Fox News: Wikileaks= Enemy combatants

[Baron Von PWN]

When they were captured. Usually a good attempt is made at killing them before hand, if you capture them great, but if you kill great as well. Either way by labeling them an enemy combatant they are taking the view it would be acceptable to kill them.

So let's say the US government finds out that the Wikileaks' offices are in Topeka, Kansas. Is the author suggesting that the US military kill these individuals out of hand? Or perhaps the author is suggesting that these people are arrested and thrown in jail? Not an ideal result. I think it's vastly more reasonable to assume the latter rather than the former. The former is complete sensationalism.

You're probably right if they were in the USA he would likely favor some gestapo style raid and arrest. However he is saying the government should label wikileaks as enemy combatants that is legitimate military targets.

I'm not questioning the idiocy of the column. I'm questioning your use of the term "bombing." There's no question that wikileaks is providing a service to the public and it should not be shut down. Instead, perhaps the United States should spend its time investigating its own military forces.

Very well I will admit "bomb" was a bit hyperbollic. I was simply extremely incredulous at this guy's recommendations, the fact that he was a senior adviser explains allot about the bush years.

[thegreekdog]

Very well I will admit "bomb" was a bit hyperbollic. I was simply extremely incredulous at this guy's recommendations, the fact that he was a senior adviser explains allot about the bush years.

I imagine most senior advisors with respect to security and/or the military would say similar things (regardless of the party affiliation of the president). I'm not sure that President Obama's senior advisors are telling him anything different considering the expansion of the Patriot Act and the continued prosecution of both wars.

[BigBallinStalin]

I'm sorry, but Assange did definitely contribute to the greater good. I know, it sucks that soldiers and possibly civilians are going to be killed from this (and I know it's easy for me to say this considering I'm sitting behind my laptop in safe upstate New York) but we need transparency in our government. None of this classified shit.

Someday when you're a little older, you'll understand the need for classified information and won't buy the lofty yet unrealistic idea that things should always be done in the open.

Like what then?

Tell us, VOL, where should the line be drawn?

[spurgistan]

Very well I will admit "bomb" was a bit hyperbollic. I was simply extremely incredulous at this guy's recommendations, the fact that he was a senior adviser explains allot about the bush years.

I imagine most senior advisors with respect to security and/or the military would say similar things (regardless of the party affiliation of the president). I'm not sure that President Obama's senior advisors are telling him anything different considering the expansion of the Patriot Act and the continued prosecution of both wars.

Agreed.

[ViperOverLord]

He calls for them to be classified as enemy combatants. What do you do with an enemy combatant? What exactly do you think the term "non-judicial measures" means? He is imploring the government to take out a whistle blower.

Well, from 2001 to 2010 an enemy combatant is typically sent to Guantanamo Bay or some other military detainee facility. Perhaps that is what he meant (and not bombed, which he didn't actually write). Yes, I'm trying to split hairs.

When they were captured. Usually a good attempt is made at killing them before hand, if you capture them great, but if you kill great as well. Either way by labeling them an enemy combatant they are taking the view it would be acceptable to kill them.

I'm sorry, but Assange did definitely contribute to the greater good. I know, it sucks that soldiers and possibly civilians are going to be killed from this (and I know it's easy for me to say this considering I'm sitting behind my laptop in safe upstate New York) but we need transparency in our government. None of this classified shit.

Someday when you're a little older, you'll understand the need for classified information and won't buy the lofty yet unrealistic idea that things should always be done in the open. Libs have talked about that for years but when Obama/Clinton got into office they have hidden behind classified info. Sometimes they hide behind it so I recognize the abuses. But other times it is absolutely necessary.

BTW - Do you think that the terrorist or even unfriendly govts are going to not keep classified info even if we try to take the higher road? You need to take a fresh breath of reality.

Yes, there are many occasions when there is a both a need and a legitimate reason to classify documents. However "it would be bad for us politically if they found out we are complicit in torture" is not one of them.

