Jon Stewart lays the smack down on Obama and exposes all the promises he hasn't kept

Collapse
X
 
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • sgreger1
    replied
    Originally posted by raptor View Post
    sgreger, go get yourself waterboarded then report back.


    If I had volunteered for special forces instead of special ops than I would have had that oppertunity.

    It is not about whether it is pleasant or not. It is not designed to be pleasant. It is designed to (in theory) make bad people start to wonder if giving up their life is worth their cause, and hope that they break and tell you something that you didn't know before. I don't understand, do you expect them to just give up intel? What is your plan for winning a war against a people who have no rules, and swear allegiance to no country. We go over and above any other country with how we treat people, and we do it with pride, but we will not allow ourselves to suffer defeat so we could say we took the high road.



    No one "wants" to be waterboarded. But when you pick up a rifle with the intent of murdering people from the world's best army, death and dismemberment are things you have to worry about. Getting water poured over your head is best case scenario and they are lucky that we give them that much respect.

    Leave a comment:


  • raptor
    replied
    sgreger, go get yourself waterboarded then report back.

    Leave a comment:


  • MGX
    replied
    Obama made the right choice via rendition. Clinton/Gore started outsourcing our torture and it makes for good PR. Keeps the hands clean.

    Leave a comment:


  • sgreger1
    replied
    Originally posted by devilock76 View Post
    A non intoxicated violent criminal, well not intoxicated with something like PCP will not have the same adrenaline level as a person whose body is literally tricked into thinking it is dying will. Hence the struggle against the restraints could exceed the limits of their skeletal structure which typically will not happen in a basic restraint situation.

    However both restraining and tazering have significant differences, they are techniques used to bring a person under control, not to inflict pain upon someone already under control. They are less lethal alternatives to the side arm and the billy club. In the case of someone you already have subdued, well that is torture. Now granted you could use a taser to torture someone, but since they are already restrained a car battery and some jumper cables is much more cost effective.

    Ken


    But your talking about what method the taser is used for. I am saying a tazer is more deadly than waterboarding, to back up my comment that I don't consider waterboarding torture. My point is that they are using a method that is less dangerous than what are police use to subdue unruly criminals. So why should it be illegal or condemned for that matter? What about if they had a midget come in an slap the guys face repeatedly, he won't ever die, and no lasting injury would occur, but is it torture just because it's "purpose" is to extract information from him? Tell me why that should be illegal to use on someone in the middle of a war, but tazers should be legal to use against anyone who resists the police? Where do we get these rules from?


    I'm just saying, the word torture comes along with a certain stigma, and blowing cigar smoke in someones face, spraying cold water on them, pouring water on a cloth over their mouth etc is not torture. It's really annoying and uncomfortable treatment done deliberately to break someones soul. These events have been going on in our domestic prisons for decades but no one ever made a national scene out of it, but as soon as bush started doing it to enemy troops, it's torture? This is the problem, our police officers have more authority to use force than our soldiers do. If we captured Osama Bin Laden and he had information about a pending terrorist attack, you would likely say that he should get a lawyer and not have to talk if he doesn't want to. These people are A) Not US citizens, and B) actively engaged as enemy combatants in a war against us. I don't see why some discomfort should be off the table.

    Leave a comment:


  • truthwolf1
    replied
    Originally posted by devilock76 View Post
    Note I said less lethal. You can also die from a crack to the skull from a billy club.

    Ken
    Yes, agreed. But for a officer to pull out a billy club you will probably be actually doing something to deserve it. I have seen countless clips where a taser is used when the officer could of simply restrained the person with a little muscle. In my opinion they have been overused and not studied enough.

    Leave a comment:


  • devilock76
    replied
    Originally posted by truthwolf1 View Post
    I would take a few hits with a billy club over the chance of having my heart stop with a taser. With the number of deaths they have caused over the years they should be deemed illegal for police use.
    Note I said less lethal. You can also die from a crack to the skull from a billy club.

    Ken

    Leave a comment:


  • truthwolf1
    replied
    Originally posted by devilock76 View Post
    A non intoxicated violent criminal, well not intoxicated with something like PCP will not have the same adrenaline level as a person whose body is literally tricked into thinking it is dying will. Hence the struggle against the restraints could exceed the limits of their skeletal structure which typically will not happen in a basic restraint situation.

    However both restraining and tazering have significant differences, they are techniques used to bring a person under control, not to inflict pain upon someone already under control. They are less lethal alternatives to the side arm and the billy club. In the case of someone you already have subdued, well that is torture. Now granted you could use a taser to torture someone, but since they are already restrained a car battery and some jumper cables is much more cost effective.

