Nice article Phillipe, you kook - but before we prosecute our "war crimes" on our government, i'd suggest YOU fly over to Iraq and YOU capture every enemy who has tortured our troops and civilians, and you prosecute them first. Because in my book, beheading, rape, mutilation, bone breaking, beating and disfigurement is slightly more "aggresive" than standing up for one hour.

My bank teller stands for almost 8 hours – i think you'll need to prosecute Bank Of America for "torturing" all their employees.

We put underwear on their heads, they cut off our heads. Is there any logic in your article?

Bush has not done enough to "encourage" the enemy to give up their secrets, they should extend the military's abilities and authorized methods.

And along that line, have we had any other attacks in America since 9-11? Nope. And that certainly does not mean the enemy hasn't wanted to, Bush has just done a good job doing what he is supposed to do. Yay President Bush.

I hear right-wing talk shows speaking about the left-wing liberal kooks, and they are so right on the mark. Quit trying to apologize for America, and quit trying to appease the enemy. They will still want to kill you if they have the chance, no matter how much you want to "understand" them.

Humiliation and torture are not the same thing - look it up in the dictionary, Einstein.

You are what's wrong with America.

I see. It's okay for us to be evil, as long as we aren't as evil as "them."

We're supposed to be better. We're supposed to be the good guys. The price of being the good guys is having to act like the good guys.

We survived the Civil War, we survived the Nazis, and we survived the Russians. This too shall pass.

Underwear on the head is "evil"?

I thought rape and beheading is evil.

By the way, we didn't "survive" the Nazis, we BEAT them.

getrealman:

Underwear on the head is "evil"?

I thought rape and beheading is evil.

By the way, we didn't "survive" the Nazis, we BEAT them.

NO IT'S NOT .BUT THAT DOES NOT MEAN WE ACT LIKE THESE ANIMALS BECAUSE THEY DO IT.YOU justification sounds like the excuses they make for their behavior.Becoming our enemies is not the american way.Unless you are of the same mindset the terrorist are,and it seems like you fit that description perfectly.NO HONOR(BECAUSE THEY HAVE NONE,)NO MORALITY (BECAUSE THEY HAVE NONE),OUR WORD HAS NO VALUE (BECAUSE THEY HAVE NO VALUE) Great way to think on your part.

You're right. Nothing short of rape and beheading qualifies as evil. It's okay for us to be evil as long as there are people in the world who are doing much much worse. Why bother prosecuting thieves when there are rapists and murderers running around?

The day that evil committed by US agents no longer arouses outrage among our citizenry is the day that we are lost.

You are prime recruiting material for a terrorist organization. You would be in one if you hadn't accidently latched on to the idea that America is somehow what you support. I've no idea why you think you ideals reflect American values in any way

Madison: You're in charge. You have the prisoners. The prisoners have the information you need to break up, disorganize, harass and kill a terrorist organization.

Further, the prisoners come from a culture where day-to-day life is much harder than any you've ever experienced, and things we consider torture are relatively commonplace.

What interrogation technique do you use? What is valid, legitimate, legal and effective? Because if its just a matter of, "Please tell us where we can find the terrorists." "No." "OK, then, you can just, uh, go," well, I for one find that to be an ineffective way to forestall future terrorist threats.

So no, I don't think we should torture people, but humiliate them? Keep them awake until they are confused, tired and malleable? Do things that trick them into thinking they will be tortured? I'd have to say yes to those things. But I'm willing to change my mind if you can name me that legal, effective method you want to see us use.

Why do people think that the only options available are "pretty please with a cherry on top" and "start warming up the hot irons!" There's an entire science and set of techniques dedicated to interrogation. Why do you think interrogation is handled by trained professionals instead of just whomever happens to be around?

Get educated about the basics of interrogation, THEN form an opinion. You can start here. <link>

You suggest that we stoop down to their level? We cannot break the international laws that we helped lay down. What makes you think that there weren't terrorist attempts on our soil before 9-11? And what has Bush done to actually prevent further terrorist attacks that wasn't already being done? That kind of thing happened and continues to happen everyday, and Bush's administration has nothing has no positive effect on it. It's not our enemies we need to worry about--we know who they are. We need to worry that we don't make new enemies. Acro101 is right about you.

trapdoor:

Madison: You're in charge. You have the prisoners. The prisoners have the information you need to break up, disorganize, harass and kill a terrorist organization.

Further, the prisoners come from a culture where day-to-day life is much harder than any you've ever experienced, and things we consider torture are relatively commonplace.

What interrogation technique do you use? What is valid, legitimate, legal and effective? Because if its just a matter of, "Please tell us where we can find the terrorists." "No." "OK, then, you can just, uh, go," well, I for one find that to be an ineffective way to forestall future terrorist threats.

So no, I don't think we should torture people, but humiliate them? Keep them awake until they are confused, tired and malleable? Do things that trick them into thinking they will be tortured? I'd have to say yes to those things. But I'm willing to change my mind if you can name me that legal, effective method you want to see us use.

