Waterboarding Khalid Sheikh Mohammed DID NOT LEAD TO THE CAPTURE OF OSAMA BIN LADEN!!

We were fighting a war in which western civilization itself was at stake. We managed to pull through without a torture program.

 

Pouring water on someones face isnt acting like savages and it isnt torture, its interrogation techniques.

 

Wrong. WWII was won without the hand-wringing media mindset that permeates our culture today. We sent out men in with their ears pinned back and teeth bared. We glorified them in our classrooms and in our media. Their were enhanced interrogation techniques during WWII, we just didn't have an AG who was actively pursuing prison sentences for those that used them.

 

Historically we have seen it as torture.

http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2007/11/29/politics/main3554687.shtml
Republican presidential candidate John McCain reminded people Thursday that some Japanese were tried and hanged for torturing American prisoners during World War II with techniques that included waterboarding.

"There should be little doubt from American history that we consider that as torture otherwise we wouldn't have tried and convicted Japanese for doing that same thing to Americans," McCain said during a news conference.


http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/11/02/AR2007110201170.html
The United States knows quite a bit about waterboarding. The U.S. government -- whether acting alone before domestic courts, commissions and courts-martial or as part of the world community -- has not only condemned the use of water torture but has severely punished those who applied it.

After World War II, we convicted several Japanese soldiers for waterboarding American and Allied prisoners of war. At the trial of his captors, then-Lt. Chase J. Nielsen, one of the 1942 Army Air Forces officers who flew in the Doolittle Raid and was captured by the Japanese, testified: "I was given several types of torture. . . . I was given what they call the water cure." He was asked what he felt when the Japanese soldiers poured the water. "Well, I felt more or less like I was drowning," he replied, "just gasping between life and death."

[...]


As a result of such accounts, a number of Japanese prison-camp officers and guards were convicted of torture that clearly violated the laws of war. They were not the only defendants convicted in such cases. As far back as the U.S. occupation of the Philippines after the 1898 Spanish-American War, U.S. soldiers were court-martialed for using the "water cure" to question Filipino guerrillas.



Same thing during the Vietnam war.

http://abcnews.go.com/WNT/Investigation/story?id=1356870
Water boarding was designated as illegal by U.S. generals in Vietnam 40 years ago. A photograph that appeared in The Washington Post of a U.S. soldier involved in water boarding a North Vietnamese prisoner in 1968 led to that soldier's severe punishment.

"The soldier who participated in water torture in January 1968 was court-martialed within one month after the photos appeared in The Washington Post, and he was drummed out of the Army," recounted Darius Rejali, a political science professor at Reed College.

 

We were fighting lawful combatants on the battle field not terrorist.

And since we have no torture program now.............

 

Different enemy yes. But not nearly as dangerous. We have not tolerated torture in the past. we should not tolerate it now.

 

See my post #254 for the answer.

 

Totally and we do not.

 

Waterboarding is torture and we have historically treated it as such.

 

Not the manner in which we used it under the EIT program.


As a result of such accounts, a number of Japanese prison-camp officers and guards were convicted of torture that clearly violated the laws of war. They were not the only defendants convicted in such cases. As far back as the U.S. occupation of the Philippines after the 1898 Spanish-American War, U.S. soldiers were court-martialed for using the "water cure" to question Filipino guerrillas.

Yes and if any of our soldiers did what they did they would also be convicted. The military is not allowed to use EIT or waterboarding of any manner against capitives. AND prove that the Japanese who were convicted of war crimes were convicted SOLELY for waterboarding.

To compare the acts of the Japanese during WW2 to how we interrogate and treat terrorist we capture is absurd.

 

From the same Washington Post article I linked to earlier:

After World War II, we convicted several Japanese soldiers for waterboarding American and Allied prisoners of war. At the trial of his captors, then-Lt. Chase J. Nielsen, one of the 1942 Army Air Forces officers who flew in the Doolittle Raid and was captured by the Japanese, testified: "I was given several types of torture. . . . I was given what they call the water cure." He was asked what he felt when the Japanese soldiers poured the water. "Well, I felt more or less like I was drowning," he replied, "just gasping between life and death."

Nielsen's experience was not unique. Nor was the prosecution of his captors. After Japan surrendered, the United States organized and participated in the International Military Tribunal for the Far East, generally called the Tokyo War Crimes Trials. Leading members of Japan's military and government elite were charged, among their many other crimes, with torturing Allied military personnel and civilians. The principal proof upon which their torture convictions were based was conduct that we would now call waterboarding.

 

Again our CIA Director said differently from the thread title.

Here is a source liberals will trust!

