DiscussWorldIssues - Socio-Economic Religion and Political Uncensored Debate - View Single Post

**crazuMovies** · 02-23-2012, 07:31 PM

It's harmless. Great way to get somebody to talk, too. We do it to our troops in evasion training. It sucks when it's happening, but there are no lasting effects. It's no different than turning up or down the thermostat or pumping in loud music for hours on end.

That being said, there is a time and a place. For it to remain effective, it should only be used when needed. If time is of the essence and there is no doubt that somebody is a bad guy. If there is doubt, it should be off the table. Though, would you really shed a tear if cops did it to gang-bangers?

I just can't figure out why it isn't kept secret. It leaves no marks, that's the beauty of it.

I know that sometimes you have to do unpleasant things in order to protect the greater good, but why publicize it? Why feed the fire?

It would have been much more effective to come out and say that KSM was a coward and a stool pigeon who talked openly and willingly with US authorities. Tarnish his name, and hurt the morale of al Qaeda, as well as keep them guessing about how much we know...

Am I crazy? Aren't we doing this all wrong?

02-23-2012, 07:31 PM	#26
crazuMovies Join Date Oct 2005 Posts 512 Senior Member	It's harmless. Great way to get somebody to talk, too. We do it to our troops in evasion training. It sucks when it's happening, but there are no lasting effects. It's no different than turning up or down the thermostat or pumping in loud music for hours on end. That being said, there is a time and a place. For it to remain effective, it should only be used when needed. If time is of the essence and there is no doubt that somebody is a bad guy. If there is doubt, it should be off the table. Though, would you really shed a tear if cops did it to gang-bangers? I just can't figure out why it isn't kept secret. It leaves no marks, that's the beauty of it. I know that sometimes you have to do unpleasant things in order to protect the greater good, but why publicize it? Why feed the fire? It would have been much more effective to come out and say that KSM was a coward and a stool pigeon who talked openly and willingly with US authorities. Tarnish his name, and hurt the morale of al Qaeda, as well as keep them guessing about how much we know... Am I crazy? Aren't we doing this all wrong?
	Quote