intel or law?

intel or law? (Full Version)

All Forums >> [Community Discussions] >> Dungeon of Political and Religious Discussion

Message

philosophy -> intel or law? (2/11/2010 8:28:35 PM)
http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20100212/ap_on_re_eu/eu_britain_torture_claims ......an interesting story. Raises a question though, should access to intel trump human rights? If so, how many people.....how many individuals need to be sacrificed in order to retain the ability of the UK to share US intel?

AnimusRex -> RE: intel or law? (2/11/2010 8:36:29 PM)
A lot of interesting questions- For instance, Ronald Reagan signed a treaty that forced the United States to prosecute any government anywhere if it engaged in torture. Awkward silence ensues.....

TheHeretic -> RE: intel or law? (2/11/2010 10:22:16 PM)
Head on out to your nearest indian reservation, Rex, and ask anybody you find about treaties... Bit of a tough spot there, Phil. Hope it doesn't get a lot of UK folk killed. If they want the information that comes out of that murky grey area, then they need to keep the details of where it came from murky and grey as well.

DarlingSavage -> RE: intel or law? (2/11/2010 11:58:23 PM)
I continue to be appalled that the previous admin and those that were in charge for authorizing the use of torture are still living in their mansions, unscathed.

philosophy -> RE: intel or law? (2/12/2010 12:00:47 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: TheHeretic Head on out to your nearest indian reservation, Rex, and ask anybody you find about treaties... Bit of a tough spot there, Phil. Hope it doesn't get a lot of UK folk killed. If they want the information that comes out of that murky grey area, then they need to keep the details of where it came from murky and grey as well. .......thing is Rich, how many principles have to be sacrificed? And after you go down that road for a while, aren't you betraying what you sought to protect in the first place? Look into the abyss, and guess what looks back into you. This wouldn't even be a problem if the principles we seek to defend had been upheld in the first place. Let's be clear here. This is about us (the UK and the US) being caught doing exactly the sort of thing we find so deplorable in others. For myself, i applaud the British court that has put principles above expediency. i know that some will call themselves pragmatists and disagree.....but i don't see it as pragmatism. i see it as capitulation.

LadyEllen -> RE: intel or law? (2/12/2010 4:41:43 AM)
On the plus side, this indicates that our squeamishness about returning illegals and failed asylum seekers to countries where they may be subject to maltreatment by the authorities is shaky at best as a grounds to fail to send them home. Human rights considerations are after all here seen to be based on relative - not absolute concepts and it could be argued applicable in any case only to citizens. By returning such people to overseas regimes where they enjoy no such protections and may indeed face maltreatment, our hands are clean - we did not torture them and nor did we condone their torture - and their fate is not something we need not concern ourselves with overmuch except to cover it up and if it should be discovered to deny any complicity, deplore the treatment and look to diplomatic and commercial relations rather than law, justice or rights. "Ethical foreign policy" has become moral relativism in such a short time. E

willbeurdaddy -> RE: intel or law? (2/12/2010 5:54:27 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: philosophy .......thing is Rich, how many principles have to be sacrificed? And after you go down that road for a while, aren't you betraying what you sought to protect in the first place? Nope.

mnottertail -> RE: intel or law? (2/12/2010 6:37:51 AM)
but you never get useful and truthful intel from torture.

Kana -> RE: intel or law? (2/12/2010 6:40:23 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: mnottertail but you never get useful and truthful intel from torture. Oh c'mon...never? Not once in the history of the world has anyone gotten anything reliable from torture? I seriously doubt that. (And this is said taking no side on the question under debate)

mnottertail -> RE: intel or law? (2/12/2010 6:41:33 AM)
seriously? give me a citeable and reasonable example of good and useful intel from torture.