First of all i would not lower the u.s. to the same level as the scumbag religious zealots we are at war with.Second i would listen to the vast majority specialist in the intellagence community on the subject of interigations and not ignore them while looking for someone who supported my preconcieved and uneducated ideas just to have some support. I would not show the rest of the world that we are no better than the dirtbags we are fighting or north korea,or the old soviet union .No info we have gotten from torture is proving to be anything short of garbage.no proof of any reliable info at all!But most importantly i would not insult the memories and sacrafices made by all the americans who have died defending this county from those enemies that have the mentality you and others who "think" like you have.They died protecting us from those who torture,from those who misslead their people,from those who sell out our national honor OUT OF FEAR AND STUPIDITY,from those who think nothing of throwing out their values when convienent,from those like you ,who have no problem becoming like the evil scum we are at war with.WE didn't do this before and won WWI and WWII.And as far as prisoners having info we need ,how do you know? What make you think every little peon in alquada has all the info the leaders have?They are just tools for the nuts at the top and are sent out with the minimum info they need to do their job.BTW,i agree that putting panties on ones head is not torture but i wonder who origionally thought it was.What was this guy thinking and is he still making important decisions or has someone actually paid attention and culled this character from any position of power.

acro101:

You are what's wrong with America.

Seconded.

MADISON: Please lay off the caffeine -- you're entire statement is one long sentence.

And what is interesting is that nowhere in that long, punctuation-challenged diatribe is there an answer to the question I asked. What techniques would you use.

I spent a year working in media relations for the Army Intelligence Center and Fort Huachuca some time back (2002 timeframe). I knew some of the trained interrogators there, and knew some general things about the techniques they used. They said it was time to shrug when it came to Islamic terrorists -- the terrorists knew all the standard techniques and had been trained to deal with them. So, what would you do?

Now, one way of showing the world we are better than the dirtbags is to find and kill said dirtbags, but that requires intelligence from human intelligence sources; among them, detainees. This puts us back to "How would you get the information from the detainees?"

WE didn't do this before and won WWI and WWII.

When it comes to U.S. behavior in past conflicts, I can show you evidence that we did as bad, and worse, than GitMO to a lot of prisoners in past wars, including WWI and WWII. The "60 Minutes" commentator Andy Rooney, who was a war correspondent in WWII, said he more than once came across places were captured German soldiers were summarily executed by our troops. Only a lack of knowledge of history would lead anyone to assume that somehow we won WWI and WWII using purified methods.

What make you think every little peon in alquada has all the info the leaders have?

When it comes to al Quaeda, I don't and didn't think that -- but they might be the assett that allows someone to track down a specific cell, which in turn could have the hard drive containing the info that gives us the whereabouts of the leaders. The intelligence gathering process works that way, a lead here, a tiny bit of information there -- it isn't like James Bond where it's all wrapped up on a single piece of microfilm.

i agree that putting panties on ones head is not torture but i wonder who origionally thought it was.What was this guy thinking and is he still making important decisions or has someone actually paid attention and culled this character from any position of power.

I have a theory about the "panties on the head" thing, as well as the human pyramid and a couple of other Abu Ghraib photos. The people who did those things did them because they thought they were funny -- they were basically reservists from a rural area, and our military raises very few people who's human includes Shakespeare's "Twelfth Night." They were 19 and 20-something kids pulling pranks without any thought that it was serious. I've seen worse done on college campuses. This does not excuse the actual torture, but it does explain some of the photos. And you don't have to worry about those kids ever having power -- they were courtmartialed, disgraced and imprisoned.

First, you have assumed that the prisoners possess this information. Exactly how do you know that before you have even interrogated them? Ah hell, just put the thumbscrews to all of 'em, and the ones who know something will talk. The ones who really don't have any useful information? Shit, they've still got four fingers left on either hand. Besides, we know they're all guilty anyway, right?

I really don't care how they were treated in their home country, and how being sodomized with a broom handle can actually be considered an improvement from being violated with a saguaro cactus. The point is that we are supposed to be better than they are - we tell ourselves that all the time, right? And yet, can you tell me exactly how "trick[ing] them into thinking they will be tortured" (i.e. waterboarding, if you substituted the word "killed") demonstrates our moral superiority?

You can't dismiss this question as nitpicking or irrelevant, because it is absolutely central. "Winning" the battle against terrorism isn't going to come when we kill every terrorist; it is going to involve changing the circumstances that lead people to think that terrorism is actually a useful answer to their problems. We certainly aren't going to demonstrate that by showing them that we are only marginally better than the despots that terrorize them already. Yes, that involves compromising effectiveness for the sake of being right. Could you make a hypothetical argument for bending the rules in a specific instance to avert a truly massive disaster? Sure, but this administration has amply demonstrated that the methods it wishes to use are not by any means intended only for use in special cases.

"Those who would trade liberty for security deserve neither." It is a paraphrase of a famous quote commonly misattributed to Benjamin Franklin, but regardless of the speaker it rings true. And similarly, those who would trade morality for effectiveness in trying to control terrorism will ultimately meet the same result.

antigoglin:

You are prime recruiting material for a terrorist organization.

I wouldn't be surprised if that's exactly what he is hoping for.