http://www.statenews.com It has been argued by leading scholars such as Noam Chomsky that our efforts in the War on Terror have made us less safe. American foreign policy as of late has exempted itself from international law while sanctioning those who are deemed as threats, and it is this kind of behavior that fuels the flame that is extremist anti-American sentiment. en-us Gryphon 2.2.3b-tsn (woodward)/Foundry5 Thu, 07 May 2009 09:27:17 -0400 webmaster@statenews.com http://www.statenews.com/index.php/comment/view/39319 I’ll bet my tuition for this entire year that this guy has never served in the military. You are putting people into extreme situations where their lives are constantly in danger against an enemy that does not wear a uniform. You don’t know who is your friend and who is your enemy and whether the next person walking up to you is going to thank you or blow your head off. It’s easy for people to sit here and arm-chair quarter back as you sit comfortably in your dorm room not wondering you’ll make it though another day of violence. When it’s your mother/father/brother/sister/child that has volunteered to put themselves in harms way so that you can go to sleep safe every night, you’ll want everything done to insure that they are able to obtain valuable information that will save the lives of them or others in their unit. I believe Jack Nicholson said it best, “…I prefer you said thank you, and went on your way. Otherwise, I suggest you pick up a weapon, and stand to post.” Tue, 28 Apr 2009 20:18:00 -0400 http://www.statenews.com/index.php/comment/view/39319 http://www.statenews.com/index.php/comment/view/39321 Boy Brad, you’re mixing messages here. First, the release of the CIA & Justice Dept. memos is exactly the type of change that obama campaigned about; that is more transparency in government. Did Obama make a mistake by releasing those memos? Could be, time will tell. But to claim that doing so is inconsistent with his message of change is blatantly incorrect. Second, releasing the memos does nothing but strengthen our standing in the international community. Its called accountability. It wasn’t some big mystery or secret that our government used waterboarding as a component of its “enhanced interrogation” in the “war on terror.” The “debate” wasn’t whether we waterboarded, but whether waterboarding is torture. To openly admit past failings of this country and taking ownership for our misdeeds, that shows that, moving forward, America is once again ready to work cooperatively on a global scale and lead by example instead of by military might. Further, the point of the executive branch is to execute and enforce the laws. If a senate committee or a grand jury determine that officials of the previous administration broke the law, they need to be held accountable. I have heard some vague references to SERE these past couple weeks, but don’t know enough about it to make an informed judgment. But to say that because certain of our (most likely elite) soldiers were trained in the SERE program that they can’t be expected to refrain from torture is ridiculous. The decision of whether to use such “tactics” comes from the military and intelligence commanders. If there are individual soldiers who do so despite clear directives not to, they should be court marshaled, simple as that. Tue, 28 Apr 2009 20:30:08 -0400 http://www.statenews.com/index.php/comment/view/39321 http://www.statenews.com/index.php/comment/view/39322 Steve, You seem to imply by your statement “you’ll want everything done to insure that they are able to obtain valuable information” that you condone the use of torture. If that is the case, how do you respond to the fact that nearly every study concludes that information obtained through torture is inherently unreliable? Unreliable information has more potential to harm us (wasting resources responding to false information) than help us. Not to mention the fact that such practices only further isolate our country on a global level and further incite any anti-american movement. Tue, 28 Apr 2009 20:36:03 -0400 http://www.statenews.com/index.php/comment/view/39322 http://www.statenews.com/index.php/comment/view/39332 “leading scholars such as Noam Chomsky” Hahahahaha. Too dumb; didn’t read. Tue, 28 Apr 2009 23:27:31 -0400 http://www.statenews.com/index.php/comment/view/39332 http://www.statenews.com/index.php/comment/view/39334 “If that is the case, how do you respond to the fact that nearly every study concludes that information obtained through torture is inherently unreliable?” Hmmm – would that be studies on torture that was kept hidden by the CIA and administration? Please explain to me how studies could be done on methods deliberately hidden from the public domain. Do you think the CIA just let scholars sit and observe a few waterboardings? Do you really think they kept percentages on good results versus bad? Do you really think that when it worked that the terrorist was free to go and tell the world about his bad experience? It continues to amaze me that people believe that the CIA, which is entrusted with spying, lying, misinformation, and counterintelligence, is compeltely honest with the public – which would certainly curtail its effectiveness. Personally, I’m happy with a select few doing the dirty work of keeping our country safe. Tue, 28 Apr 2009 23:32:50 -0400 http://www.statenews.com/index.php/comment/view/39334 http://www.statenews.com/index.php/comment/view/39335 No Bob, These would be studies of data dating back as far as WWII