Red Cross Torture Report

[Vuk]

Vuk, then by your definition rape, if done properly and with plenty of lube, is not torture. If we choose to sodomize each and every detainee, this is in compliance with the Convention Against Torture, correct?

Besides which, as several sources I've linked to point out, the focus on waterboarding is misleading. The torture enhanced interrogation program was a program, with a combination of degrading and degenerative techniques used to break a man. Multiple sources have said that sleep deprivation was the most important element, not waterboarding.

But you and Sean Hannity believe that waterboarding is as American as apple pie, which makes me wonder why we once prosecuted it as a war crime.

Here are the "experts" who believe that waterboarding is an acceptable interrogation technique: North Korea, China, the Schutstaffel, the Gestapo, the Khmer Rouge, the Spanish Inquisition and the KGB. And of course Fox News. Fast company you're keeping.

ooo, Godwin already. That's the way Lemmy, "You associate with Hitler!" An intelligent way to win an argument.
(You are the one who started with the Godwin calling obsession, so don't blame me )

First of all, sexual degradation of ANY type is torture. I do not support any 'punishment' of sexual nature. I want to point out the difference for you here Lemmy. The program that the Bush Administration used is nothing at all like what was used by Nazis or Japanese. The techniques were completely different, and involved a great deal of physical pain and brutality, and often led to death. They are NOT the same thing, and cannot be compared. I never claimed that the 'waterboarding' used by Japan, Nazi Germany, the USSR, or anyone else was not torture. I was talking about the specific program oked by the Bush Administration.

Still, the fact remains that you were essentially in control of the situation. You could tap out as soon as you felt you couldn't take it anymore with no negative consequence other than loss of personal pride. Very different to being at the mercy of an interrogator who will keep going far past your comfort zone and will not stop until you break down and give him whatever he wants.

I also don't understand the distinction you draw between mental stress and mental suffering. What exactly is the difference, and how do you figure that making someone think they are about to die is not going to cause mental suffering?

You have to remember though, they could effectively 'tap out' too if it got too much for them and tell the information. The point was that they would feel like they would die if they did not, but the interrogators would not really allow any harm to come to them. It is tricking someone into thinking that they will be killed; they do not really kill them if they do not give out. They had to give out when they panicked, but they really knew that they would not be killed. That is why I say it is only mental stress. It is self induced mental stress. What is mental pain? Knowing you lost your family, your testicles, being sodomized or otherwise sexual assaulted, etc. Mental pain HAS to accompany physical pain of some sort (that is how it can be classified as pain). Doesn't mean that the physical pain has to be inflicted on him though. A guy watching his wife be tortured is mental pain, because he is feeling her physical pain.

[Lemur]

ooo, Godwin already.

I can't help but mention the agencies that approved of waterboarding; you'll note that the Wermacht are missing. They famously refused to torture captives. Sorry I had to include two NSDAP agencies on the list, but there haven't been very many polities that approved of waterboarding. Needs must.

First of all, sexual degradation of ANY type is torture.

This is a new an unexpected development. The Convention Against Torture does not mention sex. Neither does the Geneva Convention. Your opinion is your opinion and nothing more, o subject of a state that (by your own argument) has the right to detain you indefinitely and torture you the entire time, while never filing charges. Your opinion is meaningless before the unlimited power of the state you support. That which is not explicitly forbidden is permitted. So prepare to be legally sodomized.

The program that the Bush Administration used is nothing at all like what was used by Nazis or Japanese. The techniques were completely different, and involved a great deal of physical pain and brutality, and often led to death. They are NOT the same thing, and cannot be compared.

(Dang it ! I forgot to mention Imperial Japan! Bad Lemur!) What a fool I was, to compare waterboarding to waterboarding. It's like comparing apples to apples or something equally insane. And as I have clearly established, with primary documentation in this thread, plenty of people did die in our "enhanced interrogations," so the difference ... hmmm ...

What is mental pain? Knowing you lost your family, your testicles, being sodomized or otherwise sexual assaulted, etc. Mental pain HAS to accompany physical pain of some sort (that is how it can be classified as pain). Doesn't mean that the physical pain has to be inflicted on him though. A guy watching his wife be tortured is mental pain, because he is feeling her physical pain.

Clear as mud. Why are you including sodomy on the list? Your inconsistencies, if spun and attached to a turbine, could power a Kansas town.

Now that you've proved that waterboarding is not torture (that is, the waterboarding we do, not the waterboarding they do) it's time to move on! Have your friends move you through various stress positions until you collapse, then hit you until you get up again, while keeping you awake for eleven days. I can't wait to hear how it's not torture.

