Quantcast
Jump to content
Search In
  • More options...
Find results that contain...
Find results in...
    1. Welcome to GTAForums!

    1. Red Dead Redemption 2

      1. PC
      2. Gameplay
      3. Missions
      4. Help & Support
    2. Red Dead Online

      1. Gameplay
      2. Find Lobbies & Outlaws
      3. Help & Support
      4. Frontier Pursuits
    1. Crews & Posses

      1. Recruitment
    2. Events

    1. GTA Online

      1. Diamond Casino & Resort
      2. DLC
      3. Find Lobbies & Players
      4. Guides & Strategies
      5. Vehicles
      6. Content Creator
      7. Help & Support
    2. Grand Theft Auto Series

    3. GTA 6

    4. GTA V

      1. PC
      2. Guides & Strategies
      3. Help & Support
    5. GTA IV

      1. Episodes from Liberty City
      2. Multiplayer
      3. Guides & Strategies
      4. Help & Support
      5. GTA IV Mods
    6. GTA Chinatown Wars

    7. GTA Vice City Stories

    8. GTA Liberty City Stories

    9. GTA San Andreas

      1. Guides & Strategies
      2. Help & Support
      3. GTA SA Mods
    10. GTA Vice City

      1. Guides & Strategies
      2. Help & Support
      3. GTA VC Mods
    11. GTA III

      1. Guides & Strategies
      2. Help & Support
      3. GTA III Mods
    12. Top Down Games

      1. GTA Advance
      2. GTA 2
      3. GTA
    13. Wiki

      1. Merchandising
    1. GTA Modding

      1. GTA V
      2. GTA IV
      3. GTA III, VC & SA
      4. Tutorials
    2. Mod Showroom

      1. Scripts & Plugins
      2. Maps
      3. Total Conversions
      4. Vehicles
      5. Textures
      6. Characters
      7. Tools
      8. Other
      9. Workshop
    3. Featured Mods

      1. DYOM
      2. OpenIV
      3. GTA: Underground
      4. GTA: Liberty City
      5. GTA: State of Liberty
    1. Red Dead Redemption

    2. Rockstar Games

    1. Off-Topic

      1. General Chat
      2. Gaming
      3. Technology
      4. Programming
      5. Movies & TV
      6. Music
      7. Sports
      8. Vehicles
    2. Expression

      1. Graphics / Visual Arts
      2. GFX Requests & Tutorials
      3. Writers' Discussion
      4. Debates & Discussion
    1. News

    2. Forum Support

    3. Site Suggestions

Finn 7 five 11

So the government is allowed to torture?

Recommended Posts

Finn 7 five 11

I was just reading the " CIA torture report"

 

I was just wondering, has anybody been imprisoned for this? Other than the whistleblower who spoke out about torture. Why are they allowed to to torture people? What gives them that right?

 

 

I feel more and more that ISIS isn't the world's enemy, the USA is.

 

Forgot my source

 

http://tenplay.com.au/channel-ten/the-project/top-stories-december-2014/cia-torture-report-released

Edited by Finn 7 five 11

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Payne Killer

Torture has been used way before that report came out.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
universetwisters

I was just reading the " CIA torture report"

 

I was just wondering, has anybody been imprisoned for this? Other than the whistleblower who spoke out about torture. Why are they allowed to to torture people? What gives them that right?

 

 

I feel more and more that ISIS isn't the world's enemy, the USA is.

 

alex-jones-o.gif

 

But seriously though, I'd like to imagine what it would be like if the US never ever tortured folks. Didn't they find Osama because they caught one of his couriers and got him to snitch VIA torture?

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Finn 7 five 11

Torture has been used way before that report came out.

That's not the point in any way at all, this sailed over your head so far that an atmosphere reentry was required for the point to come back to earth.

People have been pillaged, raped and murdered before we reported it, does that Make it right?

