Investigations of CIA interrogators

[acco40]

Fire bombing Dresden, to prevent attacks from Hummel figurines or cuckoo clocks, or nuking Nagasaki from 20,000 ft is very impersonal.

 

Waterboarding a suspected terrorist gets ones hands dirty.

 

Alls fair in love and war but we are not nuking Afghanistan or Pakistan. We run into this problem when we moderate our response in a war - Korea, Viet Nam, Iraq, etc. I don't advocating total all-out war but this is a messy business - trying to defend and look out for our intests by projecting force.

[BrentAllen]

OGE,

I Don't know if the end justifies the means, well actually I know that the end does not justify the means, at least the ends does not in the universe of pure reason and logic..." Yes, I know how you finished the sentence, but this is what lead to my comment.

 

Beavah,

Your argument might work with your lawyer buddies, but it doesn't hold water with me. Killing prisoners will stiffen the opposition (lesson from WWII). Learning that your fellow countrymen were losing body parts for not giving intel might stiffen the opposition. Learning that your fellow countrymen were being waterboarded isn't going to get the same reaction. Can you show me where we fought any harder or were more determined to defeat our enemy when we learned of the NVA torturing our soldiers and airmen? Exactly how did that stiffen our resolve? How long did it take to get them all out?? How many NVA and VC were tried for war crimes??

 

I believe we still train some of our military in resisting torture - they expect to be tortured, if caught.

[Beavah]

There are no rules in War

 

So how do yeh reconcile that with "a Scout is Reverent?". Your professed faith seems to believe with infallible authority that there are in fact rules in war.

 

Of course, U.S.Law agrees.

 

We have been involved in a War on Drugs now for many years longer than our War on Terrorism. Those who sell drugs are a shadowy lot, much like da terrorists, and they have killed or injured far more Americans than any group of terrorists. The War on Drugs much like da War on Terrorism is an undeclared conflict. Governments love undeclared, never-ending wars and states of emergency. Just look at Mubarak and the current butcher in Syria.

 

So in keepin' with da wonderful examples we're following, can da DEA torture a scout suspected of buying a joint from a dealer after school for information? Can da secret police spirit away the neighbor of a suspected terrorist and torture his 6 year old daughter? Can we imprison advocates of legalized marijuana for sedition in wartime? Yeh hear that kind of rhetoric often enough.

 

Nice country we're building.

 

Unfortunately, yeh have a problem, eh? Because yeh just pulled me and most other Americans into the war on the other side. That's da problem with being unethical, eh? Yeh alienate even your friends.

 

Beavah

[Beavah]

Can you show me where we fought any harder or were more determined to defeat our enemy when we learned of the NVA torturing our soldiers and airmen?

 

I reckon da effect was blunted by the coverage of our own atrocities, eh? Regardless of whether yeh think all of that coverage was fair or not (and I do not), yeh have to admit that even the perception that we were engaged in such activities caused us to lose the war in Vietnam. It undermined support at home and abroad, and undermined unit cohesion in-theater. The effect was so profound that we're still living with some of da consequences of it more than 40 years later.

 

So why would we ever return to a strategy that caused us to lose a war? That undermined our nation? Especially when it's so much easier to behave with honor and in accord with the law.

 

Beavah

 

[packsaddle]

When I think of how easy it seems for some of us to just dismiss any sense of personal conscience on the rationalization of 'warfare', it just makes me wonder...and sad. I wonder, why even bother with the rationalization if that is a person's inclination?

But I guess for that matter some people don't bother, they actually rather enjoy doing these things to other people and war just makes it easy.

 

I have known a few of them, persons who took the 'anything goes' attitude toward other persons. They are/were, in fact, criminals. One was executed for it.

 

Edit: just saw Beavah's followup. One of my fellow scouts joined up in order to go to Vietnam. The rest of us recognized that there was some kind of ever-present malice in him but most of the time he was fair and fun. But once in a while he would do things that betrayed something terrible.

He returned from the war once in a while and re-upped as long as it was possible. He seemed 'apart' from the rest of us when he spoke and he bragged about the thrill of killing. I have no idea how much of it was true but knowing him, it was believable. It is possible that he was responsible for some terrible things, the way he talked about women, especially. I visited the wall and looked for his name. Not there. I hope his life has taken a turn for the better.(This message has been edited by packsaddle)

[OldGreyEagle]

I may have hit the jackpot, I have both sides of the argument, BrentAllen and Beavah both against me

 

must be my natural wit and boyish charm

[Beavah]

LOL, Jackpot indeed! Though BA and I agree far more than I let on, especially on Scouting.

 

But I'm really interested in an answer to my question, OGE, if yeh care to share. I'm always interested in those whose professed beliefs and advocated actions are so at odds.

