Posted on 03/23/2016 11:35:20 AM PDT by Starman417
In wake of the Brussels attack, media (including center-right polibloggers monikered "wordsmith") once again are drawing focus on Trump; because how do you keep a narcissist happy? Feed them the attention they ask for:
The Republican frontrunner was the first presidential hopeful to respond to the Brussels attacks, tweeting and then appearing on multiple television shows to promote an anti-immigration policy and endorse torture.
~~~ He also endorsed the use of torture for people who have information on terrorists.“If they could expand the laws, I would do a lot more than waterboarding,” Trump told NBC’s Today Show. “You have to get the information from people.”
On Wolf Blitzer:
CNN's Wolf Blitzer asked Trump about Paris attacker Salah Abdeslam, who was captured in Belgium last week and is reportedly talking with investigators.“Well you know he may be talking, but he’ll talk a lot faster with the torture," Trump said, remarking that if he would have talked sooner, perhaps Tuesday's attacks could have been prevented.
While I do believe we have moral standards to live up to, rule of laws to uphold, I also believe it's immoral to not do everything we can to save lives because we treat our enemies with kid gloves. I understand that. I get it.
Unfortunately, Trump's (mis)understanding of waterboarding as implemented in the Bush-era and how interrogations work is glaringly obvious. He apparently shares mainstream perception that the CIA and military engaged in torture; the difference being is his come-away: So what? It's torture lite and we should not be ashamed of it but do "a helluva lot worse". Trump is embodying the cartoonish view of right-wingers willing to go all Jack Bauer on some terrorist candy-a$$e$.
Trump, like most of the world, is speaking out of ignorance.
As Marc Thiessen, author of Courting Disaster, wrote in February as a response to Trump's claims that he'd bring back waterboarding "and worse":
the idea that we need something “beyond waterboarding” to achieve this is absurd. Of the tens of thousands of individuals captured since the terrorist attacks of September 11, 2001, only about 30 were subjected to enhanced interrogation of any kind, and just three underwent waterboarding.SITs are appropriate in most cases. EITs, even in absence of any public controversy that arose after 2005, became less used and less needed as time wore on. In the early days, we knew very little about al Qaeda and were desperate to prevent the next wave of attacks that seemed imminent on the heels of 9/11. But by 2006, we owed over half of what we came to learn and understand about al Qaeda, through information obtained in the CIA RDI Program(s). To this day, the intelligence community is benefiting from those intell yields from the likes of KSM, who did have EITs applied, including 5 CIA swim lessons.So the idea that we need to go “beyond waterboarding” to get the information we need to protect the country is flat wrong. With the exception of a few extreme cases—like 9/11 mastermind Khalid Sheikh Mohammed—we can get the information we need without waterboarding, much less techniques that are “far worse.”
My response in February:
the issue is moot. When Ted Cruz states he “would not bring it back in any sort of widespread use,” it perpetuates a commonly held misperception that the practice was used on more than just 3 HVTs; and in use by our military (Rumsfeld specifically rejected it as an EIT when military officials came to him requesting alternate techniques, whereas Bush signed on to it while rejecting an EIT that was even more severe).As I wrote before:
Waterboarding was discontinued in 2006 as a CIA EIT practice under Bush’s watch (and the last time an HVT received waterboarding treatment was in 2003) as its effectiveness was compromised when its usage as a technique to interrogate HVTs became common knowledge (applied to only 3 HVTs). President Obama’s 2009 EO signed upon his first day in office banning all EITs was basically redundant on the torture issue, since President Bush essentially said much the same in his 2007 EO.
~~~ What made waterboarding- and all the EITs in the CIA program- effective as tools against HVTs who were trained to resist standard interrogation practices, was in the not knowing. In the secrecy. Because of all the media attention and President Obama’s decision to release the OLC “torture” memos describing the techniques, the Houdini psychological power of these techniques have been all but effectively nullified.The CIA program should probably be revived; but now that the magic tricks have been revealed to its al Qaeda audience, demystifying the EITs, HVTs know that what they have to train against is the smoke and mirrors of simulated torture, and not real torture. So what techniques would a revived CIA interrogation program that goes beyond the Army Field Manual have to entail? Whatever they come up with, we the general public should not be privy to.
Some comments I've seen from people argue "If it was okay under Bush, how come it's not okay now?" How is it that a staunch defender of CIA waterboarding like Marc Thiessen not also endorse Trump's views? How does former CIA Director Michael Hayden defend the CIA interrogation program with a straight face while attacking Trump over claims of military allowance for waterboarding (something that Rumsfeld had rejected as inappropriate for military interrogations)?