Edited by Finn 7 five 11

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Payne Killer

Torture is not right. Its not even good for getting information, I'm sure anyone would lie in order to stop being tortured.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Finn 7 five 11

 

I was just reading the " CIA torture report"

 

I was just wondering, has anybody been imprisoned for this? Other than the whistleblower who spoke out about torture. Why are they allowed to to torture people? What gives them that right?

 

 

I feel more and more that ISIS isn't the world's enemy, the USA is.

[imfgg]http://stream1.gifsoup.com/view8/4595407/alex-jones-o.gif[/img]

 

But seriously though, I'd like to imagine what it would be like if the US never ever tortured folks. Didn't they find Osama because they caught one of his couriers and got him to snitch VIA torture?

 

As the report indicates, information from the torture was inaccurate and irrelevant and all relevant information was gathered before torture even began.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
theadmiral

It is torture not knowing when i'll next be behind the seat of a big ol' Johnny and when i'll watch the next episode of sailor moon

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
RussianCommie

What I found just really outrageous, I guess is the word, is that none of the information that was obtained through means of torture really led anywhere and did not produce any results. You would expect some progress through simulating someone drowning, as an example here being waterboarding, but nothing of such was achieved.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
GTA_stu

My main qualm is it's usually not a very effective method of gaining information, since people being tortured will tell you anything and everything, and nearly none of it will be reliable. Plus it also damages your reputation as a country and it limits and makes it much harder to take an effective stance against real human rights abusers like North Korea or ISIS. But as a principle I have no issue with using some methods of torture against persons guilty of extreme crimes against my country, if in theory it could save lives.

Edited by stu

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
PoeticWhisper

 

 

My man Trevor knows what's up.

Edited by PoeticWhisper

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Shaundi.

In 2014, I think the CIA should swap extreme torture for hard labour.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Finn 7 five 11

My main qualm is it's usually not a very effective method of gaining information, since people being tortured will tell you anything and everything, and nearly none of it will be reliable. Plus it also damages your reputation as a country and it limits and makes it much harder to take an effective stance against real human rights abusers like North Korea or ISIS. But as a principle I have no issue with using some methods of torture against persons guilty of extreme crimes against my country, if in theory it could save lives.

Humans aren't like the movies. If you're locked up with a bunch of CIA agents who are going to beat the sh*t out of you until you tell them something, you're just going to tell them in the hopes of getting out alive.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
GTA_stu

 

My main qualm is it's usually not a very effective method of gaining information, since people being tortured will tell you anything and everything, and nearly none of it will be reliable. Plus it also damages your reputation as a country and it limits and makes it much harder to take an effective stance against real human rights abusers like North Korea or ISIS. But as a principle I have no issue with using some methods of torture against persons guilty of extreme crimes against my country, if in theory it could save lives.

Humans aren't like the movies. If you're locked up with a bunch of CIA agents who are going to beat the sh*t out of you until you tell them something, you're just going to tell them in the hopes of getting out alive.

 

 

That's pretty much what I said lol. I said it's not reliable for information gathering, but that if it could be used in a hypothetical scenario where it would save lives I wouldn't be against it on moral/ethical grounds.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Finn 7 five 11

 

 

 

My main qualm is it's usually not a very effective method of gaining information, since people being tortured will tell you anything and everything, and nearly none of it will be reliable. Plus it also damages your reputation as a country and it limits and makes it much harder to take an effective stance against real human rights abusers like North Korea or ISIS. But as a principle I have no issue with using some methods of torture against persons guilty of extreme crimes against my country, if in theory it could save lives.

Humans aren't like the movies. If you're locked up with a bunch of CIA agents who are going to beat the sh*t out of you until you tell them something, you're just going to tell them in the hopes of getting out alive.

 

That's pretty much what I said lol. I said it's not reliable for information gathering, but that if it could be used in a hypothetical scenario where it would save lives I wouldn't be against it on moral/ethical grounds.

Well yes you did say that, but then you go on to contradict yourself, twice now. Edited by Finn 7 five 11

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
na89340qv0n34b09q340

I feel more and more that ISIS isn't the world's enemy, the USA is.

