re: Do you believe torture/enhanced interrogation is effective ?

quote:

---

Well, as early as 2006, the Bush administration agreed that the Geneva Conventions apply to all war on terror detainees.

---

Of course they apply when the initial conditions are met.

quote:

---

The Conventions apply to all cases of declared war between signatory nations. This is the original sense of applicability, which predates the 1949 version.

The Conventions apply to all cases of armed conflict between two or more signatory nations, even in the absence of a declaration of war.

The Conventions apply to a signatory nation even if the opposing nation is not a signatory, but only if the opposing nation "accepts and applies the provisions" of the Conventions.

---

quote:

---

Of course they apply when the initial conditions are met.

---

LINK

quote:

---

The Bush administration has agreed to apply the Geneva Conventions to all terrorism suspects in U.S. custody, bowing to the Supreme Court's recent rejection of policies that have imprisoned hundreds for years without trials.

The Pentagon announced yesterday that it has called on military officials to adhere to the conventions in dealing with al-Qaeda detainees. The administration also has decided that even prisoners held by the CIA in secret prisons abroad must be treated in accordance with international standards, an interpretation that would prohibit prisoners from being subjected to harsh treatment in interrogations, several U.S. officials said.

---

quote:

---

Spoken like someone posting from the comfort of their home with no responsibility for others.

And, actually, techniques like this have been used by the US long before you were born.

---

Oh? Have they been declassified by now, so we can all learn about the ticking time bomb that torture saved us from?

And???

GWB could have directed the military to apply the conventions to the Californian delta smelt.

It works

The concept gets people upset but it works.

We don't need to do it except in rare instances though but we need to keep the option available.

The Geneva convention only applies to Enemy Combatants, not fricking terrorists.

FAIL. FAIL FAIL.

Of course they're going to say that. Would you expect them to say anything differently?

For as much skepticism this board casts on government, it is funny to see so many people blindly believe the CIA when they try to justify torture.
============================

Of course you and Iosh would rather believe the SOB's that lied to us about Obamacare, than the CIA operatives.



I mean Gruber just proved that the WHOLE FRICKING DEM PARTY sees you all as nothing but stupid bastards that deserve to be lied to.

But you go right on believing those lying SOB'S.

quote:

---

THAT is the issue.

Chopping off a shoplifters hand in public is undoubtedly a deterrent.
It's also highly uncivilized.

---

Okay, NC is absolutely right. But I'm stopping at his post. Can't go further in this thread. It's torturing me to read too much silly bullshite.

First, the argument isn't whether this current report was politically motivated by the Democrats. That's utterly irrelevant to the actual issue.

Second, I also heard a discussion on the radio today by a counter-terrorism expert. The guy was not soft hearted. I also have done a little interwebz research. If you honestly research the subject, the evidence, according to every objective source, demonstrates that torture yields very, very little actionable intelligence . . . if any.

People aren't arguing about that in this thread. They're just bitching about this Senate committee and saying frick terrorists. Fair enough. But that doesn't mean torture is effective.

Well we know from the Spanish Inquisition it is very effective in getting confessions. As far as actionable intel, not very effective as you get too much garbage.

Everyone in intel knew this. This was not really about intel it was about vengeance and politics. Look who did and it and was in charge of it, greenies and scrubs.

quote:

---

Do you really think that the CIA would have done it if it didn't work? Think about this, the CIA is the world leader in intelligence. I'm quite sure they know what they are doing and that their methodology is tested to be highly effective. We needed information in a hurry. It was 100% justified and we probably should have killed them when we were finished.

---

Im beginning to wonder if CIA bootlickers are even worse than Police bootlickers?

Do I have to list the countless fails of the CIA?