User Tag List

Results 1 to 4 of 4

Thread: Be Careful What You Concede

  1. #1
    TOL Legend
    Join Date
    Dec 2014
    Posts
    15,250
    Thanks
    370
    Thanked 3,742 Times in 2,789 Posts

    Blog Entries
    1
    Mentioned
    32 Post(s)
    Tagged
    3 Thread(s)

    Rep Power
    1247754

    Be Careful What You Concede

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EHF0yXrwr-0&app=desktop



    Some thoughts on the above video...

    What Stewart Rhodes (the guy with the eye patch) read just after that recording of McCain's obvious sell out to his Vietnam captors, way back when, is also an apt description of Trump's obvious sell out at Hilsinki.

    The part where Rhodes is asked "Now, how did John McCain violate the Soldier's Code of Conduct, here?" and he answers with "Well, by making statements that were against the war effort, that hurt the war effort, and helped the enemy...you're not supposed to make any statements that will aid the enemy...So, for example, it says here 'I will make no oral nor written statement disloyal to my country, nor to our allies, nor to their cause..." - so, by getting on there and saying 'I'm a war criminal, and I'm the aggressor' that's feeding right into their propoganda, hurt the war effort, plain and simple, it violated the code of conduct..."

    End of part one...

  2. #2
    TOL Legend
    Join Date
    Dec 2014
    Posts
    15,250
    Thanks
    370
    Thanked 3,742 Times in 2,789 Posts

    Blog Entries
    1
    Mentioned
    32 Post(s)
    Tagged
    3 Thread(s)

    Rep Power
    1247754
    Be Careful What You Concede

    Part two...

    The above also describes exactly the kinds of statements our supposed "Commander in Chief" made, first against our allies, during that fraudulent trip of his abroad, and then later, against our country, at Helsinki.

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rWj1wC2YW0A&app=desktop



    What is actually behind these obviously insidious sell-outs?

    The following, by Robert Cialdini, on pages 53, 54 of his bestselling "Influence: The Psychology of Influence" sheds some interesting light...
    ______________

    "The question of what makes a commitment effective has a number of answers. A variety of factors affect the ability of a commitment to constrain our future behavior.

    One large-scale program designed to produce compliance illustrates nicely how several of the factors work. The remarkable thing about this program is that it was systematically employing these factors decades ago, well before scientific research had identified them.

    During the Korean War, many captured American soldiers found themselves in prisoner-of-war (POW) camps run by the Chinese Communists. It became clear early in the conflict that the Chinese treated captives quite differently than did their allies, the North Koreans, who favored savagery and harsh punishment to gain compliance.

    Specifically avoiding the appearance of brutality, the Red Chinese engaged in what they termed their “lenient policy,” which was in reality a concerted and sophisticated psychological assault on their captives.

    After the war, American psychologists questioned the returning prisoners intensively to determine what had occurred.

    The intensive psychological investigation took place, in part, because of the unsettling success of some aspects of the Chinese program.

    For example, the Chinese were very effective in getting Americans to inform on one another, in striking contrast to the behavior of American POWs in World War II.

    For this reason, among others, escape plans were quickly uncovered and the escape attempts themselves almost always unsuccessful.

    “When an escape did occur,” wrote Dr. Edgar Schein, a principal American investigator of the Chinese indoctrination program in Korea, “the Chinese usually recovered the man easily by offering a bag of rice to anyone turning him in.”

    In fact, nearly all American prisoners in the Chinese camps are said to have collaborated with the enemy in one form or another.

    An examination of the Chinese prison-camp program shows that its personnel relied heavily on commitment and consistency pressures to gain the desired compliance from prisoners.

    Of course, the first problem facing the Chinese was how to get any collaboration at all from the Americans. These were men who were trained to provide nothing but name, rank, and serial number.

    Short of physical brutalization, how could the captors hope to get such men to give military information, turn in fellow prisoners, or publicly denounce their country?

    The Chinese answer was elementary: Start small and build.

    For instance, prisoners were frequently asked to make statements so mildly anti-American or pro-Communist as to seem inconsequential (“The United States is not perfect.” “In a Communist country, unemployment is not a problem.”).

    But once these minor requests were complied with, the men found themselves pushed to submit to related yet more substantive requests.