The world's enemy is anyone who acts as if their goals are important enough to opress other people in pursuit of them. Both groups suck in that regard. :)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Docfaustino

 

I feel more and more that ISIS isn't the world's enemy, the USA is.

The world's enemy is anyone who acts as if their goals are important enough to opress other people in pursuit of them. Both groups suck in that regard. :)

 

 

Wow, that was really well put.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
GTA_stu

 

 

 

My main qualm is it's usually not a very effective method of gaining information, since people being tortured will tell you anything and everything, and nearly none of it will be reliable. Plus it also damages your reputation as a country and it limits and makes it much harder to take an effective stance against real human rights abusers like North Korea or ISIS. But as a principle I have no issue with using some methods of torture against persons guilty of extreme crimes against my country, if in theory it could save lives.

Humans aren't like the movies. If you're locked up with a bunch of CIA agents who are going to beat the sh*t out of you until you tell them something, you're just going to tell them in the hopes of getting out alive.

 

That's pretty much what I said lol. I said it's not reliable for information gathering, but that if it could be used in a hypothetical scenario where it would save lives I wouldn't be against it on moral/ethical grounds.

Well yes you did say that, but then you go on to contradict yourself, twice now.

 

 

How did I contradict myself?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Raavi

Torture is hit and miss, although much more the latter than the former. One guy in Guantanamo Bay can produce actionable intelligence leading to the capture of some top level terrorist, whilst some other guy in a CIA black site in Poland can say there are bombs up the rectums of the geese in Central Park and have everything but conspicuous guys going up the rectums of geese in Central Park. Sending them quite literally on a wild goose chase. It really depends on the person in the hot seat. Should it be a legal option, in the hypothetical scenario that there is 100% certainty the guy has actionable intelligence that's going to save hundreds of lives and all other options have been exhausted and it's 5 to twelve, then.. let's just say I wouldn't be outraged. It should never be used however on someone like a sheep herder from Afghanistan who might have once sold a carton of milk to the nephew of a friend of some terrorist honcho. It's a nuclear option and should be treated as such.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
make total destroy

Torture is p barbaric, regardless of who is doing the torturing to who, and why. Unless you're in the Wu-Tang Clan, it's just not acceptable.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Ai®a©ob®a

The offical answer to your question is No since it is against the Genva Convention but Bush used the logic of since they aren't your typical enemy combatant since they don't wear uniforms than they aren't subject to the protection under the Genva Convention and even if they were typical armed forces combatants and protected under it all the CIA needs to a signature from the President with his policy that isn't subject to congress control the CIA doesn't answer to anyone but the President himself so in the eyes of Bush & the CIA it was allowed.

 

Studies have shown ever since World War II though Vietnam and into the Gulf Wars that information obtain though such practices was around 90% if no more of false information given by "POW" just so they would stop being subjected to it meanwhile they take him at his word and go on a wild chase trying to find as Raavi put it "The bombs up the rectums of the geese in Central Park"

 

The CIA had claimed that the practice is what lead them to Osama Bin Laden though his minder which lead the CIA to where Bin Laden was staying but in reality that was false Bin Laden was actually found though good intel not torture.

Edited by Troubadour

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
ddyoung

When they fly planes full of people into buildings, they deserve to get tortured so that we can learn about their network. Although this is ethically wrong, its is politicly and strategically right.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
gtamann123

Of course the government is allowed to torture. They make the rules so they can do whatever they want.

Torture is p barbaric, regardless of who is doing the torturing to who, and why. Unless you're in the Wu-Tang Clan, it's just not acceptable.

Yeah but what about torturing rich people and business owners

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Nick1020

When they fly planes full of people into buildings, they deserve to get tortured so that we can learn about their network. Although this is ethically wrong, its is politicly and strategically right.

What about innocents being wrongfully associated?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Docfaustino

When they fly planes full of people into buildings, they deserve to get tortured so that we can learn about their network. Although this is ethically wrong, its is politicly and strategically right.

