This, exactly.

I did not ask for the political grandeur of torture, I asked if there was cases of lasting psychological harm (notice the word potentially, everything has an risk factor) Side note, how can you say we gain nothing from waterboaring yet, when all the memos has yet to be released? that said, Abu Zubayda broke after 35 seconds of being waterboarded, because of that they were able to stop an number of terrorists attacks. I didn't know terrorists get citizen treatment to me, I mean since we are not at war and play nice maybe they won't find our values so offensive. Maybe the rest of there community will give up, and join them in the treatment we offer. That said, I'm not here to debate the "best" method to do things. I'm simply stating my own opinion and trying to slice threw some misconceptions people have about waterboarding.

That said, saying that "torture/waterboarding is simply skipping ahead without all the information.

That said go look up the (some) memos that where recently released

I am not sure what you mean by "political grandeur of torture". And the fact that Americans have to sign a release acknowledging there is potential permanent psychological harm should answer your question.

It is "bad interrogation. I mean you can get anyone to confess to anything if the torture's bad enough", said former CIA officer Bob Baer.

If Abu Zubaydah broke after 35 seconds, why was he subjected to waterboarding over 80 times?

In March 2009, the Washington Post reported: "In the end, though, not a single significant plot was foiled as a result of Abu Zubaida's tortured confessions, according to former senior government officials who closely followed the interrogations. Nearly all of the leads attained through the harsh measures quickly evaporated, while most of the useful information from Abu Zubaida -- chiefly names of al-Qaeda members and associates -- was obtained before waterboarding was introduced, they said."
[Peter Finn and Joby Warrick, "[Detainee's Harsh Treatment Foiled No Plots]," Washington Post 29 March 2009 p. A1]

It's not about getting "citizen treatment". It is about getting "human treatment". If we are going to lower ourselves in this way to abuse the prisoners we capture with waterboarding, sleep deprivation, naked humiliation and other techniques, then what right do we have to say we are "better" than the terrorists we capture?

I recommend you do the same.

Yes, they played chess with them, and that worked when they had weeks or months to get information about weapons technology or the locations of sensitive targets. The types of information sought nowadays is of a time sensitive nature, and you aren't going to "befriend" a terrorist, learn what he knows, and take action if that action is going to occur in a matter of days, if not hours.

And, we must not forget that the Nazis, for all their faults, were European Christians for the most part, and were nothing like the ideological religious fundamentalists we face today.

Why is torture used? Is it used just because interrogators are sadistic fiends who had unhappy childhoods and went to work for the CIA as an emotional outlet?

The idea that torture doesn't lead to information is patently false. The catchword here is "reliable", but when trying to get intelligence there is no such thing as useless information. Every fact, no matter how minor, or what the context, is a piece to a larger puzzle, and potentially the key piece.

Once again, if a terrorist were caught on his way to blow up your neighborhood, or the train or plane that you (or one of your family members) had a ticket to be on, would you still think torture was unjustified?

It's far to easy for those of us who live in an insulated world to say that we oppose things like torture. We can criticize, theorize, or justify any view we like because we have never had to come face to face with the uglier side of humanity.

I meant I do not care for spin. I only asked for the cases of lasting psychological harm because of waterboarding. Secondly you have to sign an waiver to play paintball, so no it doesn't answer my question when you almost have to sign waivers anywhere where's there an risk of harm. So I would like to know if there are any/few cases.

I'm going to begin with the last comment (and move up) you made. In what way do you think I haven't read the reports? I have all 4 of them on my computer and will continue to add to that when the rest are released. On that you would find by reading them, the whole "wateboarding doesn't work" argument gets an big punch in the face.

Did you forget we are at war? When do you tell your secrets before an war is over? Secondly I do find it weird that you would say that beheading someone is online is the same as waterboarding. I mean we didn't attack them, they want to kill us regardless of reason. In what way do we become like them trying to protect ourselves? If someone sons/daughters/parents etc. are on the line shame on the person that doesn't value there life enough to do what needs to be done. I don't see the argument we "lose are values" when we even value the lives of those we put to waterboarding. Simply put, we are at war and MUST value us lives over theirs.

Quotes from the May 30 memo.
page 8
"The CIA used the waterboarding extensively in the interrogations in KSM and Zubaydah, but did so after it became clear that the standard interrogation techniques where not working. Interrogators used enhanced techniques in the interrogation of al-Nashiri with notable results as early as the first day. See IG report at 35-36. Twelve days into the interrogation, the CIA subjected al-Nashiri to one session of the waterboarding during witch water was applied two times see id. at 36"

(these things are scans so I have to copy word for word, but in retrospect some paragraph are very long so I will summarize so you can get an chance to read the memos later)

Anyways the next paragraph after that details events where they would get doctors to look over them before the waterboarding to make sure no lasting pain phy/psy would come to them. Even then they would stay and make stop it if something goes wrong. They even go as far to say that no technique would be used if they guy was to suffer serious harm.

page 10

notes how enhanced interrogation on KSM was used to foil an plot called the "second wave" to use east Asian operatives to crash an hijacked airliner into an building in Los Angeles. It also notes that more information was obtained from him that led to the capture of Hambali and the discovery of the Guraba cell- and seven member Jemaah Islamiah cell tasked with the "second wave"

This was all obtain from just one memo. As far as I"m concerned what was reported here denies your claim that water boarding doesn't work. Information was needed hence why he was continued to be waterboarded.

Kinda funny how the world is flipping out because of the US waterboarding terrorists.... Once we're done with the interrogations they're given back to their country and their country shoots or hangs them right there at the airport as they get off our plane.

What's worse?

That is another reason why some people where kept at Gitmo. People gawk at the idea of waterboarding but just don't understand it (it's still an hard thing to do) or understand just how well these people who want to kill us are treated in this country.

Of course waterboarding is torture.

The technique involves water to be forced down the nose while smothering the mouth. It gives the effect of drowning.

Try it sometime if you don't think it's torture...

it tricks your brain into an "flee" response. In very rare circumstance do you even actually start to drown, as the technique requires you to be in such an degree as to NOT allow water into the lungs.

I also said given the chance I may very will TRY it. Hence why I don't think it's torture.

I don't know how what you said makes waterboarding not torture... please define what torture is according to you...

Bear in mind that waterboarding among other things lead to executions of Japanese POW commanders after WW2.

The US itself defines it as torture.