I have to start by saying that this forum is great. I like politics and the martial arts and being able to do both at the same place is great. Now, at another site I go to "Biggovernment.com" they are pointing out excerpts from President Bush's new book. The one that caught my attention was about the decision to use waterboarding to interogate three of the terrorists at guantanamo bay. You can check out the exact excerpt yourself but I find it interesting. When the C.I.A told him they had khalid sheik mohammud and that he had information on upcoming terrorist attacks, they requested permission to waterboard the guy. Bush gave the okay himself. He isn't hiding, he isn't passing the buck. What a breath of fresh air.
Bush's book
- Thread starter billc
- Start date
WC_lun
Senior Master
I'm not advocating charges or anything, but isn't that admitting to a war crime? Waterboarding is considered torture by both the Geneva convention and our own military code of conduct. Seems admitting to authorizing torture doesn't do himself any good and gives enemies of the US more ammunition in thier recruiting.
Neither Bush nor the CIA operatives engaged in the technique are in the military, so there are no code of conduct issues there.
I thought Bush was at that time the CIC....though what rule applies where I'm not sure. But I think WC is right, Bush just admitted to authorizing an action that's listed as torture by treaty.
Me personally, I think he had the whole thing ghost written...because it wasn't in crayon n all that.
Me personally, I think he had the whole thing ghost written...because it wasn't in crayon n all that.
WC_lun
Senior Master
That really wasn't the point. The point is that our government recognizes waterboarding as torture, even to the extent that we have prosecuted other country's soldiers and even our own soldiers for doing it. Now an ex-president is saying he personally authorized the use of torture, which is a war crime. It lends credence to our enemy's claim and to those that want Bush brought up on charges. It doesn't seem admitting to such a thing would be in Bush's best interest.
Also, if you want to get into the issues of breaking a code of conduct, both Bush and the CIA were representatives of our government. Our government is a signer of the Geneva convention treaty. Water boarding is expressly listed as torture in that treaty and they KNOWLINGLY violated that treay. So with that perspective, whether they are in the military is moot.
First, the terrorists didn't need waterboarding to recruit terrorists who,Bombed the Kobar towers, our embassies in Africa, the attack on the Cole, or the killing of over 3000 americans, the attack on Mumbai india the attack in Bali etc...The idea that anything we do will help or hurt their recruitment is silly. Again, terrorists are not covered under the geneva convention. If we wanted to we could shoot them on the battlefield without trial, they are the war criminals, not us. I support waterboarding. It doesn't tear flesh, break bones or leave permanent damage. As soon as you stop the waterboardee is fine. It was done to three terrorists with the utmost legal and ethical scrutiny and it was done to save innocent lives. I do not believe in the kind of torture that the terrorists use everyday to kill innocent human beings around the world. I do not believe in the kind of torture the terrorists use to make innocent people so afraid that they have to go into hiding just because they suggested that artists draw pictures of Mohummaed. Lets get real out there.
By torturing in our name, our government has made terrorists of us all.
That's real.
Really, that's what you can come back with. Explain that to all the people who would have died without the information from khalid sheik mohummed, and the other two. Real lives were saved and the terrorists planning to murder them didn't even sustain lasting or permanent damage. War is not bean bag, the terrorists know this, we need to learn this. Maybe some of the moderates in the muslim world would be more helpful if they didn't see the U.S. as the weak horse. The terrorists cut off heads, hands, noses and feet from innocent people. They cut the throats of innocent flight attendants, they have real, real medieval torture chambers. They slaughter innocent people without remorse and you compare our waterboarding three guys, to that.
Blade96
Senior Master
i bet if terrorists were waterboarding american guys, the US wouldnt like it. But its ok for US to do it to them because they're saving lives. Well it saves lives so torture is ok ? Heck Omar Khadr (our canadian one) was threatened with rape and everything. Wtf? Just cause the terrorists do it, doesnt mean the us should then feel ok to launch into a less brutal form of torture. It hardly makes US much better than them.
Blade96
Senior Master
Story written by a guy who tried waterboarding for himself to see what it is like.
Story by writer Chistopher Hitchens.
http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/world/us_and_americas/article5061441.ece
Story by writer Chistopher Hitchens.
http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/world/us_and_americas/article5061441.ece
For our guys who actually torture prisoners and commit war crimes, you punish them, they are covered by the geneva convention and need to go to jail or be executed if the crimes warrant it. These acts are not U.S. policy. The terrorists do these things as religously sanctioned activities. Yeah, I can see it now, the american officer goes to the iraqi, or afghani local leader, "can you tell us where the terrorists are?" the leader replies, "yes, but if I tell you, they will come and torture, rape and murder not only my family but many families in this town. They will do it in front of the husbands and village elders. What will you do to protect us?" " Well, first, we will give the terrorists we capture their miranda warnings and make sure they have access to legal council, then, after we run it up the chain of command I am pretty sure we will maybe get the chance to ask some pretty direct questions about what they have been doing." "Hopefully, their court appointed lawyer will allow them to tell us about their activities so then we can possibly get a civillian judge to give us a warrant to arrest the terrorists. We can probably be pretty sure that noone will screw up the warrant, and that the capture will be legally binding." "I just hope you help us pretty soon because the new administration wants us out of here in about a year, so you better act quick, cause you know, once were gone, only the terrorsits will be left, and they might be a little mad that you and your village helped us." Hmmm. Let me think. What are the odds that the town leaders are going to help our weak horse.