 

Right but what about the 15 year old child soldier who ended up tortured by the American government. What about the 4 Afghans who were detained and tortured to death just for trying to cross the border. They were cab drivers man. As comforting as it would be to believe that this is a black and white, good guy vs. terrorist issues, the world doesn't work that way. CIA agents make mistakes of identity. Sometimes they abuse their power. I'll never forget, a female CIA agent who wiretapped a mosque I believe, thought she heard the word "planes" spoken over the phone. In reality he said something different and was just talking to a friend. The man was kidnapped and tortured. He was misinterpreted and in fact, was just another citizen.

 

We've stopped torturing people for years and not only have there been no 9/11s, our intelligence is better than ever. Not to mention the torture didn't even work according to the report.

Edited by Docfaustino

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Dingdongs

 

 

Torture is hit and miss, although much more the latter than the former. One guy in Guantanamo Bay can produce actionable intelligence leading to the capture of some top level terrorist, whilst some other guy in a CIA black site in Poland can say there are bombs up the rectums of the geese in Central Park and have everything but conspicuous guys going up the rectums of geese in Central Park. Sending them quite literally on a wild goose chase. It really depends on the person in the hot seat. Should it be a legal option, in the hypothetical scenario that there is 100% certainty the guy has actionable intelligence that's going to save hundreds of lives and all other options have been exhausted and it's 5 to twelve, then.. let's just say I wouldn't be outraged. It should never be used however on someone like a sheep herder from Afghanistan who might have once sold a carton of milk to the nephew of a friend of some terrorist honcho. It's a nuclear option and should be treated as such.

Agree with you 100% (surprisingly)

 

Liberals would have you believe torture was a complete failure and that it was a waste of time and did nothing. Conservative party would have you believe it saved America from numerous attacks, caught UBL, and singlehandedly prevented American women from taking it up the ass forcibly from towel headed camel hoarders trying to come to the US. The truth probably lies somewhere in the middle. Those of you who are saying in this thread that it was not torture that led to Bin Laden just really don't have a basis for that. Yes the Senate Democrats and a lot of CIA analysts (not case officers by and large) say it wasn't torture. But most of the CIA leadership, along with the case officers who work the field, do believe it at least contributed. Then you've got Dick Cheney saying it was the sole reason we found Bin Laden. Again, truth is somewhere in the middle.

 

I've read Ali Soufan's book where he talks about how he was able to get KSM to give actionable intelligence by sitting with him and talking to him in Arabic and getting on his level. How he would debate Middle Eastern politics with terrorists in FBI/JTTF custody. I think that these are the methods we need to focus on and train people in. But if it gets to a point where you are spending 3 months and these people will not say a single actionable thing, then I say f*ck it. Break out the rectal feedings, the waterboard, and break their legs and make them stand in stress positions. Whatever they have to do. Take "full control" of the detainee. But don't do it as the first step because you think torturing terrorists is righteous, which I think we got carried away with after 9/11. I would say it is hard to argue that the CIA did not get at least some actionable information through torture. Could they have gotten it through other methods? Who knows...

 

As a quick aside, I do think that certain methods like sensory deprivation, sleep deprivation, forced injections of truth serums, are methods that should be used too and regularly at that on terror suspects/hostile foreign operatives. If detainee 's only motivation to give info is to stop pain, who knows what that info will be? If you break the detainee down and disorient them through those methods, then use conventional methods of interrogation on a detainee that is under serum, sensory deprived (i.e. loud music in their ears), or sleep deprived, it is likely you can get them "off guard" and get information. That's probably more effective than the old waterboard.

Edited by Irviding

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
161isaiah161

The us has done this for years

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
sivispacem

Humans aren't like the movies. If you're locked up with a bunch of CIA agents who are going to beat the sh*t out of you until you tell them something, you're just going to tell them in the hopes of getting out alive.

