Closing Gitmo.

[Amazon 7]

Quote

This whole post is so full of shit and un-verifiable platitudes it shinks.

So much so it is funny

Yes yours does... completely BLIND to facts

There are SMART ways to fight a war.... and we have not seen that since the end of 2001

[rushmc 23]

Quote

Quote

This whole post is so full of shit and un-verifiable platitudes it shinks.

So much so it is funny

Yes yours does... completely BLIND to facts

There are SMART ways to fight a war.... and we have not seen that since the end of 2001

You said facts!

Show them to me

I laugh because you cant

"America will never be destroyed from the outside,
if we falter and lose our freedoms,
it will be because we destroyed ourselves."
Abraham Lincoln

[billvon 2,994]

>Crucifiction does not equate to sleep deprivation or loud music.

Uh, right. Crucifixion is bad, and we should stop doing that. I was responding to Notbond who did not believe that we did any of that.

[Amazon 7]

You cant see anything thru those rose colored glasses Marc... How many posts from fuiners would it take to you to believe that outside the borders of Iowa.. a hell of a lot of the world has lost most of the respect it USED to have for this country before 2002.. all because of your cokehead good ole boy wannabe. He is gone... he is not in control anymore.. and the WORLD has breathed a sigh of relief far bigger thanyou ever made as you took the biggest dump you have ever taken..

[rushmc 23]

Quote

You cant see anything thru those rose colored glasses Marc... How many posts from fuiners would it take to you to believe that outside the borders of Iowa.. a hell of a lot of the world has lost most of the respect it USED to have for this country before 2002.. all because of your cokehead good ole boy wannabe. He is gone... he is not in control anymore.. and the WORLD has breathed a sigh of relief far bigger thanyou ever made as you took the biggest dump you have ever taken..

I am very confident with myself and my views.

The record comment has more to do with the way the media was the media and people showed respect. I was hoping you might remember that time. I am sorry I was in error.

Oh, and again you chuck platitudes and opinion. The world has done nothing. The media has. You have no fact, just your vitriolic comments and insults. Of which I grow tired (yet again)

"America will never be destroyed from the outside,
if we falter and lose our freedoms,
it will be because we destroyed ourselves."
Abraham Lincoln

[n23x 0]

Quote

You keep that same sentiment when these douches blow something else up in the USA after their release.

Weak. It is sad that you guys are wetting your pants about this. Feel proud knowing that fear allowed you to override your sense of right and wrong.

.jim

"Don't touch my fucking Easter eggs, I'll be back monday." ~JTFC

[Amazon 7]

WRONGO... yet again.... sport

[NotBond 0]

Quote

>Crucifiction does not equate to sleep deprivation or loud music.

Uh, right. Crucifixion is bad, and we should stop doing that. I was responding to Notbond who did not believe that we did any of that.

Whoops, double check. That post was Chuck, #24. I simply quoted it.

I have a solution. Dr. Strangeglove is on TCM tonight, let's all watch and see how arguments are supposed to be settled!

Courage is being scared to death - but saddling up anyways... - John Wayne

[chuckakers 425]

Quote

***

WE ARE NOT willing to do what is UNNECESSARY (and COUNTERPRODUCTIVE) to win the war!!!

Water boarding is what made Khalid Sheikh Mohammed spill his guts. I can't say for sure it was necessary, but it was sure as hell productive.

Chuck Akers
D-10855
Houston, TX

[Gawain 0]

Quote

Quote

People who are not willing to do what is necessary to win wars will eventually be oppressed by people who are.

Concur. And as has been demonstrated over-and-over again, the most effective methods to defeat insurgents and terrorists is not through traditional military action and not through torture, e.g., the failure of the French in Algeria. Less than 7% of terrorist groups active in the latter half of the 20th Century and first 7 years of this century were defeated by military action.

Do you want to use the most effective methods, or are there other reasons you want to pursue ineffective methods?

And while history is not predictive, we ignore(d) it at our own peril.

/Marg

The military is still needed though to occupy or divert attention of those that support these terror groups. There was no way to effectively do that without removing the Taliban from power, or by allowing Saddam to remain in power and still effectively force the hand of Iran, who is fighting three proxy wars, and losing the money to do so now that oil is cheap again.