done by scientists, not CIA operatives. When humans are tortured, they will say whatever it takes (what the “interrogator” wants to hear) to stop the torture. Tue, 28 Apr 2009 23:52:34 -0400 http://www.statenews.com/index.php/comment/view/39335 http://www.statenews.com/index.php/comment/view/39338 WRONG “It has been argued by leading scholars such as Noam Chomsky that our efforts in the War on Terror ..” Chomsky is a professor of linguistics. He has no scholarly training in political science or military science. Get your facts right. Wed, 29 Apr 2009 07:45:22 -0400 http://www.statenews.com/index.php/comment/view/39338 http://www.statenews.com/index.php/comment/view/39343 Actually, in most cases there are CIA observers of torture. Especially with rendition to “black sites” where we hand detanees over to other countries who do torture so technically the US remains “innocent.” And former CIA operative Bob Baer who has been tortured himself and who has observed torture on others would agree the information is unreliable. The individual facing torture will tell you anything you want to hear, regardless of the accuracy or validity of the information. If torture is so effective, how come no public official has stated on record that it has given us information that saved US lives? I’d like to know what efforts were stopped by information gained through torture and exactly how many lives were saved. Wed, 29 Apr 2009 08:41:54 -0400 http://www.statenews.com/index.php/comment/view/39343 http://www.statenews.com/index.php/comment/view/39344 Another James Madison who reads a couple of books, essays and op-eds and thinks he knows it all. To equate the SERE training with torture really distorts the picture of what that training is all about. I’d suggest he do more study on it, but we all know that won’t happen. Wed, 29 Apr 2009 09:17:58 -0400 http://www.statenews.com/index.php/comment/view/39344 http://www.statenews.com/index.php/comment/view/39345 I am also willing to bet my life that this yahoo has never served in the military. The extent of his knowledge is probably based on “Full Metal Jacket” and “Jarhead,” hardly realistic portraits of the current military. Even so, if this guy thinks that Noam Chomskey is an expert on foreign policy, it makes him an even bigger moron. From someone in the military, having served a tour in Iraq, Bradley is the sterotypical college student that is completely out of touch with reality. It frustrates me that I put my life on the line for an idiot like this, but at least I know that I have done something other than whined in the college newspaper. So Bradley: What “brutal hazing tactics” of the military are you citing, and what is the basis for your assertion? Wed, 29 Apr 2009 09:19:14 -0400 http://www.statenews.com/index.php/comment/view/39345 http://www.statenews.com/index.php/comment/view/39353 Assuming that Steve has also served in the military, it would helpful for him and haha to give us their perspective on the issue rather than ridicule the author of the letter. Explain why the SERE training methods are necessary. I have my own theories, but why bother throwing them out there if they’ll immediately be discounted because I have never served. With respect to the information obtained by torture, nearly everyone agrees that it is unreliable and nobody can predict when the information obtained will be reliable. That isn’t to say it has never worked but who pursues that sort of policy? It seems like a giant waste of resources not to mention it is immoral and unlawful in the context of a “traditional” war (whatever that means). Wed, 29 Apr 2009 09:41:46 -0400 http://www.statenews.com/index.php/comment/view/39353 http://www.statenews.com/index.php/comment/view/39367 The military trains many of its Soldiers and Marines to understand enemy tactics, etc. Part of that training includes adverse circumstances such as a SERE type program as well as dealing with unconventional warfare, blah, blah. Part of that training includes combat soldiers learning the strategies and tactics of an enemy and then applying those leasons in training exercises. In my time that meant learning NVA and VC tactics then mock attacking Marines units training before deployment in Viet Nam, etc. Torture is un-American and posers are the only ones who advocate its use. All explanations justifying is are BS. Wed, 29 Apr 2009 11:15:25 -0400 http://www.statenews.com/index.php/comment/view/39367 http://www.statenews.com/index.php/comment/view/39374 A few responses: No, I have never served in the US Military. Please do not equate my frustration with training tactics with a disregard for the danger inherent and unavoidable whilst serving the USA. Secondly, in response to Diogenes, I suggest you look into the published works of Noam Chomsky to find that while he is a leading Professor in linguistics he nonetheless has published books dealing with American exceptionalism, most notably the book that I recently read titled “Failed States”. Yes, I am a Madison student and while I may fit the description of your stereotypical whatever I wish that I could spend five minutes with you, and I would be hard pressed to deny that I could not also label you as one thing or another. Perhaps I was not clear in what I meant by the memo making us less safe. I would first like to point out that the comment on transparency is absolutely right—-up until this memo release I have not been against the idea of prosecuting the lawyers of the Bush administration for their human rights violations, and I also do not