I believe it is called the "royal" we. I'm speaking of the US forces doing the actual detention of course, and I would assume you knew that. What's with the playing dumb?
Originally posted by: Ozoned
WE?Originally posted by: Rainsford
Originally posted by: Ozoned
Well, responding to both of your posts;Originally posted by: Rainsford
Originally posted by: Ozoned
Well, if our rules and actions are unacceptable, perhaps we should use the rules and actions that our adversaries prescribe to... Its all black and white, correct?
No...that's the point. There are more than two sides to the coin here.
The argument wouldn't exist if torture wasn't a subjective term, would it? It all boils down to what keeps you from sleeping. I am a salty old fart, just so you know...
Well yes, I suppose that's true. But you're arguing for moral relativity, something I'm not too comfortable with.
In any case, why ARE we doing it? Maybe it doesn't bother you, but given your language, it seems to make you feel better, but does little else. What is the reason we're actually doing that stuff, I wonder? That was sort of my point, we should need a better reason than revenge. Especially when that revenge might hurt our overall mission.
Originally posted by: ValuedCustomer
What do you mean by "argue his position"? I've given reasons for my position to other posters (read the thread and catch-up); it's you that's playing the sanctimony-card/endorsing the tail-between-your-legs approach. And don't confuse my pragmatism/realism w/ an emotional call for pay-back like Rainsford. I've lived too long on this earth to believe that if I'd just treat people the way I wanted to be treated they'll reciprocate. It doesn't work that way, junior.. grow up.Originally posted by: Gigantopithecus
Originally posted by: ValuedCustomer
"powerless"? I'm a registered US voter.. someday when you grow up and turn 18 you'll have as much "power" as me! woo-pee!Originally posted by: Hayabusa Rider
Originally posted by: Gigantopithecus
Originally posted by: ValuedCustomer
..and if you believe that then you're as delusional as the terrorists.Originally posted by: Gigantopithecus
Anyone who says, "who cares about these isolated incidents of torture, look what they do to us!" is no better than those we're trying to defeat in this 'war' on 'terror'.
/used to say the same sort of idealistic mumbo-jumbo when I was in school
Then what makes you any better than they are? And whose opinion is more juvenile: mine (maintaining the justification for attacking these people - we really are better than they are) or yours (he played dirty first, now I'll play dirty back)?
He isn't any better. Fortunately he is powerless to do harm. A powerless whack job is a frustrated one. I kind of like it
'I do have power, I can vote, you're all kids, even though I'm the one who can't argue his position, and resorts to name calling when challenged.'
Brilliant! :disgust:
Originally posted by: Gigantopithecus
Originally posted by: ValuedCustomer
What do you mean by "argue his position"? I've given reasons for my position to other posters (read the thread and catch-up); it's you that's playing the sanctimony-card/endorsing the tail-between-your-legs approach. And don't confuse my pragmatism/realism w/ an emotional call for pay-back like Rainsford. I've lived too long on this earth to believe that if I'd just treat people the way I wanted to be treated they'll reciprocate. It doesn't work that way, junior.. grow up.Originally posted by: Gigantopithecus
Originally posted by: ValuedCustomer
"powerless"? I'm a registered US voter.. someday when you grow up and turn 18 you'll have as much "power" as me! woo-pee!Originally posted by: Hayabusa Rider
Originally posted by: Gigantopithecus
Originally posted by: ValuedCustomer
..and if you believe that then you're as delusional as the terrorists.Originally posted by: Gigantopithecus
Anyone who says, "who cares about these isolated incidents of torture, look what they do to us!" is no better than those we're trying to defeat in this 'war' on 'terror'.
/used to say the same sort of idealistic mumbo-jumbo when I was in school
Then what makes you any better than they are? And whose opinion is more juvenile: mine (maintaining the justification for attacking these people - we really are better than they are) or yours (he played dirty first, now I'll play dirty back)?
