Articles
   
       
       
Pics/Video
   
       
       
Shop
Search
 
 
 
 
 
Home   Articles   Pics/Video   Gear   Wake 101   Events   Community   Forums   Classifieds   Contests   Shop   Search
WAKE WORLD HOME
Email Password
Go Back   WakeWorld > Non-Wakeboarding Discussion

Share 
Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
Old     (Laker1234)      Join Date: Mar 2010       03-10-2010, 9:52 PM Reply   
I've heard a lot about waterboarding but didn't understand until I was sent this. I don't recommend trying this at home. http://content1.clipmarks.com/conten...4-3A07CF501B7C
Old     (aarond0083)      Join Date: Apr 2007       03-11-2010, 8:28 AM Reply   
Very effective. When it comes to captured terrorists, they should be doing this 24x7 to get all the intel they can.
Old     (wake77)      Join Date: Jan 2009       03-11-2010, 9:08 AM Reply   
Quote:
Originally Posted by aarond0083 View Post
Very effective. When it comes to captured terrorists, they should be doing this 24x7 to get all the intel they can.
It has been proven as an ineffective means of torture. Thousands of hours have been wasted as a result of chasing bogus leads given by those subjected to waterboarding.
Old     (wake77)      Join Date: Jan 2009       03-11-2010, 9:08 AM Reply   
...With no proven results of preventing any attacks.
Old     (psudy)      Join Date: Dec 2003       03-11-2010, 9:25 AM Reply   
Then they should waterboard and not ask any questions.
Old     (helinut)      Join Date: Apr 2007       03-11-2010, 11:42 AM Reply   
Or how bout just put em under water.
Old     (dh03r6)      Join Date: Mar 2007       03-12-2010, 9:01 AM Reply   
Quote:
Originally Posted by wake77 View Post
It has been proven as an ineffective means of torture. Thousands of hours have been wasted as a result of chasing bogus leads given by those subjected to waterboarding.
My father in law is a navy commander he had to be waterboarded for some type of training he claims it is VERY effective. He also thinks we should use it whenever needed.
Old     (wake77)      Join Date: Jan 2009       03-12-2010, 11:14 AM Reply   
John McCain would disagree with your father-in-law. If you want to ellicit a false response from a waterboardee, than yes it is effective.
The guys being waterboarded feel they are being drowned and will say anything to save their life. Does a private in the US Army know all of the critical information on the workings of the military? Why would some low-level terrorist know all of the workings of al queda?

Last edited by wake77; 03-12-2010 at 11:17 AM. Reason: accidentally posted before finishing.
Old     (psudy)      Join Date: Dec 2003       03-12-2010, 11:27 AM Reply   
Wow.
Old     (deltahoosier)      Join Date: Jun 2002       03-12-2010, 11:32 AM Reply   
Again you are choosing to ignore the rational for applying stress to a person who has information. Are you ignoring the reasons that they do that to people? You also make uninformed statements about the content of their confession. Then you are making false arguments of who they are doing this procedure too. I can play along if you want. In a time of war, even a low level private can give away important details of where they were and why they thought they were there. Number of members, methods of communication and so on. Then the captors put that with other information a develop a the big picture.

Do you guys really want to stay with this very short sited notion that our intelligence officers are morons but you know better?

Would John McCain like to be kept in small cage again? I bet not. Would John McCain want to have to live a daily life of going in the gas chamber like he did in boot camp? Does John McCain want to do grassers until he hurls? I doubt it.
Old     (zo1)      Join Date: Aug 2002       03-12-2010, 12:09 PM Reply   
Good opinion on it...

http://theamericanscene.com/2009/04/...s-and-strategy

Let’s assume arguendo that torture works in the tactical sense that I believe has been used so far in this debate; that is, that one can gain useful information reliably in at least some subset of situations through torture that could not otherwise be obtained. Further, assume that we don’t care about morality per se, only winning: defeating our enemies militarily, and achieving a materially advantaged life for the citizens of the United States. It seems to me that the real question is whether torture works strategically; that is, is the U.S. better able to achieve these objectives by conducting systematic torture as a matter of policy, or by refusing to do this? Given that human society is complex, it’s not clear that tactical efficacy implies strategic efficacy.

When you ask the question this way, one obvious point stands out: we keep beating the torturing nations. The regimes in the modern world that have used systematic torture and directly threatened the survival of the United States – Nazi Germany, WWII-era Japan, and the Soviet Union – have been annihilated, while we are the world’s leading nation. The list of other torturing nations governed by regimes that would like to do us serious harm, but lack the capacity for this kind of challenge because they are economically underdeveloped (an interesting observation in itself), are not places that most people reading this blog would ever want to live as a typical resident. They have won no competition worth winning. The classically liberal nations of Western Europe, North America and the Pacific that led the move away from systematic government-sponsored torture are the world’s winners.