Ivirding covered this pretty much flawlessly, but to expand on what he said, it wasn't just the individual that determined whether torture worked but their reaction to particular methods of interrogation.

 

Stuff like sleep deprivation has a similar effect to deliriants. Some people will remain lucid enough to engage in conversation, some will just babble incoherently.

 

In terms of outcomes versus ramifications, it doesn't look great.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
t3h PeNgU1N oF d00m

It is torture not knowing when i'll next be behind the seat of a big ol' Johnny and when i'll watch the next episode of sailor moon

Hahaha, so randumb.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Finn 7 five 11

 

 

 

 

Torture is hit and miss, although much more the latter than the former. One guy in Guantanamo Bay can produce actionable intelligence leading to the capture of some top level terrorist, whilst some other guy in a CIA black site in Poland can say there are bombs up the rectums of the geese in Central Park and have everything but conspicuous guys going up the rectums of geese in Central Park. Sending them quite literally on a wild goose chase. It really depends on the person in the hot seat. Should it be a legal option, in the hypothetical scenario that there is 100% certainty the guy has actionable intelligence that's going to save hundreds of lives and all other options have been exhausted and it's 5 to twelve, then.. let's just say I wouldn't be outraged. It should never be used however on someone like a sheep herder from Afghanistan who might have once sold a carton of milk to the nephew of a friend of some terrorist honcho. It's a nuclear option and should be treated as such.

Agree with you 100% (surprisingly)

 

Liberals would have you believe torture was a complete failure and that it was a waste of time and did nothing. Conservative party would have you believe it saved America from numerous attacks, caught UBL, and singlehandedly prevented American women from taking it up the ass forcibly from towel headed camel hoarders trying to come to the US. The truth probably lies somewhere in the middle. Those of you who are saying in this thread that it was not torture that led to Bin Laden just really don't have a basis for that. Yes the Senate Democrats and a lot of CIA analysts (not case officers by and large) say it wasn't torture. But most of the CIA leadership, along with the case officers who work the field, do believe it at least contributed. Then you've got Dick Cheney saying it was the sole reason we found Bin Laden. Again, truth is somewhere in the middle.

 

I've read Ali Soufan's book where he talks about how he was able to get KSM to give actionable intelligence by sitting with him and talking to him in Arabic and getting on his level. How he would debate Middle Eastern politics with terrorists in FBI/JTTF custody. I think that these are the methods we need to focus on and train people in. But if it gets to a point where you are spending 3 months and these people will not say a single actionable thing, then I say f*ck it. Break out the rectal feedings, the waterboard, and break their legs and make them stand in stress positions. Whatever they have to do. Take "full control" of the detainee. But don't do it as the first step because you think torturing terrorists is righteous, which I think we got carried away with after 9/11. I would say it is hard to argue that the CIA did not get at least some actionable information through torture. Could they have gotten it through other methods? Who knows...

 

As a quick aside, I do think that certain methods like sensory deprivation, sleep deprivation, forced injections of truth serums, are methods that should be used too and regularly at that on terror suspects/hostile foreign operatives. If detainee 's only motivation to give info is to stop pain, who knows what that info will be? If you break the detainee down and disorient them through those methods, then use conventional methods of interrogation on a detainee that is under serum, sensory deprived (i.e. loud music in their ears), or sleep deprived, it is likely you can get them "off guard" and get information. That's probably more effective than the old waterboard.

Nice post man, very well put, I don't really have anything to add, other than to ask if you think anybody should face charges for extreme torture on completely innocent people?

 

I could definitely agree to the latter forms of torture because they could actually be effective in a few circumstances as sivis mentioned, and if performed in a manner that's reasonably humane. Something like sleep deprivation + interrogation, or being drugged would definitely be less psychologically harmful than getting your ass penetrated daily or being subject to extreme pain.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.


  • 1 User Currently Viewing
    0 members, 0 Anonymous, 1 Guest

×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

By using GTAForums.com, you agree to our Terms of Use and Privacy Policy.