    Ken
    I would take a few hits with a billy club over the chance of having my heart stop with a taser. With the number of deaths they have caused over the years they should be deemed illegal for police use.

    Leave a comment:


  • devilock76
    replied
    A non intoxicated violent criminal, well not intoxicated with something like PCP will not have the same adrenaline level as a person whose body is literally tricked into thinking it is dying will. Hence the struggle against the restraints could exceed the limits of their skeletal structure which typically will not happen in a basic restraint situation.

    However both restraining and tazering have significant differences, they are techniques used to bring a person under control, not to inflict pain upon someone already under control. They are less lethal alternatives to the side arm and the billy club. In the case of someone you already have subdued, well that is torture. Now granted you could use a taser to torture someone, but since they are already restrained a car battery and some jumper cables is much more cost effective.

    Ken

    Leave a comment:


  • sgreger1
    replied
    Originally posted by devilock76 View Post
    You actually can die from waterboarding, the simulation of drowning can cause the lungs to react in a spasm and water does get in from that, it causes what is called a dry drowning in that way. Also in struggling against the restraints the victims can break their own limbs.

    Ken


    Okay, let's apply that to everywhere else then. Police restraining a violent criminal is torture because "struggling against the restraints" may break their limbs. Additionally, since tazers are MUCH more likely to lead to death, all countries who use tazers are guilty of condoning torture.


    I'm not trying to get into the whole waterboarding debate. Let's just say it's torture if that makes you all feel better. I'm just saying that we train our own guys by waterboarding them. It's something that is really annoying and hurts because your body thinks it's drowning, but it is hardly the same as attaching batteries to you balls and flipping on the switch.


    And the odds of dying are very low, the odds of dying in car crash or jet crash are more likely. The guys who allegedly committed 9-11 were waterboarded for breakfast lunch and dinner for half a decade and none of them died.

    Either way, the point is that this administration has demonized waterbaording while allowing much more horrendous and painfull versions of torture to continue (oh, and waterboarding too). Seems kind of hypocritical to me.

    Leave a comment:


  • devilock76
    replied
    You actually can die from waterboarding, the simulation of drowning can cause the lungs to react in a spasm and water does get in from that, it causes what is called a dry drowning in that way. Also in struggling against the restraints the victims can break their own limbs.

    Ken

    Leave a comment:


  • raptor
    replied
    It's not just pouring water on a cloth over someone's face, it's cutting off airflow to the lungs to give a sensation of drowning and is both physically and psychologically painful.

    http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2009/0..._n_206906.html

    Leave a comment:


  • tom502
    replied
    I'm just glad they don't use this heinous torture.

    Leave a comment:


  • sgreger1
    replied
    Originally posted by raptor View Post
    Have you ever experienced being waterboarded? How could you even say such a statement?



    Being Tazered by a cop is more lethal than waterboarding.



    It all depends on how you define torture. In today's day and age, we include things such as sleep deprevation, strobe lights, or blowing cigar smoke in ones face as torture. I consider torture something that causes lasting harm, severe pain, and could kill you. Waterbaording simulates drowning, while no drowning actually occurs and no one dies from it. It is the hardcore version of a swirley, where you dunk some kids head in the water and swish em around.

    Also, it depends on what kind of waterboarding you are referring to. US version has a written procedure and medical staff standing by, so it is made to annoy you and piss your body off more than actually cause some kind of lasting harm. In other countries it is much worse.


    The US version has no chance of you dieing. Long lasting effects would be you thinking on it to much. Safe, but annoying

    The 'other' versions may cause death, thanks to 'other' versions actually including drowning and/or dunking a person's head into water or pouring water into certain bodily opening to get water into the lungs.



    And like I said, eitehr way, even if you call waterboarding torture, we are talking about way worse types of torture. Torture like we saw at Abu Gharib, where people tie car batteries to your nipples and dunk you in water. Slicing open your testicles etc. I would not put those onthe same level as pouring water over a cloth on someones face.

    Leave a comment:


  • tom502
    replied
    John Mccain has.

    But the president is not the supreme ruler. he has to do what his puppet masters tell him, or he'll go the way of JFK.

    Leave a comment:


  • raptor
    replied
    Originally posted by sgreger1 View Post
    I still don't consider waterboarding torture
    Have you ever experienced being waterboarded? How could you even say such a statement?

    Leave a comment:

Related Topics

Collapse

Working...