It was torture when the Japanese did it to us.

I think Senator John McCain might be the ultimate expert in this area having served 5 years in the Hanoi Hilton.

He believes that waterboarding or torture of any kind is inhumane and ineffective. As I quote "Its not about them, its about us".

If we stoop to the level of our enemies, does that not make us the enemy also? and if its ok for us to torture our enemies is it not ok for them to torture the EPOW's they capture from us?

Sure lets go ahead and torture the detainees since they have no Habeous Corpus rights. That would really uplift us in the view of the rest of the world.

I'm sorry, but I grew up believing in Truth, Justice and the American way and even if it was just a blurb at the end of a TV show of a caped crusader, it was good then and still good now.

Does one think that if we tortured some of our infamous politicians that they would tell the truth? Lets give them a try before we do it to people whom we deem have no rights and probably have done us no wrong.

Lest we forget the uproar over this.

Soldiers in Vietnam use the waterboarding technique on an uncooperative enemy suspect near Da Nang in 1968 to try to obtain information from him. (United Press International)

It is torture under the Geneva Conventions rules.... end of discussion.... unless we don't ascribe to the Geneva Conventions....... Oh.... Oh... my mistake....

guess this horrific scary procedure pictured above which by description is worse than actually drowning because it goes on for a length of time... is NOT considered torture under the current regime .... I am ashamed to call myself an american some days.. gus

If actually looked at that picture more closely.. and i seems the men in it are smiling?? likely so... the "guards" always become the "abusers" in cross sectional studies of recent college youth of normal mental health status and the prisoners always become "victims".. classic basic psych 301.... abnormal psychology... we all have the capacity to torture our own brothers' and sisters particularly when they are of another race/ethicity.... ???TORTURE""?? give me a break... what the hell else could it be described as... gus

Yes, I believe waterboarding is torture - how can it not be? Anyone who's been close to drowning (or in an other situation where breating isn't easy) knows how horrific that feeling is. Now imagine at the same time being tied to a board, upside down, blind-folded and surrounded by people you know are out to hurt you...

Anyways. Here's another thought on the use of torture: how reliable is the information that comes out of these sessions?

Personally, I'd admit pretty much anything, fact or fiction, just to make the torture stop.

Good morning, Netizens...

Editor Steve Smith wrote:

Good morning,
Is waterboarding torture?
Is it acceptable to use the term "torture" in headlines dealing with this practice?
Or is it more accurate to call it "aggressive interrogation?"

Everything that emanates out of the Pentagon is semantics, isn't it? I believe that every word, every phrase used by George W. Bush and the Pentagon is massaged carefully to derive the maximum impact with the least amount of collateral damage to his regime.

To its victims, it is torture. To those who either administer it or those spokespersons for the Pentagon, it is aggressive interrogation.

Even to the high-ranking U.S. military man who spoke on television about its recent use against several known Al-Qaeda members, who stated emphatically that waterboarding forced several important terrorists to acknowledge there were several hitherto unknown terrorist plots going to take place in the United States, it was torture.

On the other side of the coin, one Jidadist folded and blabbed everything he knew under torture, perhaps saving thousands of American lives. Was he tortured or suffering from aggressive interrogation?

Of course, I reach deeply into the meaning of words by citing Lewis Carroll whenever a word is questioned by someone in authority:

Humpty Dumpty: When I use a word, it means just what I choose it to mean - neither more nor less.

Alice: The question is, whether you can make words mean so many different things.

Humpty Dumpty: The question is: which is to be master - that's all.

The threat of torture is also an excellent means of opression and control of the group of people who are being tortured or threatened with torture.

I'm sure that's part of the equation in Iraq - and also part of the justification for using torture.

Remember this holiday season all of the "torture" going on in the homes of this city with abuse, sexual assault and violence against women and children. It is the same process, just closer to home.. the real terrorists live right next door to you.

