In my opinion, it is far worse to believe it is torture and do nothing when they know it is happening than to vocally express that it is not torture.

I personally know two members of the armed forces who have been subjected to it and do not consider it torture.....and in fact, find it somewhat ridiculous that it is categorized as such. There are people who have been subjected to it who do not consider it to be. What is torture to me may not be torture to someone else. I am deathly afraid of the dentist, do not go willingly, dread it, and want it to be over immediately. It literally takes every ounce of will power I have not to bolt from the chair. Is that to be considered torture? I don't think I'd like water boarding, but someone like Michael Phelps might not mind at all. Hell, I'd like to sue my son's 4th grade music teacher for making him practice his recorder for 3 hours/month. THAT is torture.

A) Sure. I said nothing about standard interrogation procedure. No disagreement here. But the major justification of waterboarding is (can you deny this?) that we gained big important life-saving information from it. So, I'm eager to know more about that information.

B) Of course everybody spins. But saying that you know how democrats would react in a hypothetical situation is not evidence, and it's equally eye-rolling for me when the other side does it, too.

It's a horse that has been flogged in the Daily Grind many many times. I really enjoy learning new facts that shed light on the issues, and I welcome them even when they come from the other side of the aisle. (Sometimes the truth really does sting - that's fine) But hypothetical "I know what your lot would do" adds nothing to the conversation for me. I stand by this, and apologize in advance if I misunderstood your intent somehow.

I'm with you all the way about the dentist.

It seems to me that the majority of democrats have been railing against it for years now. I'd want evidence that they knew and stayed silent back in '02. And if that is so, then I'd be interested in knowing when they changed their minds and why. And then, yes, I'd agree that said weasliness is worse than simply having the opinion that the practice isn't torture. But neither of these things are high crimes - they are pretty small potatoes compared to actually authorizing and carrying out torture. (Or even enhanced unpleasantness.)

I don't doubt that there are people who can take it and shrug it off. How much did your armed forces acquaintances undergo? Were they subjected for hours at a time, over a hundred times in one month? (That is definitely going into the torture category for me.) Would they feel the same way if they underwent the procedure after being imprisoned for a few years, less fit, confined and not knowing what was happening to them? I can't answer that, of course.

I'm convinced that waterboarding doesn't belong in our bag of interrogation tricks. It seems obvious to me just as its relative harmlessness seems obvious to you. But whether or not it deserves the name torture is just semantics. Until someone convinces me with evidence, I call the practice needless, ugly and ineffective. It makes us look desperate and scared, and I'm not convinced it bought us anything useful.

Honestly, I don't know. All I know is that they've both basically said that they were waterboarded during training, it while wasn't pleasant, they really didn't think they were bring tortured. I will certainly admit that in part could be because they knew it was training and didn't figure anyone was planning on killing them.

If it's not torture, why do it. Waterboarding doesn't seem to be easily lumped under the category of "loss of privileges," e.g., "Tell us everything you know, or you can't watch Zack and Cody."

So, if your soldier friends thought it wasn't torture, I submit that either 1) they didn't experience it long enough or 2) we're bad at devising methods of torture.

The latter argument certainly doesn't excuse us. It calls to mind the testimony of the defense expert at the Rodney King beating trial who said, no, Officer Powell was not committing police brutality because, as you can see, his baton technique is really quite poor.

If someone in your family was suspected of being a terrorist, would you feel comfortable knowing that this was one of the techniques that would be used to "make them talk".

Note this would be before they had a trial - this would be an attempt to gain valuable information to save American lives.

If somebody forces you to do it as punishment or a form of cercion, then it likely is.

As for your friends who don't consider it to be torture, do you think they'd still hold that position if it were Taliban fighters doing it to a member of their platoon? Or is part of the reason that they don't consider torture that it is Americans doing it to other people?

I answered that above in post 4464. I said

They didn't expand on their experience much.

And while the national debate continues along the lines of waterboarding 3 terrorists, North Korea detonates a nuclear weapon. Good thing they followed through on their agreements to dismantle their weapons programs!

Was your post (#4468) in response to my post before it? I'm not seeing how it addresses what I asked.