(Excerpt) Read more at floppingaces.net ...
Kicking the Muslims out of Europe will prevent the next attack.
Which will happen sooner or later. Probably sooner.
Trump gets it right. Only to our corrupt media is water boarding torture but cutting a Christian’s head off is not.
Liberal say “Nah, it’s better that they blow up people than to harm the terrorists into giving up details”
Maybe... but gov officials should be tried first at least.
they need to arrest the entire family and neighborhood where he was harbored for the last few weeks
they knew where he was and didn’t tell the authorities
A moderate muslim is just one who lets violent muslims do the killing
I have no compunction against waterboarding a self confessed terrorist and murderer to directly save lives.
It’s only effective if we have the will and ability to act on the information obtained.
At least people don’t die after waterboarding. Compared to beheading, crucifixion, immolation, drowning while immobilized in a cage...
That is exactly how libtards think. They would rather see dead bodies, as long as no terrorist is inconvenienced. What dipsticks.
What made waterboarding- and all the EITs in the CIA program- effective as tools against HVTs who were trained to resist standard interrogation practices, was in the not knowing. In the secrecy. Because of all the media attention and President Obama’s decision to release the OLC “torture” memos describing the techniques, the Houdini psychological power of these techniques have been all but effectively nullified. The CIA program should probably be revived; but now that the magic tricks have been revealed to its al Qaeda audience, demystifying the EITs, HVTs know that what they have to train against is the smoke and mirrors of simulated torture, and not real torture. So what techniques would a revived CIA interrogation program that goes beyond the Army Field Manual have to entail? Whatever they come up with, we the general public should not be privy to.
Because it wasn't really torture, yet it gave the appearance of torture because the target could not know how far it could or would be taken. With uncertainity comes fear. When it is known that the act will not result in death, the fear factor is removed and the enhanced interrogation technique is endured.
Not torture per se, but I cannot help but feel that executing terrorists by boiling them alive in pig's blood would very likely prevent future Terrorist attacks from Muslims. 
This was not an intelligence failure it was a failure to act on that intelligence
No. Torture does NOT work. Have spoken to more experts than I can count back in the day. Every cop and military officer I knew laughed at the thought for any number of reasons, many of them obvious.
Torture is revenge. Now it’s a revenge I understand, but if your desire is to get information, torture is just about the worst thing you can do.
Wrong question. The right course is to remove the people who commit, or are even remotely likely to commit, terrorism from where you don't want them to operate.
To wit, kick out muslims from all Western societies. Simple, really. No need to stoop to the despicable act of torture.
I found it very unpleasant but was completely unharmed and able to do a debrief on the experience later that day.
Its a VERY effective tool, but definitely not torture in any way shape or form.
My personal opinion has always been that opponents oppose its use not because its a form of torture but instead oppose it because it is NOT torture and yet it is so effective at getting information
Perhaps. But this WILL work!
It troubles me to say it but the EUROWEENIES are hoist on their own petard!
There’s only one way to deal with these muslim killers: BOMB THE CRAP OUT OF THEM!
To end WWII and save the lives of perhaps another hundred thousand or more American troops, we dropped nukes on two Japanese cities directly killing over a quarter of a million men, women, CHILDREN and BABIES, nearly all of them CIVILIANS who just happened to be governed by a gang of militaristic maniacs bent on dominating the world. Many more of them perished in the months and years following. Some of those civilians probably disagreed with their rulers but they died just the same.
And our historically ignorant citizens have forgotten the February, 1945 FIREBOMBING of Dresden as the war in Europe was winding down. In what has correctly been called vindictive “payback” for the London Blitz, the allies suffocated and incinerated more than 150,000 mainly civilian German men, woman, children and babies. An exact count of the dead could never he determined as most of the bodies were reduced to ashes. .
How do THOSE situations differ from how we should deal with with the muslim murderers? And, if it came to it, would we get grief from the OTHER nuclear powers, Russia and China – who ALSO have problems with muslim murderers of their own?
All those dead Japanese and German CIVILIANS are today called “collateral damage”.
And if the Pakistanis who also have nukes and and have been siding with the murderers for decades – even SHELTERING BIN LADEN! – take active exception to our making Raqqah and Mosul – and now, thanks to Clinton’s destabilization of Libya, parts of that country as well – glow in the dark, we probably have a few nukes – and incendiary devices – in the arsenal with their name on them.
Yes.
Next question?
I often wonder where the terrorist groups get the orange jumpsuits and the idea of the jumpsuits from, for the beheading videos.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.