Donald Trump on waterboarding: ‘If it doesn’t work, they deserve it anyway.’

[LegendKiller]

American experimentation on orphans and mentally disabled children

http://www.philly.com/philly/blogs/healthcare/Looking-back-at-medical-experiments-on-kids.html

More on radiation effects experimentation:

http://www.counterpunch.org/2013/04/12/inhuman-radiation-experiments/

Tuskegee:

http://www.cdc.gov/tuskegee/timeline.htm

Lot's more info out there if you want to bother looking for it.

Absolutely agree that that is terrible but far short of exterminating jews, gypsies, gays, and mentally ill in a wholesale manner while launching a world war that resulted in several tens of millions of deaths.

 

[highland145]

If we're going to waterboard we might as well go all-in like the Soviets used to. There's no use half-assing this, either you escalate the brutality exponentially or use Marquess of Queensbury rules with those you know won't follow them in return.

+1 for Russia.

There's a subtle difference in their lies. Hillary tells the lies that otherwise logical, intelligent, and educated people want to hear. Trump tells the lies that the angry mob desperately wants to hear.

I think Trump is hilarious. He says some crap and then doubles down when questioned about it. 'The moon is made of cheese. I've been there."

 

[fskimospy]

I was signed up for nrotc for a full scholarship. Then my knee decided to fold in half, sideways, one morning. Ripped out a quarter of my cartilage in the initial event.

I have 3 titanium screws in my shin after they reattached my patellar tendon. They moved it to tighten up my knee cap. My knee sounds like a dump truck when I bend. Hurts like a mofo if the temp changes any more than 20 degrees in a day. I will need an artificial knee in 5 years or so.

Navy took one look at the x-rays of the screws and told me I couldn't serve.

That explains it. The tough guys are often ones who wanted to join the military but never made it.

 

[zinfamous]

So, Donald Trump says more stuff simply because he knows the base conservatives will cum all over themselves when he says it. It works in the sticks, obviously, but disaster when the vast majority of Americans turn out to vote.

And then there is this:

Don't kid yourself, folks. It works, okay? It works. Only a stupid person would say it doesn't work."

He says such things constantly, as if there is some evidence behind such a claim. Some study--never mind that he will never reference it--that supports his bloviating with real data. It's all direct lies, but it doesn't matter; he simply has to sound like he means it for people to accept it as truth. Better that they don't ask questions, anyway. Asking questions is what them "elite smart people do." It's how they "getch'ya!"

Strange that the manner of his delivery and using those exact words is basically how much of the P&N...conversation plays out around here.

 

[zinfamous]

I think Trump is hilarious. He says some crap and then doubles down when questioned about it. 'The moon is made of cheese. I've been there."

perfect

 

[LegendKiller]

That explains it. The tough guys are often ones who wanted to join the military but never made it.

As opposed to the guys who wouldn't dare.

 

[fskimospy]

As opposed to the guys who wouldn't dare.

You realize I was actually in the military, right?

 

[Sheik Yerbouti]

As opposed to the guys who wouldn't dare.

sorry, did you actually serve in the military?

 

[Darwin333]

Ah the Geneva Convention, yeah that always made me feel so warm and fuzzy inside, knowing that if I was taken as a POW it would protect me. :\

So you would prefer that we be more like the enemy? How about intentionally targeting women and children because some of those assholes do that too? How about live beheadings done by high ranking US and .mil personnel?

 

[Darwin333]

Um, yeah. I don't think people get waterboarded for the hell of it, just to see if they can find out anything. It would have to be information that you know they know, and you need to know. And even then, I wouldn't think anyone is real quick to act on that information with out at least a hint that it's accurate. I don't think our intelligence people are a bunch of idiots. At least I hope they aren't.

In the given scenario the guys wife was in imminent danger. Not a whole lot of time to try and figure out a way to confirm the information and even then, while he is confirming false information she might be getting raped and killed.

 

[glenn1]

So you would prefer that we be more like the enemy? How about intentionally targeting women and children because some of those assholes do that too? How about live beheadings done by high ranking US and .mil personnel?

