OBL(UBL) Killed

[buckman]

Originally Posted by spence

Panetta is not denying that EIT's were in the mix at some point, but he in no way is crediting them as a substantial contributor...he actually goes pretty far to make this point clear.



For you to say that water boarding "worked" means they were able to get intel from it they wouldn't have got otherwise, and that this intel aided substantially in the hunt for Bin Laden. Cause and effect. I've yet to see anything that indicates this is the case...at all.

I did also notice that on the Sunday shows the intel people were very careful on this point...hell, even #^&#^&#^&#^& Cheney danced around it...

And usually Cheney doesn't dance around anything

-spence

They would not have been able to get the intel by other means. That is the damn point Spence.

[Jim in CT]

Originally Posted by buckman

They would not have been able to get the intel by other means. That is the damn point Spence.

I don't think anyone can say that they wouldn't have been able to get the intel another way. But what matters is, THEY GOT SOME OF THE ACTIONABLE INTEL from enhanced interrogation. You can no longer say that waterboarding doesn't work. You can still (for some Godforsaken reason) argue that it's immoral, but you can't argue that it never works. When Obama's appointed CIA chief says it worked, how does that not end the argument?

Spence, you're about as rational as the birthers, who continue their propoganda despite irrefutable evidence...

[Sea Dangles]

Jim just hit a Grand Slam three posts in a row. Instead of speculation it is nice to hear first hand accounts.

[spence]

Originally Posted by buckman

They would not have been able to get the intel by other means. That is the damn point Spence.

That's exactly the point...there's nothing that Panetta said (or has been reported to my knowledge) which indicates this is the case. In fact, he goes out of his way to make this clear.

I think the spooks seem to have a realistic viewpoint, not a political one.

-spence

[Jim in CT]

Originally Posted by spence

That's exactly the point...there's nothing that Panetta said (or has been reported to my knowledge) which indicates this is the case. In fact, he goes out of his way to make this clear.

I think the spooks seem to have a realistic viewpoint, not a political one.

-spence

God almighty Spence! No one can say whether or not we would have been able to get the intelligence another way. No one can say that for sure...it's pure speculation. The only thing we CAN say for sure, is that we DID get actionable intelligence from enhanced interrogation in this case. There is no rational way to deny that. If you want to argue that killing Osama wasn't worth torturing KSM, fine. But if you insist on saying that waterboarding didn't produce actionable intelligence in this case, you are no different than the birthers.

Finally, Spence, let me say this. It would be immoral NOT to waterboard in very rare circumstances. It would be completely immoral to condemn innocent Americans to fiery deaths for lack of pouring water down someone's nose. It's absolutely baffling to me that any sane person could suggest otherwise. And I don't believe for one second that any of you liberals would refuse to pour water down someone's nose to save your life, of the life of someone you love.

[fishbones]

Originally Posted by spence

I think the spooks seem to have a realistic viewpoint, not a political one.

-spence

Wow, Spence! That's just so wrong.