[Vuk]

I can't help but mention the agencies that approved of waterboarding; you'll note that the Wermacht are missing. They famously refused to torture captives. Sorry I had to include two NSDAP agencies on the list, but there haven't been very many polities that approved of waterboarding. Needs must.

And yet when I mention Hitler as an example of how guncontrol can lead to disaster (one of the best examples out there too), I am told not to ever mention Hitler with language that still makes me shudder. And don't play sweet, your comment "this is the company you hang with" or whatever it was was very clearly trying to imply guilt by association. A very underhanded tactic.

This is a new an unexpected development. The Convention Against Torture does not mention sex. Neither does the Geneva Convention. Your opinion is your opinion and nothing more, o subject of a state that (by your own argument) has the right to detain you indefinitely and torture you the entire time, while never filing charges. Your opinion is meaningless before the unlimited power of the state you support. That which is not explicitly forbidden is permitted. So prepare to be legally sodomized.

I do not know about the exact legal rules regarding sex as punishment, but what I was saying is that sexual degradation causes mental pain, and unless you are talking about just fondling, usually involves some degree of pain. Yes, the sanctity of someone's innocence is my opinion. As I said, I am not aware of the laws concerning it, but I think it should be expressely forbidden if it is not already.

What a fool I was, to compare waterboarding to waterboarding. It's like comparing apples to apples or something equally insane. And as I have clearly established, with primary documentation int this thread, plenty of people did die in our "enhanced interrogations," so the difference ... hmmm ...

That is like me comparing condom to a knife as good sex toys, then saying, they are both tools! How silly of me to compare tools with tools. As I said, they were two very different things under the same name. The 'waterboarding' that the Japanese did for instance involved forcing large amounts of water down someones throat till their stomach cannot hold anymore, then stomping on their stomach so they throw it up. Other types of waterboarding are all designed to cause extreme physical pain, and can easily lead to death. The tecniques oked by the BA were NOT designed to cause physical pain, and were relatively safe. Sure, they could have a heart attack and die, but the same thing could happen if they sent Jessica Simpson in to have sex with them. Waterboarding would probably put less stress on their heart. :P And as I said, there is a difference between the tecniques and the tecniques misused.

Clear as mud. Why are you including sodomy on the list? Your inconsistencies, if spun and attached to a turbine, could power a Kansas town.

Doesn't take much to power a light bulb. :P Seriously though, mental pain stems from physical pain, and if physical pain is absent, you cannot have mental pain. That is a scholarly concept, not the fruit of my imagination. What is so hard to understand?

Vuk

[Lemur]

Vuk, the Godwin example of you jumping into a gun control thread is poorly chosen. You ignored the OP, you ignored the discussion, and jumped into how gun control enabled the Third Reich. It was, if anything, a classic example of how not to invoke the Nazis in an argument. If you're still sore about it, then clearly you haven't come to terms with your own error.

So pointing out the very few despotic regimes that supported waterboarding as interrogation is "guilt by association"? Even if you are voluntarily choosing to associate yourself with such scum, and defending the tactic (literally) with your life by playing at it in a bathtub?

Your inclusion of sexual degradation as torture is intriguing. It speaks to a certain squeamishness in your attitude that I did not expect. We did long-term enforced nudity with detainees, as well as splashing them with fake menstrual blood. When they refused to eat (the only option of protest left to them) we strapped them into chairs and forced food down a tube run through their noses. But sodomy, well, that's crossing the line? Really?

As for your "our waterboarding is humane and legal while their waterboarding was torture and wrong" argument, I'm curious; does any torture technique, if performed properly and without inflicting permanent damage, cease to become torture? If the mortality rate is reduced, then it becomes okay?

"mental pain stems from physical pain, and if physical pain is absent, you cannot have mental pain"

I don't even know where to start with this one. You can cause mental pain without physical pain, and quite easily. You yourself provided the example in an earlier post; threaten a person's family, and you will cause mental anguish. And where does sleep deprivation fall on your idiosyncratic list of torture/not-torture? I can't help but notice you've been ducking and dodging every time sleep deprivation is mentioned ...

[Andres]

Vuk, we all make mistakes, we're human.

Why don't you just admit that you were wrong by stating that sleep deprivation+being humiliated for weeks+enforced nudity+waterboarding+... =/= torture.

Talking about a pointless discussion

This is like arguing that apples are not apples

[Vuk]

Vuk, we all make mistakes, we're human.