Jeffff -> RE: intel or law? (2/12/2010 6:42:25 AM)
The problem is, you don't know if they are telling the truth, or saying what you want to hear just to make it stop. No matter what sort of training you have, every one breaks eventually.

mnottertail -> RE: intel or law? (2/12/2010 6:47:18 AM)
right, so I clamp a vicegrip to your nuts and say, tell me something I don't know.....what do I get? Most of the time, if you are here with me, we both know why we are here, and I already know what I want to know and am looking for independant confirmation...and know if you are lying, so whats the point? Threaten is ok, but torturing and getting information is useless. You are going to become very manipulative, to such an extent that even I who knows better, am going to belive you, and you will become very good at guessing what I want to hear and will meet and exceed my expectations.

Kana -> RE: intel or law? (2/12/2010 6:48:09 AM)
I'll agree with that Jefff, but if, in the millions of cases of torture over the history of mankind, not one has revealed useful information, that would be the statistical anomaly of all time. Flat numbers say sooner or later one is gonna cough up info.

Jeffff -> RE: intel or law? (2/12/2010 6:51:13 AM)
Yeah that's a sucker's bet. The purpose is to collect accurate information.

Kana -> RE: intel or law? (2/12/2010 6:53:28 AM)
Hey. I took no position on the question Grins Just the hyperbole

mnottertail -> RE: intel or law? (2/12/2010 6:57:02 AM)
well ok, never is a long long time. people will give truthful information under torture at times, but they are not going to give you anything that is militarily useful like the layout and makeup of troops and operations....those kinda guys are either away from the action and layered or dead. you might get like this: Is abdul abar abar bar har's cell planning to bomb the reichstag at 9pm tonight? yes. How many people and who, where are they now, what weapons do they have? I dont know. (I am the equivalent of a private, nobody tells me shit, for just this reason.) Thats what I am saying, I already know all he can tell me. Why bother torturing him for what he can't give me?

DarlingSavage -> RE: intel or law? (2/12/2010 7:01:16 AM)
quote: Flat numbers say sooner or later one is gonna cough up info. That's no excuse. There is no reason to resort to such medieval practices. When I was in the Army, they showed us a film on how to treat POWs. In the film, the soldiers would be nice to them, treat them with kindness and respect, offer them cigarettes, stuff like that. The point being that we were the good guys and that if we acted that way, we were more likely to retrieve reliable information from a prisoner. Maybe they aren't really treated all that great by their own side. Either way, the use of torture is intolerable. The Military Commissions Act and failure to prosecute those responsible continue to be a source of shame for our country before the rest of the world. These people should be in prison. It pisses me off to no end!

Kana -> RE: intel or law? (2/12/2010 7:01:30 AM)
But, but, what about all those Hollywood movies. You know, the one where the hero beats the bad guy up, sticks the gun in his face and makes him cough up the gory details, leading us to the denouement?

Kana -> RE: intel or law? (2/12/2010 7:03:08 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: DarlingSavage quote: Flat numbers say sooner or later one is gonna cough up info. That's no excuse. There is no reason to resort to such medieval practices. When I was in the Army, they showed us a film on how to treat POWs. In the film, the soldiers would be nice to them, treat them with kindness and respect, offer them cigarettes, stuff like that. The point being that we were the good guys and that if we acted that way, we were more likely to retrieve reliable information from a prisoner. Maybe they aren't really treated all that great by their own side. Either way, the use of torture is intolerable. The Military Commissions Act and failure to prosecute those responsible continue to be a source of shame for our country before the rest of the world. These people should be in prison. It pisses me off to no end! And I'm not giving any excuses or reasons for. Just stating the obvious.

mnottertail -> RE: intel or law? (2/12/2010 7:08:34 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Kana But, but, what about all those Hollywood movies. You know, the one where the hero beats the bad guy up, sticks the gun in his face and makes him cough up the gory details, leading us to the denouement? Hollywood also had John Wayne kicking ass with half a lung and emphysema and stomach cancer on guys in pretty good shape in their 30's and 40's, with a roundhouse backhand in slow motion. Now, when I see it on the big screen, I believe it, cuz Marion Morrison's job was to sell it, and he did. Then the projector lights went out, and here I am again. Ron

Page: [1] 2 3 next > >>

Collarchat.com © 2025

Terms of Service

0.0625