Posts
3156
Joined
7/31/2010
Location
Lead, SD
US
Edited Date/Time
1/26/2012 8:21am
The libs finally have come around and there is a new consensus on how to fight terrorism: Hold detainees indeterminately, question them (sometimes using "enhanced techniques"-illegally?!), capture and question even people who are "inconsequential", use elite members of the military to "assassinate" leaders even in sovereign countries without their permission or knowledge.
Now at least we can all agree that all these practices are all acceptable.
Now at least we can all agree that all these practices are all acceptable.
oldfart: "or not".
Sorry I misunderstood that exchange.
The Shop
A couple things to note. If you study the issue, which anyone who feels they should have strong opinions should do, the enhanced techniques were not developed to obtain intelligence, but lifted from a program the military was using to prepare service members at risk of being captured and tortured. At some point someone had the idea that these techniques should be used offensively, whether they actually worked at getting information or not.
People experienced in interrogation (FBI, experienced defense and intelligence personnel) resisted these techniques because conventional techniques have proven overall to be more effective at obtaining reliable information, and more of it. And while most concede some information was obtained through enhanced techniques ~ torture ~ they believe the same information and perhaps more could have been obtained through accepted interrogation methods, and without forfeiting the moral high ground that Americans believed made them different from some of their enemies. In other words, we didn't need to make ourselves as bad as our enemies to defeat them.
I basically agree with this, but it has nothing to do with holding detainees. After someone has been in isolation for 10 years, they have no information to give that isn't already known.
No, the new consensus on how to fight terrorism is sort of an "Obama Doctrine" - that when you find a terrorist who is likely to be involved in attacks on our citizens, we're going to go in there and take him out, and if he's in a country we can't trust as a partner in that, we'll do it unilaterally, surgically and without prior notification. It's a terrorism adaptation of the Powell Doctrine of concentrating overwhelming force, overwhelming intelligence and overwhelming technology so there's no fair fight in the issue at all.
The way to fight terrorists is to terrorize them. You make sure they know there's no telephone they can use, no computer they can access, no country they can hide in, no security force that can protect them, no market they can go to for food, no money they can spend - if they do anything other than breathe in and out, they leave a trail, and eventually that trail is going to intersect with a bunch of guys in helicopters that they really don't want to see.
The challenge in that doctrine is you have to be very judicious in using it - if you do it all the time, eventually you'll get lured into a trap and instead of shooting some terrorist mastermind you'll wind up shooting some innocent family sitting down to dinner. You have to have a poker player running the show, and I think the current president is a hell of a poker player.
http://www.brookings.edu/opinions/2005/1114terrorism_bloche.aspx
Ok, personally I'm against torture. I believe the West should maintain a higher moral stance - which can't be achieved if we descend to their level. This a war of ideology, a war of hearts and minds. These Muslim lads aren't born to hate the West, they're taught to. They don't start out wanting to die. It's like "Bloody Sunday" when the Paratroopers lost their heads and shot a whole bunch of innocent people - IRA recruitment literally increased over night. For every terrorist or innocent citizen, there are so many young lads who occupy the middle. All it takes is a little push, a little leverage, one more thing to use in their argument. Besides it's always been unreliable anyway.
The way to do these things is the way we've been doing it. That is to spy on all potentials, patiently build networks and only intercept when absolutely necessary. Overall it's been extremely effective.
Post a reply to: Best part of this OBL deal..