes a terrorist "think twice"), is justifiable or is in anyway a worthwhile activity.
It doesn't matter if it's ISIS or the CIA or the Chinese government. It's a disgrace and should be condemned. I get the idea that the transparency within Western democracies is good, however until someone (preferably not just a scapegoat) is tried for these activities and convicted then the transparency doesn't help that much.
Most of the people defending the torture seem to come from the perspective of;
"Well other people acted like c**ts, so it's ok for the CIA to act like c**ts"
I guess I just don't think that treating people in a degrading and inhumane way, which serves absolutely no purpose (there is NO evidence that torture has successfully extracted vital information, or makes a terrorist "think twice"), is justifiable or is in anyway a worthwhile activity.
It doesn't matter if it's ISIS or the CIA or the Chinese government. It's a disgrace and should be condemned. I get the idea that the transparency within Western democracies is good, however until someone (preferably not just a scapegoat) is tried for these activities and convicted then the transparency doesn't help that much.
Held illegally? - I'm sure they were all working 9-5 jobs with their 2.5 children when they were detained...you need to wake up and smell the coffee and take your blinkers off.
JCL666
absurdism
- Sep 23, 2011
- 2,190
Yeah you're right being a bit "foreign looking" and travelling to see your relatives in Pakistan OBVIOUSLY justifies being detained without trial and tortured.
Even the report says some were held illegally. Only because someone's life doesn't fit your limited template of normal doesn't make them terrorists.
Situation 1:
A government have captured a man that they know (he freely admits it) was involved in 9/11, where over 3000 people died. He also has information about a future terrorist plot, but he won't say anything about it. So the government waterboard him to get him to talk.
Situation 2:
An unelected group of leaders have captured a foreigner that has brought aid to their people, but they chop his head off as a message to their enemies.
Now you are saying that if I condone Situation 1, I am as bad as the people in Situation 2? I don't see how you could possibly justify that position.
Personally, I am against the use of torture, but it's easy for me to be, because I don't have to live with the consequences either way, as I'm not in power. Which reminds me of Colonel Jessop:
"Son, we live in a world that has walls, and those walls have to be guarded by men with guns. Who's gonna do it? You? You, Lt. Weinburg? I have a greater responsibility than you could possibly fathom. You weep for Santiago, and you curse the Marines. You have that luxury. You have the luxury of not knowing what I know. That Santiago's death, while tragic, probably saved lives. And my existence, while grotesque and incomprehensible to you, saves lives. You don't want the truth because deep down in places you don't talk about at parties, you want me on that wall, you need me on that wall."
Seems to me there has never been any shortage of Colonel Jessop types in the military and intelligence communities. If caught they'll explain how they were acting on your behalf and in your best interests, and will be positively outraged when they are told what they were doing was illegal. Oliver North anybody?