There's no real value achieved in your first scenario absent more dead people, whereas theoretically there *could* be some deterrent value from the second.

In reality, discussing waterboarding really involves two separate questions; (1) Does it work? IOW, do we get any additional intelligence from its use that exceeds that from other methods; and (2) Should we use waterboarding despite moral or other considerations?

These questions aren't mutually exclusive. You could agree the technique did allow for additional intel yet oppose it on moral grounds, or say yes to both, or even "NO" to the first and "YES" to the second (seeking to create a Soviet-style deterrent approach I described earlier).

 

[fskimospy]

sorry, did you actually serve in the military?

He was tough enough to try and play sailor for a few years in college. I remember when we had NROTC people on my ship. They were very nice people, but utterly clueless as to how the Navy actually worked.

I don't blame them for that or anything because how much can you really learn in a few hours a week, and they were sent to the ship to learn after all, but NROTC is a joke.

 

[thraashman]

Absolutely agree that that is terrible but far short of exterminating jews, gypsies, gays, and mentally ill in a wholesale manner while launching a world war that resulted in several tens of millions of deaths.

We started a war in the middle east that resulted in the deaths of hundreds of thousands of civilians and has caused regional destabilization that's resulting in the deaths of tens of thousands more.

 

[glenn1]

He was tough enough to try and play sailor for a few years in college. I remember when we had NROTC people on my ship. They were very nice people, but utterly clueless as to how the Navy actually worked.

I don't blame them for that or anything because how much can you really learn in a few hours a week, and they were sent to the ship to learn after all, but NROTC is a joke.

As a vet you should know better than to belittle those who didn't serve on that point rather than addressing their views. You get the same 1 vote regardless of your service and they're the taxpayers who paid our checks and parents raising the future citizens we were protecting. IMHO this isn't even close to being a question where military service or lack thereof gives you any special insight or credence to your opinion.

 

[fskimospy]

As a vet you should know better than to belittle those who didn't serve on that point rather than addressing their views. You get the same 1 vote regardless of your service and they're the taxpayers who paid our checks and parents raising the future citizens we were protecting. IMHO this isn't even close to being a question where military service or lack thereof gives you any special insight or credence to your opinion.

I agree it doesn't give me any special insight, and frankly for this topic none is necessary anyway as Trump's point is transparently stupid.

All I was talking about there is LK's internet tough guy routine, and I will absolutely denigrate those who never served but who let fly with bloodthirsty rhetoric like his. There's a famous quote from Erasmus that says 'War is delightful to those who have no experience of it', and he basically epitomizes that nonsense.

As I've said before I've never been in direct combat myself, but I have enough friends who have and I've experienced enough to have nothing but contempt for those internet badassess who just can't wait to have other people go fight as viciously as possible while never having done so themselves.

 

[glenn1]

I agree it doesn't give me any special insight, and frankly for this topic none is necessary anyway as Trump's point is transparently stupid.

All I was talking about there is LK's internet tough guy routine, and I will absolutely denigrate those who never served but who let fly with bloodthirsty rhetoric like his. There's a famous quote from Erasmus that says 'War is delightful to those who have no experience of it', and he basically epitomizes that nonsense.

As I've said before I've never been in direct combat myself, but I have enough friends who have and I've experienced enough to have nothing but contempt for those internet badassess who just can't wait to have other people go fight as viciously as possible while never having done so themselves.

Plenty of military vets including those who saw combat sent people to fight viciously as possible. For example JFK, LBJ and GHWB were all decorated WW2 vets and yet got us into Vietnam and the Gulf War. Conversely Harding, Coolidge, Hoover, Cleveland and others never served and we enjoyed peace during their terms.

 

[fskimospy]

Plenty of military vets including those who saw combat sent people to fight viciously as possible. For example JFK, LBJ and GHWB were all decorated WW2 vets and yet got us into Vietnam and the Gulf War. Conversely Harding, Coolidge, Hoover, Cleveland and others never served and we enjoyed peace during their terms.

So?

 

[LegendKiller]

I agree it doesn't give me any special insight, and frankly for this topic none is necessary anyway as Trump's point is transparently stupid.

