Boycott the U.S. Military

[selkirk]

All those who voted against W. have guaranteed themselves the right to bitch and moan all we want.

 

To those Volunteering and actively trying to change things to you!

 

unluckily me things it requires a policy making body that gives a shit what people other than those who voted for them think GW is a lame duck at the moment. He's not up for re-election so he can do anything he wants so long as it'll get past the Republican House/Senate, and that's a scary thought.

[Fairweather]

Does torture actually help our cause and advance our goals, or is it detrimental to them?

 

It can be necessary in drastic circumstances where time is an element.

 

 

 

If were going to decry their torture, and murder of our civilian contractors and military personal, and respond with retaliation, then they have every right to as well.

 

Fuck you. I haven't seen anything on our side that compares to the ritual beheadings these animals have perpetrated.

 

WE ARE ALL HUMAN. To believe that they are simply bent on distruction of everything because they are "evil" is naive and prideful. In their own minds, we are invaders, we are destroying their culture, they're way of life, we are "evil".

 

You want to win this war, really, truly, finally, and completely? Don't torture them, kill them, humiliate them. That only lends credence to their beliefs. Change their minds. "Winning the Hearts and Minds" was the perfect aspiration in Vietnam, it was just very poorly pursued.

 

It cost us the victory in Vietnam.

 

You can't stop terrorism by killing all the terrorists. Hasn't the conflict in Israel been enough to show that? You can lock them down, take away any and all weapons, attack at every chance you get, and if people are willing to commit suicide to make their point, there is very little you can do stop them.

 

This isn't exactly true. Even a suicide bomber usually has something he/she cares about more than his own life....I think you know what I mean. It's unspeakable.

[Stonehead]

How about can we accomplish the same ends through other means than torture?

 

We have the means--NASA's subvocal speech system

(http://www.nasa.gov/centers/ames/news/releases/2004/subvocal/subvocal.html

 

NASA scientists have begun to computerize human, silent reading using nerve signals in the throat that control speech. In preliminary experiments, NASA scientists found that small, button-sized sensors, stuck under the chin and on either side of the ‘Adam’s apple,’ could gather nerve signals, send them to a processor and then to a computer program that translates them into words.

 

"What is analyzed is silent, or sub-auditory, speech, such as when a person silently reads or talks to himself," said Chuck Jorgensen (pictured), a scientist whose team is developing silent, subvocal speech recognition at NASA Ames Research Center in California’s Silicon Valley.

--from source at link above

[Camilo]

This isn't exactly true. Even a suicide bomber usually has something he/she cares about more than his own life....I think you know what I mean. It's unspeakable.

If it's unspeakable, it's not a solution.

[snugtop]

Torture can be necessary in drastic circumstances where time is an element.

 

As Mattp mentioned, it's been widely shown to ineffective for getting reliable intelligence. More often than not it leads to false cofessions. When people are under extreme physical or psychological stress they will just say whatever they think their attacker wants to hear to make it stop.

[Fairweather]

Torture can be necessary in drastic circumstances where time is an element.

 

As Mattp mentioned, it's been widely shown to ineffective for getting reliable intelligence. More often than not it leads to false cofessions. When people are under extreme physical or psychological stress they will just say whatever they think their attacker wants to hear to make it stop.

 

Bullshit.

[Squid]

is

is not

is

is not

is

is not

is

[olyclimber]

is

is not

is

is not

is

is not

is

 

Bullshit!

[Squid]

Says you!

[olyclimber]

Au contraire!

[Squid]

En garde, gadfly!

[olyclimber]

[Dr_Flash_Amazing]

"I hate people like you who just complain all day long but do nothing to make their world or community a better place...Should I continue?"

 

Yeah, those damn do-nothing complainers. Also, you don't know fuck about what the good Doctor actually does with regard to furthering the ideals he values, so, to quote you, "nice try, dickhead." And, no, you've probably said enough on that topic. Volumes, actually.

 

"No I'm not too concerned about the people who are being tortured because what [am] I going to do about it? Did I say innocent people should be tortured? No I didn't, that is wrong. There is no disconnect, but I'm not going to show compasion for people who don't by no means deserve it. I'm also not blind to the fact there are times when desperate times require desperate measures."

 

So what is it about raising people's awareness of an issue such as this that incites your ire so? You decry people who "do nothing;" yet you provide an internet discussion forum, which is a great way for people to share ideas, formulate opinions, and share information. Do you think that all these things are useless or contribute nothing to decisions people make or actions they might take? If it works for climbing, why not for mobilizing politically or socially? Without awareness, then people are blind to issues, and it's guaranteed no one will get around to doing anything.

 

"Hey isn't this where you post some lyrics to a song I don't care about?"