    A man who had just agreed with his Chinese interrogator that the United States is not perfect might then be asked to indicate some of the ways in which he thought this was the case.

    Once he had so explained himself, he might be asked to make a list of these “problems with America” and to sign his name to it.

    Later he might be asked to read his list in a discussion group with other prisoners.

    “After all, it’s what you really believe, isn’t it?”

    Still later he might be asked to write an essay expanding on his list and discussing these problems in greater detail.

    The Chinese might then use his name and his essay in an anti-American radio broadcast beamed not only to the entire camp, but to other POW camps in North Korea, as well as to American forces in South Korea.

    Suddenly he would find himself a “collaborator,” having given aid to the enemy.

    Aware that he had written the essay without any strong threats or coercion, many times a man would change his image of himself to be consistent with the deed and with the new “collaborator” label, often resulting in even more extensive acts of collaboration.

    Thus, while “only a few men were able to avoid collaboration altogether,” according to Dr. Schein, “the majority collaborated at one time or another by doing things which seemed to them trivial but which the Chinese were able to turn to their own advantage….

    This was particularly effective in eliciting confessions, self-criticism, and information during interrogation.

    - pages 53, 54 Influence: The Psychology of Persuasion

  3. #3
    TOL Legend
    Join Date
    Sep 2015
    Posts
    20,933
    Thanks
    2,082
    Thanked 5,925 Times in 4,340 Posts

    Mentioned
    23 Post(s)
    Tagged
    2 Thread(s)
    Rep Power
    2147732
    we were at war with the north vietnamese

    we were at war with the north koreans

    we are not at war with the Russian Federation


    if this isn't clear I can use hand puppets

  4. #4
    TOL Legend
    Join Date
    Jan 2009
    Posts
    12,840
    Thanks
    7,396
    Thanked 9,003 Times in 4,985 Posts

    Mentioned
    21 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Rep Power
    2147731
    Quote Originally Posted by Danoh View Post
    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EHF0yXrwr-0&app=desktop



    Some thoughts on the above video...

    What Stewart Rhodes (the guy with the eye patch) read just after that recording of McCain's obvious sell out to his Vietnam captors, way back when, is also an apt description of Trump's obvious sell out at Hilsinki.

    The part where Rhodes is asked "Now, how did John McCain violate the Soldier's Code of Conduct, here?" and he answers with "Well, by making statements that were against the war effort, that hurt the war effort, and helped the enemy...you're not supposed to make any statements that will aid the enemy...So, for example, it says here 'I will make no oral nor written statement disloyal to my country, nor to our allies, nor to their cause..." - so, by getting on there and saying 'I'm a war criminal, and I'm the aggressor' that's feeding right into their propoganda, hurt the war effort, plain and simple, it violated the code of conduct..."

    End of part one...

    No one who's never been tortured can possibly know how long they could hold out, or whether they would be able to hold out without breaking, yet there are so many untested who imagine they'd be able to do exactly that.

    John McCain doesn't deserve the abuse heaped on him by so-called patriots. I'd defer to the POW's who were with him during that time:

    On Saturday, three of McCain's fellow POWs — Everett Alvarez, Orson Swindle and Jerry Coffee — provided a joint statement to The Republic calling the recorded confession "old news," praising McCain's heroism and emphasizing that any feelings of regret that may continue to haunt him are not justified.

    "Like many of us, John was subjected to torture, and coerced into making a false confession," they said in the written statement. "We all tried, as John did, to resist to the best of our physical and mental abilities the abuse the enemy inflicted on us. But we all have our limits, and many of us reached ours in Hanoi. ... While he has often expressed remorse, his regret is uncalled for. He fought our captors as hard as any of us. He did all that could be expected of him."


    Danoh, I just don't see the equivalence with Trump in Helsinki.
    So keep your candles burning

    a.k.a. starchild, starburst, stardust, sweetpea, and dumber than dirt.

  5. The Following User Says Thank You to annabenedetti For Your Post:

    Arthur Brain (August 7th, 2018)

Thread Information

Users Browsing this Thread

There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  
About us
Since 1997 TheologyOnline (TOL) has been one of the most popular theology forums on the internet. On TOL we encourage spirited conversation about religion, politics, and just about everything else.

follow us