It's pretty evident that the broad-sword that is the military is very useful at uncovering all the roaches. Only after seeing where they run can we now determine the best course of action.

Pakistan is clearly in a quiet cooperation over these missile strikes within their borders, and Iran is being tracked in their shipments to attempt resupply of Hamas and Hezbollah. The military can be an effective tool in executing political, as well as intelligence based objectives.

So I try and I scream and I beg and I sigh
Just to prove I'm alive, and it's alright
'Cause tonight there's a way I'll make light of my treacherous life
Make light!

[chuckakers 425]

Quote

***

For example, Obama wants to step up the battle & increase our troop presence in Afghanistan to fight Al Quaeda. (Remember them? The ones who ACTUALLY attacked us in 2001???)

WE ARE NOT willing to do what is UNNECESSARY (and COUNTERPRODUCTIVE) to win the war!!!


Recruiting for the enemy HELPS the enemy!

And stepping up the battle in Afghanistan - central HQ for Al Quaeda - doesn't do that? Good try, but anything and everything we do helps the enemy recruit. Our freedom helps them recruit. The so-called pornography nature of western society helps them recruit. The fact that a good many of us believe in a different savior than they do helps them recruit. Hell man, our very existence helps them recruit. You can bet yer ass that attacking the very core of their head shed helps them recruit in a BIG way.

Don't get me wrong - I think we should be bombing the shit out the mountains of Afghanistan. But don't use bogus arguments about what helps the enemy recruit. Nothing could help those animals recruit any better than the fight zeroing in on Afghanistan.

Thought before rhetoric, my man.

Chuck Akers
D-10855
Houston, TX

[rushmc 23]

Quote

Quote

***

For example, Obama wants to step up the battle & increase our troop presence in Afghanistan to fight Al Quaeda. (Remember them? The ones who ACTUALLY attacked us in 2001???)

WE ARE NOT willing to do what is UNNECESSARY (and COUNTERPRODUCTIVE) to win the war!!!


Recruiting for the enemy HELPS the enemy!

And stepping up the battle in Afghanistan - central HQ for Al Quaeda - doesn't do that? Good try, but anything and everything we do helps the enemy recruit. Our freedom helps them recruit. The so-called pornography nature of western society helps them recruit. The fact that a good many of us believe in a different savior than they do helps them recruit. Hell man, our very existence helps them recruit. You can bet yer ass that attacking the very core of their head shed helps them recruit in a BIG way.

Don't get me wrong - I think we should be bombing the shit out the mountains of Afghanistan. But don't use bogus arguments about what helps the enemy recruit. Nothing could help those animals recruit any better than the fight zeroing in on Afghanistan.

Thought before rhetoric, my man.

Wow

+1

"America will never be destroyed from the outside,
if we falter and lose our freedoms,
it will be because we destroyed ourselves."
Abraham Lincoln

[Gawain 0]

Quote

Getting back to Gitmo for a second:

When they close the base, what happens to the land the base sits on?

They aren't closing the base, they're talking about closing the detention facility (Camp Delta or whatever it's called). Not the base. The only way the Cubans can get it back is if the US abandons it.

So I try and I scream and I beg and I sigh
Just to prove I'm alive, and it's alright
'Cause tonight there's a way I'll make light of my treacherous life
Make light!

[jerryzflies 0]

Quote

>Crucifiction does not equate to sleep deprivation or loud music.

Uh, right. Crucifixion is bad, and we should stop doing that. I was responding to Notbond who did not believe that we did any of that.

Unfortunately, we do.

www.commondreams.org/headlines05/0217-09.htm

If you can't fix it with a hammer, the problem's electrical.

[nerdgirl 0]

Quote

Idiots. Geez.

Quote

Remove the threat, one way or another. Talking "nice nice" to them doesn't work, it never has.

