Panetta: Waterboarding led to bin laden

#4
#4
Defense Secretary Panetta Admits Information from Waterboarding Led US to Bin Laden

Defense Secretary Panetta Admits Information from Waterboarding Led US to Bin Laden (Video) | The Gateway Pundit

But but I thought it never worked:)


I guess the libs were finally right ---- it WAS Bush's fault we got OBL!

Thank You GWB!

Which "libs" are you referring to? Last time I checked, the GOP Candidate in 2008 was avidly against torture (to include waterboarding), while the DNC Candidate continued the policies of GWB, continued to waterboard individuals, and in keeping said policies presided over an operation that led to the death of bin Laden.

Further, Herman Cain asserted that he "doesn't agree with torture. Period." (Yes, he made the concession that waterboarding is not torture). And, both Ron Paul and Jon Hunstman were explicitly against waterboarding.

But, of course, this is only a "lib" problem, correct?
 
  • Like
Reactions: 2 people
#5
#5
Which "libs" are you referring to? Last time I checked, the GOP Candidate in 2008 was avidly against torture (to include waterboarding), while the DNC Candidate continued the policies of GWB, continued to waterboard individuals, and in keeping said policies presided over an operation that led to the death of bin Laden.

Further, Herman Cain asserted that he "doesn't agree with torture. Period." (Yes, he made the concession that waterboarding is not torture). And, both Ron Paul and Jon Hunstman were explicitly against waterboarding.

But, of course, this is only a "lib" problem, correct?

do you consider waterboarding "torture"? While I'm sure it's a horrible experience, unless there is lasting mental and/or physical trauma, I doubt it really is torture.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 person
#6
#6
If you were locked up in a bamboo box for years by the viet cong you might just have an aversion to torture. jmo
 
#7
#7
If you were locked up in a bamboo box for years by the viet cong you might just have an aversion to torture. jmo

McCain is opposed to torture, including waterboarding.
Does that make him a lib?
 
#8
#8
do you consider waterboarding "torture"? While I'm sure it's a horrible experience, unless there is lasting mental and/or physical trauma, I doubt it really is torture.

I view any sensory stimulus that is forced upon an individual with the intention of robbing the individual of his/her autonomous capacity torture. Waterboarding counts. However, I am not certain that I am against the use of torture.
 
#10
#10
If you were locked up in a bamboo box for years by the viet cong you might just have an aversion to torture. jmo

He should know more than anyone else that torture works. He told the VC absolutely everything he knew (he speaks about this with shame in his book, though I see nothing shameful about it).
 
#11
#11
I view any sensory stimulus that is forced upon an individual with the intention of robbing the individual of his/her autonomous capacity torture. Waterboarding counts. However, I am not certain that I am against the use of torture.

that means that you would consider being gagged and blindfolded torture
 
#18
#18
Yes although overwhelmingly opposed by liberals.

You know this how?

There was a pretty major conference held at Harvard this past spring in connection with the release of Francis Kamm's book Ethics for Enemies. One of the three parts of the book deals with torture and its justification. There were panels of speakers and, surprise, the vast majority of them (liberal professors from liberal institutions) offered justifications in support of using torture (and not merely waterboarding).

Now then, if you ask whether one ought to be tortured in order to prosecute the wars in Iraq and/or Afghanistan (or, the GWOT), then you might get a whole hell of a lot of liberals who come out and say "no". That "no" does not entail that they are against torture.
 
#20
#20
So for people well-read on the subject, is Zero Dark Thirty inaccurate in it's portrayal of torturing?

My impression from the movie is that it was used, and that it led to some of the more critical pieces of information. McCain and Feinstein rebut that. Panetta seems to be in a gray area of it was used, but it was only a piece.

My gut says that not one single piece of information leads to that thread. And that the movie really didn't seem inaccurate in it's portrayal. But I'm not well-read on the subject to make that call. And I'm not sure anybody knows given the classified nature of the CIA.
 
#21
#21
I view any sensory stimulus that is forced upon an individual with the intention of robbing the individual of his/her autonomous capacity torture. Waterboarding counts. However, I am not certain that I am against the use of torture.

Really?
 
#22
#22

Truly. There are a handful of compelling arguments out there in which the arguer asserts that in special cases (specifically the cases in which torture would be a viable option) that torture actually serves the will of the tortured.
 
#23
#23
Truly. There are a handful of compelling arguments out there in which the arguer asserts that in special cases (specifically the cases in which torture would be a viable option) that torture actually serves the will of the tortured.

Is that Aristotle coming back from his grave?

I don't see how someone with your theory of morality could ever entertain the idea that torture is acceptable.
 
#24
#24
Is that Aristotle coming back from his grave?

I don't see how someone with your theory of morality could ever entertain the idea that torture is acceptable.

I am not sure why treating the individual as an end would be unacceptable to someone with my theory of morality.
 
#25
#25
The problem with torture: The subject will often tell you what you want to hear rather than need to hear.
 

Advertisement



Back
Top