All I was talking about there is LK's internet tough guy routine, and I will absolutely denigrate those who never served but who let fly with bloodthirsty rhetoric like his. There's a famous quote from Erasmus that says 'War is delightful to those who have no experience of it', and he basically epitomizes that nonsense.

As I've said before I've never been in direct combat myself, but I have enough friends who have and I've experienced enough to have nothing but contempt for those internet badassess who just can't wait to have other people go fight as viciously as possible while never having done so themselves.

I have never said we should go to war to go to war. I said that if we go to war it should be to win, not to not lose. I would prefer not to go to war. I have a lot of friends that were marines and army in the last 20 years. I have seen what it does to them and their families, at least from an outsiders perspective, it isn't great. But what is worse is that they went to war for no reason when it comes to Iraq and now their efforts are seemingly wasted because we weren't committed to winning. Part of that is that you can't really win against a non state.

 

[glenn1]

So?

So you're OK with people who want to send others out to vicious wars, but only if they have military service? My examples and common sense indicate that combat service makes little difference to whether a person supports/opposes a specific future war (or wars in general), so why do you continue to call out someone else on their service (or lack thereof) as if it makes a difference?

If anything you should want to back up from that stance because far more right-leaning voters have experience than left-leaners, so seeking to trivialize the opinions of non-vets on these issues would be against your interests.

 

[JSt0rm]

I never served in the military. Am I allowed to say I dont want the country to go to war?

 

[Moonbeam]

I have never said we should go to war to go to war. I said that if we go to war it should be to win, not to not lose. I would prefer not to go to war. I have a lot of friends that were marines and army in the last 20 years. I have seen what it does to them and their families, at least from an outsiders perspective, it isn't great. But what is worse is that they went to war for no reason when it comes to Iraq and now their efforts are seemingly wasted because we weren't committed to winning. Part of that is that you can't really win against a non state.

If I become a monster to win, have I won? The whole value in being an American, in my opinion, is because of the values placed in our Constitution and founding documents by spectacularly enlightened men. We don't win by flushing that down the toilet. The war we fight in this world is a war of values. You will need those to really win.

 

[JSt0rm]

Fear will keep the local systems in line. Fear of this battle station.

 

[CitizenKain]

Yes, the Germans would have rolled over if we had maintained some idiotic moral high ground. Last I checked dresden was nor s moral high ground. It was complete defeat.

Dresden was an unnecessary bombing and a war crime that should have ended up with the people who ordered it swinging from the gallows next to the Nazis.

 

[LegendKiller]

If I become a monster to win, have I won? The whole value in being an American, in my opinion, is because of the values placed in our Constitution and founding documents by spectacularly enlightened men. We don't win by flushing that down the toilet. The war we fight in this world is a war of values. You will need those to really win.

If you go to fight and lose because you hamstring yourself, have you won?

 

[VRAMdemon]

Define "winning"..

Say NATO bombarded ISIS territory and turned every single ISIS fighter into ashes, that wouldn't destroy the ideas that motivated them. In a few months, another group would rise up with a new leader proclaiming himself the "true" caliph and the whole ugly process would begin all over again.

Part of a war on a group like ISIS must include the destruction of their idea's that motivate the youth to join a terrorist group. Some say...the terrorist organization wants their opponents to overreact, beefing up "security" to the point of infringing on accepted freedoms. When the "security" fails, the net will be cast wider to include those suspected of encouraging (or even not opposing) the ideals of the terrorists. They hope that the government enacts so many harsh laws and carries out so many punitive reactions, (with a fair amount of innocent collateral damage), that the general citizenry will either select a new government more favorable to the ideals of the terrorists or the citizenry.

Or..

If terrorists want to turn opposing countries into police states primarily for the purpose of eroding civil rights - as opposed to turning them into police states because the effectiveness of their attacks means they are probably winning militarily - I think there would be some factual evidence for that case.

Terrorists probably don't particularly care that much about our civil rights. Unlike George W Bush, Do terrorists hate us for our freedoms.? More likely they hate us for our policies most of all, with a dash of racism/intolerance thrown in. Do they want to use fear to make us change our policies toward them, not change our policies toward ourselves?