[Tom4784]

Originally Posted by EyeballPaul

So,If a terror suspect who has key information has been caught and is prepared to die before he gives any information about an attack or future attacks,Then what do you do?Just let him off?Or do you extract any information possible in order to save your citizens lives.
How could any leader just sit back and let terrorists kill hundreds or thousands of their people with no response?They would lose the confidence of the people very fast.
The first job of a president/prime minister should be the protection of its own people.
Letting them get away with murder will only encourage them to attack us more.
Leaders need to prevent attacks any way they can.These people will attack us wether we fight back or roll over and take it.I'd take fighting back any day.

Like it's been said earlier in the thread, torture isn't even that effective or reliable since chances are the suspects being tortured will simply tell the torturer what they want to hear whether it's true or not but that doesn't matter is torture isn't about getting information, it's about bloodlust and sadism dressed up as a warped sense of justice.

I won't engage in silly hypothetical situations since we'll just go around in circles and they are pointless. I will say this though, I do hope our leaders, iin this situation, would be smarter than to go with your overly simplistic 'KILL 'EM ALL' strategy. If problems could be solved so easily through war then we'd be going to war every other week.

You can't make make martyrs out of extremists, you torture or kill them? Their allies will use their sacrifice to recruit more soldiers. Groups like IS need to be dealt with carefully lest their fall gives rise to a group that's far worse.

[Kizzy]

Originally Posted by kirklancaster

The 'West' is far from some utopia, but I just wish that those who constantly decry it and deplore it - including certain immigrants - would just feck off and live in one of the freer, more civilised, more enlightened, more liberal countries in the East - Oh wait a moment - that's where most of the poor oppressed mites fled here from.

Oh well.

Name one 'Liberal' country in the east.

[kirklancaster]

Originally Posted by ArchAngel

Name one 'Liberal' country in the east.

Exactly one of the points I was making via my sarcastic post Kizzy.

[lostalex]

Would you lie to protect the ones you love? I would.

That's not evil, that's human.

[kirklancaster]

Originally Posted by lostalex

Would you lie to protect the ones you love? I would.

That's not evil, that's human.

I totally agree Alex. They're being slagged for the actions they took in order to try to protect the ones complaining.

[Tom4784]

Originally Posted by kirklancaster

I totally agree Alex. They're being slagged for the actions they took in order to try to protect the ones complaining.

That's just more hysterical rationalising.

[arista]

Originally Posted by Dezzy

That's just more hysterical rationalising.

Yes a Tube up your rectum
forcing you to tell the CIA
something you know feck all about
is America in the Shame

[kirklancaster]

Originally Posted by arista

Yes a Tube up your rectum
forcing you to tell the CIA
something you know feck all about
is America in the Shame

Yep. I do kinda feel sorry for the 93 'suspects' who did turn out to be terrorists if they had to suffer that kind of torture the poor bastards.... Can you imagine how terrified they must have been every time they heard the CIA approaching..... They wouldn't have known if it was a 'friend', or an 'enema'.....

[MTVN]

In 2004 the CIA even managed to torture two of its informants, according to the report. It says that "after both detainees had spent approximately 24 hours shackled in the standing sleep deprivation position, CIA Headquarters confirmed that the detainees were former CIA sources". Before being detained, the two CIA spies had tried to contact the agency again and again to say what they were doing and to provide intelligence.

http://www.independent.co.uk/voices/...w-9923288.html

You couldn't make it up

[GiRTh]

Youtube video

[arista]

Originally Posted by GiRTh

Youtube video

Yes she is a Tough Nut
can you see having Sex with her?


She said that on the Outnumbered (FoxNewsHD)
12PM USA and 5PM UK time

It was a great clip on the Daily Show.


Her Family came from Greece
but she is Tough
and Sexy

[GiRTh]

Originally Posted by arista

Yes she is a Tough Nut
can you see having Sex with her?

What are you talking about? Andrea Tantoros is a hateful republican hack. "We are awesome" is the genuine logic for right wing nut jobs

Youtube video

Youtube video

[lostalex]

Religion is a problem on both sides.

remember that Christians believe in a God that tortures people for all of eternity if he doesn't like them. Christians are taught that it's okay for God to torture people for all of eternity. Muslims believe the same thing, and Muslims also believe that it's okay to kill themselves because they will go to heaven and their victims will go to hell to be tortured for all eternity.

Religion is the problem.

[arista]

[Niamh.]

Originally Posted by The Geordie Jesus

You couldn't make it up

ffs

[lostalex]

I don't hate the CIA for this. they did the wrong thing, but they did it for the right reasons. They are not assholes, they are not sadists, they are not evil. They were honestly trying to protect us. but they went about it the wrong way.

Just like if a man steals a loaf of bread to feed his family. Stealing is wrong, but i can sympathize why he did it. He did the wrong thing for the right reasons.

[Nedusa]

Originally Posted by arista

I would prefer it if this headline did not have the words "quizzed on" in it and had an extra "d" after torture.






.

[Scarlett.]