He isn't any better. Fortunately he is powerless to do harm. A powerless whack job is a frustrated one. I kind of like it
'I do have power, I can vote, you're all kids, even though I'm the one who can't argue his position, and resorts to name calling when challenged.'
Brilliant! :disgust:
Your 'reasons' amount to nothing more than a hindbrain reaction, "they hurt me, I'm gonna hurt 'em back." They involve no thinking whatsoever. You can call it the product of your so-called 'experience', but you're neither thinking nor being pragmatic.
Did you ever stop to think that behavior of this sort by our country, whether it even approaches what the terrorists do or not, might make us that much more of a target? Do you think this might unhinge moderates in a region we're so desperately trying to win friends in? Do you think this type of behavior endears the natives to us, makes them want to turn in the insurgents/terrorists?
Certainly you remember what happened when Newsweek reported the Koran had been flushed down the toilet. I'm sure you can identify with those who were so incensed by that report they went out a'killin', since you're one & the same. I'm sure they tried to pass off their base emotions as 'reasonable' too. Are you even thinking of the Americans in hostile environments right now? Do you want them put at even greater risk?
What about Europe, or Asia - do you enjoy looking like bald-faced hypocrites to potential allies who might be willing to pony up some money (or even troops)? Here we are trying to spread freedom & democracy, deposing a dictator who was a law unto himself - remember how we talked about how he needed to go because he was detaining people, torturing them, convicting them without a trial? How many foreign nations sent troops to Iraq in the beginning, and how many of them have since pulled out in wake of Abu Ghraib, Gitmo, etc. There's some 'realism' for you.
I've read your posts and those of others who share your ideas. Apparently, though, you missed the previous posts stating that it's a simple fact that torture doesn't work. Go ask the Israelis, they basically stopped trying it around the Second Intifada - they found out that torture does nothing more than make people that much more willing to blow themselves up to get at you.
Further indicating your level of thinking, you automatically assume that anyone who thinks the torture of POWs is wrong supports 'running away, tail between legs'. Anyone who dares disagree with your opinions must be all for freeing the detainees in Cuba, handing them a medal & and an AK, and telling them to continue killing Americans. Where did I indicate how we ought be treating the Gitmo prisoners? That's right, I didn't. They should be kept locked up, interrogated, and given trials like any other prisoners of war as per the Geneva Convention. Or would you rather just ignore that, too?
Your argument is as dust. Show me one example of how torture got us information that accepted forms of interrogation couldn't. Show me one example of how torturing prisoners made a young kid scared of us, and willing to cooperate with us, instead of turning him into an insurgent. Show me one example of how our behaviour has strengthened rather than weakened the support of our allies. Those would be slightly more effective than dismissing the opinions of those with whom you disagree as juvenile. You, sir, are an irresponsible, ignorant, myopic mental midget. I eagerly await your ingenious rejoinder, which will be along the lines of, 'you impertinent fool child!'
WE?Originally posted by: Rainsford
In any case, why ARE we doing it? Maybe it doesn't bother you, but given your language, it seems to make you feel better, but does little else. What is the reason we're actually doing that stuff, I wonder? That was sort of my point, we should need a better reason than revenge. Especially when that revenge might hurt our overall mission.
So as long as we are as bad as them it's ok with you?Originally posted by: TastesLikeChicken
So now that this government report is out, can we compare it to the government reports of torture released by the Soviets, Nazis, and Pol Pot? I'd like to compare how many abusers our government is bringing to trial vs. the numbers theirs brought to trial, and for what reasons.
There should be lots of crossover since we are so easily confused with those regimes. Right?
Anyone know where I can find those other reports?
Originally posted by: Red Dawn
So as long as we are as bad as them it's ok with you?Originally posted by: TastesLikeChicken
So now that this government report is out, can we compare it to the government reports of torture released by the Soviets, Nazis, and Pol Pot? I'd like to compare how many abusers our government is bringing to trial vs. the numbers theirs brought to trial, and for what reasons.
