61–70 of 434 posts
I kind of hoped that Biden would try and stop this thing from happening anymore. Or Obama... Then I see stuff like this: https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2021/oct/06/cia-torture-...
No president is going to do anything about it because the intelligence agencies almost certainly have blackmail material on them all
This is the kind of stuff that probably makes some people’s job down the pipe easier and at the same time undermines the Western civilization. Make no mistake, no US citizen outside of the political class benefits from this or other atrocities. The exact same goes for the surveillance programs. Losing the moral high ground degrades the whole society. The whole anti establishment movement rallies around stuff like thi…
Is it possible for you to construct a scenario where torture is morally acceptable? E.g. you have a virtual certainty that a dirty bomb is going to be detonated in NYC and will kill 1M+ and potentially irradiate the city for decades. Is torturing one person who you know with certainty knows the location of the bomb defensible? Basically, how many lives would you be willing to sacrifice to prevent the suffering of a s…
...isn't the whole idea of such "back sites" that once anyone gets into them, they are NEVER getting out alive? Torture and atrocities asside, I'd imagine most organized crime syndicates run tighter ships (eg. the standard dissolve the bodies of torture victims + kill the "torture service providers" too at regular intervals then re-recruit new ones etc.) ...this seem so beyond sloppy it's clearly a political s throwi…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
No president is going to do anything about it because the intelligence agencies almost certainly have blackmail material on them all
I think that the CIA carries a lot of value for sitting presidents. The organization gives them a lot of power, similar to the military but with less accountability. So far we haven't seen a president that was willing to give up that power for any reason of simple morality. There is something appealing about being able to send an organization out to kill, steal, and spy for you with zero accountability. I don't think…
This is the kind of stuff that probably makes some people’s job down the pipe easier and at the same time undermines the Western civilization. Make no mistake, no US citizen outside of the political class benefits from this or other atrocities. The exact same goes for the surveillance programs. Losing the moral high ground degrades the whole society. The whole anti establishment movement rallies around stuff like thi…
Is it possible for you to construct a scenario where torture is morally acceptable? E.g. you have a virtual certainty that a dirty bomb is going to be detonated in NYC and will kill 1M+ and potentially irradiate the city for decades. Is torturing one person who you know with certainty knows the location of the bomb defensible? Basically, how many lives would you be willing to sacrifice to prevent the suffering of a s…
Taking you apart for your organs can be used to save the lives of multiple people.
So, I'd say, in your case, three or four, tops.
I don't imagine that was the answer you were looking for.
I kind of hoped that Biden would try and stop this thing from happening anymore. Or Obama... Then I see stuff like this: https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2021/oct/06/cia-torture-...
Obama ran for office on a pledge to close Guantanamo, and he could have done so by executive order. He didn't, and that should tell you all you need to know about the nature of the American presidency.
Holy shit. This is nauseating. Why do we tolerate the existence of the US state anymore? What's the point of any of this? I _hate_ the feeling of the smacking the back of my head. And they did it, against a plywood wall, by gripping a towel wrapped around his neck and slamming him into it, for two hours at a time, just to 'train' people. Everyone involved - perpetrators and victims - needs therapy and rehabilitation.…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Is it possible for you to construct a scenario where torture is morally acceptable? E.g. you have a virtual certainty that a dirty bomb is going to be detonated in NYC and will kill 1M+ and potentially irradiate the city for decades. Is torturing one person who you know with certainty knows the location of the bomb defensible? Basically, how many lives would you be willing to sacrifice to prevent the suffering of a s…
This is a good moral question, and really is going to come down to personal belief. I absolutely do not believe governments should be able to torture someone, for any reason, regardless of the consequences. It has less to do with the suffering of a single person, and more with the constant and consistent scope creep that enters every government program coupled with the ability for any and all governments to be full o…
No this is nothing more but a sleazy attempt to whitewash a crime
Earlier quoted context omitted.
No president is going to do anything about it because the intelligence agencies almost certainly have blackmail material on them all
A president was recently elected that had more viable blackmail material released about him than any previous president and instead of launching missiles into Sudan like Clinton did a couple days after his scandal, he just slid past it.
> “Ammar fabricated the information he provided when undergoing EITs,” it said. “He later admitted to his interrogators/debriefers that he was terrified and lied to get agency officers to stop the measures … Ammar also explained that he was afraid to tell a lie and was afraid to tell the truth because he did not know how either would be received.” Which is pretty much all you need to know about torture.
When torture or "EIT" is used for a source of intelligence, using that sole point of data as proof is fraught with peril. Dropping JDAMs on a building fingered solely by a detainee is sure to get random bystanders killed. Running a raid, similarly, might well be a trap.
However, when one corroborates this with other sources of data, it is a "valid" technique. When one uses a piece of intelligence from a detainee as a starting point and further validates the veracity of the claim, it is a "valid" starting point.
This isn't to say whether or not this path counts as moral, just that the "torture doesn't work because lies" is itself dishonest.