Why don't you just admit that you were wrong by stating that sleep deprivation+being humiliated for weeks+enforced nudity+waterboarding+... =/= torture.

Talking about a pointless discussion

This is like arguing that apples are not apples

Andres, I have admitted I was wrong before (both times involving torture coincidently), but both times I did so because I was convinced that I was wrong. Until someone convinces me that I am wrong, or I come to a realisation that I am wrong, I am not going to change my opinion. I am not closed minded, but I am not gonna change my opinion because I am asked to. My argument now is about waterboarding BTW, I may be feeling daring enough to discuss the others later, but what I had experience with is waterboarding, and what I am arguing is waterboarding. Until this discussion is over, I am not gonna confuse the debate more by jumping into every other related thing!

[Fixiwee]

Let's sum up.
You have stated your opinion on the matter.
Everyone else says you're wrong.
You refuse to accept our statements, and furthermore you lack any sort of evidence save for your own experience.

This is own opinion, but you're not winning this argument. You are just defending your own view on this.

[Vuk]

Vuk, the Godwin example of you jumping into a gun control thread is poorly chosen. You ignored the OP, you ignored the discussion, and jumped into how gun control enabled the Third Reich. It was, if anything, a classic example of how not to invoke the Nazis in an argument. If you're still sore about it, then clearly you haven't come to terms with your own error.

Quite wrong. The thread was on why the Obama administration was NOT actually pursuing gun control, and I based my post on the OP. I gave a link to a video which disputed the opening post, then discussed why the opening post was wrong. (because if the administration is pursuing gun registration, then they are directly or indirectly pursuing or opening the door to gun control) This is what my historical referrences were for. You chose to ignore my argument entirely and swear at me for using a historical source because you have a Hitler fetish.

So pointing out the very few despotic regimes that supported waterboarding as interrogation is "guilt by association"? Even if you are voluntarily choosing to associate yourself with such scum, and defending the tactic (literally) with your life by playing at it in a bathtub?

I am suggesting guilt by association? NOT SO! (But if you choose to associate with them we have to wonder...) Save it for someone who will believe it Lemmy. Don't insult my intelligence with such an obvious pile of bollox. You quite clearly implied guilty by association.

Your inclusion of sexual degradation as torture is intriguing. It speaks to a certain squeamishness in your attitude that I did not expect. We did long-term enforced nudity with detainees, as well as splashing them with fake menstrual blood. When they refused to eat (the only option of protest left to them) we strapped them into chairs and forced food down a tube run through their noses. But sodomy, well, that's crossing the line? Really?
Any type of sexual degradation is crossing the line. Regardless of who does it or for what reason.

As for your "our waterboarding is humane and legal while their waterboarding was torture and wrong" argument, I'm curious; does any torture technique, if performed properly and without inflicting permanent damage, cease to become torture? If the mortality rate is reduced, then it becomes okay?

I didn't say it is not torture because it does not inflict permanent damage, but because it does not inflict physical PAIN or DAMAGE. Those are the two things that torture does, and they are both missing.

"mental pain stems from physical pain, and if physical pain is absent, you cannot have mental pain"

I don't even know where to start with this one. You can cause mental pain without physical pain, and quite easily. You yourself provided the example in an earlier post; threaten a person's family, and you will cause mental anguish. And where does sleep deprivation fall on your idiosyncratic list of torture/not-torture? I can't help but notice you've been ducking and dodging every time sleep deprivation is mentioned ...
Killing someone's family is causing physical pain and damage to that family, which in turn causes mental pain to the person being tortured. Threatening a family will cause mental stress, killing or abusing the family will cause mental pain. Oh, I have not been jumping into an argument about sleep deprivation? Pardon me, but my plate is pretty full with waterboarding right now. Maybe once I clear it off I will give my opinion on that.

Vuk

[PBI]

What is mental pain? Knowing you lost your family, your testicles, being sodomized or otherwise sexual assaulted, etc. Mental pain HAS to accompany physical pain of some sort (that is how it can be classified as pain). Doesn't mean that the physical pain has to be inflicted on him though. A guy watching his wife be tortured is mental pain, because he is feeling her physical pain.

So castration as a means of extracting confessions is OK so long as we sedate the guy first?

[Vuk]

So castration as a means of extracting confessions is OK so long as we sedate the guy first?

Pardon me, I thought it was not necessary to list deprevation of body parts. Physical pain/physical damage is the truer definition, and the one I should have used.