Thoughts on Senate CIA report

[HankAZ]

Again, the assumption is that torturing means you'll get credible and useful information. The studies show he opposite, most anyone under torture will say whatever you want them to say.

Moreover, you are assuming hey are guilty , it's a very slippery slope.

So, the CIA torturing captured terrorists to get useful information is wrong. But Obama ordering drone strikes that kill entire households or even entire villages is ok when the result is annihilation of a bad guy leader? For the sake of political correctness, let’s call that a "subtle inconsistency". Either the end justifies the means or it doesn't.

 

[Smply_Rcklss]

Again, the assumption is that torturing means you'll get credible and useful information. The studies show he opposite, most anyone under torture will say whatever you want them to say.

Moreover, you are assuming hey are guilty , it's a very slippery slope.

It is a very slippery slope, but ya gotta start somewhere to get where you're headed. Like hank said, Obama is bombing Syria killing innocent ppl to stop ISIS. Why not go in & capture a few em & torture them ? My whole outlook is an eye for an eye. You kill one of ours, we kill several of yours. I don't condone the killing of the innocent Syrian ppl though. We did it in Iraq, Afghanistan, & Pakistan. So, why not go in Syria & take em into custody & get the Intel. We're already basically at war or in a better term still at war with terrorism.

 

[pappy53]

I don't think the argument is whether we should torture or not, the issue is torture doesn't work, steady according to the report in terms if the info we received.

According to what report? The Senate report did not even interview any CIA people, so how would they know that it doesn't work. The Intel that we got came from somewhere.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[anon(4698833)]

He's referencing a media report that the information received, many times, through these types of interrogation tactics are drawn more so from the person being tortured saying whatever they need to to make the torture stop, and not actually giving hard evidence. The "report" he's referencing is basically trying to say if you torture 100 guys, and they all give you whatever you want to hear to make the torturing stop, you'll eventually get information that probably would have been available to you anyways without torturing them, or that the info you received wasn't actually something they "knew", but more so the tortured prisoner giving you random info that happens to coincide with actual happenings.

I personally think it's a load of BS and that we get plenty of information from torturing people...and sometimes we don't...and that it's always been like that because that is the nature of human beings. Some will break, some will bend and some will die with their secrets.

 

[hydrogen3]

Senate Democrats released the report and it's a Propaganda Bonanza.. It's political discourse and hatred. Dianne Feinstein is throwing in with the enemy.

The real question. Who benefits from the release of this report? The techniques described were mostly terminated by the Bush administration in 2007, so the situations detailed are at least 7 years old, if not older. Are they going to press charges? If not, then what is the purpose of releasing this information? To whose benefit? The Democrats that's who!

 

[HankAZ]

Senate Democrats released the report and it's a Propaganda Bonanza.. It's political discourse and hatred. Dianne Feinstein is throwing in with the enemy.

The real question. Who benefits from the release of this report? The techniques described were mostly terminated by the Bush administration in 2007, so the situations detailed are at least 7 years old, if not older. Are they going to press charges? If not, then what is the purpose of releasing this information? To whose benefit? The Democrats that's who!

Who knows what will actually happen. But the United Nations is saying that those responsible need to be held accountable. And both Russia and North Korea are pointing their bony little fingers at us and crying about "human rights violations". Classic "pot, meet kettle" scenario.

Obama is saying the report should have been released. Must be getting close to time for another whirlwind Obama Apology Tour. Gotta be some big old fat sheik somewhere who needs his butt kissed again.

 

[boovish]

Well, seeing as these were "Top" terrorists, I think they just deserved it for trying to ruin people's lives just because they aren't devout muslims.

 

[jclisenby]

Whatever it takes. They want to take out every American life they can. Do what we need to and put them out to pasture when we have bled them dry.

 

[HAWK]

I think the timing and release of the documents is awfully convenient for political motivation myself...

http://vid.marketmenot.com/lipton-tea-city-of-animals-commercial/lipton-tea-city-of-animals.jpg

...I also think that interrogation tactics are things that society in general was never meant to be privy to, and that there are lots of things our government does, moral or not, that need to be done but also need to be kept in secrecy...unfortunately we live in an age of translucency, and people are going to start seeing how this country has acted almost since it's inception. How the freedoms we enjoy come at a cost that a lot of people may not be ok with.

Ignorance is bliss.

I agree with this 100%.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[acadia11]

Whatever it takes. They want to take out every American life they can. Do what we need to and put them out to pasture when we have bled them dry.