disagree with previous memo releases. My frustration with this latest memo release: Those who are plotting against the United States use our foreign policy as their greatest weapon. It is how they recruit new members and keep already members satisfied with their position. The memo release of two leading anti-American terrorists only gives these groups more fuel for the fire. It cannot be denied that Obama has taken drastic steps to improve our message abroad. In fact, a significant portion of his criticism deals with this notion exactly, such as his extremely friendly approach with Hugo Chavez. Not to mention Obama’s swift efforts to improve relations with Iran. As for my statements concerning the military: I would not dare to say that aggressive training is not a complete necessity—-of course it is! Soldiers do need to be hardened, and they need to have confidence that those around them are equally capable and ready for anything. I do not think that this requires torture. There are other ways to bring men together and prepare them for battle than subject them to waterboarding, starvation and extreme isolation. My main point is this: Men who are not subjected to brutal practices are probably less likely to subject the opposition to such practices. If we are serious about ending torture, if Obama is ending torture, than he must look into a major sponsor of these acts! The United States military has a long record of human rights abuses and war crimes—-all this continuing to aggravate the opposition and promote more anti-American sentiment. The United States military is our face abroad—-no doubt they should be extremely well trained, hardened and prepared for battle. I just think that there are better, more humane ways to train soldiers to carry these attributes abroad while still adhering to this now extremely popular issue. Wed, 29 Apr 2009 11:53:06 -0400 http://www.statenews.com/index.php/comment/view/39374 http://www.statenews.com/index.php/comment/view/39377 Human Rights first: death of Abed Hamed Mowhoush, an Iraqi general who was killed using the very techniques taught in SERE New York Times: In 2005, The New Yorker’s Jane Mayer reported that many of the interrogation techniques used in simulations during SERE training seem to have been used on detainees in Iraq, Afghanistan, Cuba and elsewhere. In another article on interrogations in 2007, Ms. Mayer wrote that former SERE psychologists had “implemented a regime of techniques that one well-informed former adviser to the American intelligence community described as ‘a “Clockwork Orange” kind of approach.’” The SERE affiliate told me that trainees often think that the interrogation portion of the program will be the most gruelling, but in fact for many trainees the worst moment is when they are made to listen to taped loops of cacophonous sounds. One of the most stress-inducing tapes is a recording of babies crying inconsolably. Another is a Yoko Ono album. Detainees at Guantánamo have reportedly been subjected to blaring audiotapes of loud music, cats meowing, and human infants wailing. Critics also allege that the SERE program has become a testing ground for interrogation techniques involving sexual embarrassment and humiliation. (Detainees at Guantánamo have complained of such methods, and the scandal at Abu Ghraib last year revealed that guards there photographed prisoners naked and in sexually humiliating poses.) A former military-intelligence officer who was familiar with practices at Guantánamo told me that a friend who had gone through Level C SERE training, which lasts three weeks, said that he had been sexually ridiculed by females during the program. “They strip you naked and make you do work while women laugh at the size of your ‘junk,’ ” the intelligence officer told me. What I mean by brutal hazing practices is sexual assault, humiliation, waterboarding and starvation. No I have not served in the US Military, but I find it hard to believe that the above mentioned tactics are necessary in molding a good soldier. I also find it hard to believe that those subjected to this kind of treatment will refrain from using this kind of abuse on their opposition, as mentioned above and reported on as recently as Operation Desert Storm and the War in Iraq. Wed, 29 Apr 2009 12:13:12 -0400 http://www.statenews.com/index.php/comment/view/39377 http://www.statenews.com/index.php/comment/view/39379 Bradley- A couple problems with your position: 1) How do you think we go about prosecuting the lawyers from the Bush administration without disclosing specific incidents of human rights violations? Wouldn’t this information have been revealed when these guys were tried for their alleged crimes? 2) It’s also possible that failing to release these documents would be seen by terrorists, and the international community as a whole, as an attempt to sweep the incidents under the rug. It’s awfully hard to speculate as to how radical terrorists are going to interpet any given act by the US. It seems likely that any act by the US can be twisted into a recruiting tool for terrorists. Which is why I would advocate for making policy decision based on what impact it will have on the rest of the world as opposed to a rather unpredictable, tiny minority. 