Perchoutofwater Posted April 20, 2009 Share Posted April 20, 2009 Aside from political reasons, what purpose does releasing this information have? Can it in any way be good for the US? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Randall Posted April 20, 2009 Share Posted April 20, 2009 Let me guess. It shows we are a strong enough country to tell the truth to our own people? Don't you think the terrorists know what we were doing? The Red Cross and Amnesty International has been reporting for years on what was being done. What was released that would have been news to them? This I would like to know. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kid Cid Posted April 20, 2009 Share Posted April 20, 2009 Aside from political reasons, what purpose does releasing this information have? Can it in any way be good for the US? It can't be any worse than the crime itself. Honesty is the best policy, putting it out there is the first step to putting it behind us. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ursa Majoris Posted April 20, 2009 Share Posted April 20, 2009 It can't be any worse than the crime itself. Honesty is the best policy, putting it out there is the first step to putting it behind us. +1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
westvirginia Posted April 20, 2009 Share Posted April 20, 2009 It can't be any worse than the crime itself. Honesty is the best policy, putting it out there is the first step to putting it behind us. I can see this, and lean this way. But a country has to have some secrets to survive, I'm just not sure this is one of those secrets. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Randall Posted April 20, 2009 Share Posted April 20, 2009 How does releasing this info help us in any way? How does spending $8billion a month in Iraq help us in any way. What could we be spending that on that would help us more? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
i_am_the_swammi Posted April 20, 2009 Share Posted April 20, 2009 The fact that after the last 8 years we are becoming a nation that doesn't have to cover its tracks with lies and dishonesty likely puts us in a good light somewhere, no? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NAUgrad Posted April 20, 2009 Share Posted April 20, 2009 We'll I guess we're just have to use harsh language to get any information out. Should be pretty effective. Hey terrorist where did you get your weapons. Ummm...I don't recall. You F'er where did you get your weapons. Oh geez, sorry, I bought them from that guy over there. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pope Flick Posted April 20, 2009 Share Posted April 20, 2009 We'll I guess we're just have to use harsh language to get any information out. Should be pretty effective. Hey terrorist where did you get your weapons. Ummm...I don't recall. You F'er where did you get your weapons. Oh geez, sorry, I bought them from that guy over there. http://www.fpp.co.uk/books/Overheard/US_interrogators.html When about two dozen veterans got together Friday for the first time since the 1940s, many lamented the chasm between the way they conducted interrogations during the war and the harsh measures used today in questioning terrorism suspects. Back then, they and their commanders wrestled with the morality of bugging prisoners' cells with listening devices. They felt bad about censoring letters. They took prisoners out for steak dinners to soften them up. They played games with them. "We got more information out of a German general with a game of chess or pingpong than they do today, with their torture," said Henry Kolm, 90, an MIT physicist who had been assigned to play chess in Germany with one of Hitler's commanders, Rudolf Hess Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ursa Majoris Posted April 20, 2009 Share Posted April 20, 2009 "We got more information out of a German general with a game of chess or pingpong than they do today, with their torture," said Henry Kolm, 90, an MIT physicist who had been assigned to play chess in Germany with one of Hitler's commanders, Rudolf Hess Hess flew to the UK in 1941 and was incarcerated there until the Nuremberg trials in 1946 so any information retrieved would have little value other than for prosecution purposes. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NAUgrad Posted April 20, 2009 Share Posted April 20, 2009 http://www.fpp.co.uk/books/Overheard/US_interrogators.html As far as he remembers. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pope Flick Posted April 20, 2009 Share Posted April 20, 2009 Hess flew to the UK in 1941 and was incarcerated there until the Nuremberg trials in 1946 so any information retrieved would have little value other than for prosecution purposes. Well, the point being tey felt the best approach was one apparently not considered for the past few years. AFAIC, if it was good enough for the nazis, that approach will work on anyone. Nice cheap shot, NAU. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ursa Majoris Posted April 20, 2009 Share Posted April 20, 2009 Well, the point being tey felt the best approach was one apparently not considered for the past few years. AFAIC, if it was good enough for the nazis, that approach will work on anyone. Nice cheap shot, NAU. Oh, I saw the point and I agree with it too. I just saw the chance to do my history thing. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
