Waterboarding

[justplugit]

Originally Posted by spence

Most importantly though is that it's not a unified threat against the West as portrayed by Bush, who has lumped Iran, al Qaeda and Hamas into the same bucket and pretended there's a one size fits all solution.

-spence

__________________________________________________ ___________

Hmm no, i didn't miss the point, just filling in all the blanks.

In answer to your question,what i found interesting was your quote above..

If my memory serves me right, and it hasn't always at times lately ,
I remember Busch after 9/11 declaring war on terror wherever it was, where terrorists were killing innocents.

It was to be a new kind of war,
taking decades to fight using intelligence, disruption of terror $ and communication, and taking pre-emptive strikes where needed with new as well as old tactics.

Doesn't seem to me like he lumped or used one size fits all tactics in dealing with the three you mentioned.

[spence]

Originally Posted by justplugit

If my memory serves me right, and it hasn't always at times lately ,
I remember Busch after 9/11 declaring war on terror wherever it was, where terrorists were killing innocents.

It was to be a new kind of war,
taking decades to fight using intelligence, disruption of terror $ and communication, and taking pre-emptive strikes where needed with new as well as old tactics.

Doesn't seem to me like he lumped or used one size fits all tactics in dealing with the three you mentioned.

Bush certainly took the position that the post 9/11 world required a new approach to security. But think about how he decided to apply this new approach. Saddam and Bin Laden were treated as the same regardless of the reality. Iran and Bin Laden were treated as the same regardless of the reality. Political terrorism like in Chechnya or Palestine was mixed with Religious extremism like in Pakistan as if they all had the same root causes.

The only common factor is Islam, yet Bush insists we're not at war with Islam. This is the contradiction that's been exploited to gain sympathy for those who do mean to do us harm. People (on the Right) are always trying to knock this, who cares what they think etc..., but the reality is that without mainstream sympathy the real terror organizations have little leverage.

The big problem with the Bush approach is that he had an opportunity to divide these challenges and deal with them as more fragmented issues. Instead they largely used the rhetoric around terrorism to win domestic elections, and in the process have driven our enemies closer together.

-spence

[scottw]

Obama won...he has apologized for US and we no longer have any enemies...didn't you get the memo..? it's just a matter of time......

[Fishpart]

The rest of the story is that we actually obtained some high value information using these techniques, unfortunately I didn't notice the article on the front page of the Providence Urinal today like the initial article. In fact we thwarted a 9/11 style attack on LA. In the end no one was killed by being waterboarded and no Americans died in a terror attack. Was it worth it, ask your aquaintences who live in LA.

[JohnnyD]

Originally Posted by Fishpart

In fact we thwarted a 9/11 style attack on LA. In the end no one was killed by being waterboarded and no Americans died in a terror attack. Was it worth it, ask your aquaintences who live in LA.

Did we now? And that was as a result of torturing 2 prisoners that didn't give up any useful information, according to a Bush security adviser. It has been brought up more than a few times by past security officials that little, if any, useful information was acquired.

Between the two of them, the prisoners were waterboarded 266 times. Can you somehow explain to me what they could get out of the 266th waterboarding that they couldn't get from the 200th?

While torturing at all is illegal and the appropriate people should be prosecuted, people overlook the excessive use of those actions that took place as well.

One last thing, there is no clear information that any attack on LA was thwarted. Cheney *hinted* that a 9/11 attack on LA *might* have been thwarted. But because the idea was *hinted* at, supporters of the previous administration are spinning the hell out of it and stating it as fact.

After the numerous infringements on the privacy of average American citizens, I refuse to believe the Bush administration would not be extremely public about preventing a 9/11 sized attack. They had lost all credibility and fought an uphill battle for the last 3 years he was in office. This would have given Bush the much needed boost to push through more of the Big Brother policies that he wanted enacted.

[Swimmer]

[quote=JohnnyD;683387]Between the two of them, the prisoners were waterboarded 266 times. Can you somehow explain to me what they could get out of the 266th waterboarding that they couldn't get from the 200th?

Cleaner forehead!


It begged to be said, couldn't resist.

[scottw]

Originally Posted by JohnnyD

Did we now? And that was as a result of torturing 2 prisoners that didn't give up any useful information, according to a Bush security adviser. It has been brought up more than a few times by past security officials that little, if any, useful information was acquired.

Between the two of them, the prisoners were waterboarded 266 times. Can you somehow explain to me what they could get out of the 266th waterboarding that they couldn't get from the 200th?

While torturing at all is illegal and the appropriate people should be prosecuted, people overlook the excessive use of those actions that took place as well.

One last thing, there is no clear information that any attack on LA was thwarted. Cheney *hinted* that a 9/11 attack on LA *might* have been thwarted. But because the idea was *hinted* at, supporters of the previous administration are spinning the hell out of it and stating it as fact.

After the numerous infringements on the privacy of average American citizens, I refuse to believe the Bush administration would not be extremely public about preventing a 9/11 sized attack. They had lost all credibility and fought an uphill battle for the last 3 years he was in office. This would have given Bush the much needed boost to push through more of the Big Brother policies that he wanted enacted.

you torture people everyday....

[JohnnyD]

Originally Posted by scottw

you torture people everyday....

I guess, if you consider thoughtful opinions based on facts, as opposed to copy/pastes of some Conservatives "commentary" that many take as fact.

[justplugit]

Originally Posted by spence

The big problem with the Bush approach is that he had an opportunity to divide these challenges and deal with them as more fragmented issues. Instead they largely used the rhetoric around terrorism to win domestic elections, and in the process have driven our enemies closer together.

-spence

Spence, you made some good points in your reply.
We could go round and round on this forever.

While i didn't agree with Bush on A LOT of his policies, even hindsight on the terrorist attacks forgets
we were flying by the seat of our pants in unknown threats.
Mistakes were made for sure, but we were kept safe for his entire term.

For me and my family living 16 miles from ground zero, my son in law, a pilot flying a 767 that morning non stop to LA from Kennedy leaving at 8 am, not knowing his plane was safe until 11:30, loosing 2 young friends of ours in the towers and knowing what their families still go through, and knowing we are in close proximity to other possible targets,
I for one am very greatful for his keeping us safe.

It's easy to Monday morning 1/4 back, but you have to give him credit, if for nothing else, his policy worked in keeping us safe.
Glad I didn't have to make any of those decisions.

[spence]

Originally Posted by justplugit

While i didn't agree with Bush on A LOT of his policies, even hindsight on the terrorist attacks forgets
we were flying by the seat of our pants in unknown threats.

Right after 9/11 I'd agree. And at that time I thought the Administration acted with a pretty cool head. It was after we had a chance to think about our actions that things really went awry. That worries me...

Mistakes were made for sure, but we were kept safe for his entire term.

Did he?

Firstly, I've never heard anything that indicates we've stopped any credible terrorist attacks in the US since 9/11. Most of the successes touted by Bush have been a bunch of half-wits tricked into guilt by the FBI.

After 9/11, there have been many serious terrorist attacks outside of the US on our allies, London, Madrid etc...

And perhaps most importantly. Since 9/11 we've lost 4273 American service members in Iraq, another 1000 or so contractors and what will be over a trillion in spending. All for what as a result? To overthrow a dictator who wasn't involved in 9/11 and posed little threat to the USA? To free a country that's probably going to be closer to Iran than us when it's all said and done?

It doesn't sound like we've kept Americans all that safe.

For me and my family living 16 miles from ground zero, my son in law, a pilot flying a 767 that morning non stop to LA from Kennedy leaving at 8 am, not knowing his plane was safe until 11:30, loosing 2 young friends of ours in the towers and knowing what their families still go through, and knowing we are in close proximity to other possible targets, I for one am very greatful for his keeping us safe.

It's easy to Monday morning 1/4 back, but you have to give him credit, if for nothing else, his policy worked in keeping us safe.
Glad I didn't have to make any of those decisions.

I don't think any of this has been easy, and I'm not one who believes that Bush or Cheney are evil. I do think they did what they thought was good for the American people.

That being said, I think at times they've (or more importanly those around around them) have conflated US interests with their own interests.

I've said often and I'll say again. Stay a true course and people will forgive your mistakes. But if you're often straying then things are open for scruitny. It seems like Bush strayed and often...

-spence

[justplugit]

Originally Posted by spence

Did he?

Firstly, I've never heard anything that indicates we've stopped any credible terrorist attacks in the US since 9/11.

-spence

No sense in speculating on that, none of us will ever know for sure,
unless top secret documents are released at some time, if ever.

We weren't attacked on our own soil after 9/11 and that is ALL we know for sure.

I hope that continues under Obama's watch.

[spence]

Originally Posted by justplugit

No sense in speculating on that, none of us will ever know for sure,
unless top secret documents are released at some time, if ever.

We weren't attacked on our own soil after 9/11 and that is ALL we know for sure.

I hope that continues under Obama's watch.

My hope is that our interests are not attacked, which might be very difficult to stop.

As bad as 9/11 was, a nuke or like minded attack in the Middle East could prove to be far, far worse.

-spence

[RIJIMMY]

Originally Posted by spence

My hope is that our interests are not attacked, which might be very difficult to stop.

As bad as 9/11 was, a nuke or like minded attack in the Middle East could prove to be far, far worse.

-spence

As long as no one from my family was in the Middle EAst and there were no significant American casualties I can give an F less if there is attack there. How an attack on foreign soil can be worse than one of US soil is beyond comprehension to me.

[Swimmer]

We will know about what plans may or may not have been foiled if someone gets charged with a crime in relation to the waterboarding uproar. Any defendent will have access through evidence disclosure. We all know secrets wont be divulged, so no one in the end will be charged. So in essense all Obama is doing is using the torture for his own political gain, which is cheap. At least Bush was trying to elicit plans for other 9-11's before they happened. And I'm not saying torture is the way to go, at least all the time. But what is worse, making solid your political career, or trying to save us more torment.

[justplugit]

Originally Posted by Swimmer

We will know about what plans may or may not have been foiled if someone gets charged with a crime in relation to the waterboarding uproar. Any defendent will have access through evidence disclosure.

You are right Swimmer, if Leahy and Congers have their way and Obama goes along,
all that top secret info will be exposed.

Very dangerous precedent will be set if they go ahead with this, as every
administration's policies in the future will be subject to be scrutinized after
their terms, when policies are changed.

Talk about dividing the country.