Call CPS or the Cops the next time you hear a ruckus next door, or in your own home and we'll do a lot more to end terrorism that is "real".. Dr Gus

_______________________________________________________________________________________________________________

I think it is important to remember that the military has developed more effective techniques since the days of early waterboarding in Vietnam and before that, Korea. To my understanding, there is only one acceptable technique that is approved by the Geneva Convention(s), as well as the ACLU and the US Government. The problem is that, while it is effective, it is incredibly inhumane.

This technique is known as ---"Forced Listening to Hillary Clinton Speech(es)"---...now....THAT is *TORTURE*

(-:

David Elton
GOP

(Mitt Romney fan...Rudy too...McCain...Edwards...Biden)
_______________________________________________________________________________________________________________

David....that is "Senator Clinton" or "Senator Hillary Clinton" please...gus an avowed bumper sticker wearing Obama Fan...

I just listened to a former marine jet pilot who served in the 1970's. He talked about how ALL pilots went through survival school and all were water boarded to introduce them to the technique that could confront them if they were ever captured. He said they were introduced to other techniques as well.

He said he actually had it done twice to him (he volunteered the 2nd time) and he said he would not consider water boarding as torture.

He stated that his head was placed lower than his feet (which keeps water from going into the lungs so there is no chance of drowning) and after a towel is placed over his mouth, water is poured onto it.

He said water went into his sinuses and it gave him the "sensation" that he was drowning - but that no water ever went into his lungs, nor was his breathing effected other than he was gulping for air because of the sensation that he couldn't breathe.

He was in the Marines for ten years and he was involved in training of many pilots who were all water boarded. No one ever suffered any lasting effects, and certainly no long term ill effects. He said no one ever had any lasting “trauma.”

He believes that all those who have made this such an issue have now given notice to our enemies, and that they will now be training their recruits on how to resist water boarding. He said after being water boarded and understanding that it is just an unpleasant and fear-induced sensation, he would be able to resist it. And now our enemies will be able as well. Thanks ACLU.

We now know from Brian Ross’ investigation that the two highest ranking Al Qaeda were water boarded and they gave up information that interrupted “dozens of plots” and that it saved lives; perhaps thousands of lives.

I personally find it unconscionable that Democrats are now using this as a political issue after these CIA water boarding incidents were cleared by the administration and by many Democrats who were briefed before hand and did not object. Nancy Pelosi was told as was Jay Rockefeller; neither objected.

And now we hear the issue being brought up again by Harry Reid, likening it to the Spanish Inquisition. His comments are a disgrace attempt at political advantage.

And Gus, I know you are a gentle soul who walks the walk to help the less fortunate and that you are an activist to put an end to child and spousal abuse - Kudos to you - I commend you; but, to apply those sensibilities you have for innocent children and others, to committed terrorists who would kill those very children you speak of, I find simply misguided.

And to “I wasn’t there;” I find your argument that we will “become our enemy” by the simple fact of trying to save lives by water boarding terrorists; to be simplistic and actually quite a hideous thing to say. Maybe you should refresh your knowledge about the methods used by Al Qaeda. I am offended by that statement.

And if you worry about our enemies using water boarding because we have, you are giving them way too much credit. They don’t water board, they physically torture with drills, lead pipes and they mutilate our soldiers before they let them bleed to death. Water boarding? Those US soldiers should have been so fortunate. Again, your views are an affront to those soldiers who have been brutalized and killed. That is a despicable argument!

If water boarding is so dangerous and such a dreadful act, why are our special forces, pilots and many others water boarded during training? Where is the “outrage” when we do it to our troops?

With the kind of comments I hear and read about this issue, I am quickly coming to the conclusion that America has become so “soft” from the notions of political correctness - that we are losing our will as a nation to survive. It is truly frightening the number of people who are more fearful of offenses to our “sensibilities,” than they are of losing their own lives and those around them. Frightening.

If waterboarding is not torture, what is?

I realize that question is at the heart of the debate and there is no consensus.

