Should CIA Kidnappers Be Kidnapped?

[Epistemologist]

Quote by: saltinespike If they succeed, we might not declare war, but we should not just place the agents out in the open. We should do our best to protect them, let the countries take a risk, do all we can to stop them. But if they succeed, they succeed. Is that what you were getting at?

Of course, one's own country would do anything to protect their own agents. That's basically what I meant by saying a patriot would unconditionally support his/her own troops.

Yeah, what I'm saying is that from an objective point of view, irrespective of a single nation, no country has that high ground; theoretically, all agent could be susceptible to harm.

Now, again, I reiterate the possibilities for the injustices of might makes right and even when a country's agents are captured, the country may work hard to get them back. The moral of the story, though, is that no nation should be above another. Sorry if my wording was ambiguous.

[saltinespike]

Quote by: Epistemologist Now, again, I reiterate the possibilities for the injustices of might makes right and even when a country's agents are captured, the country may work hard to get them back. The moral of the story, though, is that no nation should be above another. Sorry if my wording was ambiguous.

No problem. I understand your reasoning, but do not agree with it. "You shouldn't be stronger than me and he shouldn't be stronger than you" doesn't click with me. Countries will always have more power than another, until you get to the bottom. And it should be that way. A perfect society would be an ignorant society (and a shallow society). A perfect example of this would be communism. Everyone is equal. This world faces anarchy, ultimately, leaving the world leader to whomever can claim it.

I apologize for blurting out different ideas at random times. Hopefully you can absorb the message of the full post.

[Epistemologist]

Quote by: saltinespike No problem. I understand your reasoning, but do not agree with it. "You shouldn't be stronger than me and he shouldn't be stronger than you" doesn't click with me. Countries will always have more power than another, until you get to the bottom. And it should be that way. A perfect society would be an ignorant society (and a shallow society). A perfect example of this would be communism. Everyone is equal. This world faces anarchy, ultimately, leaving the world leader to whomever can claim it. I apologize for blurting out different ideas at random times. Hopefully you can absorb the message of the full post.

That's okay, I don't say that might makes right is necessarily wrong. I agree that it's the way thing's work in the long run. However, the most powerful nation's "right" is not necessarily the same as the true "right" in the objective sense.

So if CIA agents want to be immune to kidnapping, let them keep their desires. And when their enemies try to kidnap them, let them try and stop them. And when CIA enemies finally do kidnap them, an objective observer would really have no problem with it. An American observer, though, might have a problem, just as an Italian observer might have a problem when CIA agents kidnap Italian operatives.

A lot of times it just comes down to realizing whether or not you have enough might to even fight to make your "right" the dominant "right" in the world.

[Slevin57]

Quote by: saltinespike The CIA is so set on getting "what they need to know" that I could tell them that my Muslim neighbor has some information on a terrorist hit and he would disappear witohut warning. If they torture him, to get the information they need to know, though he knows nothing, is that doing "whatever is necessary"? It wouldn't necessarily be my fault, either, if I truly believed he had information. I do not, in any aspect, condone torture, even if it as a known fact that the person knows something. That leads to people lying, in which they are held prisoner until the lie happens, which, inevitably, will not, in which they get tortured more.

First of all the CIA doesn't handle your "muslim neighbor", the FBI handles all domestic interrogation. I would assume from a short stent in Army Intelligence that the CIA does not capture anyone without good intelligence. Your suspicions are not evidence alone. Even if they did act it would be on a completely silent basis to observe your neighbor. Not drag him in and nail him to the wall to get information.

Wonderful reasoning. Since we have done it for centuries, why stop now? There are better, cleaner ways to win a war. And the fact that this war is becoming unnecessary, is even more against your position. We are still interrogating people for weapons of mass destruction, because we cannot accept innocense from them.

I am open to new ideas. However the best and brightest minds in our intelligence community can not and will not ignore the fact that the threat of aggressive coercion is a highly effective means.

They have a choice. They do not have to go through physical or mental torture. They can give the information freely. If they are not wiling to give the information to us, then they are consenting to having it forced out. Welcome to life.

It's like the trials of the crusades. If the woman drowns, she wasn't a witch, but if she managed to survive, she's a witch! So now we get to kill her. It's a lose-lose situation.

I am fairly certain that the CIA is capable of discerning fact from fallacy. The methods of torture are classified. We do not know how they go about it. I do know that the prisoner is kept in CIA detention until his information can be verified. I would think that would compel the prisoner to tell the truth.

This is a foolish statement. I am sure that if we respected insurgents when captured, then they would be sure to think worse of us. Actually, if we respected them, they would kill more of us. No, that is silly.

Hate is a powerful thing.

Seeing as we have not yet tried to "be the better man", I don't think that you are in a position to say this honestly. Give an example.

World War II Era: Our solution would have been to blanket bomb Iraq and split it among the coalition victors. To the victor go the spoils.

Korea Era: In order to quel the insurgents, we will simply kill anyone who looks at us funny.

Current Era: Spend Billions on "smart" technology that allows precision targets while maintaining deadly accuracy. This resulted in the lowest casualty rate both on the enemy and our side and least amount of collateral damage compared the time we have been in Iraq.

From a military point of view, the war was a resounding success. Clean-up is never a resounding success, until it is long over. Ask Japan.

You are right. If the CIA does let the victim free and he does return to his militant group, he will most likely be tortured there. And killed. A soiled man has nothing to live for, anyways. The whole situation is just adding salt to the wounds.

If you have a better suggestion that will ensure the security of the United States, please write to the pentagon.

Now, neither one of us are apart of the CIA. And if we were we would both know that neither is at liberty to disclose any details whatsoever about that CIA or it's operational procedures.