After the water boarding, having heard Christopher Hitchens on Hugh Hewitts show for at least once a week, till he became ill, I'm sure he had a smoke, a stiff drink and went on his merry old english way. What do you think the people tortured by the terrorists did after their bodies were found.
Fighting wrong with wrong is rarely right.
WC_lun
Senior Master
Actually, if the presidient authorizes it, the State Dept okays it, and the DoD doesn't raise hell about it, it is indeed US government policy to torture prisoners as a means of interogation. That is what Bush did by authorizing waterboarding.
According to experts in intellegence gathering, torture (re waterboarding) is very, very, unreliable as a means of interogation. Building a trust with the prisonoer is the best and most reliable means and torture is %100 counter-productive to that.
Either we are a civilized country that believes in the rule of law or we are not. There is no middle ground. There is no acceptable circumstance in which torture and breaking our own laws is bad, unless we think we can get what we want by doing so.
Now as to waterboarding being torture, we have prosecuted foreign nationals for waterboarding our soldiers. We have prosecuted our own soldiers for waterboarding foreign nationals. According to treaties we have signed, our government has agreed it is indeed torture. The question has been answered already many, many years ago. As far as no lasting physical effects, that is hogwash. There is serious risk of lung damage in the process of waterboarding.
I don't particularly care a whit about the terrorist these techniques are being used on. However, they are ineffective and put us as a country on the wrong side of both the law and morality...not to mention making the U.S. a hyporytical country. How do you sanction other countries because of human rights violations when our government sanctions torture? How do you expect people we fight not to abuse our soldiers when taken prisoner, when we abuse people in our custody?
As to the arguement that terrorist are doing it. Well they are terrorsit, aren't they? Thier behaviour makes them terrorist and criminals. If we resort to the same behaviour, what does that make us? Sadaam Hussien gassed people, does that mean it was acceptable to do the same? Terrorist killed 3000 innocent people on 911. Does that mean we are authorized to kill 3000 innocent people in our war on terror? In my opinion this arguement is one of the biggest piles of bull dung I have heard.
According to experts in intellegence gathering, torture (re waterboarding) is very, very, unreliable as a means of interogation. Building a trust with the prisonoer is the best and most reliable means and torture is %100 counter-productive to that.
Either we are a civilized country that believes in the rule of law or we are not. There is no middle ground. There is no acceptable circumstance in which torture and breaking our own laws is bad, unless we think we can get what we want by doing so.
Now as to waterboarding being torture, we have prosecuted foreign nationals for waterboarding our soldiers. We have prosecuted our own soldiers for waterboarding foreign nationals. According to treaties we have signed, our government has agreed it is indeed torture. The question has been answered already many, many years ago. As far as no lasting physical effects, that is hogwash. There is serious risk of lung damage in the process of waterboarding.
I don't particularly care a whit about the terrorist these techniques are being used on. However, they are ineffective and put us as a country on the wrong side of both the law and morality...not to mention making the U.S. a hyporytical country. How do you sanction other countries because of human rights violations when our government sanctions torture? How do you expect people we fight not to abuse our soldiers when taken prisoner, when we abuse people in our custody?
As to the arguement that terrorist are doing it. Well they are terrorsit, aren't they? Thier behaviour makes them terrorist and criminals. If we resort to the same behaviour, what does that make us? Sadaam Hussien gassed people, does that mean it was acceptable to do the same? Terrorist killed 3000 innocent people on 911. Does that mean we are authorized to kill 3000 innocent people in our war on terror? In my opinion this arguement is one of the biggest piles of bull dung I have heard.
Torture does work, that's why it is used by every monster out there. They were getting nothing out of Khalid. In fact, when they were waterboarding them he held up his hand and showed that he was counting on his fingers how long they could hold him under at a whack. He opened up the entire Al queda network after he was waterboarded. This is the real equation, three terrorists, waterboarded with no lasting harm or damage versus possibly hundreds or thousands of dead, or maimed innocent men women and children. All the terrorist has to do to stop the waterboarding is to reveal his plans on how he is going to torture and murder innocent men, women and children. He can then go to his cell, pray to mecca, eat his kosher dinner and read his koran. What do the people who are maimed and killed do after his plot is not stopped. Do the families of the victims ever have normal lives after the attack. Real people are dying all over the world because of these monsters. I'll take waterboarding three terrorists with no permanent harm done, over one more innocent person being tortured, raped, maimed, beheaded or killed. What are you willing to do to save the next innocent life?
Mr. Hubbard, do you prosecute a police officer who shoots and kills a man about to murder someone? Do you charge the firefighters fighting forest fires in federally protected forests with arson when they set fires to trees to stop the forest fire? When a surgeon cuts open a patient with a sharp knife to save his life, do you charge him with armed assault? What would you authorize to have stopped the murder of 3000 American and foriegn innocent men, women and children? Would you run water down the nose of a monster, who would torture, maim, rape you and your family and then claim he was going to heaven, to stop the murder of the people of Mumbai? It is coming up to reality check time. The terrorists haven't given up, the current administration doesn't take them seriously, and we can't keep getting lucky.