There should be lots of crossover since we are so easily confused with those regimes. Right?
Anyone know where I can find those other reports?
Originally posted by: charrison
Originally posted by: Czar
Originally posted by: charrison
Originally posted by: Darkhawk28
Originally posted by: ValuedCustomer
Originally posted by: Darkhawk28
I swear I wonder what SS rank these apologists would've had in the 1930's and 40's.
wow.. how original.. more "nazi" allusions from the left.
/zzzzzz
Right wing a-holes in apologist mode over vile, disgusting acts...
Making comparisons to what happened at abu garabe or gitmo to what happened in nazi death camps or russian gulags shows your complete lack of any knowledge of history.
the comparison is how out of line with the norms the actions were
or thats how I see it
Ah yes the slaughter of millions compared to some very minor abuse. And those that did the abusing are now being punished.
You too failed to learn history.
Originally posted by: Red Dawn
So as long as we are as bad as them it's ok with you?Originally posted by: TastesLikeChicken
So now that this government report is out, can we compare it to the government reports of torture released by the Soviets, Nazis, and Pol Pot? I'd like to compare how many abusers our government is bringing to trial vs. the numbers theirs brought to trial, and for what reasons.
There should be lots of crossover since we are so easily confused with those regimes. Right?
Anyone know where I can find those other reports?
Excuse my typo I meant to post "So as long as we aren't as bad as them it's ok with you?"Originally posted by: TastesLikeChicken
Originally posted by: Red Dawn
So as long as we are as bad as them it's ok with you?Originally posted by: TastesLikeChicken
So now that this government report is out, can we compare it to the government reports of torture released by the Soviets, Nazis, and Pol Pot? I'd like to compare how many abusers our government is bringing to trial vs. the numbers theirs brought to trial, and for what reasons.
There should be lots of crossover since we are so easily confused with those regimes. Right?
Anyone know where I can find those other reports?
/golf clap
Way to evade the point.
It's not a question of being "ok" with it.Originally posted by: Red Dawn
Excuse my typo I meant to post "So as long as we aren't as bad as them it's ok with you?"Originally posted by: TastesLikeChicken
Originally posted by: Red Dawn
So as long as we are as bad as them it's ok with you?Originally posted by: TastesLikeChicken
So now that this government report is out, can we compare it to the government reports of torture released by the Soviets, Nazis, and Pol Pot? I'd like to compare how many abusers our government is bringing to trial vs. the numbers theirs brought to trial, and for what reasons.
There should be lots of crossover since we are so easily confused with those regimes. Right?
Anyone know where I can find those other reports?
/golf clap
Way to evade the point.
Originally posted by: TastesLikeChicken
So why are those who feel it necessary to draw comparisons between the US and nasty regimes ignoring that fact and freely tossing around the words "fascist" "gulag" and "Hitler" as if they were frisbees at a Grateful Dead concert?
Originally posted by: EagleKeeper
Originally posted by: TastesLikeChicken
So why are those who feel it necessary to draw comparisons between the US and nasty regimes ignoring that fact and freely tossing around the words "fascist" "gulag" and "Hitler" as if they were frisbees at a Grateful Dead concert?
1) Those that toss around those words are parroting without fully understanding history.
2) They want to slingn mud while sitting on their high and mighty moral throne and like to say I told you so.
3) They ignore what sacrifices that have been made to allow then the freedom of doing #2. (Pun intended )
Any chance you can point me to the people "freely tossing around the words "fascist*" "gulag" and "Hitler"? I can't find it in this thread; in fact, I can't see those words being used at all ... except by you and other Bush faithful using them to attack Bush critics. I'll concede those words have been used occasionally in other threads, but I don't recall ever seeing them "freely tossed around" as you claim. Unless you can provide such evidence, I'm going to assume it's just another straw man, typical Bushie character assassination to drown out the very real, serious failures and malfeasance of BushCo.Originally posted by: TastesLikeChicken
[ ... ]
So why are those who feel it necessary to draw comparisons between the US and nasty regimes ignoring that fact and freely tossing around the words "fascist" "gulag" and "Hitler" as if they were frisbees at a Grateful Dead concert?
