Most worrying thing in the interview re terrorist organisations is...
We’re not playing on an even field.
As far as I’m concerned we have to fight fire with fire.
😯
Though given the resources at the US's disposal the playing field is already far from even.
As far as I’m concerned we have to fight fire with fire.
Yep he said as much in that article too:
"I would absolutely authorize something beyond waterboarding."
..
He called waterboarding a "minor form" of interrogation.
..
On Cruz, Trump said that “he didn't want to get involved because he thought waterboarding was bad, so — of course it's bad, but it's not chopping off heads, folks. Okay? That I can tell you.”
..
Trump mocked Cruz for not taking a stronger stance on waterboarding. As he spoke at a rally, a woman in the audience called Cruz "a pussy" — an insult that Trump repeated to the crowd.
[url= https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/trump-says-torture-works-backs-waterboarding-and-much-worse/2016/02/17/4c9277be-d59c-11e5-b195-2e29a4e13425_story.html ]Original WP article is here[/url]. Worth a read.
Also "interesting" the way he was asked the open question by his fellow Republican in that article:
"On that whole thing of politically correct, would you allow U.S. interrogators to waterboard terrorist prisoners in order to extract information?" Herbkersman asked.
Politically Correct?
Because apparently sticking to the Geneva Convention and not committing war crimes is just political correctness gawn mad. 😯
I'm pretty sure you could get Trump to confess to being the leader of ISIS with the right "minor form of interrogation". It definitely works if you want to find someone guilty and you're not too bothered if it's the right person
At this rate there's going to be a chapter in all modern American history books titled "Senator McCain" that starts "Remember when American politics wasn't completely mental? John McCain remembers"
Surely no reasonable person can support trump now, a man who supports torture has no place as a leader in the western world. He genuinely has no clue what he's doing, a fact that becomes more and more obvious as each day passes. Various agencies are now setting up alternative Twitter accounts to keep information flowing out, and he's been president less than a week.
I saw this on BBC news last night and had to record it. These are the chumps that voted for him. Conveniently she seems have forgotten Mark 12:31...
"a man who supports torture has no place as a leader in the western world."
True, but did a man who ordered an Extra Judicial Assassination in ****stan have a place as Western leader?
Great!! This will have the lefties jumping up and down!!
Blood lefties with their respect for human life and dignity, their rejection of unreliable interrogation methods and support for the rule of law.
Bastards the lot of them.
String em up, string em up i say!
The point when even the Daily Mash satire could so easily be true...
http://www.thedailymash.co.uk/news/international/trump-has-already-pressed-fake-nuclear-button-cia-gave-him-over-a-dozen-times-20170126120990
Blood lefties with their respect for human life and dignity, their rejection of unreliable interrogation methods and support for the rule of law.
Let's see - human life and dignity, check. Unreliable interrogation methods, check. Rule of law, check.
Stone me! I never realised I was a "leftie".
Wonders will never cease.
TBH it may just be as simple as he wants to bluster but he's confident that he'll be prevented from ever actually doing anything. Not sure why he'd feel a need to do that at this point though.
True, but did a man who ordered an Extra Judicial Assassination in ****stan have a place as Western leader?
Yup. And for anyone who thinks the playing field is level...
Not sure why he'd feel a need to do that at this point though.
Because that's all he's got...
He also wants a weekly list of all crimes committed by immigrant, even if they are in the country legally.
As above anyone suporting Trump has lost touch with reality.
Surely no reasonable person can support trump now, a man who supports torture has no place as a leader in the western world
That's my point though - he quite openly campaigned on that point and people voted for him. More than that, they positively lapped it up!
TBH it may just be as simple as he wants to bluster but he's confident that he'll be prevented from ever actually doing anything.
I think that's often the case with Trump.
True, but did a man who ordered an Extra Judicial Assassination in ****stan have a place as Western leader?
Apparently. Whereas a man who stated that it would have been preferable to have a trial does not.
[quote=cchris2lou ]He also wants a weekly list of all crimes committed by immigrant, even if they are in the country legally.
As above anyone suporting Trump has lost touch with reality.
Simply stirring up hatred of all foreigners. The man is absolute 100% scum.
The man is unbelievable. He thinks that in spite of having the world's most capable military he can't fight on a level playing field and instead he's fine to resort to war crimes and defiance of the Geneva Convention?? It beggars belief.
