1984 is Still Coming

You aren’t following me. Torture often comes about because of a thirst for revenge and underlying sadism, be it conscious or unconscious. It also comes about because practitioners of the despicable practice misunderstand its efficacy for intelligence purposes. Not only is is ineffective, but it’s counterproductive. Vis-a-vis religious terrorism in the 21st century, the practice has been shown to increase the mobilization and radicalization of terrorist and insurgent organizations. Plenty of peer reviewed scientific studies and the professional options of subject matter experts above. I’m not going to rehash all of it.

That is exactly why you’re supposed to kill them when you’re done. They should just put everybody from Gitmo on a decomisssioned boat then use it for target practice. Otherwise we are going to have some supremely pissed off former prisoners bonded by a common experience spearheadig the next generation of terror organization.

You misunderstand the findings of the study. Probably because you couldn’t be bothered to read it. The widely publicized torture of Muslims by Americans at Gitmo and Abu Ghraib served as a potent propaganda and recruiting tool for militant jihadists. This isn’t just an “academic” conclusion. Practitioners such as the former commander of JSOC, Stanley McChrystal, have also attested to the phenomenon.

Oh sure, the slaughter of unarmed Muslims in US custody (the majority of whom are indeed terrorists) wouldn’t be akin to throwing gasoline on a fire. Nor would it be a significant blow to American values, reputation, and security.

Jihadists want to be perceived as holy warriors. If they are killed in such a manner, they become martyrs. Rotting in a cell like a criminal delegitimizes that perception.

You know Bis, sometimes I just say stuff to get a rise out of you. This is one of those times.

However, I had read a while back (probably 12 or so years ago) that al qaeda had roots in the Egyptian political prisons in the '70s. Do you suppose that captivity and trea?tment in a place like Gitmo could give rise to a threat in the future comprised of or led by these captives?

I actually read way more than you give me credit for. I just don’t usually have any fucks to give about constructing a statement or response. Diapers, teaching a 3 year old to read and research into religious symbolism ando alrchitectural history kinda trump this stuff.

Yep… we need to get voters to realize THE ANSWER TO 1984… IS 1776… Rand Paul should have won

A bit late on this, and my conclusions are unsourced, but torture works great to cut down on dissent and enforce the party line, but not so great for interrogations.

[quote=“pushharder, post:68, topic:214091, full:true”]

Depends.

Like I told Bistro, I bet I could get you to tell me anything I felt you needed to tell me if we spent some time together…interrogation time, that is.

You or he are free to join me for the experiment. I already have the duct tape and gasoline handy…[/quote]

Think you’d get your results with water-boarding?

I have to agree with Bistro.

If you’ve ever seen ANY Rambo movie, you know only bad guys torture people.

Also, sure you can get info out of a guy. So it “works.” But you have to know what you need to know. And you have to know who knows it. And you have to get him. The intelligence(?) you would have would almost negate the need for torturing the dude.

The New York atomic attack that 1 dude knows about is not a realistic situation. And it certainly doesn’t justify water boarding a Chinese Muslim in some secret prison. Or making some guys do cheerleader stunts naked.

Just making sure we’re all agreed that water-boarding Is torture.

And it doesn’t work for intelligence gathering purposes.

Even the Romans were acutely aware of the fact - Cicero and Horatius made poignant comments regarding the stipulation of the Roman law that a slave’s testimony is only accepted if given under torture. People tend to say anything when tortured.

Romans were definitely not violence-shy - they had no qualms exterminating entire tribes and ethnic groups during their prolonged pacification of the Iberian peninsula and using torture as a tool of psychological warfare.

But even Roman historians acknowledged that for extracting useful intelligence, it doesn’t work. Turning people does. That’s why Roman greatest successes in the decades long struggle to quell the rebellion(s) of Iberian tribes, to use the anachronistic “counter terrorism” expression, occurred when they resorted to more sophisticated methods - such as elimination of Sertorius and Viriathus through “turned” agents.

Also, to skip two millennia forward, one of arguably the most counter successful terrorism units relied heavily on a controversial approach:

Mind you, I’m not advocating this approach, just pointing out the fact that even from ancient times it was understood that torture doesn’t work for intelligence gathering.

And they definitely didn’t have any moral constraints about torture and have used it extensively.

You mean, being out in front of the people who are only now (somehow only now) realizing they’ve been backing a turd sandwich for President? Hillary getting them double digits over him now!

So anyways, it was a question regarding torture, a subject which happens to be under discussion.

Sorry to see political opposition to Trump inflicted so much pain upon you.

[quote=“pushharder, post:78, topic:214091, full:true”]

More like visceral, turn your soul inside out, and bleed from your pores opposition and not so much political. [/quote]
.

Forgot, moral AND political opposition.

Newspeak

http://cnsnews.com/commentary/terence-p-jeffrey/obama-administration-tells-supreme-court-lawfully-doesnt-mean-legally