Attorney general nominee's answer on torture frustrates Democrats

[Dos Equis]

Yeah, but weight gain is not conclusive to the validity of torture when you are throwing your humanity out of the window to torture another human being for giggles...it sure isn't b/c of the efficacy of extracting valid information.

I can't convince someone that torture is evil.  If it is in one's moral code to approve of the torture of another human being, I am at a loss.

On the other hand, if waterboarding is so benign, why don't we have Sean, Rush, Bill and all the other 'men' that approve of torture undergo a thorough regimen of waterboarding on national tv?  Then we'll see what these 'men' are made of.

I put the word 'men' in quotes b/c I believe that torture is the interrogation methodology of sadistic cowards....not men.

You get no argument from me, for the most part, that torture shouldn't be part of the interrogation handbook.  Where we differ is (1) how we define torture (for example, a cold cell doesn't qualify for me) and (2) whether we actually torture detainees. 

Also, like headhunter said, these are very bad men.  And the distinction I draw between these detainees and child molesters, etc. is these suspected terrorists threaten the safety of our entire country and we need information from them, while a pedophile can simply be locked up to make society safer. 

[Decker]

You get no argument from me, for the most part, that torture shouldn't be part of the interrogation handbook.  Where we differ is (1) how we define torture (for example, a cold cell doesn't qualify for me) and (2) whether we actually torture detainees. 

Also, like headhunter said, these are very bad men.  And the distinction I draw between these detainees and child molesters, etc. is these suspected terrorists threaten the safety of our entire country and we need information from them, while a pedophile can simply be locked up to make society safer. 

Terrorists have always threatened our country.  Why use torture now?  Every resource I look at says that torture not only does not work re needed info, it is counter-productive b/c tortured people will say anything to stop the torture.

We've already seen how the Bush administration used testimony from a tortured Iraqi insider to strengthen its rush to war.  Problem was, all the info was false and Bush ran with it anyways....much like the info from CurveBall.

Why do you think torture works?

[Dos Equis]

Terrorists have always threatened our country.  Why use torture now?  Every resource I look at says that torture not only does not work re needed info, it is counter-productive b/c tortured people will say anything to stop the torture.

We've already seen how the Bush administration used testimony from a tortured Iraqi insider to strengthen its rush to war.  Problem was, all the info was false and Bush ran with it anyways....much like the info from CurveBall.

Why do you think torture works?

Terrorists have been a threat for a long time, but they never carried out a large scale attack on American soil before 911.  That really changed everything IMO.

I'm not conceding we use torture.  I'm not convinced waterboarding is torture (it might be) and I definitely don't think sitting in a cold cell is torture. 

I really have no idea what interrogation techniques are better than others.  I am in favor of using whatever reasonable means necessary to protect the country.  If torture (the real kind) doesn't work then we shouldn't use it.   

[Decker]

Terrorists have been a threat for a long time, but they never carried out a large scale attack on American soil before 911.  That really changed everything IMO.

I'm not conceding we use torture.  I'm not convinced waterboarding is torture (it might be) and I definitely don't think sitting in a cold cell is torture. 

I really have no idea what interrogation techniques are better than others.  I am in favor of using whatever reasonable means necessary to protect the country.  If torture (the real kind) doesn't work then we shouldn't use it.   

I disagree.  I think very little has changed since 9/11 re the threat presented by terrorists and torture.  The terrorists struck in '93 and we didn't have to resort to torture.  The US tried and convicted a japanese officer after WWII for waterboarding.  Do you think it's become better with age?

You are trying to give torture the benefit of the doubt by qualifying your statements with contingencies, if it's effective then use it and vice-versa.  I can't do that.

[Dos Equis]

I disagree.  I think very little has changed since 9/11 re the threat presented by terrorists and torture.  The terrorists struck in '93 and we didn't have to resort to torture.  The US tried and convicted a japanese officer after WWII for waterboarding.  Do you think it's become better with age?

You are trying to give torture the benefit of the doubt by qualifying your statements with contingencies, if it's effective then use it and vice-versa.  I can't do that.

The 93 and 01 attacks are in different universes.  One of the country's financial nerve centers and our military headquarters were attacked.  Our country was at a virtual standstill.  Hard to overstate the impact of 911.  The 93 attack wasn't nearly as bad.  I guess we just have different outlooks on 911.

I am being a little wishy washy on this whole torture thing.  I really don't favor things I definitely consider to be torture (breaking bones, pulling fingernails, and the stuff you see in the movies).     I am not convinced waterboarding falls within that category. 

My main focus is protecting the country.       

[Decker]

The 93 and 01 attacks are in different universes.  One of the country's financial nerve centers and our military headquarters were attacked.  Our country was at a virtual standstill.  Hard to overstate the impact of 911.  The 93 attack wasn't nearly as bad.  I guess we just have different outlooks on 911.

I am being a little wishy washy on this whole torture thing.  I really don't favor things I definitely consider to be torture (breaking bones, pulling fingernails, and the stuff you see in the movies).     I am not convinced waterboarding falls within that category. 

My main focus is protecting the country.       

9/11 was 19 guys with boxcutters hijacking 4 planes and nothing more.
The alarmists and those with ulterior motives played up 9/11 to be a world changing event...although it was sad it was not even remotely a world changing event by its own merit.  However the US's extreme response did change our world.

