• Welcome to OGBoards 10.0, keep in mind that we will be making LOTS of changes to smooth out the experience here and make it as close as possible functionally to the old software, but feel free to drop suggestions or requests in the Tech Support subforum!

Torture Report Released

wakelaw13 said:
How is torture even an issue? I mean, if it worked, then I can see there being a serious debate as to its morality. But my understanding is that it doesn't.
Click to expand...

tumblr_inline_n36njc7Ne11qzjix8.gif


If ineffectiveness is your reason for thinking torturing another human being is immoral then you might need a new moral theory.
 
Let's think about the totally BS rationalization that torture could stop an imminent threat. Exactly how could it be ticking three months or six months or a year or two years after someone has been captured?
 
Oh man, went down the rabbit hole after reading the wiki page Ph posted. Should not have done that.
 
knowell said:
I am pretty sure torture works to some extent. That does not make it okay by any means but it should factor in the discussion. I am uncomfortable with the idea of torture, but it would be hard to say never if you know the suspect has solid info on an imminent threat. Also think that all torture is not equal. Water boarding is not the same gouging eyes etc.
Click to expand...

See that's the problem. Reading the section on Abu Zubaydah, who was the first CIA prisoner and the first one tortured. They justified the torture because they were certain he was holding back info about an upcoming attack on the U.S. This despite the fact that he was generally cooperative with the non-violent questioning and didn't talk about an upcoming attack.

Then, after they started torturing him and he didn't reveal any more info, they came to the conclusion that he probably didn't know anything. But they kept torturing him and eventually deemed the torture a success because it confirmed that he had already revealed everything he knew.

It seems to me that there are going to be very few instances where you know for certain that somebody knows something that you can torture out of them, especially considering that in this entire post-9/11 world it didn't happen once, according to the report.
 
Cheaper and faster to just bomb them with a drone and be done with it. Change we can believe in.
 
Deacs89 said:
Cheaper and faster to just bomb them with a drone and be done with it. Change we can believe in.
Click to expand...

Better than lying to send thousands to their deaths and tens of thousands to be maimed to get yourself re-elected and punish someone for trying to shoot your dad.
 
No one gives a shit but I do like ACLU Romero's idea about the Presidential pardon.

Coward Nobama ain't doing shite
 
Thank you, Senator Rockefeller

Old money > Wall Street money

Remember when the rich felt a duty to bettering the world?
 
RJKarl said:
Better than lying to send thousands to their deaths and tens of thousands to be maimed to get yourself re-elected and punish someone for trying to shoot your dad.
Click to expand...

I don't have an issue with the drone program. It's one thing I think Obama got right. Just think its sad that the left is throwing the CIA under the bus as if they are some sort of morality police when they continue to be judge jury and executioner overseas. I suppose Obama is like the racist police and the terrorists are like the mike browns on the international world. Where is the outrage.
 
There's a lot of outrage over drones on the left. Not enough, but a lot. Search "flying death robots" or watch Chris Hayes' show or check The Atlantic or The Intercept. Sad fact of the matter is that the POTUS is basically unconstrained and there's no reason to expect that to change. So unless you're a single-issue foreign policy voter (i.e. a unicorn), there's little reason to expect people to withhold votes from Obummer over this issue.
 
Last edited:
Nothing to see here folks. Dick Cheney has deemed the report "a bunch of hooey." Case closed
 
Deacs89 said:
I don't have an issue with the drone program. It's one thing I think Obama got right. Just think its sad that the left is throwing the CIA under the bus as if they are some sort of morality police when they continue to be judge jury and executioner overseas. I suppose Obama is like the racist police and the terrorists are like the mike browns on the international world. Where is the outrage.
Click to expand...

I was on board with W using drones. I am on board with Obama using drones.
 
Bob Kerrey has a good take on this:

I regret having to write a piece that is critical of the Democratic members of the Senate Select Committee on Intelligence. Most of them are former colleagues and friends. I hope they will remain friends after reading this.

