Obama: No charges for harsh CIA interrogation
Registered User
Joined: May 2006
Posts: 5,686
From: I was up above it, now I'm down in it
Car Info: New Government Motors SUV!
I only brought that up as it pertained to your comment about obeying orders and illustrated that even an organization as strict as the military requires soldiers to not obey illegal orders.
If they tortured people, then they broke the law. The CIA is not above the law.
I don't know why you brought that up, but I assume it's because I referred to the Nuremberg Defense. The point was not to compare torture to genocide, but to address your comment about them "just obeying orders," which is referred to as the "Nuremberg Defense." It was also to show what happens in the extremes of the "just obeying orders" mentality.
If they tortured people, then they broke the law. The CIA is not above the law.
I don't know why you brought that up, but I assume it's because I referred to the Nuremberg Defense. The point was not to compare torture to genocide, but to address your comment about them "just obeying orders," which is referred to as the "Nuremberg Defense." It was also to show what happens in the extremes of the "just obeying orders" mentality.
It would be an empty political gesture to prosecute the people at the bottom of the totem pole while nothing is done to the upper chain of command.
Registered User
Joined: May 2006
Posts: 5,686
From: I was up above it, now I'm down in it
Car Info: New Government Motors SUV!
iClub Silver Vendor
iTrader: (25)
Joined: Nov 2002
Posts: 15,494
From: Participating in some Anarchy!
Car Info: 2005 LGT wagon
Thread Starter
Registered User
Joined: Jun 2008
Posts: 1,808
From: San Jose, CA
Car Info: 2015 WRX
The CIA was given permission to use certain interrogation techniques by Bush. The agents are no more at fault than the president, and no one is going after Bush. I don't think it's ethical to punish the agents just because it's too hard to punish the one who authorized the methods.
It would be an empty political gesture to prosecute the people at the bottom of the totem pole while nothing is done to the upper chain of command.
It would be an empty political gesture to prosecute the people at the bottom of the totem pole while nothing is done to the upper chain of command.
I expect people to be held accountable for breaking the law and violating human and civil rights, regardless of who their boss is.
Registered User
Joined: Jan 2005
Posts: 9,198
From: I gotta have more cow bell!!!!
Car Info: 05 STi
I've been thinking about this for a while and I can't help be see a conflict of interest here. First off, I'm 100% for the humane treatment of EPWs for several reasons. First, I think it's the moral thing to do. Secondly and perhaps more importantly to me, it saves lives downrange. An enemy is more prone to "give up" when he knows he'll be treated well if he surrenders. Having said this though I'm a bit at a lose. I've endured some pretty grueling things, some of the worse have actually been in training. I signed on the proverbial dotted line and was willing to take the pain to reach an end-state and I'm glad I did. I do see a correlation to this being the cerebal effort of making deliberate violent actions towards an opposing nation-state. These terrorists should have expected the worst and not considered themselves as falling under the umbrella of certain "EPW" priveleges. I have nothing but respect for someone who picks up a weapon and takes it to the "enemy" regardless of who they're fighting for. Anyone who sees something bigger than themselves worth giving their life for has my respect. What terrorists are doing now though is often a cowardly way to fight. You don't kill civilians and doing so should negate any privileges you have what so ever.
I'm not advocating we "stoop" to their level and we SHOULD set a moral precedent. We should also distinguish a "freedom fighter" from a "terrorist" though. Any individual that attacks a purely civilian target is a coward. If Al Qaeda had flown a plane into just the Pentagon I'd have bite my tongue, strapped up and done battle but the fact that they attacked a purely civilian population in NYC changes things. They don't deserve the rights that Al-joe Iraqi gets for being pissed off Americans are still in his town tearing up his fields so he gets the AK out.
That's all I have to say about that.
I'm not advocating we "stoop" to their level and we SHOULD set a moral precedent. We should also distinguish a "freedom fighter" from a "terrorist" though. Any individual that attacks a purely civilian target is a coward. If Al Qaeda had flown a plane into just the Pentagon I'd have bite my tongue, strapped up and done battle but the fact that they attacked a purely civilian population in NYC changes things. They don't deserve the rights that Al-joe Iraqi gets for being pissed off Americans are still in his town tearing up his fields so he gets the AK out.
That's all I have to say about that.
