Should we treat our POWs better? - Page 2

**EnglishPaul** · 01-30-2008, 11:47 AM

Thanks

~~Nik00117~~ · 01-31-2008, 02:39 PM

I've done a bit of research on the generals, so very strongle agreed with what Hilter did and fully supported him even after the facts were shown.

They still give valuable information.

I think it may work, and I think a test program would be a great idea.

yustr · 02-02-2008, 10:38 PM

The real point here is what value can these POW's (oops I mean enemy combatants) have 6 years removed from the field? And just to repeat a message from some time ago: we were clearly not interested in what these poor SOB's knew at any time as it took 3 years after they were captured to even begin to look at the bags full of materials that were captured along with them.

So they have no intelligence value now and we were never really interested in knowing what they knew anyway. I fail to see how can this be viewed as anything other than a concentration camp? Yes, I mean it in the worst possible connotation of that concept.

Repugnant. Immoral. Shameful. Criminal.

~~Nik00117~~ · 02-03-2008, 10:33 AM

Um, what about the guys caught a few months ago?

yustr · 02-03-2008, 10:49 AM

In an environment as fluid as what I suspect the terrorist's cells are, you'd have to get information out of them within a few weeks at most for it to be of any value. Otherwise it'd be:

terrorist #1: "What was you plan?"
terrorist #2: "We were going to kill the infidels."
terrorist #1: "Hey us too."

~~Nik00117~~ · 02-03-2008, 08:13 PM

Problem is, we don't know this for sure do we now?

I mean seriously everyone is commenting on how short their info line is, well how do we know? We don't, thats the problem.

bry623 · 02-04-2008, 10:41 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by yustr

In an environment as fluid as what I suspect the terrorist's cells are, you'd have to get information out of them within a few weeks at most for it to be of any value. Otherwise it'd be:

terrorist #1: "What was you plan?"
terrorist #2: "We were going to kill the infidels."
terrorist #1: "Hey us too."

That was funny

**Chode** · 02-05-2008, 07:35 PM

The treatment of detainees at Guantanamo just reflects panic. The situation is analogous to the witch-hunts of the MIddle Ages. How do we know the accused are witches? Well, someone told us they were. Sure enough, it had to be true, since they confessed after we tortured them enough.

The official position is that all the detainees are "terrorists", even though in many cases, the Government can't actually determine that the Mohammad Akbar of Anbar province in custody is even the "terrorist" they want, or just simply one of 5000 or so other "Mohammad Akbars" from Anbar. Still, we must be right because if you deprive Mohammad of enough sleep and waterboard him enough, he'll confess. If he fails to confess, repeat as necessary. If he dies during interrogation, or fails to confess, that just proves he's a terrorist because they are all fanatics.

01-30-2008, 11:47 AM	#21 (permalink)
EnglishPaul Still no avatar Join Date: Sep 2007 Location: Sheffield Posts: 1,076 OS: XP SP2 Blog Entries: 5	Re: Should we treat our POWs better? Thanks

01-31-2008, 02:39 PM	#22 (permalink)
~~Nik00117~~ Troubled Join Date: Jan 2007 Location: Germany Posts: 1,572 OS: XP Pro, Vista Ulimate My System	Re: Should we treat our POWs better? I've done a bit of research on the generals, so very strongle agreed with what Hilter did and fully supported him even after the facts were shown. They still give valuable information. I think it may work, and I think a test program would be a great idea.

02-02-2008, 10:38 PM	#23 (permalink)
yustr Asst. Manager, The Conversation Pit Join Date: Sep 2004 Location: Connecticut shore Posts: 4,993 OS: XP Pro My System	Re: Should we treat our POWs better? The real point here is what value can these POW's (oops I mean enemy combatants) have 6 years removed from the field? And just to repeat a message from some time ago: we were clearly not interested in what these poor SOB's knew at any time as it took 3 years after they were captured to even begin to look at the bags full of materials that were captured along with them. So they have no intelligence value now and we were never really interested in knowing what they knew anyway. I fail to see how can this be viewed as anything other than a concentration camp? Yes, I mean it in the worst possible connotation of that concept. Repugnant. Immoral. Shameful. Criminal. __________________ I didn't mean to say it. But I meant what I said. J. McMurtry In Vino Veritas

02-03-2008, 10:33 AM	#24 (permalink)
~~Nik00117~~ Troubled Join Date: Jan 2007 Location: Germany Posts: 1,572 OS: XP Pro, Vista Ulimate My System	Re: Should we treat our POWs better? Um, what about the guys caught a few months ago?

02-03-2008, 10:49 AM	#25 (permalink)
yustr Asst. Manager, The Conversation Pit Join Date: Sep 2004 Location: Connecticut shore Posts: 4,993 OS: XP Pro My System	Re: Should we treat our POWs better? In an environment as fluid as what I suspect the terrorist's cells are, you'd have to get information out of them within a few weeks at most for it to be of any value. Otherwise it'd be: terrorist #1: "What was you plan?" terrorist #2: "We were going to kill the infidels." terrorist #1: "Hey us too." __________________ I didn't mean to say it. But I meant what I said. J. McMurtry In Vino Veritas

02-03-2008, 08:13 PM	#26 (permalink)
~~Nik00117~~ Troubled Join Date: Jan 2007 Location: Germany Posts: 1,572 OS: XP Pro, Vista Ulimate My System	Re: Should we treat our POWs better? Problem is, we don't know this for sure do we now? I mean seriously everyone is commenting on how short their info line is, well how do we know? We don't, thats the problem.

02-05-2008, 07:35 PM	#28 (permalink)
Chode TSF Enthusiast Join Date: Sep 2006 Posts: 903 OS: Windows XP Pro	Re: Should we treat our POWs better? The treatment of detainees at Guantanamo just reflects panic. The situation is analogous to the witch-hunts of the MIddle Ages. How do we know the accused are witches? Well, someone told us they were. Sure enough, it had to be true, since they confessed after we tortured them enough. The official position is that all the detainees are "terrorists", even though in many cases, the Government can't actually determine that the Mohammad Akbar of Anbar province in custody is even the "terrorist" they want, or just simply one of 5000 or so other "Mohammad Akbars" from Anbar. Still, we must be right because if you deprive Mohammad of enough sleep and waterboard him enough, he'll confess. If he fails to confess, repeat as necessary. If he dies during interrogation, or fails to confess, that just proves he's a terrorist because they are all fanatics. __________________ Sweet!