It depends. If we were to end up having extreme torture palaces like Saddam had in which people got gassed, beheaded, electrocuted and raped with systematic precision then you're right. But when we're living in a world in which our enemies (domestic and abroad) are more than willing to equate water boarding (a process that does no damage) to those things then it'd be stupid to broadcast isolated instances of abuse. That is what wikileaks and other anti-American outlets are seeking to build their cases upon as it is.

[Baron Von PWN]

It depends. If we were to end up having extreme torture palaces like Saddam had in which people got gassed, beheaded, electrocuted and raped with systematic precision then you're right. But when we're living in a world in which our enemies (domestic and abroad) are more than willing to equate water boarding (a process that does no damage) to those things then it'd be stupid to broadcast isolated instances of abuse. That is what wikileaks and other anti-American outlets are seeking to build their cases upon as it is.

Oh so, so long as there is only a little bit of torture not located in palaces its ok. By the way gassing and beheading people not torture, that would be an execution. The reports mention electrocuted and beaten detainees, as well as summary executions. many times individual US personnel intervened other times they just reported the incident, nothing was ever done.

...any act by which severe pain or suffering, whether physical or mental, is intentionally inflicted on a person for such purposes as obtaining from him, or a third person, information or a confession, punishing him for an act he or a third person has committed or is suspected of having committed, or intimidating or coercing him or a third person, or for any reason based on discrimination of any kind, when such pain or suffering is inflicted by or at the instigation of or with the consent or acquiescence of a public official or other person acting in an official capacity. It does not include pain or suffering arising only from, inherent in, or incidental to, lawful sanctions.
—UN Convention Against Torture[1]

Water boarding simulates drowning. So when water-boarded you feel as if you were being drowned, do you intend to tell that does not constitute severe pain or mental suffering? Would shoving your head under water amount to torture to you? after all no damage is done only a bit of coughing. Ever been under water a little too long? I have it sucks, imagine that repeated over and over and tell me it isn't torture.

Don't give me that "water boarding isn't torture" bullshit, it is torture and your government has been doing it. According to you, I'm now an enemy of the USA for thought crime.

[spurgistan]

Very well I will admit "bomb" was a bit hyperbollic. I was simply extremely incredulous at this guy's recommendations, the fact that he was a senior adviser explains allot about the bush years.

I imagine most senior advisors with respect to security and/or the military would say similar things (regardless of the party affiliation of the president). I'm not sure that President Obama's senior advisors are telling him anything different considering the expansion of the Patriot Act and the continued prosecution of both wars.

Agreed.

However, I would like to hear what President Nader's advisers would have to say on the subject. Given what I've heard him say, it would hopefully be different.

[thegreekdog]

Very well I will admit "bomb" was a bit hyperbollic. I was simply extremely incredulous at this guy's recommendations, the fact that he was a senior adviser explains allot about the bush years.

I imagine most senior advisors with respect to security and/or the military would say similar things (regardless of the party affiliation of the president). I'm not sure that President Obama's senior advisors are telling him anything different considering the expansion of the Patriot Act and the continued prosecution of both wars.

Agreed.

However, I would like to hear what President Nader's advisers would have to say on the subject. Given what I've heard him say, it would hopefully be different.

I suspect they would say something different, but I also suspect he'd have to clear out the upper echelons of the military, the NSA, and the like as well.

[BigBallinStalin]

It depends. If we were to end up having extreme torture palaces like Saddam had in which people got gassed, beheaded, electrocuted and raped with systematic precision then you're right. But when we're living in a world in which our enemies (domestic and abroad) are more than willing to equate water boarding (a process that does no damage) to those things then it'd be stupid to broadcast isolated instances of abuse. That is what wikileaks and other anti-American outlets are seeking to build their cases upon as it is.

Oh so, so long as there is only a little bit of torture not located in palaces its ok. By the way gassing and beheading people not torture, that would be an execution. The reports mention electrocuted and beaten detainees, as well as summary executions. many times individual US personnel intervened other times they just reported the incident, nothing was ever done.

...any act by which severe pain or suffering, whether physical or mental, is intentionally inflicted on a person for such purposes as obtaining from him, or a third person, information or a confession, punishing him for an act he or a third person has committed or is suspected of having committed, or intimidating or coercing him or a third person, or for any reason based on discrimination of any kind, when such pain or suffering is inflicted by or at the instigation of or with the consent or acquiescence of a public official or other person acting in an official capacity. It does not include pain or suffering arising only from, inherent in, or incidental to, lawful sanctions.
—UN Convention Against Torture[1]

Water boarding simulates drowning. So when water-boarded you feel as if you were being drowned, do you intend to tell that does not constitute severe pain or mental suffering? Would shoving your head under water amount to torture to you? after all no damage is done only a bit of coughing. Ever been under water a little too long? I have it sucks, imagine that repeated over and over and tell me it isn't torture.

Don't give me that "water boarding isn't torture" bullshit, it is torture and your government has been doing it. According to you, I'm now an enemy of the USA for thought crime.

I recall some years back that a few people died while undergoing water boarding.

[Juan_Bottom]

And I recall a few months back where I linked evidence that the US had prosecuted, and executed at least 1 Japanese Officer in the wake of WWII for water boarding American POWs.

[Baron Von PWN]

It depends. If we were to end up having extreme torture palaces like Saddam had in which people got gassed, beheaded, electrocuted and raped with systematic precision then you're right. But when we're living in a world in which our enemies (domestic and abroad) are more than willing to equate water boarding (a process that does no damage) to those things then it'd be stupid to broadcast isolated instances of abuse. That is what wikileaks and other anti-American outlets are seeking to build their cases upon as it is.

Oh so, so long as there is only a little bit of torture not located in palaces its ok. By the way gassing and beheading people not torture, that would be an execution. The reports mention electrocuted and beaten detainees, as well as summary executions. many times individual US personnel intervened other times they just reported the incident, nothing was ever done.

...any act by which severe pain or suffering, whether physical or mental, is intentionally inflicted on a person for such purposes as obtaining from him, or a third person, information or a confession, punishing him for an act he or a third person has committed or is suspected of having committed, or intimidating or coercing him or a third person, or for any reason based on discrimination of any kind, when such pain or suffering is inflicted by or at the instigation of or with the consent or acquiescence of a public official or other person acting in an official capacity. It does not include pain or suffering arising only from, inherent in, or incidental to, lawful sanctions.
—UN Convention Against Torture[1]

Water boarding simulates drowning. So when water-boarded you feel as if you were being drowned, do you intend to tell that does not constitute severe pain or mental suffering? Would shoving your head under water amount to torture to you? after all no damage is done only a bit of coughing. Ever been under water a little too long? I have it sucks, imagine that repeated over and over and tell me it isn't torture.

Don't give me that "water boarding isn't torture" bullshit, it is torture and your government has been doing it. According to you, I'm now an enemy of the USA for thought crime.

I recall some years back that a few people died while undergoing water boarding.

Its ok though, they probably hated freedom.

[Woodruff]

But when we're living in a world in which our enemies (domestic and abroad) are more than willing to equate water boarding (a process that does no damage)

"except when they die", you meant to add...right?

[Juan_Bottom]

Anyone have a link for the dead? Or are we talking about all the leaked stuff here?

[Baron Von PWN]

Anyone have a link for the dead? Or are we talking about all the leaked stuff here?

What i am referencing is from the leaked documents. US army reports about their Iraqi allies torturing(electrocuting, beating ect)/summarily executing detainees. These reports have apparently been ignored making the US complicit in torture. Not surprising since they themselves have engaged in it.

[ViperOverLord]

It depends. If we were to end up having extreme torture palaces like Saddam had in which people got gassed, beheaded, electrocuted and raped with systematic precision then you're right. But when we're living in a world in which our enemies (domestic and abroad) are more than willing to equate water boarding (a process that does no damage) to those things then it'd be stupid to broadcast isolated instances of abuse. That is what wikileaks and other anti-American outlets are seeking to build their cases upon as it is.

Oh so, so long as there is only a little bit of torture not located in palaces its ok. By the way gassing and beheading people not torture, that would be an execution. The reports mention electrocuted and beaten detainees, as well as summary executions. many times individual US personnel intervened other times they just reported the incident, nothing was ever done.

...any act by which severe pain or suffering, whether physical or mental, is intentionally inflicted on a person for such purposes as obtaining from him, or a third person, information or a confession, punishing him for an act he or a third person has committed or is suspected of having committed, or intimidating or coercing him or a third person, or for any reason based on discrimination of any kind, when such pain or suffering is inflicted by or at the instigation of or with the consent or acquiescence of a public official or other person acting in an official capacity. It does not include pain or suffering arising only from, inherent in, or incidental to, lawful sanctions.
—UN Convention Against Torture[1]

Water boarding simulates drowning. So when water-boarded you feel as if you were being drowned, do you intend to tell that does not constitute severe pain or mental suffering? Would shoving your head under water amount to torture to you? after all no damage is done only a bit of coughing. Ever been under water a little too long? I have it sucks, imagine that repeated over and over and tell me it isn't torture.

Don't give me that "water boarding isn't torture" bullshit, it is torture and your government has been doing it. According to you, I'm now an enemy of the USA for thought crime.

Don't argue red herring points if you want to talk about bull shit. Gassing/Electrocution/Beheadings have a torturous element and there was plenty of torture to go with that. Plus execution is worse than torture so what's your fucking point?

I guess we have different definitions of torture for this case. Waterboarding causes temporary discomfort (Not to mention that I'm using the international definition of torture and you aren't). A person can be waterboarded and feel fine right after. I consider it causing extreme discomfort rather than severe pain. Unlike other forms of 'torture' the person will not be feeling pain later that day and if a person knows that waterboarding is the worst thing that can happen then they know that they are not in a torturous place, but rather subject to a discomforting process if they do not want to cooperate. Waterboarding is responsible for stopping a terror plot in Los Angeles and nobody was harmed. Don't fucking equate waterboarding with the bull shit terrorists would do to you if you were their captive.

Also I never said shit about thought crime, so you can take that and stuff it.

[ViperOverLord]

But when we're living in a world in which our enemies (domestic and abroad) are more than willing to equate water boarding (a process that does no damage)

"except when they die", you meant to add...right?

Nobody's died from it, you conveniently forget ....right? Not to mention that you forget the international definition of terrorism....right?

[Woodruff]

But when we're living in a world in which our enemies (domestic and abroad) are more than willing to equate water boarding (a process that does no damage)

"except when they die", you meant to add...right?

Nobody's died from it, you conveniently forget ....right? Not to mention that you forget the international definition of terrorism....right?

Nobody has died from waterboarding? That's a typo on your part...right? Because it's not at all accurate. Also, even your basic statement about their being no long-term physical effects from waterboarding is not accurate, unless you don't consider lung damage and brain damage to be particularly important.

[Juan_Bottom]

JUAN_BOTTOM DELIVERS

On November 29, 2007, Sen. McCain, while campaigning in St. Petersburg, Florida, said, "Following World War II war crime trials were convened. The Japanese were tried and convicted and hung for war crimes committed against American POWs. Among those charges for which they were convicted was waterboarding."

http://www.politifact.com/truth-o-meter ... rboarding/

"McCain is referencing the Tokyo Trials, officially known as the International Military Tribunal for the Far East. After World War II, an international coalition convened to prosecute Japanese soldiers charged with torture. At the top of the list of techniques was water-based interrogation, known variously then as 'water cure,' 'water torture' and 'waterboarding,' according to the charging documents. It simulates drowning." Politifact went on to report, "A number of the Japanese soldiers convicted by American judges were hanged, while others received lengthy prison sentences or time in labor camps."

Sometimes, though, the questions we face about detainees and interrogation get more specific. One such set of questions relates to "waterboarding."
That term is used to describe several interrogation techniques. The victim may be immersed in water, have water forced into the nose and mouth, or have water poured onto material placed over the face so that the liquid is inhaled or swallowed. The media usually characterize the practice as "simulated drowning." That's incorrect. To be effective, waterboarding is usually real drowning that simulates death. That is, the victim experiences the sensations of drowning: struggle, panic, breath-holding, swallowing, vomiting, taking water into the lungs and, eventually, the same feeling of not being able to breathe that one experiences after being punched in the gut. The main difference is that the drowning process is halted. According to those who have studied waterboarding's effects, it can cause severe psychological trauma, such as panic attacks, for years.