Last edited by 1reguL8NSTi; Apr 21, 2009 at 06:35 AM.
VIP Member
Joined: Oct 2003
Posts: 2,064
From: Detroit, Where the weak are killed and eaten...
Car Info: 02 Impreza WRX Sedan & 2008 GMC Sierra 4x4
I've been thinking about this for a while and I can't help be see a conflict of interest here. First off, I'm 100% for the humane treatment of EPWs for several reasons. First, I think it's the moral thing to do. Secondly and perhaps more importantly to me, it saves lives downrange. An enemy is more prone to "give up" when he knows he'll be treated well if he surrenders. Having said this though I'm a bit at a lose. I've endured some pretty grueling things, some of the worse have actually been in training. I signed on the proverbial dotted line and was willing to take the pain to reach an end-state and I'm glad I did. I do see a correlation to this being the cerebal effort of making deliberate violent actions towards an opposing nation-state. These terrorists should have expected the worst and not considered themselves as falling under the umbrella of certain "EPW" priveleges. I have nothing but respect for someone who picks up a weapon and takes it to the "enemy" regardless of who they're fighting for. Anyone who sees something bigger than themselves worth giving their life for has my respect. What terrorists are doing now though is often a cowardly way to fight. You don't kill civilians and doing so should negate any privileges you have what so ever.
I'm not advocating we "stoop" to their level and we SHOULD set a moral precedent. We should also distinguish a "freedom fighter" from a "terrorist" though. Any individual that attacks a purely civilian target is a coward. If Al Qaeda had flown a plane into just the Pentagon I'd have bite my tongue, strapped up and done battle but the fact that they attacked a purely civilian population in NYC changes things. They don't deserve the rights that Al-joe Iraqi gets for being pissed off Americans are still in his town tearing up his fields so he gets the AK out.
That's all I have to say about that.
I'm not advocating we "stoop" to their level and we SHOULD set a moral precedent. We should also distinguish a "freedom fighter" from a "terrorist" though. Any individual that attacks a purely civilian target is a coward. If Al Qaeda had flown a plane into just the Pentagon I'd have bite my tongue, strapped up and done battle but the fact that they attacked a purely civilian population in NYC changes things. They don't deserve the rights that Al-joe Iraqi gets for being pissed off Americans are still in his town tearing up his fields so he gets the AK out.
That's all I have to say about that.
iClub Silver Vendor
iTrader: (25)
Joined: Nov 2002
Posts: 15,494
From: Participating in some Anarchy!
Car Info: 2005 LGT wagon
Here's another point of view...that isn't getting much attention.
In releasing highly classified documents on the CIA interrogation program last week, President Obama declared that the techniques used to question captured terrorists "did not make us safer." This is patently false. The proof is in the memos Obama made public -- in sections that have gone virtually unreported in the media.
In particular, the CIA believes that it would have been unable to obtain critical information from numerous detainees, including [Khalid Sheik Mohammed] and Abu Zubaydah, without these enhanced techniques." The memo continues: "Before the CIA used enhanced techniques . . . KSM resisted giving any answers to questions about future attacks, simply noting, 'Soon you will find out.' " Once the techniques were applied, "interrogations have led to specific, actionable intelligence, as well as a general increase in the amount of intelligence regarding al Qaeda and its affiliates."
Specifically, interrogation with enhanced techniques "led to the discovery of a KSM plot, the 'Second Wave,' 'to use East Asian operatives to crash a hijacked airliner into' a building in Los Angeles." KSM later acknowledged before a military commission at Guantanamo Bay that the target was the Library Tower, the tallest building on the West Coast. The memo explains that "information obtained from KSM also led to the capture of Riduan bin Isomuddin, better known as Hambali, and the discovery of the Guraba Cell, a 17-member Jemmah Islamiyah cell tasked with executing the 'Second Wave.' " In other words, without enhanced interrogations, there could be a hole in the ground in Los Angeles to match the one in New York.
In particular, the CIA believes that it would have been unable to obtain critical information from numerous detainees, including [Khalid Sheik Mohammed] and Abu Zubaydah, without these enhanced techniques." The memo continues: "Before the CIA used enhanced techniques . . . KSM resisted giving any answers to questions about future attacks, simply noting, 'Soon you will find out.' " Once the techniques were applied, "interrogations have led to specific, actionable intelligence, as well as a general increase in the amount of intelligence regarding al Qaeda and its affiliates."