Torture is just a very unreliable way of interrogating someone, you push someone to the edge to tell them what you want to hear. Picard says it best

Youtube video

[GiRTh]

Youtube video

Dick Cheney is crazier than Hannibal Lector.

[GiRTh]

Youtube video

Interesting that Cheney and Rove are now claiming Bush knew everything. This could get ugly if someone decides to make a name for them self and attempt prosecutions

[kirklancaster]

Originally Posted by Nedusa

I would prefer it if this headline did not have the words "quizzed on" in it and had an extra "d" after torture.

.

I know what you mean.

[kirklancaster]

Originally Posted by lostalex

Religion is a problem on both sides.

remember that Christians believe in a God that tortures people for all of eternity if he doesn't like them. Christians are taught that it's okay for God to torture people for all of eternity. Muslims believe the same thing, and Muslims also believe that it's okay to kill themselves because they will go to heaven and their victims will go to hell to be tortured for all eternity.

Religion is the problem.

So my Christian God is really an American and the Director of the CIA, then Alex?

And as for: "Religion is a problem on both sides". I think you need to read up on this whole Islamic Fundamentalist terror war if you think that these demons only targets are Christians.

FFS -

[lostalex]

Originally Posted by kirklancaster

So my Christian God is really an American and the Director of the CIA, then Alex?

And as for: "Religion is a problem on both sides". I think you need to read up on this whole Islamic Fundamentalist terror war if you think that these demons only targets are Christians.

FFS -

i never said their only targets are christians. obviously they hate gay people and feminists and atheists too.

[kirklancaster]

QUOTE=Dezzy;7414037]Like it's been said earlier in the thread, torture isn't even that effective or reliable since chances are the suspects being tortured will simply tell the torturer what they want to hear whether it's true or not but that doesn't matter is torture isn't about getting information, it's about bloodlust and sadism dressed up as a warped sense of justice.

Yes, sometimes mistakes are made by our Intelligence Services, and the FBI and CIA, and yes, sometimes suspects being 'intensely interrogated' (torture' is such a nasty word) will say anything to gain respite, but to say that 'intense interrogation' is that effective or reliable is untrue, because sometimes it absolutely does yield vital information:

In August 1998, al-Qaeda terrorist Mohammed Sadiq Odeh was arrested in Pakistan. Under FBI ‘interrogation’, Odeh provided details of bin Laden's international terror network, as well as detailing bin Laden's role major bombing atrocities. Completely due to this vital information, the subsequent tracking down, arrest and interrogation of other terrorist suspects have yielded more equally vital information, and as a direct result, U.S. intelligence has since foiled many al-Qaeda plots, including one designed to disrupt millennium celebrations in December 1999.

How many thousands of lives have been saved and how many millions of dollars by Odeh's information?

Oh... And how sweet it is, that the end can sometimes justify the means.

I do confess to being a little puzzled though by how terms like; "bloodlust" and "sadism" are freely used as descriptors by certain people on here, when it comes to criticising Western efforts to save lives and defeat terrorists, but the same terms are never, ever used by the same people to describe the vile actions of terrorists.

Why, some people even have a 'hissy fit' if anyone dares to refer to terrorists as 'Monsters' or 'Demons' - even when they have just beheaded yet another bowed and beaten, terrified, innocent victim, or even when they have just cold-bloodedly executed over 200 terrified and innocent schoolchildren and set ablaze an innocent teacher or two.

I wonder why that is?

"I won't engage in silly hypothetical situations since we'll just go around in circles and they are pointless. I will say this though, I do hope our leaders, iin this situation, would be smarter than to go with your overly simplistic 'KILL 'EM ALL' strategy. If problems could be solved so easily through war then we'd be going to war every other week."

I think our leaders have been 'smarter' - in using 'intense interrogation' techniques to try to elicit vital information from suspected terrorists for example - but their efforts to cut short this 'war' by these and other techniques are being foiled and hindered by certain parties within the West who are criticising them for such 'smart' techniques.

It's a good job that we still live in a free, liberal democratic country which allows such voices of dissent - despite the evil efforts of the Islamic Fundamentalist terrorists to conquer us and replace that democracy with their own oppressive and barbaric regime and their repressive medieval Sharia Law.

If the unthinkable does happen and they do win this war - try openly criticising the new regime then.

"You can't make make martyrs out of extremists, you torture or kill them? Their allies will use their sacrifice to recruit more soldiers. Groups like IS need to be dealt with carefully lest their fall gives rise to a group that's far worse."

I will say it again - the idea that dead terrorist Martyrs matter to anyone outside their own organisations, is pure B.S. propaganda. There is absolutely no evidence that they lead to any boost in recruitment. Nor is there any evidence that the memory of martyrs endures. Who remembers Bobby Sands?

All your statement does is weaken the West's position and aids the terrorists cause.

And what do you actually mean, when you write: "You can't make make martyrs out of extremists, (if) you torture or kill them? Their allies will use their sacrifice to recruit more soldiers.”

