Sept. 11 planner waterboarded 183 times

[Knife]

Ah, so release them here.

I see your point about medical attention and I sort of agree, but after than charge them in court or deport them. Problem with that is, as Obamma found out, not a lot of places want these jack asses.

[SirNitram]

Ah, so release them here.

I see your point about medical attention and I sort of agree, but after than charge them in court or deport them. Problem with that is, as Obamma found out, not a lot of places want these jack asses.

Charge them with what? With what evidence that'd not be laughed out in a motion? That's the problem. And frankly, I don't think there's an 'after' for alot of the individuals. How many times can your brain be convinced you are, in fact, dying of drowning, before you just never come back?

[Alyrium Denryle]

I will be the first one to say

Fucking release them then.

Release them where?

If the alternative is to have to go through the diplomatic hassle of finding a country that will take them, and violating the constitution in a way that sets up a dangerous legal slippery slope, I will take the hassle. There is bound to be an islamist hell-hole who will take them in (on the sly if necessary)

Might they try and attack us again? Sure. And if they were innocent before, they sure as fuck want us dead now. But we made our bed, and we get to take this thing called responsibility for that decision without our legal framework. IE. If we want our laws to mean more than the paper they are printed on, we just have to eat those consequences.

Alternatively, you could put them into a CUSHY mental ward...

[Rogue 9]

Wow. And the worst part is the guy probably went home to his family and was fine.

Khalid Sheikh Mohammed? Not bloody likely; he's standing trial for planning the September 11 attacks.

A country that's holding and torturing its suspects before their trial is unworthy to be called a democracy.

What leads you to that conclusion? Torture is horrible, yes, but that doesn't change the method of government.

[Themightytom]

A country that's holding and torturing its suspects before their trial is unworthy to be called a democracy

What leads you to that conclusion? Torture is horrible, yes, but that doesn't change the method of government.

Assuming the people don't support torture the governments actions are not representative, but to be honest seeing the reactions on the board I suspect a large population while not being "supportive" of torture would be at the very least indifferent in this case, which is evven MORE scary.

At lest the threat of 183 waterboards is a bit of a deterrent, and REALLY raises the bar for torture resistance programs. Would they have any recruits left after training them to resist waterboarding 183 times? how effective would they be and how much does that telescope the training period out :-p

[Knife]

If the alternative is to have to go through the diplomatic hassle of finding a country that will take them, and violating the constitution in a way that sets up a dangerous legal slippery slope, I will take the hassle.

Agreed, but that doesn't mean there is a place that will take em.

There is bound to be an islamist hell-hole who will take them in (on the sly if necessary)

I have no problems with that if you can find one, on the sly or not.

Alternatively, you could put them into a CUSHY mental ward...

Problem with that, is it is still medical treatment and either you accept that they either a) accept it and then when they are cured you are back to square one, in that what do you do with them? b)if they refuse medical treatment, come on, I want no part of your doctors 'treating me', what do you do with them or c) force them into treatment which I think you can make a case of them just thinking they left the frying pan for the fire.

[The Duchess of Zeon]

Yes, torture is thoroughly democratic, right up there with voting to execute people who fail in military operations, another penchant of democracy. Another thoroughly democratic good old time was the French Revolution, and they certainly tortured people. I cannot believe that someone would seriously come out and say that torture is undemocratic. All you need is for the people themselves to support torture. Only 53% of Americans oppose torture in all circumstances, a level even lower than China (66%). Now, you might say, "Ah, but that means a majority doesn't support it". The ugly truth is that you cannot look at opinion polls as simple majorities, you have to add in the Give A Shit metric, as I call it.

Let's say 0 is I Don't Give A Shit, and 10 This Is Very Important.

Now, 47% of Americans support torture, and then let's say another 4% of Americans don't suppor torture but also have a 0 rating in how much they care about it, and those 4% have a 10 rating for God in schools and guns in their hands.

That's 51% of the population being willing to support a candidate who endorses torture.

[Pablo Sanchez]

Release them where?

A place to start is to figure out countries against which they may have committed crimes and the cases can be proven without any reference to tainted US evidence, and release them from US custody fully and without prejudice... directly into the custody of the other nation. For example, handing Khalid Sheikh Mohammed directly into Philippine hands for immediate trial for his involvement in blowing up one of their airliners in the '90s. Most of the high value detainees, meaning the actual and definite terrorists, are very likely to have priors in other countries. Obviously it would be a scandal in itself to, for example, dump them in countries where they'd be tortured or viciously executed anyway, so Syria, Egypt, Saudi Arabia, etc. are out. Additionally some countries have said they don't want them, which is fair, but the US can bring some soft diplomatic pressure to bear to try and convince them. It will be a diplomatic hassle but in the interests of justice and our international standing that's an expense we'll just have to incur.

Depending on the extent of psychological damage from torture, Nitram is right in suggesting that we could go Brezhnev on them and put them in mental hospitals. Zubaydah, who is legitimately a crazy person by all accounts, would be a good candidate for this.

But there's always the issue that some detainees were held for no good reason, and we have to just let them go free. If they're pissed at us, we're just going to have to suck that one up, because they've got good reason to. Think of the Bush administration as having taken a big shit on the floor and then covered every flat surface in the room with it. It's just not going to be fun cleaning it up, but it's still got to be done.

[The Yosemite Bear]

I nominate the soon to be constructed Lovecraft/Poe institute for the Fanaticaly Insane. Can we send the neocons there too?

[Knife]

Release them where?

A place to start is to figure out countries against which they may have committed crimes and the cases can be proven without any reference to tainted US evidence, and release them from US custody fully and without prejudice... directly into the custody of the other nation. For example, handing Khalid Sheikh Mohammed directly into Philippine hands for immediate trial for his involvement in blowing up one of their airliners in the '90s. Most of the high value detainees, meaning the actual and definite terrorists, are very likely to have priors in other countries. Obviously it would be a scandal in itself to, for example, dump them in countries where they'd be tortured or viciously executed anyway, so Syria, Egypt, Saudi Arabia, etc. are out. Additionally some countries have said they don't want them, which is fair, but the US can bring some soft diplomatic pressure to bear to try and convince them. It will be a diplomatic hassle but in the interests of justice and our international standing that's an expense we'll just have to incur.

Depending on the extent of psychological damage from torture, Nitram is right in suggesting that we could go Brezhnev on them and put them in mental hospitals. Zubaydah, who is legitimately a crazy person by all accounts, would be a good candidate for this.

But there's always the issue that some detainees were held for no good reason, and we have to just let them go free. If they're pissed at us, we're just going to have to suck that one up, because they've got good reason to. Think of the Bush administration as having taken a big shit on the floor and then covered every flat surface in the room with it. It's just not going to be fun cleaning it up, but it's still got to be done.

I agree with most of that too, just really didn't like the flippant 'release them' with no thought behind it. For example, I kind of like the concept of Exile and in this day and age there really isn't a way we can just send people out into the wilderness without violating other countries, so as easy as it would be to say 'exile someone' I really don't say it. Release them as a simple statement has the same problems.

[The Yosemite Bear]

well I guess then we will have to make space colonys available, just so we can have a new botony bay....

yeah, I know a bad joke.