Quote

All of the militant Islamic nut jobs are cheering all around the world because they know we have a "diplomacy first" pussy in the white house. Shutting down gitmo, halting trails, and saying no "torture" will really get the attention of the extremists. It will make them back down because they are being treated with respect. The STUPIDITY of people is amazing these days. Lets all hold hands and Have a Coke and a Smile! What alternate reality do some of you live in?

Quote

in order to win a war you must be willing to go at least 1 step further than who you are fighting. anything less is a waste of time and effort. showing weakness (like pulling out of the war, releasing prisoners, or even having a large percentage of the population show outrage for the war itself) only instills confidence and resolve in the ones you are fighting and makes the war harder to fight and win and that ultimately costs more lives, time and resourses.

Quote

I think we should be bombing the shit out the mountains of Afghanistan. But don't use bogus arguments about what helps the enemy recruit.

Do you guys think these guys are idiots, liberal pussies, living in an alternate reality, showing weakness, wasting time, making bogus arguments, or using the methods aren’t working? And on what basis do you know more than they do?

The guy who has suggested that we should negotiate with the Taliban “I do think you have to talk to enemies”?

Or the guys who wrote “Focus on protecting civilians over killing the enemy. Assume greater risk. Use minimum, not maximum force”? W/r/t diplomacy, they’ve noted “The very fact that Pakistan serves as a sanctuary for the Taliban and al Qaeda makes regional diplomacy far more necessary than it was in Iraq.” (One of those guys also co-wrote this.) They’ve also written under the heading “Some of the best weapons do not shoot”:

“Although all development is critical in this impoverished country, roads are the single most important path to success in Afghanistan. In Ghazni province last summer, one of us spoke with an Afghan road builder whose shirt was covered in dried blood. He’d been shot by the Taliban a day earlier for working with the coalition, but he was back the next morning with his paving crew because he thought that finishing that road was the best way to bolster security in his village. Indeed, the U.S. general who was critical of U.S. counterinsurgency efforts in Afghanistan pointed at Afghanistan’s ring road from the window of his Black Hawk helicopter, and declared, ‘Where the road ends, the Taliban begins.’”

On the use of overwhelming kinetic means, under the heading “Sometimes the more force is used, the less effective it is”:

“Bombs—even “smart” bombs—are blunt instruments, and they inevitably kill people other than their intended targets. Each civilian death at the hands of the coalition further diminishes the finite amount of goodwill toward the United States among the Afghan people. Each civilian death undermines the legitimacy of the Afghan government the United States seeks to support. Each civilian death, when refracted through the Taliban’s propaganda campaign, strengthens the narrative of America’s enemies.”

More on what he calls [url http://www.press.uchicago.edu/Misc/Chicago/841519.html]paradoxes:

“Sometimes, the more force is used, the less effective it is. The more force applied, the greater the chance of collateral damage and mistakes. Using substantial force also increases the opportunity for insurgent propaganda to portray lethal military activities as brutal. In contrast, using force precisely and discriminately strengthens the rule of law that needs to be established.”

Rule of law. He also writes about the importance of economic development.


Or the guy who said “recognition that you can’t kill or capture your way out of a complex, industrial-strength insurgency” is critical in Afghanistan? He also said “the challenge in Afghanistan, of course, is figuring out how to create the conditions that enable reconciliation.”


Or the guy who adopted the motto “No better friend, no worse enemy-First Do No Harm”?


Or the guy who said “We don’t have to become our enemies to defeat them” and “Respect, rapport, hope, cunning, and deception are our tools”?


Or the guy who has challenged publically the usefulness of information obtained at Guantanamo by waterboarding or other “enhanced interrogation means”?


Or the guy who said "I would hope that we would understand, my friends, that life is not 24 and Jack Bauer"?


Or the guy who said:

use of torture and Orwellian-“enhanced interrogation” has been the “greatest recruiting tool” for al Qa’eda, al Qa’eda in Iraq, and other insurgents targeting US soldiers, airmen, sailors, Marines, deployed civilians, and US nationals abroad

and

“So you can’t underestimate the damage that our treatment of prisoners, both at Abu Ghraib and other [facilities, has] ... harmed our national security interests”?

Or this guy?