Specifically, interrogation with enhanced techniques "led to the discovery of a KSM plot, the 'Second Wave,' 'to use East Asian operatives to crash a hijacked airliner into' a building in Los Angeles." KSM later acknowledged before a military commission at Guantanamo Bay that the target was the Library Tower, the tallest building on the West Coast. The memo explains that "information obtained from KSM also led to the capture of Riduan bin Isomuddin, better known as Hambali, and the discovery of the Guraba Cell, a 17-member Jemmah Islamiyah cell tasked with executing the 'Second Wave.' " In other words, without enhanced interrogations, there could be a hole in the ground in Los Angeles to match the one in New York.
Thread Starter
Registered User
Joined: Jun 2008
Posts: 1,808
From: San Jose, CA
Car Info: 2015 WRX
I think they just happened to "luck out" with this particular scenario and by chance happened to get actionable information -- and are now using that small percentage of success to justify broad application of torture.
Thread Starter
Registered User
Joined: Jun 2008
Posts: 1,808
From: San Jose, CA
Car Info: 2015 WRX
I've been thinking about this for a while and I can't help be see a conflict of interest here. First off, I'm 100% for the humane treatment of EPWs for several reasons. First, I think it's the moral thing to do. Secondly and perhaps more importantly to me, it saves lives downrange. An enemy is more prone to "give up" when he knows he'll be treated well if he surrenders. Having said this though I'm a bit at a lose. I've endured some pretty grueling things, some of the worse have actually been in training. I signed on the proverbial dotted line and was willing to take the pain to reach an end-state and I'm glad I did. I do see a correlation to this being the cerebal effort of making deliberate violent actions towards an opposing nation-state. These terrorists should have expected the worst and not considered themselves as falling under the umbrella of certain "EPW" priveleges. I have nothing but respect for someone who picks up a weapon and takes it to the "enemy" regardless of who they're fighting for. Anyone who sees something bigger than themselves worth giving their life for has my respect. What terrorists are doing now though is often a cowardly way to fight. You don't kill civilians and doing so should negate any privileges you have what so ever.
I'm not advocating we "stoop" to their level and we SHOULD set a moral precedent. We should also distinguish a "freedom fighter" from a "terrorist" though. Any individual that attacks a purely civilian target is a coward. If Al Qaeda had flown a plane into just the Pentagon I'd have bite my tongue, strapped up and done battle but the fact that they attacked a purely civilian population in NYC changes things. They don't deserve the rights that Al-joe Iraqi gets for being pissed off Americans are still in his town tearing up his fields so he gets the AK out.
That's all I have to say about that.
I'm not advocating we "stoop" to their level and we SHOULD set a moral precedent. We should also distinguish a "freedom fighter" from a "terrorist" though. Any individual that attacks a purely civilian target is a coward. If Al Qaeda had flown a plane into just the Pentagon I'd have bite my tongue, strapped up and done battle but the fact that they attacked a purely civilian population in NYC changes things. They don't deserve the rights that Al-joe Iraqi gets for being pissed off Americans are still in his town tearing up his fields so he gets the AK out.
That's all I have to say about that.
Registered User
Joined: Jan 2005
Posts: 9,198
From: I gotta have more cow bell!!!!
Car Info: 05 STi
Using that logic, practically every first-world nation on this planet doesn't "deserve" the rights you mentioned. I can't think of a single country that hasn't attacked civilian targets -- the only real difference is that "governments" make excuses for when they get caught doing it.
iClub Silver Vendor
iTrader: (25)
Joined: Nov 2002
Posts: 15,494
From: Participating in some Anarchy!
Car Info: 2005 LGT wagon
Congress Knew About the Interrogations
Before pulling the pin on a hand grenade, it's wise to get out of the blast radius...
Before pulling the pin on a hand grenade, it's wise to get out of the blast radius...
It was not necessary to release details of the enhanced interrogation techniques, because members of Congress from both parties have been fully aware of them since the program began in 2002. We believed it was something that had to be done in the aftermath of the 9/11 terrorist attacks to keep our nation safe. After many long and contentious debates, Congress repeatedly approved and funded this program on a bipartisan basis in both Republican and Democratic Congresses.
