[国会记录第162卷第23号（2016年2月9日星期二）][参议院][第S716-S717页]对麦凯恩先生进行水刑。总统先生，今天是新罕布什尔州第100次总统初选。无论谁获胜，这都是对我们充满活力的民主的一次庆祝。我们的公民积极参与，让候选人接受考验，并要求回答下一任总统将面临的棘手问题。这也是我们选择下一任总司令的另一个重要步骤，赌注再高不过了。正如我们今天上午从国家情报局局长那里听到的那样，我们国家面临的威胁越来越多样化、越来越复杂、越来越危险。我们比以往任何时候都更需要一位具有清晰愿景、稳健的手、健全的判断力和信心的总司令——不仅要相信我们国家的实力，还要相信一代又一代美国英雄为之奋斗并为之牺牲的价值观和理想。这就是为什么看到一些总统候选人在竞选过程中就恢复水刑和其他不人道的审讯手段大放厥词金博宝正规网址，令人失望的原因。人们可能很容易将这种咆哮斥为低俗的竞选花言巧语，但这些言论决不能置之不理，因为它们误导了美国人民，误导他们了解审讯的现实、如何收集情报、如何捍卫我们的安全，以及在最根本的层面上，作为一个国家，我们为之奋斗的是什么，我们是一个什么样的国家。重要的是要记住这样一个事实，即这些形式的酷刑不仅没有达到确保可采取行动的情报以防止对美国及其盟国的进一步袭击的目的，而且损害了我们的价值观，玷污了我们的国家荣誉，也没有什么实际好处。虽然有些人可耻地试图尽量减少水刑的做法，但我清楚地看到，这种做法是一种模拟溺水处决的做法，任何理性的人都会这样定义它，它等于酷刑，我们是签署国的《关于战俘待遇的日内瓦公约》是如何定义它的。美国使用这些方法是可耻和不必要的，因为美国审判、定罪并处决了对美国战俘实施酷刑（包括水刑）的外国战斗人员。第二次世界大战后，日本将军们受到审判、定罪和绞刑。对他们的指控之一是他们实行水刑。与一些捍卫者的断言相反，它没有提供多少有用的情报来帮助我们追查9·11袭击的肇事者或防止新的袭击和暴行。这位参议员从个人经验中知道，虐待囚犯会产生比好情报更坏的情报。我知道，如果酷刑受害者认为绑架者会相信，他们会故意提供误导性信息。我知道他们会说任何他们认为折磨他们的人希望他们说的话，如果他们相信这会停止他们的痛苦。最重要的是，我知道，酷刑的使用损害了我们与敌人的最大区别——我们相信所有人，甚至被俘虏的敌人，都拥有基本人权，这些人权受到美国不仅加入而且大部分是自己制定的国际公约的保护。我知道，在我们的祖国遭受最严重的恐怖袭击之后，那些批准和使用严厉审讯方法的人真诚地致力于为恐怖袭击的受害者伸张正义，保护美国人免受进一步伤害。我知道，在巴黎和圣贝纳迪诺发生恐怖袭击后，许多美国人再次感受到15年前的严重紧迫感。但我全心全意地质疑，我们的国家当时使用这些审讯方法是正确的，还是我们的国家现在使用这些方法是正确的。水刑，以及任何其他形式的酷刑，都不符合正义、安全或理想的最佳利益[[第S717页]]我们牺牲了这么多鲜血和财富来捍卫。正是对酷刑的可疑功效的了解以及对虐待囚犯的强烈道德反对，在这个问题上形成了广泛的两党共识。去年，参议院以91票对3票的压倒性多数通过了2016财年《国防授权法案》，该法案将美国政府的审讯技术限制在《陆军野战手册》中的审讯技术上，为一劳永逸地禁止酷刑迈出了历史性的一步。投票结果是91票对3票。在军事委员会和参议院的会议上，对这一问题进行了辩论和讨论。投票结果是91票对3票。现在候选人说他们将无视法律。我认为这是我们对现任美国总统的抱怨——共和党的抱怨。美国军方成功审问的外国恐怖分子被拘留者比我们政府的任何其他机构都多nt. The Army Field Manual, in its current form, has worked for the U.S. military-- including on high-value terrorist detainees in Iraq, Afghanistan, and elsewhere--and it reflects current best thinking and practices on interrogation. Moreover, the Army Field Manual embodies the values Americans have embraced for generations, preserving the ability of our interrogators to extract critical intelligence from our adversaries while recognizing that torture and cruel treatment are ineffective interrogation methods. Some of the Nation's most respected leaders from the U.S. military, CIA, and FBI supported this legislation, as well as numerous human rights organizations and faith groups, including the National Association of Evangelicals and the U.S. Conference of Catholic Bishops. GEN David Petraeus, a military leader whom I admire more than literally any living military leader, said he supported the use of the Army Field Manual because ``our Nation has paid a high price in recent decades for the information gained by the use of techniques beyond those in the field manual--and, in my view, that price far outweighed the value of the information gained through the use of techniques beyond those in the manual.'' Obviously, that includes waterboarding. Why don't we listen to people like GEN David Petraeus, who has had vast experience in Iraq and Afghanistan with detainees, the information we have gotten from them, and our practices. If General Petraeus were here, he would tell you the most effective method of gaining information is establishing a friendly relationship with the detainee. Obviously, we need intelligence to defeat our enemies, but we need reliable intelligence. Torture produces more misleading information than actionable intelligence. What the advocates of harsh and cruel interrogation methods have never established is that we couldn't have gathered as good or more reliable intelligence from using humane methods. The most important lead we got in the search for bin Laden came from using conventional interrogation methods. I think it is an insult to many of the intelligence officers who have acquired good intelligence without hurting or degrading prisoners to assert that we cannot win this war on terrorism without such methods. Yes, we can and we will. In the end, torture's failure to serve its intended purpose isn't the main reason to oppose its use. I have often said and will always maintain that this question isn't about our enemies, it is about us. It is about who we were, who we are, and whom we aspire to be. It is about how we represent ourselves to the world. We have made our way in this often dangerous and cruel world, not by just strictly pursuing our geopolitical interests but by exemplifying our political values and influencing other nations to embrace them. When we fight to defend our security, we fight also for an idea that all men are endowed by their Creator with inalienable rights; that is, all men and women. How much safer the world would be if all nations believed the same. How much more dangerous it can become when we forget it ourselves, even momentarily, as we learned from Abu Ghraib. Our enemies act without conscience. We must not. It isn't necessary, and it isn't even helpful in winning this strange and long war we are fighting. Our Nation needs a Commander in Chief who understands and affirms this basic truth. Our Nation needs a Commander in Chief who will make clear to those who fight on our behalf that they are defending this sacred ideal and that sacrificing our national honor and our respect for human dignity will make it harder, not easier, to prevail in this war. Our Nation needs a Commander in Chief who reminds us that in the worst of times, through the chaos and terror of war, when facing cruelty, suffering, and loss, that we are always Americans--different, stronger, and better than those who would destroy us. I yield the floor. ____________________