Or these guys, whose journal masthead reflects their experience and opinion:

“…despite the complexities and difficulties of dealing with an enemy from such a hostile and alien culture, some American interrogators consistently managed to extract useful information from prisoners. The successful interrogators all had one thing in common in the way they approached their subject. They were nice to them” ?

Or the guys who wrote: “Revelation of use of torture by U.S. personnel will bring discredit upon the U.S. and its armed forces while undermining domestic and international support for the war effort”? (warning: large pdf file)

VR/Marg

Act as if everything you do matters, while laughing at yourself for thinking anything you do matters.
Tibetan Buddhist saying

[nerdgirl 0]

Quote

Water boarding is what made Khalid Sheikh Mohammed spill his guts. I can't say for sure it was necessary, but it was sure as hell productive.

Let’s look more closely at the alleged waterboarding “success” story you cited.

Khalid Sheikh Mohammed: Al Qa’eda’s chief of propaganda operations. Very bad person. Likely source of intelligence, needed to be apprehended, and removed from society.

Two critical questions:
(1) Was it interrogation by torture that led to obtaining useful information as you assert?
(2) Was information obtained via interrogation by torture useful?

If you review the DefenseLink transcript listing of things he confessed to (that have been publically released) – from a plot to assassinate former President Carter to a plot to kill Pope John Paul II to the February 1993 bombing of the World Trade Center – he confessed to everything. Some of the things he claimed to have been responsible would have required him to be in multiple places at the same time. I only somewhat facetiously ask Was he asked if he was on the grassy knoll in Dallas in November 1963?

Khalid Sheikh Mohammed also compares himself to President George Washington – is that what you mean by "productive"?

What proved to be the single largest source of intelligence obtained from KSM? A computer hard drive seized during KSM’s capture. (So it wasn’t any part of the interrogation, empathetic, ‘enhanced,’ or torture.)

If you read the transcript, it’s less than clear what motivated his alleged assertions. At least one expert, forensic psychiatrist Michael Welner, M.D., who specializes in false confessions, “observed from the testimony transcript that his concerns about his family may have been far more influential in soliciting Mohammed’s cooperation than any earlier reported mistreatment.” During testimony, the CIA official cautioned that “many of Mohammed’s claims during interrogation were ‘white noise’ designed to send the U.S. on wild goose chases or to get him through the day’s interrogation session.”

Of what was later confirmed to be accurate, what percentage was actually obtained through ‘enhanced interrogation’? And more importantly, what *was* missed or was lost because of ‘enhanced interrogation’? How much time, energy, & expense were wasted following up on false confessions? It is just – if not more – reasonable & supported by evidence and experts that more information useful to save US lives may have been obtained if he was NOT subjected to ‘enhanced interrogation.’ That’s the core of the effectiveness argument; effective interrogation techniques should be employed. Torture is not effective.

How about the 2nd detainee who the CIA has confirmed was waterboarded: Abu Zubaydah. Of what was cited as useful intelligence gained from Abu Zubaydah, the leading piece that is mentioned – the identity of Ramzi bin al Shibh – was already known. FBI agent Dennis Lormel told Congress who Ramzi bin Al Shibh was in February 2002, i.e., a month before Abu Zubaydah was even apprehended. So yes, Abu Zubaydah did confirm what was already known. Is there any evidence to suggest that ‘enhanced interrogation’ techniques were critical for the tertiary confirmation? No.

