And you still think it's "just a few bad apples" and "it's not really
torture"?


Vito wrote:
I believe it is a combo of the two.

I used to train horses. I got excellent results by *never* hurting the horse
but instead simply convincing it that sooner or later it wound have to do my
bidding. This is a tried and proven technique.

Ever heard of "Behavioral psychology"? What you are describing is a sort
of rudimentary behaviorism. It is indeed a "tried & proven technique"
and one that can be vastly improved & made more effective by a little study.


... If I got a particular
hard case I would never, ever hurt it. I'd just trip it to the ground and
tie it there, set on it and pet it, offer treats and water, sometimes for
hours until it finally understood that I had complete control and gave up.

I think you have a bizarre idea of what "hurt" consists of. Please
describe in detail exactly how you trip a horse to the ground, tie it
up, and sit on it, without inflicting any pain.

BTW pain is an excellent tool for modifying behavior. However it can
easily be overused, and of course there is the psychological question of
whether or not it is being applied for a gainful purpose, or for the
sadistic pleasure of the person inflicting it.


Was that torture?

Not in my opinion. However I think it's pretty obvious that you'd
benefit from a beginner psych course or two at the local community college.




There in no doubt that some soft heads call the techniques that are
routinely and systematically used by pro interrogators "torture",

Uh huh.

What would you call it when an interrogator stubs out a cigarrette on
the eyelids of the person being questioned? When the person being
questioned is tied up, and has his head forecfully held under water
until he is unconsious? When he has his arms tied behind his back and
has his full weight suspeneded from his wrists until his elbows and
shoulders are not only dislocated but suffer permanent injury? When a
person being questioned is tied up and has an attack loosed upon him, so
that he suffers serious bite wounds on his head and other places?

I call this "torture" and it is documented to have been performed by
U.S. personnel. It is also not recommended by Army field intel manuals,
but is winked at all up & down the chain of command.



.. We are dealing with very dangerous and committed people here, people
who will *eagerly* kill themselves in order to kill an enemies women and
children. I see nothing wrong with depriving them of sleep, insulting the
religion that drives them to these outrages, and otherwise offending and
degrading them until, like a bad horse, they begin to doubt first themselves
then their conditioning and finally realise their captors are in control.

Depending on the methods used, I wouldn't object to that either,
although sleep deprivation can have serious side effects and if taken to
an extreme would definitely be a torture on par with that listed above.

The basic question is not who we are fighting, but who we are ourselves.
Is the U.S. an evil despotism that tortures prisoners? Or is it a
civilized & moral nation that obeys international laws?

If you set aside your principles for convenience, you never had any
principles.


admitting ...that the Bush Administration has set this policy from the
highest
levels...


On the contrary. I have yet to see evidence that Bush, Chaney, Rummy, et
al, ever made it US policy to inflict physical pain or torture (ie break
anybodys legs) on anybody.

Oh? Maybe you should go and find that patch of sand that Dave has his
head buried in... I'm sure he'll move over for you...

DSK