I'm actually confused on the torture issue

I'm actually confused on the torture issue.

On one hand, I admit there have been times when actionable intelligence was received via torture

But my concern is with weighing that against the negatives: the effect on the torturer, the innocent torturees (is that a fucking word?"), and the what happens to society when these people are discharged back into it.

"Honest men should not make war their sole profession"--Machiavelli

Also, last time I made this thread, someone told me not to quote "The Prince," unironically. The above quote is actually from Machiavelli's "Art of War," which was the gold standard of military strategy more or less until the American Revolution. It is still considered to be definitive for its era

Other urls found in this thread:

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_support_for_Iraq_during_the_Iran–Iraq_war
twitter.com/AnonBabble

if you fall as low as your enemy you've become your enemy
enjoy living in the soviet union mister "tiny amount of taxation is enough for me to declare independence"

What is happening in the pic OP?

OP here

That is incredibly thin ice to stand on

I was hoping for something more substantial, but I can't blame you--I thought of nothing myself.

Torture is wrong. People are not objects and information given under torture isn't reliable.
If you kill your enemies, they win.

Terrorist have no rights. Sorry Muhammad

>American
>doesnt recognize Abu Ghraib

Abu Ghraib was when these photos from a torture site in Iraq got leaked. Some of the prisoners ended up being innocent

Its a big deal because its the first time Americans saw what torture actually is. Most people think its just nipple clamps or something gay, but torture is really a science at this point

I never understand what is happening in these images. Are there any more?

Nah, just a white urban arm chair Sup Forumsitician

I meant for what purpose were they stacked up like this.

>Terrorist have no rights
you're right. your police state proves americans have no rights

In the OP, and in my second pic, they are basically just trying to humiliate the men. Its part of a typical modern torture regime.

>If you kill your enemies, they win.
A FUCKING LEAF!

Turns out they didn't have WMDs
meanwhile the war added 1 trillion in debt
13,000 homeless veterans on the streets of america

Some tools of the trade

same reason they were leaked
recruitment material for islamists to destabilize their own countries

TORTURE THE MUSLIMS SHIT HEADS

I DON'T GIVE FUCK.

KILL THEM AND MAKE THEM SUFFER BEFORE HAND.

lmao, I knew better than to take you seriously

What are the curved ones for?

>he thinks his secret police is actually trying to fix the middle east
what's next, handouts are given to blacks to make them more prosperous?

In that pic specifically, its just to humiliate them. You switch between pain and humiliation, and the humiliation actually starts to feel like relief from pain. Its just another way to turn a person into a slobbering idiot

>That bent screwdriver

dunno why but that one looks the spookiest. Something about its simplicity....I know that was used for butt stuff somehow and that frightens me

We have definitions for torture.

>The legal definition of torture by the Justice Department tightly narrowed to define as torture only actions which "must be equivalent in intensity to the pain accompanying serious physical injury, such as organ failure, impairment of bodily function, or even death," and argued that actions that inflict any lesser pain, including moderate or fleeting pain, do not necessarily constitute torture.

-t. "christian"

I can't say for sure myself, but most likely, they are inserted into orifices. A common technique the British used on Africans was to use curved tools to push sand into the anus of a prisoner

haha man, I didnt say any of that

>I admit there have been times when actionable intelligence was received via torture

doubt it, they can just look at the terrorists phones and shit, the torture thing is just an intimidation tactic that makes our enemies scared and desperate so they can't think straight and fuck up

I think Napoleon found torture a bad pursuit so there is your suit to follow.

seeIn pic related

>..I know that was used for butt stuff s

nah they shove it up your nose and drag you around with it

when they pull it out blood gushes and hits the floor then they say your dickhole is next

everyone says shit but most of it is useless, it's just intimidation, they let that guy spill to the rest of the cell mates, they have them spill to everyone in the field, they tape that shit and play the tape to people

it works but it just makes people terrified of us

иди нaхoй хoхoл

Duly noted, actually

They clearly did, remember the chemical weapons.

You mean the ones we gave them?

My bad, I'm out of torture pics

I'll post a few other good ones

>Pissing on corpses

Why is this considered bad again? They're dead. They have no rights.

gave saddam chemical weapons when?

the real consequence is when the sleeple finally have enough, balkanize your country, and hang most of your politicians, police, soldiers, and those like you, for your crimes

>Machiavelli
waS A BITCH, WRITE A BOOK FOR ONE PERSON THEN WHEN SHIT DOESNT WORK OUT JUST KEEP JUMPING AROUND AS TO WHO IT WAS FOR. ALSO FUCK YOUR CAPS IM NOT RETYPING SHIT

I IMAGINE IT IS ALOT HARDER TO BE AROUND AND KILL PEOPLE YOU CONSIDER TO BE PEOPLE. ESPECIALLY WHEN THEY DONT ACT LIKE PEOPLE AGAIN FUCK YOUR CAPS

Are you trolling, or really this stupid?