You didn’t mention Abd al Rahim al Nashiri. You may know that al Nashiri was the 3rd terrorist suspect on whom the former CIA Director acknowledged “enhanced interrogation” techniques were used including waterboarding. How accurate and useful was the information obtained from al Nashiri? Again from reading the Defenselink transcript, he asserts he made up a long list of al Qa’eda plots and attacks so his captors would stop torturing him, even telling interrogators that Osama bin Laden had a nuclear bomb. Al Nashiri, in all likelihood, had very useful information. What was lost & how many opportunities were wasted because ‘enhanced interrogation’ methods were used? When the signal to noise ratio becomes so low, it ceases to be effective for anything other than distracting US investigatory efforts.

~~~ ~ ~~~

Summary on ineffectiveness of waterboarding or “enhanced interrogation” as a euphemism for torture:

In the 3 cases in which CIA has acknowledged use of waterboarding (Khalid Sheikh Mohammed, Abu Zubaydah, & Abd al Rahim al Nashiri) it is unclear to dubious that “enhanced interrogation” did anything that traditional interrogation would not have. To the contrary, there is significant evidence that “enhanced interrogation” led to reams of false confessions, which took away time & resources, and may have undermined the useful intel for prosecution.

(2) In at least three real-world “ticking time bomb” scenarios, useful intelligence has been gained without the use of “enhanced interrogation,” waterboarding, or torture.

(3) Bad information obtained through torture by thirdparty states has produced bad/faulty intel that has been passed on to US policymakers, e.g., Ibn al Shaykh al Libbi.

(4) At least 60 years of operators, across multiple agencies have observed the ineffectiveness of torture in interrogation.

Taken in consideration with the other 3 arguments against torture (reciprocity on US service members, impedance of US foreign policy and national defense goals, and morals/ethics), there is no strategic, operational, or tactical advantage to employing waterboarding or “enhanced interrogation” as a euphemism for torture as part of investigatory process. One may argue that such a policy has (strongly) negative strategic, operational, and tactical repercussions.

If you really want to advocate for effective tools for protecting the Republic and saving American and allies lives (e.g., like the intelligence and interrogation methods that were successfully employed to eliminate Abu Musab Al Zarqawi in 2006), look to what the US military recognizes: torture is ineffective as a means of interrogation and such a policy puts US soldiers, sailors, airmen, Marines, and US foreign nationals, such as defense and intelligence civilians deployed at greater risk (than they already are).

Supporting the troops means opposing all use of torture. All. By all. Against all.

VR/Marg

Act as if everything you do matters, while laughing at yourself for thinking anything you do matters.
Tibetan Buddhist saying

[nerdgirl 0]

Quote

Quote

Quote

People who are not willing to do what is necessary to win wars will eventually be oppressed by people who are.

Concur. And as has been demonstrated over-and-over again, the most effective methods to defeat insurgents and terrorists is not through traditional military action and not through torture, e.g., the failure of the French in Algeria. Less than 7% of terrorist groups active in the latter half of the 20th Century and first 7 years of this century were defeated by military action.

Do you want to use the most effective methods, or are there other reasons you want to pursue ineffective methods?

And while history is not predictive, we ignore(d) it at our own peril.

The military is still needed though to occupy or divert attention of those that support these terror groups. There was no way to effectively do that without removing the Taliban from power, or by allowing Saddam to remain in power and still effectively force the hand of Iran, who is fighting three proxy wars, and losing the money to do so now that oil is cheap again.

It's pretty evident that the broad-sword that is the military is very useful at uncovering all the roaches. Only after seeing where they run can we now determine the best course of action.

Pakistan is clearly in a quiet cooperation over these missile strikes within their borders, and Iran is being tracked in their shipments to attempt resupply of Hamas and Hezbollah. The military can be an effective tool in executing political, as well as intelligence based objectives.

