Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Politics : Foreign Affairs Discussion Group -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: jttmab who wrote (197202)	8/14/2006 11:02:46 AM
From: Hawkmoon	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 281500

If you write a DoD policy that says "no measures can be used beyond what is legally allowed in the disciplining of children", you're going to be laughed off the block. Kind of like people laughed when certain states have tried to pass laws that claim spanking your children for misbehaving constitutes child abuse. In fact, some people would have us believe that "sparing the rod" leads children to be better disciplined, but they don't want to discuss "time out", or sending a child to the solitude of his room as a form of mental torture. You laugh and scoff at the analogy, but in legal terms there's not much of a difference, except with regard to degree of the "social violation" that is perpetrated by a child versus a terrorist who lacks any international representation under the Geneva Accords by a sovereign government that can be considered a signator of that convention. And maybe you're right, to a certain extent. Saving human life is NOT a laughing matter. So to that extent, the comparison between child discipline and saving human life by obtaining information from intransigent and sociopathic terrorists does break down. And while YOU continue to focus upon alleged acts of physical abuse which I would also agree could be construed as excessive, if not criminal, I'm focused upon other methods that are denied to interrogators, but permitted by the common parent in altering attitudes towards cooperation and modifying behavior. And I also focus my opinion upon dealing with detainees who we have probable cause to believe possess information that might prevent a future attack by the detainees associates and lead to the saving of lives. My view is that slapping an intransigent prisoner to shock him out his arrogant disregard for cooperation should be permissible. I don't believe a detainee, as defined above, should be "made comfortable" when our goals are to prevent his associates from implementing their terrorist operations. You see, I care about saving people's lives FAR MORE than I care about saving the "personal pride" of the detainee being questioned. And you wonder about emotional trauma? Ask the interrogators how they feel when they fail to obtain the information that might have save the lives of countless innocent people, or their fellow soldiers. That their failure to obtain this information makes them feel personally responsible for innocent people dying. But I do not believe in torturing people for pleasure, or as some form of institutionalized punishment. NOR do I believe that means generally denied to a parent in disciplining their child, should be used. I believe in using means which DO NOT lead to permanent physical harm to obtain information. I do not believe in using physical abuse merely the purpose of fulfilling some warped and despicable Sadistic form of punishment. Which means I DON'T BELIEVE in "surf-boarding", drilling holes into their knee caps, or putting cigarette butts out on their skin. But I do believe in making them uncomfortable, making them stand, and even slapping them when they mouth off, or believe they are invulnerable to being physically harmed. In fact (and thank god I've not found myself in this position), if I'm absolutely positive that the detainee holds information that would save the lives of innocent civilians, or friendly forces, I would probably have to be restrained from doing whatever I have to do in order to get the detainee to provide the information I need to prevent those deaths. So you tell me where "honor" lies?? I'm trying to save lives and you're trying to preserve the dignity of an individual who is trying to kill innocent civilians. Can you honestly tell me that you would have the self-restraint not to do everything you have to do in order to protect the lives of other people whom have been be entrusted to your protection?? What do you think the murdered victims of these suicide attacks and hostage/killings would advise you to do when interrogating a suspect (if they could speak)? You're living in "la-lah" land jttmab. Either that, or your "legalistic" worldview and false sense of honor and integrity have left you cold and indifferent to the values of protecting and saving innocent lives. And tell me that if you knew your intransigent and unruly child had been involved (even watching) in the killing of another human being (or even a neighborhood pet) that you wouldn't slap them until they were in tears until they confessed what they knew about who perpetrated the atrocity?? So continue to misrepresent my views to your hearts content. I'm on record, through my various postings, that my purpose is saving human life from future atrocities and that I do not believe in systematic and sadistic torture of ANY human being. Hawk