I will point out to Bruce that this really isn't an ACLU issue (they are such a favorite whipping dog of the disgruntled and disappointed). The Congress, including some very hawkish members, have made this an issue for the last several years. The courts have been involved, not through the ACLU, but through the very system of justice our military fights to defend and which should promise a measure of justice to all, including the truly evil.

And I don't think it has anything to do with political correctness or collective weakness.

Maybe some folks have lost their personal moral compass if they reduce this very important debate to mere political correctness.

Attempting to establish a moral center in this strife-torn world, where moral certitude gives way to geo-politcal relativism, is a hugely important endeavor.

What a sorry country we would have become if we couldn't debate this sort of issue without suggesting those who question waterboarding are personally, politically or militarily soft.

But back to the question -- if waterboarding, a practice that is psychologically terrifying and undeniably painful, is not torture, what is?

And if we comfortably engage in this practice, then we must assume it is acceptable for our enemies to practice it on our own.

Do we really want to go there?

steve

_______________________________________________________________________________________________________________

GUS

Her name is Hillary...Not "The esteemed carpetbagger of Arkansas"...or..."The coat-tail rider of her more talented husband"

HILLARY-HILLARY
HILLARY-HILLARY

Senator Barak Obama
Senator Joe Biden
Senator John McCain

But....Hill is Hill

I think this is "Hill-arious"

David Elton
_______________________________________________________________________________________________________________

Waterboarding, in my opinion, is NOT TORTURE !

Torture is physical...not psychological. Actual pain...not merely fear.

Next issue ?
_______________________________________________________________________________________________________________

Suggested reading, if anyone's interested:

A Question of Torture: CIA Interrogation, from the Cold War to the War on Terror (Hardcover), by Alfred McCoy

I dislike to have Bruce blown out of the water, but you have been listening to some "Sea Stories" aka Fairy Tales. Your source "serving in the 1970's" is way out of date. Maybe too many re-runs of GI-Jane.

I have been through Aviation Survival Training and I have my Wings to prove it. At no time was waterboarding ever demonstrated at the Pensacola Naval Aviation Survival School circa 1977.

If you have any credibility on the subject you will produce your mythological "Pilot".

Here is an Washington Monthly. May 1988 Article "Hurts so good; at POW school the Navy locked me in a box. Here's why I'm grateful - prisoner of war"
It only refers to waterboarding as to hearing someone scream and supposing it is water boarding. Nothing more, nothing less.

http://findarticles.com/p/articles/mi_m1316/is_n4_v20/ai_6676337

Further articles in the Small Wars Journal (SWJ) indicates that the current SERE training syllabus involves waterboarding and judges it as torture.

Waterboarding is Torture…

http://smallwarsjournal.com/blog/2007/10/waterboarding-is-torture-perio/

On the West Coast FASOTRAGROUPAC

Here is a short mission statement.

The mission of SERE is to ensure those Americans fighting in the Armed Forces of our country, defending our freedoms and way of life, are armed with the confidence, knowledge, and skills required to survive the challenges of isolation in hostile environments. Training is based on, and reinforces the values expressed in the Code of Conduct through the safe and effective use of realistic training practice while instilling motivation and dedication to survive and return with honor.

FASOTRAGRUPAC is tasked to provide Level C Code of Conduct instruction by COMNAVAIRPAC for CNO. Level C Code of Conduct training is provided in three spectrums; wartime, peacetime, and hostage.

FASOTRAGRUPAC also provides predeployment and environmental survival training in support of the warfighter.

Here is the Syllabus Description of the SERE training.

http://www.faso.navy.mil/2d0039.htm

The Sere Handbook can be downloaded here:
http://www.faso.navy.mil/Handbook.pdf

There is no mention of waterboarding at all.

We have heard former CIA testimony that Abu Zubaydah and Khalid Sheikh Mohammed gave up intelligence, after being water boarded, that was used to disrupt “dozens of operations,” including targets in the US, saving many lives, perhaps thousands.