driveby Posted April 20, 2009 Share Posted April 20, 2009 Keeps the focus off what a bang up job O is doing so far. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NAUgrad Posted April 20, 2009 Share Posted April 20, 2009 (edited) Nice cheap shot, NAU. Yeah sorry about that, I should've included a or something like that. I actually feel like this stuff might be released now because of all of the negative press Obama is getting related to the bailout. We'll see if that's the case but there is a possibility that political reasons are the only reason this stuff is being made public. BTW I do think that this kind of thing has a purpose and can be effective at times. It also can be abused. Not sure if either was done in this case. Edited April 20, 2009 by NAUgrad Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pope Flick Posted April 20, 2009 Share Posted April 20, 2009 Keeps the focus off what a bang up job O is doing so far. True dat! This is one thing he certainly got right. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AtomicCEO Posted April 20, 2009 Share Posted April 20, 2009 (edited) We'll I guess we're just have to use harsh language to get any information out. Should be pretty effective. Hey terrorist where did you get your weapons. Ummm...I don't recall. You F'er where did you get your weapons. Oh geez, sorry, I bought them from that guy over there. So in the example quoted, did it take 183 bouts of torture to get him to talk, or did he talk the first time and the rest was just for fun? Either way, I'm pretty sure we were doing it wrong. BTW I do think that this kind of thing has a purpose and can be effective at times. It also can be abused. Not sure if either was done in this case. I think you'd have to agree that EITHER it was incredibly ineffective or was abused in this case, right? I mean... or both? You can't possibly argue that it was neither. Edited April 20, 2009 by AtomicCEO Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WaterMan Posted April 20, 2009 Share Posted April 20, 2009 How can Obama betray secrets to the enemy like this? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Choppy Posted April 20, 2009 Share Posted April 20, 2009 Why don't we ask the famlies of the 9-11 victims if they think it's too harsh. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
caddyman Posted April 20, 2009 Share Posted April 20, 2009 Why don't we ask the famlies of the 9-11 victims if they think it's too harsh. Nah...Barry and the rest of these bleeding hearts are too concerned with how the rest of the world views us. Of course they forget that there were attacks before GW was mean to the world. And there will still be attacks even after we play nice. But everything is the fault of the Bush admin. Even the attacks BEFORE 2000. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NAUgrad Posted April 20, 2009 Share Posted April 20, 2009 So in the example quoted, did it take 183 bouts of torture to get him to talk, or did he talk the first time and the rest was just for fun? Either way, I'm pretty sure we were doing it wrong. I think you'd have to agree that EITHER it was incredibly ineffective or was abused in this case, right? I mean... or both? You can't possibly argue that it was neither. Since you were obviously there and know the exact reason as to why they did this so much, why don't you fill us in on how much of a waste of time and ineffective it was. Because if we did get information out of him, that would be released as well right? Sure whatever you say. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Savage Beatings Posted April 20, 2009 Share Posted April 20, 2009 They were for it before they were against it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Scooby Posted April 20, 2009 Share Posted April 20, 2009 time to bring back the iron maiden Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Azazello1313 Posted April 20, 2009 Share Posted April 20, 2009 CHENEY: “One of the things that I find a little bit disturbing about this recent disclosure is they put out the legal memos, the memos that the CIA got from the Office of Legal Counsel, but they didn't put out the memos that showed the success of the effort. And there are reports that show specifically what we gained as a result of this activity. They have not been declassified.” “I formally asked that they be declassified now. I haven't announced this up until now, I haven't talked about it, but I know specifically of reports that I read, that I saw that lay out what we learned through the interrogation process and what the consequences were for the country.” “And I've now formally asked the CIA to take steps to declassify those memos so we can lay them out there and the American people have a chance to see what we obtained and what we learned and how good the intelligence was, as well as to see this debate over the legal opinions.” Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Perchoutofwater Posted April 20, 2009 Author Share Posted April 20, 2009 Not going to happen, it wouldn't be good for Obama's campaign for Secretary General, as he obviously cares more about what the rest of the world thinks of him than he does about what they think of the US, of of what many here in the US think. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts