Donald Trump Says Torture 'absolutely Works' In First Major Interview As President

Not sure if he said it but he did type it.

 

Maybe he meant to say, I mean type "native"?

 

How can torture work?

For example, water boarding. You're not going to get anything out of someone by turning them upside down and pouring water over their face. At best you'll likely hear something along the lines of "gargle, gargle"

What you are still failing to appreciate is that while torture might work sometimes, it does not work all of the time.

Employing such techniques to extract information from POWs is always performed on the assumption that they know something, or might know something.

What if they don't know anything? How does a POW who doesn't know anything stop themselves being tortured?

By making something up, telling the people who are torturing them what they think they want to hear to make it stop.

And then we end up with innocent men in Afganistan being captured by the US military and flown to Guantanamo Bay and held for years indefinately without charge, contrary to international law and probably tortured as well.

No this is very much not acceptable in the modern world. Get a fucking grip.

 

I was so distressed and failed to describe the statement in the correct manner.

 

I recommend Gitmo Diary by Mohammadu Ould Slahi...available on line at the usual book vendor sites.

 

Why yes, that's precisely what I said/typed/telepathed. I know it helps people sleep better at night to think it doesn't work, but that all that is accomplished by denying it. Again, humans have been torturing people for millennia in all kinds of ways. Sure, some of it is for pure sadism like this bullshit collection of tortures ISIS has been delivering. But a lot of it has been used to effectively render information.

I'm not advocating for this to happen. But I'm not closing my eyes to it and humming kumbaya either. We have some very horrible people out there torturing people right now, and getting away with it. No amount of fairy tale thinking will stop it. We'll probably see the end of racism before we see the end of torture. Give it a couple of thousand years.

 

Yea, I answered all of this back in January. Scroll back. Of course you never once saw me post this torture was "acceptable" in any way, so why pester me with your feelings?

 

Bribery also works, but the same problems plague that as well. People will say anything for money.

You say you get it, yet you still talk like some who supports torture.

If you get it then you don't support torture.

Who am I to debate this with someone who is an expert in these matters though.

The other problem with torture is of course the torturers. How do we know they are not terrorists as well? The kind of people who wouldn't think twice about orchestrating a terrorist attack on home soil and then blaming it on some fantasy character who lives in a cave, yet somehow manages to be the ringleader of a global terrorist organisation by recording tapes and sending them out on the internet. Still waiting on the bloodshed he promised to spill on the west, and proof that he was assassinated by black ops.

Maybe we should capture some western leaders and torture them, might be the first time in history any of them speaks a word of fucking truth.

 

So then, there are occasions when you support using torture. Who'd a thought it?

I've explained that I understand torture, not that I support it. There is a difference.

 

Not as a method of extracting information, I meant that comment as a joke. I would condone torturing some politicians for the fun of it though.

You have pointed out the most obvious basic logic behind torture as a means of extracing information. Everyone knows this. There is nothing exceptionally profound about your observation there whatsoever, it's a no brainer.

You also come across as though you condone torture as a legtimate tool for the intelligence agencies and you argue for torture on the grounds that it works, but fail to acknowledge it's obvious failings which render it potentially more harmful than beneficial in times of war. In that respect, overall it is not a competent method of seeking out vital intelligence.

 

You're projecting that notion onto me, I never once suggested that I condone it at all. I have only said that it's naive to think it doesn't work or that it's ever going to just go away because people speak out against it. It's part of the human condition, which you just demonstrated personally.

 

You are doing there exactly what you are accusing me of doing.

Torture is not part of the human condition, it's a mental illness.

Once again, the passion with which you argue for the effectiveness of torture is indicative of your own personal views that it should be condoned. You haven't explicitly stated you condone it, but the inference is there, whether true or not. Noone is projecting any notions on to you, you are pojecting them out via your misguided and simplistic comments about torture.

 

Mental illness is also part of the human condition. There's a lot of loons out there.

From all of this discussion it appears what you really need is an "enemy" and I have no interest in playing such a role for you. I can only explain so many times that I don't advocate torture but you keep insisting that I do. This is pointless.

 

I thought Republicans hummed, "The East and West are mine. The North and South are mine." And all their humming is keyed to the viola rendition of Swan Lake.

 

Spare me the psychoanalysis.

If you say you don't advocate torture then you don't. All I'm saying is you come across as though you do.

You have also still failed to concede that overall torture does not facilitate effective measures towards increasing national security. All you have done is point out the obvious. Like saying that if you pointed a gun at someone's head and told them to give you their wallet that this is an effective method of robbing people, you're stating the obvious, nothing more.

And I'm not "looking for an enemy", you are the one who seems to consistently return posts with sanctimony and animosity, so speak for yourself.

 

During WWII one of the more successful Nazi interrogators was a German Jew who never resorted to torture. He took his time, made friendly talk and let them slowly tell him what he needed.

All the while he was having them fed only boiled potatoes which he was pissing on.

Seventy years later he still regrets pissing on their food.

 

Did he piss on them after they were boiled, or just boil them in the piss?

Either way, I bet the POWs were glad they didn't get any HP sauce.

 

He pissed on them after they were cooked. He was interviewed on NPR and was ashamed of what he did.

I personally don't agree with physical torture. I think it does more to create more terrorists than stop future attacks.

 

So now I'm a republican? Amazing!

 

if by working, he means generating false confessions to use as excuses,
because if anything the interigator makes clear to thier victims,
its that the last thing in hell they're interested in is truth,
because the victim has already given that and it didn't stop,
so the unavoidable conclusion is that what the interigator wants,
is admission to something the victim has never heard of and knows nothing about.