 

Beavah

[Old_OX_Eagle83]

No the end does not justify the means. Were discussing horrific behavior, acts that are violations of National, and International Law. Scoutings timeless values do not include torture, inhumane acts, and human degradation. These is a criminal justice system designed to deal with people like this, let the system do its job. Ill speed better at night knowing these atrocities have been put to a stop. If we allow someone to be treated this way, we open the door for anyone to be treated this way.

[JoeBob]

You hear this often:

"torturing captives only leads to stiffened resolve, better recruiting,"

Is there any proof?

 

"less willingness to surrender"

I'll buy that one.

 

"and the torture of our own men and women in retaliation."

Since this enemy is torturing and killing their captives anyway, what's to be gained by being nice?

 

The normal rules of chivalry don't apply to an enemy who wants to die so he can get to his virgins.

 

 

 

 

[acco40]

Not torture exactly, but I've read academic dissertations aboutthe effects of bombing civilian populations - i.e. London, Dresden, etc. The desired effect - trying to defeat the will of the people to fight - was not achieved. Surprisingly to some (not me) - the effect was just the opposite. It stiffened the resolve of those being bombed to resist.

 

Think of it this way. What was your thoughts on muslim/Islamic radicals before 9/11? After 9/11? Did you move much closer to "those guys have a legitimate point" or "okay, I'm get the point, I'll stop supporting Israel and renounce my 'Western' ways"? I bet it was more like - "let's kill the bastards, each and every one no matter what it takes."

[BrentAllen]

acco40,

Hiroshima and Nagasaki kind of kills your argument, no?

 

packsaddle wants to know where I would draw the line. Simple - no physical maiming, no removing body parts, no hanging prisoners with their arms behind their backs (ala McCain). Waterboarding? I have no problem with it, and don't consider it torture. Is it painful and traumatic? Yes. Does it maim the person? No. Scareing the person to the point of where he thinks he is going to die? No problem (thinking of the scene on the porch of the cabin in The Untouchables). I'm not even an amateur on interrogation techniques, but I think there are lots of things that can be done that can yield results before you get to maiming. That is where I would draw the line.

 

So Beavah, our torture in Vietnam caused us to lose the war? I wasn't aware of that. Maybe the NVA's torture of our soldiers caused them to win the war. That's just as plausible as your argument.

[Scoutfish]

Politics is one of the things that hurt us in Nam. Numbers and feel good body counts.

 

Too much control was p-laced in the hnands of people who only understand polls and election results, not warfare.

 

The second thing was jumping the fence to get into somebody elses backyard without having a clue what their mentality was like or how their landscape was set up.

 

Kinda similar to the whole religion thing: You have to look at your enemy through their eyes, noty your own.

 

Of Course, having s bunch of people call you baby killers without having a clue what you went through didn't help.

 

Last but not least......It's a humongous shame that we Americans spit on people for doing what they were drafted ( read as FORCED ) drafted to do. Why nobody realized they didn't have a choice is beyond me.

[nldscout]

OGE,

 

There is one essential rule of war. Kill the other son of a **** before he kills you so you can come home safe and in one piece.

 

If you will note, there are not nearly as many taken captive these days as in the early days of the conflict.

[Scoutfish]

"Kill the other son of a **** before he kills you"

 

Yeah, I won't argue that!

 

Especially if that's the only rule he follows.

 

I had a military friend of mine once say "Hard to put a flower in the barrel of a rifle when bullets are coming out.

 

And the thing about the rules of war are simple: They only work if both sides recognize them.

 

That reminds me of a joke also:

 

A farmer is out in one of his fields one day when a stranger drives up, gets out and introduces himself as a surveyor for the Dept of Interior. He says he is doing surveys and will be all over the farmers fields.

 

The farmer says fine, just stay out of the back northern field.

 

The Agent then pulls out a ID cad and says: See this card? It is a US Government issued card that says I can go anywhere I want and you can't stop me!"

 

The farmers hrugs and tells the agent to help himself.

 

About 30 minutes later, the farmer hears horrible terrified screams. He looks up and see's the agent in the back nborthern field being chased by the farmers highly irritated and mean bull.

 

The agent hollers to the farmer: "Help me, help me!"

 

The farmer then yells back: "Show him your card!"

 

 

WEll, point being, most of the time, the enemy is the bull. They do not care about what we think or our rules of war or engagement.

 

There is alot to be said of taking the high ground. But sometimes the high ground makes you an easier target.

[Beavah]

The normal rules of chivalry don't apply to an enemy who wants to die so he can get to his virgins.

 

Yah, there are always excuses, eh? But recall that I said

 

"If we are at "war" against an unconventional enemy, then torturing captives only leads to stiffened resolve, better recruiting, less willingness to surrender, the torture of innocent parties by mistake, less willingness on the part of local population to cooperate in giving us vital intelligence, and the loss of allies and respect in the eyes of the world. "

 

No claims about retaliation, we know they aren't goin' to follow da rules. It doesn't matter, eh? What they're tryin' to do is to get us to break our own rules, because that does the most damage to us.

 

B