I think again the question isn't whether we should do whatever we need to, the question was is torture effective in getting information. The problem is someone being tortured is trying to figure out what you want to hear in order to give you that information as opposed to telling you the truth. It has been shown that torture is not effective to getting quality information that's the issue. That's what the report was trying to show that no credible info actually came from the torture.

 

[acadia11]

According to what report? The Senate report did not even interview any CIA people, so how would they know that it doesn't work. The Intel that we got came from somewhere.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

So now the senate is lying? The debate has access to the intelligence reports and where the information came from. They don't need to interview the CIA operatives

 

[acadia11]

It is a very slippery slope, but ya gotta start somewhere to get where you're headed. Like hank said, Obama is bombing Syria killing innocent ppl to stop ISIS. Why not go in & capture a few em & torture them ? My whole outlook is an eye for an eye. You kill one of ours, we kill several of yours. I don't condone the killing of the innocent Syrian ppl though. We did it in Iraq, Afghanistan, & Pakistan. So, why not go in Syria & take em into custody & get the Intel. We're already basically at war or in a better term still at war with terrorism.

Why use a tactic that's already proven useless in gathering information???

 

[anon(4698833)]

That's what the report was trying to show that no credible info actually came from the torture.

You're only offering part of the story here to make it sound totally inefficient...what the report ACTUALLY said is that no credible information about "imminent attacks" was gained. The truth is, there just isn't that much information in this report at all, but it feels like a swimming pool full of details, when in reality, it's more like a fish bowl. We'll never know what information they really obtained, and we'll never know the true depths of torture and interrogating they resorted to with these terrorists.

All in all, this whole report was released for political posturing...moving chess pieces around leading up to a major house change and coming presidential election.

Why use a tactic that's already proven useless in gathering information???

You're now reflecting on the words of this report in a totally opinionated fashion. No part of the report gave an indication the methods were all around useless...if anything, reading into it, it was more of a report on inefficiency.

 

[palandri]

Let's look at it from another angle. Just imagine that a group of terrorists kidnapped a close family member of yours, and one of the terrorists was captured. The only way to get that family member back alive is to "torture" the terrorist in custody to get info. Now, you have to ask yourself "what would Palandri do?" .


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

I wouldn't torture people, period. What I find extremely disturbing is how you justify it. Aggression breeds aggression.

 

[anon(4698833)]

I wouldn't torture people, period. What I find extremely disturbing is how you justify it. Aggression breeds aggression.

What do you feel is the most efficient way of getting information out of captive terrorists then? What would be your go to method of doing such?

 

[HankAZ]

I wouldn't torture people, period. What I find extremely disturbing is how you justify it. Aggression breeds aggression.

Yeah, if we just ignore the heinous acts of these terrorists, maybe they will leave us alone and eventually, maybe they will even learn to like us.

Give me a freaking break.

 

[palandri]

What do you feel is the most efficient way of getting information out of captive terrorists then? What would be your go to method of doing such?

Does the FBI, ATF, Secret Service, or your local Police do what the CIA did to get information? There's a 101 other ways to get the information you need.

 

[palandri]

Yeah, if we just ignore the heinous acts of these terrorists, maybe they will leave us alone and eventually, maybe they will even learn to like us.

Give me a freaking break.

What you don't understand is aggression breeds aggression. If I come on to you aggressively, what am I going to get? I am going to get an aggressive response. What does that solve?

 

[Smply_Rcklss]

What you don't understand is aggression breeds aggression. If I come on to you aggressively, what am I going to get? I am going to get an aggressive response. What does that solve?

What if those 101 ways don't work the first time ? So you're saying is, if someone kidnaps a love one, I'm suppose to be passive ? I can't justify that, I'd have to resort to some kinda torture method to get what I want to know. Look at it in this perspective, say a criminal kidnaps a loved one of yours & u kidnap his partner. You'd take the passive route in hope of getting that loved one back ? I just don't see it going that easy or simple.

 

[palandri]

What if those 101 ways don't work the first time ? So you're saying is, if someone kidnaps a love one, I'm suppose to be passive ? I can't justify that, I'd have to resort to some kinda torture method to get what I want to know. Look at it in this perspective, say a criminal kidnaps a loved one of yours & u kidnap his partner. You'd take the passive route in hope of getting that loved one back ? I just don't see it going that easy or simple.

If you think that's morally right, then you go ahead and do that. If you could pop back in here and give us your cell number at Leavenworth, I'll write to you.