Well that's done it. I will absolutely not be setting foot in USA for fear of being mistaken for a wrong 'un and then tortured.
The guy's barking and as for anyone who attempts to defend this moron, why don't you pop over and live there for a bit in this new Utopia?
He's right enough, it's not a level playing field. Asymetric warfare isn't it, no amount of aircraft carriers are useful against a guy driving a truck into a crowd- and no amount of dudes with bomb vests stop a tank from rolling into your capital city. Unsportingly, the baddies now refuse to get into aircraft carrier duels with the US, and they fight tanks with hostages and armies by attacking where they're not.
And moral codes make things unequal too, fundamentally we're at a disadvantage here- and the real kicker is, we have to make sure we always are, even when it'd be tempting to level that playing field.
But of course it's a slippery slope, just one little torture to stop an imminent terrorist attack... Except here we're not talking slippery slope at all, we're talking outright moral black and white "be evil to fight evil, as a first resort". Usually you're worried that this stuff sneaks in at the greys.
The scary thing about this, apart from the obvious fact that the bloke is clearly absolutely unhinged, is that he seems like a man just getting started, and really warming to his theme. You can just see that he;s getting more drunk on power by the day, and feels like theres nobody who can, or should, have the right to prevent him doing whatever the hell he likes
i worry that in a terrifyingly short time-frame we're going to be viewing things like endorsing the use of torture as a quaint golden age of reason.
His attitude to international diplomacy reminds me of...
[img] 
[/img]
Take a look at his demeanour and posturing as he publicly signs these executive orders, and be afraid. Be very very afraid. He clearly thinks he's some kind of Roman emperor
He's right enough, it's not a level playing field. Asymetric warfare isn't it, no amount of aircraft carriers are useful against a guy driving a truck into a crowd- and no amount of dudes with bomb vests stop a tank from rolling into your capital city. Unsportingly, the baddies now refuse to get into aircraft carrier duels with the US, and they fight tanks with hostages and armies by attacking where they're not.And moral codes make things unequal too, fundamentally we're at a disadvantage here- and the real kicker is, we have to make sure we always are, even when it'd be tempting to level that playing field.
+1
Apparently. Whereas a man who stated that it would have been preferable to have a trial does not.
True, although that man picked just about the only form of words possible to make his statement of that near-universally accepted fact look like advocating rabid insanity.
Unsportingly, the baddies now refuse to get into aircraft carrier duels with the US, and they fight tanks with hostages and armies by attacking where they're not.And moral codes make things unequal too, fundamentally we're at a disadvantage here- and the real kicker is, we have to make sure we always are, even when it'd be tempting to level that playing field.
Unsportingly the good guys now use drones to drop bombs on anyone anywhere who they think might be a threat with moral codes that don't seem that unequal... ([url= https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2012/jun/11/obama-drone-wars-normalisation-extrajudicial-killing ]source[/url])
Without the scrutiny of the legislature and the courts, and outside the public eye, Obama is authorizing murder on a weekly basis, with a discussion of the guilt or innocence of candidates for the "kill list" being resolved in secret on "Terror Tuesday" teleconferences with administration officials and intelligence officials.
The thought of what Trump might do with this very uneven playing field is more terrifying than any terrorist threat.
He clearly thinks he's some kind of Roman emperor
He clearly thinks he's powerless and can say what he likes and then blame Congress/Senate when it doesn't end up as law.
Thus winning votes with Rednecks without doing any significant harm.
I hope you're right fella.
What a great move by TM to be the first one to visit.
🙄
He clearly thinks he's powerless and can say what he likes and then blame Congress/Senate when it doesn't end up as law.
Isn't he making a lot of these changes as Executive Orders?
I don't understand the American legal/political framework enough to know how they work but it seems like they carry some legal weight.
Anyone legally minded care to explain them?
Thus winning votes with Rednecks without doing any significant harm.
Apart from the day one harm, the recruitment propaganda for is etc
Isn't he making a lot of these changes as Executive Orders?I don't understand the American legal/political framework enough to know how they work but it seems like they carry some legal weight.
Anyone legally minded care to explain them?
Nor me but I was referring to torture and that has been illegal for a few years now in the states and that's not going to change because of anything Trump has said.
Apart from the day one harm, the recruitment propaganda for is etc
Hence 'significant'.
Isn't he making a lot of these changes as Executive Orders?I don't understand the American legal/political framework enough to know how they work but it seems like they carry some legal weight.