So not only must we not ‘intensely interrogate’ these terrorists we also cannot kill them. So are you proposing that in a battle when these terrorists are firing at our forces, or if a nutjack suicide bomber is driving a car towards them laden with half a ton of explosives, that our troops should throw bags of marshmallows at them for fear that the terrorists will recruit more terrorists if we “fight fire with fire’ and shoot to kill?

And perhaps you would kindly explain to me just what you mean by; “Groups like IS need to be dealt with carefully”?

What does that actually mean?

Finally, what do you actually mean by “Lest their fall gives rise to a group that’s far worse”?

Are you proposing; that we don’t ‘intensely interrogate’ them to extract vital information which could aid our defeat of them, and that we don’t kill them, and we treat them ‘carefully’, so that they do not fall?

If you don’t mean that, please explain what you do mean because I am genuinely confused..

[Tom4784]

Originally Posted by kirklancaster

QUOTE=Dezzy;7414037]Like it's been said earlier in the thread, torture isn't even that effective or reliable since chances are the suspects being tortured will simply tell the torturer what they want to hear whether it's true or not but that doesn't matter is torture isn't about getting information, it's about bloodlust and sadism dressed up as a warped sense of justice.

Yes, sometimes mistakes are made by our Intelligence Services, and the FBI and CIA, and yes, sometimes suspects being 'intensely interrogated' (torture' is such a nasty word) will say anything to gain respite, but to say that 'intense interrogation' is that effective or reliable is untrue, because sometimes it absolutely does yield vital information:

In August 1998, al-Qaeda terrorist Mohammed Sadiq Odeh was arrested in Pakistan. Under FBI ‘interrogation’, Odeh provided details of bin Laden's international terror network, as well as detailing bin Laden's role major bombing atrocities. Completely due to this vital information, the subsequent tracking down, arrest and interrogation of other terrorist suspects have yielded more equally vital information, and as a direct result, U.S. intelligence has since foiled many al-Qaeda plots, including one designed to disrupt millennium celebrations in December 1999.

How many thousands of lives have been saved and how many millions of dollars by Odeh's information?

Oh... And how sweet it is, that the end can sometimes justify the means.

I do confess to being a little puzzled though by how terms like; "bloodlust" and "sadism" are freely used as descriptors by certain people on here, when it comes to criticising Western efforts to save lives and defeat terrorists, but the same terms are never, ever used by the same people to describe the vile actions of terrorists.

Why, some people even have a 'hissy fit' if anyone dares to refer to terrorists as 'Monsters' or 'Demons' - even when they have just beheaded yet another bowed and beaten, terrified, innocent victim, or even when they have just cold-bloodedly executed over 200 terrified and innocent schoolchildren and set ablaze an innocent teacher or two.

I wonder why that is?

"I won't engage in silly hypothetical situations since we'll just go around in circles and they are pointless. I will say this though, I do hope our leaders, iin this situation, would be smarter than to go with your overly simplistic 'KILL 'EM ALL' strategy. If problems could be solved so easily through war then we'd be going to war every other week."

I think our leaders have been 'smarter' - in using 'intense interrogation' techniques to try to elicit vital information from suspected terrorists for example - but their efforts to cut short this 'war' by these and other techniques are being foiled and hindered by certain parties within the West who are criticising them for such 'smart' techniques.

It's a good job that we still live in a free, liberal democratic country which allows such voices of dissent - despite the evil efforts of the Islamic Fundamentalist terrorists to conquer us and replace that democracy with their own oppressive and barbaric regime and their repressive medieval Sharia Law.

If the unthinkable does happen and they do win this war - try openly criticising the new regime then.

"You can't make make martyrs out of extremists, you torture or kill them? Their allies will use their sacrifice to recruit more soldiers. Groups like IS need to be dealt with carefully lest their fall gives rise to a group that's far worse."

I will say it again - the idea that dead terrorist Martyrs matter to anyone outside their own organisations, is pure B.S. propaganda. There is absolutely no evidence that they lead to any boost in recruitment. Nor is there any evidence that the memory of martyrs endures. Who remembers Bobby Sands?

All your statement does is weaken the West's position and aids the terrorists cause.

And what do you actually mean, when you write: "You can't make make martyrs out of extremists, (if) you torture or kill them? Their allies will use their sacrifice to recruit more soldiers.”

So not only must we not ‘intensely interrogate’ these terrorists we also cannot kill them. So are you proposing that in a battle when these terrorists are firing at our forces, or if a nutjack suicide bomber is driving a car towards them laden with half a ton of explosives, that our troops should throw bags of marshmallows at them for fear that the terrorists will recruit more terrorists if we “fight fire with fire’ and shoot to kill?

And perhaps you would kindly explain to me just what you mean by; “Groups like IS need to be dealt with carefully”?

What does that actually mean?

Finally, what do you actually mean by “Lest their fall gives rise to a group that’s far worse”?

Are you proposing; that we don’t ‘intensely interrogate’ them to extract vital information which could aid our defeat of them, and that we don’t kill them, and we treat them ‘carefully’, so that they do not fall?

If you don’t mean that, please explain what you do mean because I am genuinely confused..

More rationalising.