Why didn't we implement torture after the Murrah Building attack by local terrorists?

But I agree with you, we see 9/11 differently.

[Dos Equis]

9/11 was 19 guys with boxcutters hijacking 4 planes and nothing more.
The alarmists and those with ulterior motives played up 9/11 to be a world changing event...although it was sad it was not even remotely a world changing event by its own merit.  However the US's extreme response did change our world.

Why didn't we implement torture after the Murrah Building attack by local terrorists?

But I agree with you, we see 9/11 differently.

It was much than just 19 hijackers.  It was an unprecedented attack on our soil by foreigners, loss of thousands of lives, billions in lost revenue, and the loss of our sense of security.  In other words, a near picture perfect act of terrorism.  I certainly view it as a world changing event.  I think the entire world was captivated too.  We are the biggest kid on the block.  We were taken to our knees, at least for a day, by a handful of animals. 

Oklahoma City was carried out by three guys.  One is in prison, one served time and was released, and one is dead. 

[Decker]

It was much than just 19 hijackers.  It was an unprecedented attack on our soil by foreigners, loss of thousands of lives, billions in lost revenue, and the loss of our sense of security.  In other words, a near picture perfect act of terrorism.  I certainly view it as a world changing event.  I think the entire world was captivated too.  We are the biggest kid on the block.  We were taken to our knees, at least for a day, by a handful of animals. 

Oklahoma City was carried out by three guys.  One is in prison, one served time and was released, and one is dead. 

Those are good points but 9/11 has changed nothing:  assassins and terrorists have always walked amongst us.  The only reason that the 9/11 attacks was a "near picture perfect act of terrorism" was b/c of Bush's predictable reaction to the attacks.  The terrorists were counting on Bush to change our way of life while improving their own standing in the world and he played right into their hands.

Thanks to Bush, we have a president that violates the constitution on a regular basis (FISA, signing statements, illegal wars), we have the US's reputation in tatters--we torture people and invade countries with no legal justification, we can't take hair gel on an airplane, and worldwide terrorism has grown exponentially etc.

It's not the terrorists that did those things on 9/11.  It was the Bush administration's response to 9/11.

Terrorists do terrorism to affect a change in the political climate:  to that I'd say MISSION ACCOMPLISHED!

[Dos Equis]

Those are good points but 9/11 has changed nothing:  assassins and terrorists have always walked amongst us.  The only reason that the 9/11 attacks was a "near picture perfect act of terrorism" was b/c of Bush's predictable reaction to the attacks.  The terrorists were counting on Bush to change our way of life while improving their own standing in the world and he played right into their hands.

Thanks to Bush, we have a president that violates the constitution on a regular basis (FISA, signing statements, illegal wars), we have the US's reputation in tatters--we torture people and invade countries with no legal justification, we can't take hair gel on an airplane, and worldwide terrorism has grown exponentially etc.

It's not the terrorists that did those things on 9/11.  It was the Bush administration's response to 9/11.

Terrorists do terrorism to affect a change in the political climate:  to that I'd say MISSION ACCOMPLISHED!

Bush's response to 911 was right on the money.  We had to eliminate the terrorist base in Afghanistan that was used as a training ground to prepare the hijackers for the 911 attack.  I don't think the people who planned 911 improved their way of life.  Before the attacks, Osama was being hosted by a country and had free reign to plan and train his suicide bombers.  After 911, he lives in caves, on the run, and may be dead. 

Military action was absolute necessity after 911.     

P.S.  I typed "Obama" instead of "Osama" at first.     Oops. 

[Decker]

Bush's response to 911 was right on the money.  We had to eliminate the terrorist base in Afghanistan that was used as a training ground to prepare the hijackers for the 911 attack.  I don't think the people who planned 911 improved their way of life.  Before the attacks, Osama was being hosted by a country and had free reign to plan and train his suicide bombers.  After 911, he lives in caves, on the run, and may be dead. 

Military action was absolute necessity after 911.     

P.S.  I typed "Obama" instead of "Osama" at first.     Oops. 

Your typo will become common place if Obama Hussein wins the nomination.  Maybe not by you but others will think it's a hoot.

Who in the hell names their kid Obama Hussein?.....why not Adolf Shucklegruber?

The Taliban supported Al Qaeda.

Saudi Arabia supported Al Qaeda.

Pakistan supported Al Qaeda.  And I know there are more state sponsors.  I guess Pres. Bush just overlooked those countries and attacked the softest one that supported Al Qaeda.

Not to mention the helping hand Al Qaeda received at its inception from the US's CIA.

[Dos Equis]

Your typo will become common place if Obama Hussein wins the nomination.  Maybe not by you but others will think it's a hoot.

Who in the hell names their kid Obama Hussein?.....why not Adolf Shucklegruber?

The Taliban supported Al Qaeda.

Saudi Arabia supported Al Qaeda.

Pakistan supported Al Qaeda.  And I know there are more state sponsors.  I guess Pres. Bush just overlooked those countries and attacked the softest one that supported Al Qaeda.

Not to mention the helping hand Al Qaeda received at its inception from the US's CIA.

The Taliban hosted Al Qaeda.  Not only hosted them, but allowed them to train for the 911 attacks.  Major distinction.

I agree Barack Hussein Obama is a horrible name.  What were his parents smoking?  On the other hand, Osama and Saddam weren't major players 46 years ago.