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_support_for_Iraq_during_the_Iran–Iraq_war

The report then detailed 70 shipments (including Bacillus anthracis) from the United States to Iraqi government agencies over three years, concluding "It was later learned that these microorganisms exported by the United States were identical to those the UN inspectors found and recovered from the Iraqi biological warfare program."

The nihlist in me agrees with you completely. However, I understand why its seen as "morally bankrupt"

Furthermore, I find bravado to be a sign of cowardice or incompetence

>the US balkanizing

You read too many habbening threads

There are many military scholars and even generals who disagree with you. What are your qualifications?

Talk to an operator. To be really good, you have to respect your enemy. This goes back to ancient times

FUN FACT BACITRACIN A COMMON ANTIBIOTIC , IS WHAT THE DICTIONARY CALLS AN ARBITRARY BLEND OF "BACILLUS AND THE LAST NAME OF THE AMERICAN GIRLL MARGARET TRACY FROM WHOSE WOUNDS THE BACTERIA WERE ISOLATED IN 1945. YAY PLAGIARISM

BUT MIDWAY THROUGH THE PRINCE HE SWITCHED WHO HE WAS WRITING FOR THEN SWITCHED IT AGAIN IF IM REMEBERING CORRECTLY once who he was writing for died. im not saying he didnt know his shit im just saying fuck him for no reason other than that

Then why was the secretary of defense in charge of the operation?

>negatives
....
>positives
actionable information

"The Prince" was the last book he wrote, know? I believe he was very fed up with the general state of affairs at the time, and it was sarcastic.

A lot of his work is just a military extension of plato though. Boring, but solid

i dont understand? i was talking about an antibiotic being cultured from some woman

>You read too many habbening threads
it's just how the powers that be operate
you'll get what's coming to you just like the rest of them did. right now it's looking like china will take your place

i never read anything after the prince, but i suppose i should have, i read enough to and now i pay for scribd so i might as well

Sup Forums, the post

shut up, jew. i make 150k a year, lift 30 hr/wk and have a 10/10 aryan gf.

Art of War is definitely worth it, and cheap in paperback

He lays out reasoning for:

Short term limits for all military personal, including normal foot soldiers

Only raising on army of citizens (no mercenaries or natives of colonies)

Conscripting all young men who are deemed fit for some period of time

Having no standing army (for political and financial reasons)

And some more existential stuff

The second half is about ideal military formations for his era. Always put artillery on a flank, how to order rank and file to perform what types of maneuvers, etc

shouldn't we have a standing army because we're trying to colonize the world?

Well if its working, then its not standing, is it?

It doesnt say much about imperialism. What little it does say, is not to recruit from natives of colonies. So in fact, Machiavelli presumes imperialism, no?

ive read art of war i wasnt that impressed and almost everyone i know keeps a copy on their desk or in their office like it makes them good at their job

"innocent muslim" fucking kill yourself you faggot marxist rat.

gotcha. what does he suggest an army do with natives?

also different author. i just dont like Machiavelli i think hes a sell out

Not much in the Art of War, at least. I assume its a matter more left to police. The British have literally miles of records on how to suppress natives, and most of it is more up to date than Machiavelli

Look up the Mau Mau, for example. Btw, Im not some ghey crusading liberal. Im just saying, if you have a colony that you want to control or cleanse, look at the Mau Mau

mau mau is my cats name but i thought when it kept going mau mau it was talking about mau ze dong.

>le racist meme

kek

>Abu Ghraib
None of these men were beheaded, lit on fire or drowned. I could give less of a fuck about them really. Our softness in war is why they are beating us.

What actionable intelligence was gathered through torture? none, it doesn't work. That is why the debate is stupid.

They aren't beating us. Look, you can commit war crimes and torture people, fine, Just stop with the holier thou moral superiority nonsense.

still really satisfying

>innocent

You know whats sad is you could make legitimate points for your stance, but you decided not to make a single one of them.

... Uh, weirdo, but okay.

Torture produces wrong information that can get our "heroes" killed. How is that for a reason not to do it>?

>what actionable intelligence was gathered through torture?

Are you implying that nothing of use was ever obtained from torture?

>Our softness in war is why they are beating us.
That was my point.

someone has the girls und panzer version?

radical islam is advancing, and western civilization is concerned with transgender bathrooms and trigger words. I'm not as confident as you are that we are winning.

