McCain: don't give a damn what trump wants- Waterboarding Won't Be Reinstated

B

Bill

Malarkeyville
by The Associated Press

HALIFAX, Nova Scotia — A leading Republican voice on national security matters said Saturday he doesn't care what President-elect Donald Trump says, the United States will not reinstate waterboarding.

Sen. John McCain of Arizona, chairman of the Armed Services Committee, said at the Halifax International Security Forum that any attempt to bring back harsh interrogation techniques such as waterboarding, which simulates drowning, would quickly be challenged in court.

"I don't give a damn what the president of the United States wants to do or anybody else wants to do. We will not waterboard. We will not do it,"​
 McCain said to applause during a panel discussion.

McCain, who was tortured as a prisoner of war during the Vietnam War, said extreme interrogation techniques are banned under U.S. law and the Geneva Conventions.

During the campaign, Trump said he would push to change laws that prohibit waterboarding, which was used against suspected terrorists during the George W. Bush administration.

McCain, the 2008 Republican presidential nominee, said waterboarding doesn't work and makes it hard for the U.S. to claim moral superiority.

"What does it say about America if we're going to inflict torture on people," he said.

McCain also expressed support for the North American Free Trade Agreement with Canada and Mexico and said the United States should not back out of the not-yet-implemented Trans-Pacific Partnership. As a candidate, Trump said NAFTA should be renegotiated and opposed the TPP, arguing that such trade agreements cause significant job losses in the U.S.
Image: John McCain
Sen. John McCain, R-Ariz., laughs while speaking at the Halifax International Security Forum in Halifax on Saturday, Nov. 19, 2016. Darren Calabrese / The Canadian Press via AP

"I think we are going to pay a terrible price for abandoning the TPP," McCain said. "You are going to see Chinese assertion of economic influence in the region, and possible dominance. All of these countries are now going to join with China in trade agreements and we're going to be out in the cold. Historians will judge us very harshly."

In its eighth year, the Halifax International Security Forum has attracted top defense and security officials from Western democracies. Trump has dominated the discussions.

Rose Gottemoeller, NATO's Deputy Secretary General, said in a panel discussion that NATO Secretary General Jens Stoltenberg had spoken with Trump on Friday.

"The two men agreed about the enduring importance of the NATO alliance and the enduring importance of increased defense spending," Gottemoeller said.

Trump suggested during the campaign that he might review NATO members' financial contributions before deciding whether to honor commitments under the alliance's mutual defense clause. He also raised concerns among U.S. allies with his effusive comments about Russian President Vladimir Putin.
 
During the campaign, Trump said he would push to change laws that prohibit waterboarding, which was used against suspected terrorists during the George W. Bush administration.
Click to expand...
waterboardingnot going to happen. it's all campaign bullshit. Tough on terrorism. talk.

I do expect some kind of "extreme vetting" whatever that is...for the millionth time. CHILL OUT and SEE HOW IT GOES
 
anatta said:
waterboardingnot going to happen. it's all campaign bullshit. Tough on terrorism. talk.

I do expect some kind of "extreme vetting" whatever that is...for the millionth time. CHILL OUT and SEE HOW IT GOES
Click to expand...
Are you trying to discourage me & others from posting??
 
Bill said:
Are you trying to discourage me & others from posting??
Click to expand...
of course not. I'm giving my opinion. I think there is way too much hyperbole all over the place. Some of that is because of Trump's earlier reckless language -some of it is the campaign . Some of it is because the left wants to freak out.

Never, ever would i tell anyone not to speak up - but i can also say "chill"
 
anatta said:
waterboardingnot going to happen. it's all campaign bullshit. Tough on terrorism. talk.

I do expect some kind of "extreme vetting" whatever that is...for the millionth time. CHILL OUT and SEE HOW IT GOES
Click to expand...

its probaby going to happen we just will not know about it. They will pick more reliable guys to do it and better blacksites.
 
I think the US should look into bleachboarding. We could save that for our most egregious enemies, the liberal Left.
 
Bill,

Thanks for this well chosen topic. It is very worthy of public discourse.

Let us first say, there's no such thing as a one-sided coin. There are two sides to this argument.

- One side: "the ticking time-bomb" argument:
Terrorists have 7 major East coast cities rigged with massive "radioactive dirty bombs". If detonated, they won't destroy the cities. But they'll so badly contaminate them the cities will have to be abandoned, and $Trillions of $Dollars worth of irreplaceable coastal real estate will be lost for 5,000 years.
The timers are set to detonate in 12 hours.
What should we do?
Offer the terrorists a cup of tea? Or wire their genitals to an AC generator and let 'er rip?

- The other side, the Geneva Convention side, and I remind: the United States of America is a signatory to the Geneva protocols, including those violated during the Bush administration:
Treat all peoples humanely.
If we do that, their now justifiable excuse for calling U.S. "the great satan" goes away.

We don't go to the store to buy enemies. We make them ourselves.

I've never been a POW.
But Senator McCain (R-AZ) has. On this weighty matter, I defer to him. If he were wishy-washy on it, I might be too.
But Senator McCain is resolute on this issue. That's good enough for me. And anyone that doubt's McCain's standing to take a position on it can high-five him the next time they see him.

Oh wait.
No they can't.
Senator McCain can't raise his own arms above his shoulders, because of what the NVA did to him at the Hanoi Hilton.

We ain't faddiddlin' around here boys & girls. This is RL. So are we going to be a great country? Or aren't we?
 
I am sure that President Elect Trump will take former President McCain's opinion under advisement. Oh wait................
 
sear said:
Bill,

Thanks for this well chosen topic. It is very worthy of public discourse.