That being said, back to our hypothetical argument

[PatrickHenry]

Slevin, at least one of the CIA's muslim victims was entirely innocent.
Khaled al-Masri is a citizen of the German republic.



He was kidnapped, taken to Afghanistan and tortured for months. And now you say

They have a choice. They do not have to go through physical or mental torture. They can give the information freely. If they are not wiling to give the information to us, then they are consenting to having it forced out. Welcome to life.

If this man has NO information, what is he consenting to?

Your view is vicious tyranny, a hatred for anyone unlike yourself. I think US citizens like you are what is fueling this insane behavior by what was once the freest, nost respected nation on earth.

[Osborn F Enready]

Ditto Pat, ditto.

[Arawn-ap-Hywel]

Quote by: PatrickHenry So that they can stand trial in the nations where they are accused? I assume that the US will refuse to extradite them... See, they kidnapped others and shipped them in secret flights so that they could be tortured. Not to stand trial. To be tortured... BBC NEWS | World | Europe | Germany issues CIA arrest orders CNN.com - Italy warrants for 22 purported CIA operatives - Dec 23, 2005 Why should US kidnappers not be kidnapped if that is such a wonderful method of correcting the world's problems?

The should be tried in absentia. If found guilty a price placed upon their heads. It would show justice and someone might desire the rewards :)

[PatrickHenry]

Quote by: Arawn-ap-Hywel The should be tried in absentia. If found guilty a price placed upon their heads. It would show justice and someone might desire the rewards :)

Now that's an idea! Convicted kidnappers could be fair game for clandestine bounty hunters...

[saltinespike]

Quote by: PatrickHenry Now that's an idea! Convicted kidnappers could be fair game for clandestine bounty hunters...

I could understand this coming from a family member or friend of the tortured, but as a patriotic American, I am obviously not in favor of this. Listen to yourself. You are cheering the idea for our own government agents, that do what they do to protect our country, to be leveled out by death. Not even formally.

[PatrickHenry]

Quote by: saltinespike I could understand this coming from a family member or friend of the tortured, but as a patriotic American, I am obviously not in favor of this. Listen to yourself. You are cheering the idea for our own government agents, that do what they do to protect our country, to be leveled out by death. Not even formally.

To what do you owe your loyalty, saltine? A long vanished republic? CIA agents are hired guns for Uncle Sam, not friends of mine. I side with the less priveleged people of this sad world.


I hate what the USA stands for: Military bullying, nuclear warfare, international hypocrisy, government financial corruption, domination of outlying regions by autocrats from Washington, DC, lying politicians, stolen elections and now kidnapping and torture in the name of "security." There's not a worse nation on this green and blue earth...

[saltinespike]

Quote by: PatrickHenry To what do you owe your loyalty, saltine? A long vanished republic? CIA agents are hired guns for Uncle Sam, not friends of mine. I side with the less priveleged people of this sad world. I hate what the USA stands for: Military bullying, nuclear warfare, international hypocrisy, government financial corruption, domination of outlying regions by autocrats from Washington, DC, lying politicians, stolen elections and now kidnapping and torture in the name of "security." There's not a worse nation on this green and blue earth...

Agreed. But everything we are caught up in is not necessarily our fault. Either that or the end result was inevitable. For example: if we intervene in international affairs, we're nosy bullies, if we don't, we're arrogant idiots. Either way, we'll have enemies. Just the choosing game.

Many of your reasons for disliking America are understandable, but irrelavent, other than the explanation I gave above.

We are one of the few successful democratic nations. And with great things, come horrible things. If we were to suddenly shut this 'bad factory' down (stopped bullying, destroyed our nukes, admitted we were wrong, exposed our financial secrets, told the truth, stopped stealing, and returned the prisoners) then we would no longer be the greatest nation in the world. We are horrible to others, but wonderful to citezens, which theoretically makes us the best nation in the world.

But I am a sucker for these priveledges (and so are you, seeing as you live here), and will defend my country to the death. Kinda gives a new meaning to "it's what's on the inside that counts".

[Setnakt]

On what do you base your argument that America is "wonderful to citezens[sp]"? Do you really need a fact sheet quoted here to contradict this sentiment?

[saltinespike]

Quote by: Setnakt On what do you base your argument that America is "wonderful to citezens[sp]"? Do you really need a fact sheet quoted here to contradict this sentiment?

Yep. Sure do. Please provide one.

[Arawn-ap-Hywel]

Ex-CIA chief: rendition flights put allies in difficult position | Special reports | Guardian Unlimited

Tyler Drumheller, who was in charge of the CIA's clandestine activities in Europe until 2005, said: "We have put our allies in a very difficult position." He said the way the issue of rendition flights was handled was one of the reasons he resigned. He told BBC2's Mystery Flights programme last night that it affected "the willingness of other countries to work with us - the intelligence services and police forces of other countries we go to". He said: "It makes it difficult even if those countries do want to help us ... because there's all this bad publicity and they're at risk of violating their own laws and that sort of thing." Asked where the buck stopped, Mr Drumheller replied: "The president's the president ... I blame the administration for creating an atmosphere of ... rage and vengeance." He continued: "The people up the line need to have responsibility for what happened ... They wanted to draw a line so that there was no direct line from what happened to their authority and that's not right." Asked if he was referring to "deniability", he replied: "Deniability, to put it in plain English, yeah." Sir Richard Dearlove, the former head of MI6, said in little-noted remarks at a conference in Aspen, Colorado, last year, that CIA rendition flights "would have been illegal under British common law".

Deniability, a questionable defense for any President and administration?