The United States knows quite a bit about waterboarding. The U.S. government -- whether acting alone before domestic courts, commissions and courts-martial or as part of the world community -- has not only condemned the use of water torture but has severely punished those who applied it.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/co ... 01170.html

[Baron Von PWN]

Waterboarding causes temporary discomfort..... A person can be waterboarded and feel fine right after.I consider it causing extreme discomfort rather than severe pain. Unlike other forms of 'torture' the person will not be feeling pain later that day and if a person knows that waterboarding is the worst thing that can happen then they know that they are not in a torturous place, but rather subject to a discomforting process if they do not want to cooperate.

O rly?!

Waterboarding is a form of torture that consists of immobilizing the subject on his/her back with the head inclined downwards; water is then poured over the face into breathing passages, thus triggering the mammalian diving reflex causing the captive to experience the sensations of drowning.[1][2] In contrast to submerging the head face-forward in water, waterboarding precipitates an almost immediate gag reflex.[3] It can cause extreme pain, dry drowning, damage to lungs, brain damage from oxygen deprivation, other physical injuries including broken bones due to struggling against restraints, lasting psychological damage and, if uninterrupted, death.[4] Adverse physical consequences can manifest themselves months after the event, while psychological effects can last for years.[5] The term waterboarding was coined in 2004

Not to mention that I'm using the international definition of torture and you aren't

Ohoh Rly?

So the definition in the UN convention on torture isn't the international definition? I don't believe you have provided a definition of torture.

Don't argue red herring points if you want to talk about bull shit. Gassing/Electrocution/Beheadings have a torturous element and there was plenty of torture to go with that. Plus execution is worse than torture so what's your fucking point?

Well torture is the use of pain/coercion to extract information/a confession from a prisoner. Whereas gassing/ beheading someone is simply an execution, the result of which makes it difficult to withdraw information. Yes executing through gassing and beheading is aweful but it isn't torture its an execution, different things. That would be my point.

Waterboarding is responsible for stopping a terror plot in Los Angeles and nobody was harmed. Don't fucking equate waterboarding with the bull shit terrorists would do to you if you were their captive.

Also I never said shit about thought crime, so you can take that and stuff it.

According to who? the people doing the torturing?

Say ,I have a rock that will protect you from tigers, would you like to buy it?

You made the statement (and I'm paraphrasing) "water-boarding is being called torture by the enemies of the US (Foreing and domestic)" . To me that statement suggest anyone who disagrees that Water-boarding is not torture is an enemy of the USA. So the person's thought is so offensive they are an enemy. Thought crime.

Who's to say Terrorists wouldn't use water-boarding? they are pretty nasty after all. Besides it doesn't matter what terrorists do they are the things that go bump in the night, the USA is supposed to stand up for what is right. You know, Freedom, liberty, Human rights. Somehow I don't think Water-boarding jives with that.

[Baron Von PWN]

So the US is complicit in even what they consider to be torture, and has tortured detainees. So who is responsible? Army brass for not responding? Government officials for enacting a policy permitting water boarding? Should they be hung like the Japanese torturer after ww2?

In my opinion the USA must do something to redeem itself. As it stands any calls from the US to stop torture will ring hollow unless those responsible for permitting these human rights breaches are brought to justice.

[Woodruff]

So the US is complicit in even what they consider to be torture, and has tortured detainees. So who is responsible? Army brass for not responding? Government officials for enacting a policy permitting water boarding? Should they be hung like the Japanese torturer after ww2?

Everyone who knows it happened and did nothing to stop it absolutely should be court-martialed if they're in the military and taken to trial if they are not. Everyone who is complicit in it happening (enacting policy and such) should likewise be court-martialed or taken to trail.

Reminder: Court-martial is simply the military term for taking someone to trial, it is not a punishment or a finding of guilt.

In my opinion the USA must do something to redeem itself. As it stands any calls from the US to stop torture will ring hollow unless those responsible for permitting these human rights breaches are brought to justice.

Absolutely true.