So, how is it that there is so much hand-wringing by some over this issue, when they live in a nation that utilizes the death penalty as a form of punishment; that allows legal cessation of a pregnancy - even within minutes of a live birth - using techniques that would be considered barbarous but 15 minutes later when the child was now breathing; and, that deliberately dropped a nuclear bomb on a city roughly the size of Spokane inhabited by civilians, in order to end a war and save lives?

If that isn’t the result of politically correct notions of relativism, then what could it possibly be?

Let me ask this; if we renditioned these captives to Egypt or Jordan in order to obtain the intelligence we obtained through water boarding, would that resolve the moral issue? Why or why not?

No. Because of the word "we" in your question.

"We" either have high moral standards or "we" do not. Exporting our dirty work does not absolve us

that was used to disrupt “dozens of operations,”

So if this is really true and they are really disrupted, how come there is no record of the arrests and why wont the "intelligence" community divulge all these DOZENS of operations. I guess that would mean the FBI would have to come clean on their spying of the PJALS in Spokane.

Come on Bruce, do you really slurp up that pablum they serve to justify their violations of the Constitution?

Oops I think I saw a terrorist at Walmart last week, she was wearing a Red Hat.

Why do you think, "wherever you were," that it would be a smart practice to publish and make known our intelligence findings or methodology? And who are "they" that serve the pablum? Some people, I guess, just choose to stick their head in the sand taking illogical posiitons because it fits their ideology.

And Dave Hoggard - either we have "high moral" standards or we don't. That is about as simplistic a view as i have ever heard.

The problem with naysayers is that their naysaying reaches a point of being reflexive without any actual refection or thought. it is clear both of you have reached that point.

So how do those who are doing all the hand wringing over the “moral” question of water boarding, square this?: we live in a nation that allows the cessation of a pregnancy – even within minutes of a live birth – using techniques that would be considered barbaric if used 15 minutes later when the child was now breathing?

Any takers? And don’t use spin such as, ‘abortion is legal’, or late-term abortion is used only when the mother’s life is threatened (because that isn’t the reality). And go ahead, use your "high moral standards" measurement.

and, for those of you who really have an interest in this issue and its real implications - as opposed to merely following their anti-Bush nose, I ask the following;

We are all aware of the happenings on 9/11/01. The mayhem, the death, the injuries, the tragedies, the widows and widowers, the fatherless and motherless, the destruction and the fear, etc, etc.

Now suppose a scenario wheere our intelligence learned that something was about to take place and they actually fingered someone who we knew, through intelligence sources, was the mastermind of the plot. suppose this happened on 9/5/07.

wwe knew the plot was horrific, we knew it targeted innocents, we knew it would involve many, many deaths.

Now I know this question requires that you have the foreknowledge of what did take place that day, but all of you who have "moral" problem with water boarding; for all of you who feel that water boarding means we "become" our enemy; and, for all of you who oppose it because it is called 'torture' by some, would we be committing a grave act of immorality if we water board this master mind and broke up the attack?

If your answer is yes, that you would still oppose the act of water boarding based on a moral or legal argument, please explain how you would weigh those standards against the real toll from 9/11.

Any takers to one, or the other question? i have my own thoughts about whether anyone will honestly answer these questions.

I was there?? dave Hoggard? Gus? David Laird? Pia? Steve? anyone?

Hi Bruce..i'll try and sign on to this one... We have rules that are black and white with regards lots of things, but most of us live in shades of grey.

I guess as i thought about this.. it was mostly with the thought that with the current decline of habeus corpus and civil rights guaranteed ... i am in some silly sort of way.. concerned that it will be me ending up on the water board...

The books of my early adult years and movies like Lord of the Flies, Clock Work Orange, 1984, Atlas Shrugged etc.etc.. gave me a sense that there is a very thin line between you and me being the perpetrator of heinous acts.. and the recent study of college students of equal psychologic base.. "normal" kids when made into guards of the prisoners, became abusive.. to a one.. cross sectional double blind, clean scentific study.. and the Prisoners became "victims" to a one with only a few exceptions (reference the jews walking complacently into the showers... I do not think that I, nor would You go so quietly... but who knows??