Yeah dude, duh. Did you watch that one movie and believe it?

why is heroes in quotations? you unpatriotic piece of shit. its not out soldiers that make the decisions but our government, also fuck them if torture and terror worked for saddam like people say (im not going to find the post) then why wouldnt it work for us. i think the problem is we are being too easy. if force worked in the past wouldnt it work now.

Leaders have to weigh costs against benefits all the time. A few soldiers may be a small price for the benefit

From now on, this thread will be a "safe space" for complete sentences.

>i unironically think the burden of proof isn't on me in this argument
This is why your family is embarrassed of you

Radical Islam can suck a dick, calm down and stop being a little whiny bitch.
Saddam used torture for fun,not intel. Torture has never and will never work.
"Heroes" cuz they aren't. Some are sure, some are bad, and most are just dudes doing a job. We aren't too easy, we fucked up and got ourselves into something that is to big to deal with.
Leaders were scared and overcompensating because every section of government failed us on 9/11. They did things that are un-American, just grabbing at straws.

Genocide has been used as a solution. I dont agree with it myself. But thats where your solution ends up, and its been effective many times

Nothing of use has ever been obtained through torture. You are less intelligent if you can't make the connection. It has been proven time and time again that if you hurt people, they will say anything you want them to say to end it.

It's that fucking simple, yet we have mouth-breathers still thinking it works to get information. People will say any bullshit to get bad things to stop happening. It is a wonderful way to make your enemies fight more viciously against you because they would rather die than be captured, recruit more people to their "just" cause against the torturers, and make it all the easier to kill you.

You are human trash if you think torture works.

you think it was for fun? not the because of the same bullshit? also torture can be fun if you are into that. i thought you were into people being themselves

>leaders were overcompensating

Commander in chief can use military stance to bolster his political capital. Your overcompensating is another persons cost-benefit analysis.

Yea, Bush sucked. That shits played out, can we please talk about something else?

i dont care if torture works, shitty people should be tortured. youre a terorist fuck you and all your pain we will see what mohammad thinks of you when we are done.

You must have been dropped on the head several times. Sadism is a sign of mental illness.

We are no better than them if we act like animals ourselves.

Saddam, yea fun. The terror of torture, to normal people, is a deterrent. Normies get scared, Not enemy combatants. History is filled with POWs giving wrong intel when tortured.
You mentioned the leaders and I simply mentioned why they enacted the policy that they did.
Calm down nigger, go be a man and not an internet warrior. Chicken hawk faggot.

so all this bullshit we are doing now is working? were we better off when bush left or with obama at the reigns

Kill 'em on the battlefield and/or treat the POWs with respect. That is what makes(Made) us better.

Bush left and Iraq wanted us out. Are we better now? Statistically, yes. You're truipping if you think attacks wont happen, this is life now. Get used to it. Live your life and chill. Obama admin has killed many many more terrorists than Bush admin did.

Torture for terrorists, but hold back on civilized countries who will not torture us. It's pretty fucking simple. Why give your enemy the advantage? We shouldn't have to go to that barbaric level, but sometimes if you have to, you must.

In regards to the accuracy of their intel, it can go either way. If you torture them, they may give the wrong answers to stop the torture, they may not. If you don't, they may or may not depending on how persuasive you are.

Why don't we give the OPTION to the interrogation specialists who would know when to use it in the right situation if it has drawbacks like some people like to say?

with anyone group that is rational then yes it did. but the japs didnt treat our pows fairly so we fucked them and it all ended up working out in the end. maybe fucking them completely is the answer, its not like we have shit going on now

Up until the Cold War British ontelligence was the best in the world.

They didn't employ torture, preferring bribery.

The French leaned on it heavily to poor effect.

This is what is wrong with democracy. Absolute children and fucking monkeys voting on the basis of their emotionally reactive bullshit.

While we're talking about Abu grahib, what was the purpose of hooding prisoners and making them stand on a bucket with their hands held up with wires attached to them? You guys know the photo. I'd post it if I wasn't on mobile. I want to believe it was more interesting that just exhausting them.

3edgy5me

Fuck if their rational. This is a question of our national pride and honor. We don't torture, that is why we are better. Bomb 'em, sure, kill 'em sure. We don't torture. Doesn't work anyways.

I think people do torture all wrong.

Being gruesome is so 70's

Personally I prefer to very slowly pluck hairs out of the nose, top of foot, arm pit, and other sensitive areas.

Inflicts a lot of pain and the subject doesn't appear tortured.

>its pretty simple

Okay, why dont you grab a bucket and a towel and go do it then?

>meme
>muslim is a race

seriously, kill yourself.