Let us first say, there's no such thing as a one-sided coin. There are two sides to this argument.

- One side: "the ticking time-bomb" argument:
Terrorists have 7 major East coast cities rigged with massive "radioactive dirty bombs". If detonated, they won't destroy the cities. But they'll so badly contaminate them the cities will have to be abandoned, and $Trillions of $Dollars worth of irreplaceable coastal real estate will be lost for 5,000 years.
The timers are set to detonate in 12 hours.
What should we do?
Offer the terrorists a cup of tea? Or wire their genitals to an AC generator and let 'er rip?

- The other side, the Geneva Convention side, and I remind: the United States of America is a signatory to the Geneva protocols, including those violated during the Bush administration:
Treat all peoples humanely.
If we do that, their now justifiable excuse for calling U.S. "the great satan" goes away.

We don't go to the store to buy enemies. We make them ourselves.

I've never been a POW.
But Senator McCain (R-AZ) has. On this weighty matter, I defer to him. If he were wishy-washy on it, I might be too.
But Senator McCain is resolute on this issue. That's good enough for me. And anyone that doubt's McCain's standing to take a position on it can high-five him the next time they see him.

Oh wait.
No they can't.
Senator McCain can't raise his own arms above his shoulders, because of what the NVA did to him at the Hanoi Hilton.

We ain't faddiddlin' around here boys & girls. This is RL. So are we going to be a great country? Or aren't we?
Click to expand...

Just a couple of things about your post

1) Yes we are a signatory to the Geneva Convention, but ISIS and Al Queda are not. That is no small distinction
2) With regards to your highlight McShamnesty's position, you are committing a logical fallacy by an appeal to authority, i.e. McShamnesty was tortured and opposes torture, therefore he is the arbiter on the issue.

Ask yourself this question, if McShamnesty were pro water boarding would you still use the same appeal to authority?
 
HISTORY.....

Remember the media fury about waterboarding when President Barack Obama was a junior senator seeking the U.S. presidency?

Rendition was also a hot topic, with most media blaming President George W. Bush for starting the practice of spiriting a suspect off to a foreign country for interrogation.

In the interest of cleaning up the spin, a look at past and current presidents' policy is useful because legacy media completely overlooked the Clinton era.

Obama’s State Dept. legal adviser Harold Hongju Koh said during a press conference in 2010:

“This president of the United States said that torture and cruel and inhuman or degrading treatment will not be used going forward with regard to interrogation practices. So there has been a clear turning of the page.”

What didn’t media and Koh mention?

Rendition didn’t start under Bush 43. President Bill Clinton first ramped up the practice that previous presidents had used sparingly. Two left of center sites, the American Civil Liberties Union and The Brookings Institution confirmed this. As Brookings disclosed:

Beginning in 1995, President Bill Clinton's administration turned up the speed with a full-fledged program to use rendition to disrupt terrorism plotting abroad. According to former director of central intelligence George J. Tenet, about 70 renditions were carried out before Sept. 11, 2001, most of them during the Clinton years.

Little has been said about the use of waterboarding prior to Bush 43, but I don’t believe the practice originated with him.

Waterboarding and rendition, however, take a back seat when it comes to drone strikes. Obama has indisputably and markedly increased drone strikes. In June, 2012, left-leaning Slate said Obama drone strikes outnumbered those of Bush 43 by “5 to 1.”

Let me point something out to low-info Democrat voters. You don’t live to talk about a drone strike.

Why bring this up?

Obama campaigned on the basis of his moral superiority, evidenced by Koh’s empty words. Where is Koh now?

Maybe Obama’s legal counsel is spinning a speech justifying the decision to kill American citizens even if they haven’t been charged with a crime. Now legacy media are telling you what many of us have told you before, as per a Justice Dept. memo:

“The condition that an operational leader present an ‘imminent’ threat of violent attack against the United States does not require the United States to have clear evidence that a specific attack on U.S. persons and interests will take place in the immediate future,” the memo states.”

And there’s this:

As in Holder’s speech, the confidential memo lays out a three-part test that would make targeted killings of American lawful: In addition to the suspect being an imminent threat, capture of the target must be “infeasible, and the strike must be conducted according to “law of war principles.” But the memo elaborates on some of these factors in ways that go beyond what the attorney general said publicly. For example, it states that U.S. officials may consider whether an attempted capture of a suspect would pose an “undue risk” to U.S. personnel involved in such an operation. If so, U.S. officials could determine that the capture operation of the targeted American would not be feasible, making it lawful for the U.S. government to order a killing instead, the memo concludes.

Democrats can back off their moral superiority. This president prefers the most lethal weapon in the terrorism arsenal. He’s not alone. Historically and currently when it comes to national defense, few countries could claim moral superiority.

It’s important to point out that national security in this era is a daunting task and any country’s practices warrant discussion. Why legacy media routinely lie about this president’s actions—in fact, about any Democrat’s actions—should also be a topic for discussion.

Meanwhile, despite opinions to the contrary in state-controlled media, the world doesn’t love us a morsel more than they did under Bush 43.

Hope and change are in shorter supply these days, with the U.S. Constitution under attack by Democrats and their liberal allies. Now you know a major reason the political class would like to sail that document out the door.

http://www.theusreport.com/the-us-r...rding-rendition-drones-and-us-presidents.html
 
Bill said:
by The Associated Press
[URL="http://www.nbcnews.com/news/us

Is John McCain the President? and is he dumb enough to believe that the CIA takes orders from him?

No he is the dumbest ass in his graduating class, who flew a perfectly good jet into a missile
Click to expand...
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top