So the point i'm getting to here..is:

Unless the people doing the water boarding, under tightly controlled conditions.. with sets of standards and parameters for release of the prisoner... my premise is that the "violence" escalates.. and continues to do so..even in the face of someone dying without cause...

My premise is that at least in Males of the species there is a "check point" which with very good impulse control keeps our society reasonably stable and non violent in the whole..

I know that if you push me hard enough i'll kill... i know that.. ( it does take a great deal of "push" to get past my more than excellent impulse control...) but it will happen...

Even a low testosterone 63 year old male can get agitated enough to harm another pretty severely..

Who knows, i might actually like to do waterboarding to someone, if it was sure that i would not be caught, and get away with it... I'm told that there is a rush when you kill someone, from deep down inside akin to a sexual rush.. and sometimes the two are confused in folks with poor impulse control..

We have a whole new generation of young males that have not been "gifted the control" from a reasonable adult male parent or uncle.. in my view that is why society is just rattling apart in some part... gus

The discussion about waterboarding takes me back to '93 when I was a young Marine sergeant going through SERE at Coronado. At the time I was working in Combat Intelligence in a Marine rifle battalion aboard Camp Pendleton.

There are many forms of aggressive interrogation, physical and psychological, that were applied to us while we were in the 'Resistance' phase of SERE. I understood after graduating from the program that at some point I would break under pressure. Everyone does. The point of the exercise, however, is for everyone to learn how to bend for as long as possible.

Fast forward to 2004 when I was a Washington Army National Guard infantry squad leader spending a year in the Green Zone. I saw and heard firsthand aggressive interrogation being practically applied in a live environment and I had no problem with it whatsoever.

Most people on this board can rock back and forth in their easy chairs and fret about what's torture and what's not torture because you haven't had the pleasure of experiencing a two-way rifle range (That means the bullets go both ways). Good for you.

While I don't condone naked human pyramids and walking prisoners around on all fours strapped to a dog collar and leash ala Abu Gharib, I can honestly say that if someone is an enemy combatant who a few minutes ago may have been on the operating end of my M-16, I want to make sure I get the opportunity to find out who his buddies are and where their holes are.

I have been trained in the Laws of War and the Code of Conduct, but many of you need to understand something: War is Hell. And if the way to get out of Hell in one piece is to interrogate this enemy combatant to the fullest extent to determine what he knows in order to save my fellow soldiers guess what? I'm going to do it. And do you know why?

Because those fellow soldiers of mine are your boyfriends, next door neighbors, sons-in-laws, cousins, fathers, guys you partied with in high school / college, husbands, fathers, drinking buddies and co-workers. And the last thing I want to do is have to come home and tell you I didn't do everything to the fullest extent to bring them home alive.

The laws we govern our Armed Forces may be black and white, but war is nothing but shades of gray, but I sleep peacefully at night knowing that most of my men got home alive because I did my job to the fullest extent.

Rob -

I first want to thank you for your service to our country, I don't take your sacrifices lightly, or those of all the other men and women in our armed services. Thank you, I am honored that you share your insights.

Your thoughts and words certainly have a ring of truth to them; and I can certainly appreciate that the experiences of war are all kinds of shades of grey. it is unfortunate that the self-appointed critics of those who must make the often split-second decisions - life and death decisions - are unable or unwilling to recognize that issues of "right and wrong" or "legal and illegal" and "moral and immoral," do not have the luxury of evaluating the situation from their board room "easy chairs" - as you so aptly characterized.

And i am not the least bit surprised that, so far anyway, not one of the newspaper people have attempted to respond to the questions put forth above.

But I will give them the benefit of doubt since I know they have work to do. So, we will see.