3) You praise Obama for the changes he has made, but seem to want him to sort of scale back how far he distances himself from Bush. Disclosing these actions reveals a increased level of transparency and accountability that was all but openly mocked during the previous administration. I think this new transparency and acountability is just as important as closing Guantanomo and ending these “enhanced interrogation techniques”. Wed, 29 Apr 2009 12:19:55 -0400 http://www.statenews.com/index.php/comment/view/39379 http://www.statenews.com/index.php/comment/view/39393 To HA HA HA, Kudos to serving in Iraq, I guess. But let’s get real for a second: how exactly did you “put your life on the line” for this particular author? I’m sure you were in danger, but I don’t really see how that danger had anything to do with a ‘stereotypical college kid’. Wed, 29 Apr 2009 14:52:00 -0400 http://www.statenews.com/index.php/comment/view/39393 http://www.statenews.com/index.php/comment/view/39416 “ .. Secondly, in response to Diogenes, I suggest you look into the published works of Noam Chomsky to find that while he is a leading Professor in linguistics he nonetheless has published books dealing with American exceptionalism ..” You obviously do not understand the concept of “scholarly.” Just about any fool can get a book published. That is NOT the same as focused, intense study of a topic. Chomsky is a politician. He has publicized his political positions. It has helped him become a multi-millionaire, noted in his legal filings. Nice — becoming rich, tearing down the USA. Just like Fat Mike Moore. Chomsky is NOT a scholar of political science or military science. Check your facts — you are wrong and need an editor. Wed, 29 Apr 2009 17:45:44 -0400 http://www.statenews.com/index.php/comment/view/39416 http://www.statenews.com/index.php/comment/view/39417 “….leading scholars such as Noam Chomsky….” That’s as far a I could get when I burst into fits of hysterical laughter ….then sobs for you poor saps who must go to todays straight-jacketed, gagged colleges and university. HAAHAHAHAH BOOOOOOOO HOOOO Wed, 29 Apr 2009 17:57:05 -0400 http://www.statenews.com/index.php/comment/view/39417 http://www.statenews.com/index.php/comment/view/39428 While there are many, and I mean many, problems in this argument, the one that sticks out most to me is the total lack of evidence provided for the assertion that the use of torture on our soldiers in training will inherently lead to the same tactics being used abroad by those same soldiers. First of all, no. Our soldiers undergo this type of training so that if they are ever captured, they will be able to handle the situation and hopefully live through it. This is necessary because most other countries, including European countries, also use torture as a tactic. Second, ordinary soldiers are not the ones to use torture on enemy combatants. As I’m sure you’re aware by your reference to the CIA memos, it is the CIA and specially trained examiners that employ these tactics. If soldiers that are not specifically trained to do so use torture, they should, as someone mentioned above, be court marshalled. On a different issue, I agree, to an extent, that Obama is using diplomacy effectively and is improving our image abroad. Ending the use of torture by our government, while it promotes a good image, is merely posturing for the sake of image. If you’ve read the news in the past few days, you will see that our Attorney General is begging Europe to take the prisoners of Gitmo. This suggests, then, that these combatants will not be released or given a trial, but merely shunted off to some other prison. Further, it has also been shown that, while the United States will not torture those captured, we certainly have no problem sending them to other countries who will get their hands dirty. Just because we ourselves aren’t using the practice doesn’t mean we aren’t asking others to do it for us. What happens when that information is made public? Thu, 30 Apr 2009 00:06:16 -0400 http://www.statenews.com/index.php/comment/view/39428 http://www.statenews.com/index.php/comment/view/39553 “how come no public official has stated on record that it has given us information that saved US lives?” http://www.cnn.com/2007/POLITICS/12/11/agent.tapes/index.html, not to mention rumsfeld calling for the release of memos detailing information gathered from harsh interrogation techniques. Simply put, you cannot argue that harsh interrogation is more or less effective than other methods. For example, is some information gathered from waterboarding better or worse than no information gathered from other techniques. It seems that both methods have been effective depending on the one being interrogated and no one method has been proven to be clearly more effective than the other. Therefore, simply arguing based on effectiveness doesn’t work. you are either morally against it or you are not. Fri, 01 May 2009 11:32:21 -0400 http://www.statenews.com/index.php/comment/view/39553 http://www.statenews.com/index.php/comment/view/39716 Noam Chomsky as a credible source for this argument? This is satire right? I missed something? You would be hard pressed to find a more left wing, America denigrating mind today or at any time for that matter. Anyone who reads or studies MORE THAN one source of information to come to an opinion or conclusion would very quickly see that this is clearly an indoctrinated individual repeating the mantra. You folks always ask to see the evidence that “torture” as you call it, has made us safer. I would ask that you produce the evidence that “torture” has made us less safe, as you folks constantly assert. I don’t remember any large terrorist attacks in the US recently, do you? Thu, 07 May 2009 09:27:17 -0400 http://www.statenews.com/index.php/comment/view/39716