Don’t disagree with much of what you wrote. However, it’s just not particularly relevant to my response in the context of [chuckakers] assertion implying conventional military methods using overwhelming force and use of torture are necessary methods to defeat insurgents or terrorists, to which I provided evidence that was wrong (at least 93% of the time). I’m all about that citable evidence and logical argumentation over rhetoric … in case ya hadn’t noticed. Use of asymmetric methods (e.g., terrorism) arises because an enemy recognizes they can’t win via traditional conventional methods, political or militarily. Also thought the Algeria reference (COL Galula) would have been obvious to you … mistaken assumption on my part. See my subsequent response to [FallingOsh]: “traditional military ops versus COIN” right before I boarded my plane in Houston Friday and my post above the one on ineffectiveness of waterboarding: it should be clearer.

Perhaps the irony is that I don’t know of anyone in the DoD (beyond Doug Feith-era USD(P)-shop) beyond the voices on this board that argues for torture or ‘scorched earth’-esque methods. (I’m confident they’re out there … I just don’t ever see them.)

Now if you want to argue the COL Gian Gentile-position, that’s different too. He’s emerged as an eloquent de facto spokesman for a 3rd perspective. That’s peer competitor prioritization versus unconventional warfare and counterinsurgency prioritization, largely w/r/t the MDAPs/POMs of USN/USAF vs USA/USMC (i.e., ships/planes vs ‘boots on the ground.’) Gross simplification … but distilled to the basics.

I’m arguing from the Petraeus/Nagl/Kilcullen/Montgomery McFate/Steve Metz position. It’s been at least a month (I think?) since I’ve invoked SSTR/DoDD 3000.05/DoDD 3000.07. That last directive was delayed >6 months because Army Staff was non-concur, which is an illustration of the complexity that my analogy in the previous paragraph has broken down.

The perspectives to which I replied (posts #157, #115 & #116) are arguing from the “Jack Bauer”/UC Berkeley Prof John Yoo/former USD Doug Feith position … remember how GEN Franks characterized the latter (p. 563)? (I know at least one dz.commer/semi-lurker does. )

VR/Marg

Act as if everything you do matters, while laughing at yourself for thinking anything you do matters.
Tibetan Buddhist saying

[chuckakers 425]

Quote

Quote

Quote

Quote

However, it’s just not particularly relevant to my response in the context of [chuckakers] assertion implying conventional military methods using overwhelming force and use of torture are necessary methods to defeat insurgents or terrorists, to which I provided evidence that was wrong (at least 93% of the time).

I didn't imply that our military use overwhelming force or torture. I said they should do whatever is necessary. If that includes torture, so be it.

And while torture may only work 7% of the time, it has proven to save American lives. Given the brutal nature of the enemy, I don't care what we do to them, as long as it makes them talk.

Wrap 'em in bacon and bury 'em facing west. 5 left and cut....

Chuck Akers
D-10855
Houston, TX

• Quote

Share this post

---

Link to post

Share on other sites

[Andy9o8 2]

http://mediamatters.org/items/200901230002?f=h_top

Quote

Media advance falsehood that Pentagon has confirmed that 61 former Guantánamo detainees have returned to battlefield

[jerryzflies 0]

Don't confuse the right wingers with facts, Nerdgirl. They need their alternate reality.

If you can't fix it with a hammer, the problem's electrical.

[rushmc 23]

Quote

Don't confuse the right wingers with facts, Nerdgirl. They need their alternate reality.

Are you related to Amazon?

"America will never be destroyed from the outside,
if we falter and lose our freedoms,
it will be because we destroyed ourselves."
Abraham Lincoln

[Andy9o8 2]

Quote

Quote

Don't confuse the right wingers with facts, Nerdgirl. They need their alternate reality.

Are you related to Amazon?

Wow. She must really intimidate you.

[rushmc 23]

Quote

Quote

Quote

Don't confuse the right wingers with facts, Nerdgirl. They need their alternate reality.

Are you related to Amazon?

Wow. She must really intimidate you.

No, not really.

Just commenting to posts look the same

"America will never be destroyed from the outside,
if we falter and lose our freedoms,
it will be because we destroyed ourselves."
Abraham Lincoln

[chuckakers 425]

I have the solution. Tell the evil pieces of shit that as long as they talk, they stay alive. When they quit talkin', kill 'em - right in front of their piece of shit brothers - with a bacon wrapped dagger (shaped like a cross, of course). Then shove a big hunk o' ham down their throats and bury 'em facing west with a grave full of Jack Daniels and porno vids.

Nerdly, you sound like smart kid, but you have a lot to learn about this vicious enemy.

Torture or no torture, these people must be removed from the earth. Not jailed, not carted off to an island somewhere. REMOVED - as in killed. That is the ONLY thing that will stop them. Ad if we don't stop them, they will kill us, including you.

Pass the sausage. I got me some killin' to do.

Chuck Akers
D-10855
Houston, TX

[SpeedRacer 1]

Quote

Nerdly, you sound like smart kid, but you have a lot to learn about this vicious enemy.

What specific information do you have that wasn't covered? What is the extent of your background in this field?

Speed Racer
--------------------------------------------------