Now, correlation is not causality. Said differently, we might have done even better in WWII and the Cold War had we also engaged in systematic torture as a matter of policy. Further, one could argue that the world is different now: that because of the nature of our enemies, or because of technological developments or whatever, that torture is now strategically advantageous. But I think the burden of proof is on those who would make these arguments, given that they call for overturning what has been an important element of American identity for so many years and through so many conflicts.
Old     (deltahoosier)      Join Date: Jun 2002       03-12-2010, 12:43 PM Reply   
Jeremy, you sure like to make illogical leaps of faith.

First, we have more than Osama's limo driver and on top of that, I am pretty sure they don't exactly announce who they have. They only put out what they want you to hear. I am not in the intelligence field. Also, I did not say you were insulting me. I said you were insulting the intelligence community in thinking they are not smart enough to tell that people are lying but you think you know who, what and where they are getting information.

Second, you are making a very big assumption of who I voted for and what I voted for.

Third, you are still missing the point of why you put stress on someone.

Fourth, you are missing the point that these people are not being hurt one bit. Just because they feel they are going to die does not mean it is real. They just get really stressed at having to deal with it, so they become compliant. It is not like they are shoving knives in their knee caps or cutting off eye lids like they did to our people. Again torture is in the eye of the beholder. Is it torture to put someone in a tear gas filled building and make them to physical tasks or make them answer questions before they are allowed to leave the tear gas filled building?
Old     (deltahoosier)      Join Date: Jun 2002       03-12-2010, 12:45 PM Reply   
Ron. Manzo has a point bud. You can point out the never ending quotes of Al Gore, President Clinton, Hillary, Sen. Kerry, Albright and others making the case for taking Saddam out and laying out how dangerous he was and also include those people's votes on giving the president the authority to invade Iraq in the name of the American people.
Old     (wake77)      Join Date: Jan 2009       03-12-2010, 1:04 PM Reply   
"Is it torture to put someone in a tear gas filled building and make them to physical tasks or make them answer questions before they are allowed to leave the tear gas filled building?"

Dude, I was in the Navy and subjected to the tear gas training. Did it suck, yes, but it was not torture. We were monitored by about six trained specialists to make sure nothing went wrong. I also knew prior to enlisting in the USN that I would be subjected to extra physical training, less sleep, and the gas chamber, that was part of it. But there wasn't one time while I was inhaling the tear gas that I thought I was going to die. I think you are making a bad comparison.

Waterboarding is useless just like the Patriot Act, but Cheney and Bush used them to show their smarts and power when it came to fighting terrorism. I certainly do not feel any safer because of the measures Bush and Co. used while they were in office.
Old     (deltahoosier)      Join Date: Jun 2002       03-12-2010, 2:14 PM Reply   
Well I consider going into the gas chamber as torture. If you did it every day for many sessions a day it would be torture by definintion. I know people who are extremely clostaphobic (sp?) and living in a small cage would be extremely torturous. Torture is in the eye of the beholder.

It is OK to submit you to a condition where you can not breath and if left in it long enough you would die and it is OK to do that because you knew about it and there were train specialist there to try and restart you heart if you died? That makes it OK to do? Then I guess, I agree with you. It is not torture and neither is waterboarding then. They are administering the technique with trained specialists as well. They don't want that person to die just like the military did not want you to die. Seems like you all are on equal footing then. Then why are they being tortured and you weren't again? Let me get this straight. These people engage in an activity that theyc know is going to get a cruise missile in their bedroom or a special ops sniper blow their head off but if we catch them and subject them to things that we do to our own military and things that I would argue are just as humane as we do to teens in the name of football practice or name your sport - we are bad?

Your argument is an emotional argument because the facts don't add up. Don't you think that the terrorists signed up for this too? Isn't that your excuse. IF you signed up for it, it is not torture? Heck, these people strap bombs to themselves and fly airplanes into buildings but you are worried if they feel like they can't breath?

The only things you argued are:

Bush started torture - hate to tell you but this has been around way before Bush so you are continuing the Bush delusion of the left.

Patriot act is useless and it was a Bush thing again (more of the Bush delusion of the left) -
is that why Obama has left the patriot act basically untouched and we still have Gitmo and we are getting ready to try the enemy combatants in a military court just like Bush?

Everything is Bush, Bush, Bush. Marcia, Marcia, Marcia. Open your eyes. All the crap you are arguing are exactly the things the democrats voted for too and are still continuing. At the end of the day you have to deduce one of two things. Either they are all out to get you or maybe intelligent people all looked at the same information and come up with the same rational answers. Only difference is you actually believe that your side is different.

Reply
Share 

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is On



All times are GMT -7. The time now is 12:42 AM.

Home   Articles   Pics/Video   Gear   Wake 101   Events   Community   Forums   Classifieds   Contests   Shop   Search
Wake World Home

 

© 2012 eWake, Inc.    
Advertise    |    Contact    |    Terms of Use    |    Privacy Policy    |    Report Abuse    |    Conduct    |    About Us