 

How would DFA know what to post? What if the Doctor accidentally posted lyrics you really cared about, that touched you deep down in some secret special place? Nah, that might totally backfire. No lyrics for you!

 

[Dr_Flash_Amazing]

Would Dr Flash condone torture to save a friend, family member...or another skyscraper full of innocents? I would.

 

God, Fairweather; the Doctor loves watching ALIAS, too; that shit's a kick in the ass...but that's not how the world really works!

[snugtop]

Torture can be necessary in drastic circumstances where time is an element.

 

As Mattp mentioned, it's been widely shown to ineffective for getting reliable intelligence. More often than not it leads to false cofessions. When people are under extreme physical or psychological stress they will just say whatever they think their attacker wants to hear to make it stop.

 

Bullshit.

 

And you would know this how?

[Fairweather]

As Mattp mentioned, it's been widely shown to ineffective for getting reliable intelligence. More often than not it leads to false cofessions. When people are under extreme physical or psychological stress they will just say whatever they think their attacker wants to hear to make it stop.

 

This is just anecdote. Do you have an actual study to back up the fantasy?

 

If torture were not effective, it wouldn't be used for the purpose of gaining intelligence by virtually every political/military structure that has existed since the dawn of... 'civilization'.

 

Hey Dr Flash! Even one of the most outspoken liberal prof's in the country agrees!.....

 

http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2002/01/17/60minutes/main324751.shtml

Edited May 21, 2005 by Fairweather

[KaskadskyjKozak]

As Mattp mentioned, it's been widely shown to ineffective for getting reliable intelligence. More often than not it leads to false cofessions. When people are under extreme physical or psychological stress they will just say whatever they think their attacker wants to hear to make it stop.

 

It, it, it. Define torture. Currently bleeding hearts are redefining "it" to include milder and milder forms of interrogation tactics - sleep deprivation, psychological tactics, and so on.

 

When I think of "torture", I think of sadistic, brutal physical abuse, not shining bright lights in prisoners faces after 48 hours of not sleeping. The former does fall under the characterization of "non-productive" techniques, whereas the latter *have* proven effective.

[glacierdog]

I think torture is unavoidable - -like it or not it’s a normal part of warfare. What irks me is when our leaders avoid responsibility for said military torture tactics leaving 19 year old photo snapping depraved privates to take the rap.

 

Today, we are in agreeance.

[snugtop]

This is just anecdote. Do you have an actual study to back up the fantasy?

 

 

from the article I posted:

 

Scientific research on the efficacy of torture and rough interrogation is limited, because of the moral and legal impediments to experimentation. Tom Parker, a former officer for M.I.5, the British intelligence agency, who teaches at Yale, argued that, whether or not forceful interrogations yield accurate information from terrorist suspects, a larger problem is that many detainees “have nothing to tell.” For many years, he said, British authorities subjected members of the Irish Republican Army to forceful interrogations, but, in the end, the government concluded that “detainees aren’t valuable.” A more effective strategy, Parker said, was “being creative” about human intelligence gathering, such as infiltration and eavesdropping. “The U.S. is doing what the British did in the nineteen-seventies, detaining people and violating their civil liberties,” he said. “It did nothing but exacerbate the situation. Most of those interned went back to terrorism. You’ll end up radicalizing the entire population.”

....

 

Also torture isn't always about getting information, it's about humilating people and displaying total control over another human. A lot of sicko dictators just do it because they can and because they like it...bloodthirtiness...not for any noble causes.

[Dr_Flash_Amazing]

This is just anecdote. Do you have an actual study to back up the fantasy?

 

If torture were not effective, it wouldn't be used for the purpose of gaining intelligence by virtually every political/military structure that has existed since the dawn of... 'civilization'.

 

Hey Dr Flash! Even one of the most outspoken liberal prof's in the country agrees!.....

 

http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2002/01/17/60minutes/main324751.shtml

 

Cute, Fairweather; but first of all, DFA doesn't just think things because other people with similar points of view think them--but thanks for implying as much. Also, this fellow is stating his opinion about a completely hypothetical situation; in an interview about a year after 9/11 no less...But if you want to go along with the conjecture of some semi-famous liberal fella, that's your prerogative. And, again, the scenario in question is straight out of a movie. Next time a situation actually arises when the bomb squad locates the conveniently ticking time bomb with thirty minutes to go, and a knowledgeable suspect is conveniently located sometime thereafter, and some means of coersion causes the suspect to help stop the bomb, then we can talk. Until then, maybe you should go easy on the "24" DVDs, hmm?

 

As for your assertion that torture has been used for years and so must be effective...why are there still terrorists? Why are we still fighting wars? If torture, violence, and killing were really that effective, don't you think they would have had some lasting impact on the global state of affairs? All we see is more war, more terror, more dictators, etc. Likewise has the death penalty done little to ameliorate the commission of murder. The cliche bumpersticker question "why do we kill people who kill people to show them that killing is wrong?" is an apt one.