MSNBC

 

Again not in the manner in which we used EIT. If anyone in our military did what the Japanese did they would be arrested and put on trial. As you note they tortured, and using water was just one way they tortured, civilians and lawful combatants. And I see no evidence that the principle reason anyone of them was convicted was solely waterboarding even in the manner in which they employed it.

And tell me this, if waterboarding and torture do no produce valuable information why did the Japanese engage in it?

 

Let us read this one again:
The principal proof upon which their torture convictions were based was conduct that we would now call waterboarding.

The principal proof. How can it be more clear? Yes, we have given it another name because turture has a bad rep, but it is still torture.

 

And there was other it was not the SOLE form of treatment nor was it applied as we did and to whom we did and the writer provides no evidence of his assertion anyway.

AND it was the MILITARY, we do not allow our military to engage in EIT, you do know that?

To compare what the Japanese engaged in and to whom and to how with what we engaged in is absurd.

BTW have you ever read Flags of Our Fathers?

 

I sugest you read the article. Waterboarding was the principle proof used when the Japanese were convicted.

It doesn't matter who does the torture.

It is not absurd to compare waterboarding to waterboarding.

I havent' read that book. But I have read 'Faith of My Fathers' by McCain in which he explains how he gave wrong information when tortured.

Let us look at the interrogation program we had during WWII called 'P.O. Box 1142'.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/10/05/AR2007100502492.html
"We got more information out of a German general with a game of chess or Ping-Pong than they do today, with their torture," said Henry Kolm, 90, an MIT physicist who had been assigned to play chess in Germany with Hitler's deputy, Rudolf Hess.


[...]

The interrogators had standards that remain a source of pride and honor.

"During the many interrogations, I never laid hands on anyone," said George Frenkel, 87, of Kensington. "We extracted information in a battle of the wits. I'm proud to say I never compromised my humanity."

 

KSM coughed up the info on UBL's communication methods.

It took the CIA awhile to get the guys name.

They found him, tailed him, and nailed UBL.

Waterboarding worked, and without it, UBL would still be alive.

Just FYI: Denial is not a river in Egypt.

 

The problem is that information is not reliable when you get it under torture. People will say anything to make it stop, so you have no way of knowing if you can trust that information. Maybe the prisoner doesn't even know the real answer and simply makes something up. Maybe the prisoner lies. Maybe the prisoner is completely innocent and has been turned over by a rival tribal as part of a local feud.

And yes, you are in denial about these things. We are supposed to be the shining city upon a hill as Reagan put it. We want to stand for freedom and the rights of the individual but when push comes to shove we can't live up to the ideals we tirelessly talk about.

 

The problem with your statement is... Its wrong.

UBL got busted because the CIA learned his communication practices by waterboarding KSM.

 

Nope. I am right.

I assume you are referring to Khalid Shaikh Mohammed, who mentioned Abu Ahmed al-Kuwaiti. Yes, KSM was tortured after being captured in March 2003 but the information about the courier was not obtained then.

http://www.nytimes.com/2011/05/04/us/politics/04torture.html?_r=1
According to an American official familiar with his interrogation, Mr. Mohammed was first asked about Mr. Kuwaiti in the fall of 2003, months after the waterboarding. He acknowledged having known him but said the courier was “retired” and of little significance.

 

What is his proof and AGAIN it wasn't the SOLE reason, nor was the manner in which they used water the same as we did, nor were the people who did it or whom they did it to.

Apples and Elephants.

It matters who does interrogations.

It is absurd to believe ALL waterboarding is the same, or the circumstances are the same.

You should, it might open your eyes as to what we the United States engaged in during WW2 and what the Japanese engaged in.

And right information.

And after we broke KSM it probably didn't take much but your argument is specious we KNOW it did work.

The interrogators had standards that remain a source of pride and honor.

Good for him, it didn't work on the three terrorist we used waterboarding on.

 

And 100% reliable when you don't?

The fact is we KNOW it did work on these guys.

Now if we are faced with the same situation and we capture a high level terrorist whom we know has information that could stop an imminent attack are you really going to say we can't use EIT order to get him to give it up? You'd rather see Americans jumping out of buildings again?

 

So he told them the name, and that UBL uses couriers, and that was enough to locate UBL

 

New day; new slogan. I'd rather be known as "the country that nobody F@#k's with".

Do you recall the USSR's reaction to Iran taking the US Embassy personnel hostage?
To paraphrase, they told Iran "F#$k with our embassy and we'll turn your country into a parking lot."

 

The thread title should be changed. Its pretty disengenuous to claim that "waterboarding Khalid Sheikh Mohammaed did not lead to the capture of Osama Bin Laden," when its pretty clear that it had a positive impact. Whether we should be torturing people is a different issue.

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/wor...en-killed-after-tip-offs-from-Guantanamo.html