You can sign stuff into law, what he will struggle with on things like the wall is paying for it.
On torture he has to get that approved too and actually find somebody who will do it.
I don't understand the American legal/political framework enough to know how they work but it seems like they carry some legal weight.
They can be implemented during his term, but they are not law and can be rescinded by the next President...
By the way, I've found that I JUST CAN'T STAND listening to that hideous voice sliming out all over the room from the TV every time he opens his rancid face hole... I have to attend to what he says in newsprint or second-hand reportage because his voice just makes my skin crawl.
Any body else get this, or is it just me?
outofbreath - MemberHe clearly thinks he's powerless and can say what he likes and then blame Congress/Senate when it doesn't end up as law.
Thus winning votes with Rednecks without doing any significant harm.
Someone should tell him he's already the president.
he's fine to resort to war crimes and defiance of the Geneva Convention?
You've read the Geneva conventions, right?
You understand the difference between those who are recognised as lawful combatants, and protected under the Geneva conventions, and those who are not, right?
Or are you knee jerk mouthing off about something using phrases that you've head of but don't understand?
Which ones can we waterboard ninfan? You buying the buckets?
By the way, I've found that I JUST CAN'T STAND listening to that hideous voice sliming out all over the room from the TV every time he opens his rancid face hole... I have to attend to what he says in newsprint or second-hand reportage because his voice just makes my skin crawl.Any body else get this, or is it just me?
A weird as this is to admit, when he's scripted I find his voice really relaxing in a kind of ASMR way.
When he's speaking off the cuff the words are too embarrassing to be relaxing.
I'm with you 100% on that one Wopster. Its like nails down a blackboard to me too. I deliberately avoided all TV and radio news for the day of his inauguration, and the 2 days afterwards. So I know what he said because I read it, but I just can't bring myself to listen to it. I can't stand watching his mannerisms when he speaks either. Those movements with his creepy, tiny little hands.
This....
[img] 
[/img]
Makes my skin crawl
"I hope you're right fella."
Time will tell.
Which ones can we waterboard ninfan? You buying the buckets?
What you probably missed, just reading the headlines in the guardian and morning star like you do, is that he said it was a decision for his defence staff, and that for example General Matiss didn't think it worked, that others disagreed and though it did, but that he would follow the lead of his experts
Imagine, a president who listened to the advice of the experts and let them lead the decisions - who would have thought that was a bad thing?
The Geneva convention can be side-stepped even in armed combat, for example Afghanistan and the Taliban, simply because it is an agreement between states, and if you do not recognise your opponent in this way, for example ISIS, then the protections of the GC do not apply to combatants.
The UN Convention on Torture which the US signed in the 80s is not quite as simple to dodge, hence the use of foreign installations so the US can pay lip service to meeting its requirements while torturing the crap out of whoever they fancy. But with a president who is a vocal advocate of waterboarding, I'm not sure how long that particular charade can go on.
The US can, and will do what it wants, claiming to be a humane democracy while doing the precise opposite in some hellhole prison in north Africa.
You understand the difference between those who are recognised as lawful combatants, and protected under the Geneva conventions, and those who are not, right?
So those not covered under the Geneva Convention as lawful combatants are what? Criminals I suppose since they are presumably civilian and have committed crimes (which as I recall is how the IRA were looked upon during the troubles). Is it OK to torture civilian criminals?
Or to write it a little differently he promised it all the way round his campaign, got elected wants to do it but nobody in their right mind will allow it. His appointments had to categorically state they would do no such thing then he goes on tv and still says he wants to. He knew when he did the interview they said they wouldn't do it so why say you want to?
Or are you knee jerk mouthing off about something using phrases that you've head of but don't understand?
Maybe. Just like you're knee-jerk trolling by saying something that makes you look like you support torture but is sufficiently ambiguous to allow you to walk away from it if challenged.
So those not covered under the Geneva Convention as lawful combatants are what? Criminals I suppose since they are presumably civilian and have committed crimes (which as I recall is how the IRA were looked upon during the troubles). Is it OK to torture civilian criminals?
IIRC they are not even criminals since they have not been convicted of any crime, and suspected criminals are guaranteed a fair court hearing. Maybe they are sort of "alternative criminals".
Ninfan: a decade in the Army (and counting) gives me a bit more knowledge about this than just reading headlines.