For eight years I served on this committee. I know how difficult and important the work of providing tough and fair oversight of our nation's $50 billion top-secret intelligence network.

I will wait until I have fully read and considered Tuesday's report to enter the debate over whether the CIA handled interrogation of detainees in an appropriate manner. Thanks to the 2005 and 2006 efforts of Senator John McCain I do not have to wait to be certain our interrogation policies and procedures are aligned with our core values.


I also do not have to wait to know we are fighting a war that is different than any in our country's past. The enemy does not have an easy to identify and analyze military. In the war against global jihadism, human intelligence and interrogation have become more important, and I worry that the partisan nature of this report could make this kind of collection more difficult.

I do not need to read the report to know that the Democratic staff alone wrote it. The Republicans checked out early when they determined that their counterparts started out with the premise that the CIA was guilty and then worked to prove it.

When Congress created the intelligence committees in the 1970's, the purpose was for people's representatives to stand above the fray and render balanced judgments about this most sensitive aspect of national security. This committee departed from that high road and slipped into the same partisan mode that marks most of what happens on Capitol Hill these days.


I have participated in two extensive investigations into intelligence failures, once when Aldrich Ames was discovered to be spying for Russia after he had done substantial damage to our human intelligence collection capability and another following the 9/11 attacks. In both cases we were very critical of the practices of the intelligence agencies. In both cases we avoided partisan pressure to blame the opposing party. In both cases Congress made statutory changes and the agencies changed their policies. It didn't make things perfect, but it did make them better.

In both of these efforts the committee staff examined documents and interviewed all of the individuals involved. The Senate's Intelligence Committee staff chose to interview no one. Their rationale - that some officers were under investigation and could not be made available – is not persuasive. Most officers were never under investigation and for those who were, the process ended by 2012.

Fairness should dictate that the examination of documents alone do not eliminate the need for interviews conducted by the investigators. Isolated emails, memos and transcripts can look much different when there is no context or perspective provided by those who sent, received or recorded them.

It is important for all of us to remember how unprepared we were for the attacks of September 11, 2001 and how unprepared we were to do the things necessary to keep the country from being attacked again. There was no operating manual to guide the choices and decisions made by the men and women in charge of protecting us. I will continue to read the report to learn of the mistakes we apparently made. I do not need to read the report in full to know this: We have not been attacked since and for that I am very grateful.


It is important for all of us to not let Congress dodge responsibility. Congressional oversight of intelligence is notoriously weak. The 9/11 Commission recommended a number of changes in the authorities of Congressional committees but the proposal – advanced by Senator McCain – did not come close to gathering a majority of votes in either the Senate or the House.

The worse consequence of a partisan report can be seen in this disturbing fact: It contains no recommendations. This is perhaps the most significant missed opportunity, because no one would claim the program was perfect or without its problems. But equally, no one with real experience would claim it was the completely ineffective and superfluous effort this report alleges.

Our intelligence personnel – who are once again on the front lines fighting the Islamic State – need recommended guidance from their board of governors: The U.S. Congress. Remarkably this report contains none. I hope – for the sake of our security and our values – Congress will follow the leadership of Senator McCain and give them this guidance.

Bob Kerrey, former governor of Nebraska and U.S. senator, is now the managing director of Allen and Company.
Click to expand...
 
Why would they need to interview people years after the fact if they have documentation from that time?
 
PhDeac said:
Why would they need to interview people years after the fact if they have documentation from that time?
Click to expand...

I'll just quote Mr. Kerrey on this since he says it clearer than I would.

Fairness should dictate that the examination of documents alone do not eliminate the need for interviews conducted by the investigators. Isolated emails, memos and transcripts can look much different when there is no context or perspective provided by those who sent, received or recorded them.
Click to expand...

Pretty interesting to read some of the conclusions in the report (no credible intelligence, etc) and then read that they didn't interview a single person.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top