 

These actions, such as war and the death penalty, sate a desire for revenge, but do they really solve problems? History says "no."

[Dr_Flash_Amazing]

This is just anecdote. Do you have an actual study to back up the fantasy?

 

 

from the article I posted:

 

Scientific research on the efficacy of torture and rough interrogation is limited, because of the moral and legal impediments to experimentation. Tom Parker, a former officer for M.I.5, the British intelligence agency, who teaches at Yale, argued that, whether or not forceful interrogations yield accurate information from terrorist suspects, a larger problem is that many detainees “have nothing to tell.” For many years, he said, British authorities subjected members of the Irish Republican Army to forceful interrogations, but, in the end, the government concluded that “detainees aren’t valuable.” A more effective strategy, Parker said, was “being creative” about human intelligence gathering, such as infiltration and eavesdropping. “The U.S. is doing what the British did in the nineteen-seventies, detaining people and violating their civil liberties,” he said. “It did nothing but exacerbate the situation. Most of those interned went back to terrorism. You’ll end up radicalizing the entire population.”

....

 

Also torture isn't always about getting information, it's about humilating people and displaying total control over another human. A lot of sicko dictators just do it because they can and because they like it...bloodthirtiness...not for any noble causes.

 

Nice.

 

It's so funny; this is such a basic concept. It's like disciplining a child; you can scream at them, spank them, humiliate them, and tell them how "bad" they are, and you might gain temporary compliance (or more likely teach the child to fear you and simply resort to lying or sneaking around behind your back), but in the long run, the child will grow to resent you and possibly him- or herself, leading to further misbehavior...see a pattern?

[Fairweather]

 

It's so funny; this is such a basic concept. It's like disciplining a child; you can scream at them, spank them, humiliate them, and tell them how "bad" they are, and you might gain temporary compliance (or more likely teach the child to fear you and simply resort to lying or sneaking around behind your back), but in the long run, the child will grow to resent you and possibly him- or herself, leading to further misbehavior...see a pattern?

 

So now you're Dr Spock, eh? How old are your kids?

[Dr_Flash_Amazing]

It's so funny; this is such a basic concept. It's like disciplining a child; you can scream at them, spank them, humiliate them, and tell them how "bad" they are, and you might gain temporary compliance (or more likely teach the child to fear you and simply resort to lying or sneaking around behind your back), but in the long run, the child will grow to resent you and possibly him- or herself, leading to further misbehavior...see a pattern?

 

So now you're Dr Spock, eh? How old are your kids?

 

Why don't you just display some humility and agree with the good Doctor for once? Or are you going to argue this point, too? Surely you are not going to hinge your dispute on the makeup of the Doctor's family (which, it should be mentioned, you know zilch about).

 

Oh, there is a report on NPR right now about the innocent taxi driver who was tortured to death. Think his family is convinced of the necessity and efficacy of torture? Hamed Karzai sure doesn't seem too happy about it. So much for even getting off on the right diplomatic foot with a government of that's newly in place because of U.S. action. Maybe we should bomb them again?

 

 

 

[Fairweather]

 

As for your assertion that torture has been used for years and so must be effective...why are there still terrorists? Why are we still fighting wars? If torture, violence, and killing were really that effective, don't you think they would have had some lasting impact on the global state of affairs? All we see is more war, more terror, more dictators, etc.

This is the human condition. Only many more millenia of history and evolution will change it....maybe.

Likewise has the death penalty done little to ameliorate the commission of murder. The cliche bumpersticker question "why do we kill people who kill people to show them that killing is wrong?" is an apt one.

I support the death penalty because it is a fitting punishment for someone who kills/rapes a child. I suspect that, in order to remain pro-life consistent, I'll eventually have to cede that the death penalty is incorrect and, probably, unconstitutional.

 

These actions, such as war and the death penalty, sate a desire for revenge, but do they really solve problems? History says "no."

History sometimes says, "yes". Defeating nazi Germany wasn't a resolution to a problem? By your login, the defeat of the C.S.A. didn't resolve a problem?

 

You truly DO live in that unattainable fantastic utopia that will likely never exist. Really, as long as humans possess the slightest hint of individuality, can it ever?

[KaskadskyjKozak]

the death penalty done little to ameliorate the commission of murder.

 

Only a small percentage of murders are tried as capital cases, and, of those, only some result in a capital conviction. Moreover, the time lag between sentencing and the execution is often more than 10 years. As such, it is a dishonest argument to state that capital punishment is not a deterrent - it is simply not applied often (or soon) enough to be one.