3 ms·
From what I understand, which is admittedly not very much, waterboarding is a lot worse than being submerged. It's not so much dunking you into water as it is p
by CobrastanJorji 9y ago
From what I understand, which is admittedly not very much, waterboarding is a lot worse than being submerged. It's not so much dunking you into water as it is pouring water up your breathing passages.
- wrycoder 9y agoThe approved method is to hold the person down on his back, then quickly apply a sheet of Saranwrap over the face followed by a washcloth, followed by many five gallon buckets of water. The drowning reflex is elicited long before a typical breath hold time. If water gets into the breathing passages, that's very bad - it means the procedure was done incorrectly. The procedure is terminated quickly once the person is entering distress due to lack of oxygen. The first few times it's done on a person, it's very frightening. Later, it becomes very annoying, especially if they wake you up at 4 AM for another go.
- Someone 9y agoOpinions differ about the adjective 'approved'. I also doubt that, in practice, the procedure is "terminated quickly once the person is entering distress". You make it sound like the DoD, Amnesty International and the Red Cross had a couple of meetings on this and came up with a humane way of doing this.
- gene-h 9y agoBeing submerged wasn't bad, it was the water that flowed into my nose near the end of the scan that was bad. It was in no way as bad as waterboarding(especially since I was able to immediately get out), but enough to throw me into a bit of a coughing fit.