Originally posted by: EagleKeeper
Originally posted by: TastesLikeChicken
So why are those who feel it necessary to draw comparisons between the US and nasty regimes ignoring that fact and freely tossing around the words "fascist" "gulag" and "Hitler" as if they were frisbees at a Grateful Dead concert?
1) Those that toss around those words are parroting without fully understanding history.
2) They want to slingn mud while sitting on their high and mighty moral throne and like to say I told you so.
3) They ignore what sacrifices that have been made to allow then the freedom of doing #2. (Pun intended )
Originally posted by: EagleKeeper
Of course a public beheading is not considered torture - therefore there is not explanation required. Burning to death in a 100+ story building is not torture.
Information from POWS not under the Geneva convention can be useful.
Much useful information has been obtained.
Also, we will need to see the exact report to determine what iwas being classified.
People have been working on expanding the definition of the term ever since the first captured person was given access to the media.
Sure. Go to the Demoratic Underground and search on those words. Also check out some of the recent statements from Democrats.Originally posted by: Bowfinger
Any chance you can point me to the people "freely tossing around the words "fascist*" "gulag" and "Hitler"?Originally posted by: TastesLikeChicken
[ ... ]
So why are those who feel it necessary to draw comparisons between the US and nasty regimes ignoring that fact and freely tossing around the words "fascist" "gulag" and "Hitler" as if they were frisbees at a Grateful Dead concert?
I can't find where I claimed it was being done in this thread. I can't even find where I limited it to ATP&N (which I didn't as it goes much, much further than that). Please go look up the definition of "strawman."I can't find it in this thread;
http://www.diymedia.net/collage/gwb-fascist.htm...in fact, I can't see those words being used at all ... except by you and other Bush faithful using them to attack Bush critics. I'll concede those words have been used occasionally in other threads, but I don't recall ever seeing them "freely tossed around" as you claim. Unless you can provide such evidence, I'm going to assume it's just another straw man, typical Bushie character assassination to drown out the very real, serious failures and malfeasance of BushCo.
I have no problem when it's legitimately discussed. The problem is that, more often than not, it's used as a slur and a method to equate the Bush admin with those nasty little fascist regimes of the past that we all know and despise.(*Contrary to your implication, fascism is a political ideology that can be legitimately used in discussions about this administration. BushCo embraces many fascist ideals and uses many fascist techniques, albeit nowhere near to the same extremes as other, more infamous fascist regimes. That the Bush administration has not been as heinous as other fascist regimes in no way invalidates the observation that they've adopted a similar philosophy.)
Whew. For a second there I was afraid you wouldn't find a post worthy of responding to. Afterall, you failed to respond to those commenting on your 'beheading' post. (You're not becoming another Rip, are you?)Originally posted by: EagleKeeper
Originally posted by: TastesLikeChicken
So why are those who feel it necessary to draw comparisons between the US and nasty regimes ignoring that fact and freely tossing around the words "fascist" "gulag" and "Hitler" as if they were frisbees at a Grateful Dead concert?
1) Those that toss around those words are parroting without fully understanding history.
2) They want to slingn mud while sitting on their high and mighty moral throne and like to say I told you so.
3) They ignore what sacrifices that have been made to allow then the freedom of doing #2. (Pun intended )
How did you come to this conclusion?Originally posted by: charrison
Most of what has been claimed is not torture.
Originally posted by: Gaard
Whew. For a second there I was afraid you wouldn't find a post worthy of responding to. Afterall, you failed to respond to those commenting on your 'beheading' post. (You're not becoming another Rip, are you?)Originally posted by: EagleKeeper
Originally posted by: TastesLikeChicken
So why are those who feel it necessary to draw comparisons between the US and nasty regimes ignoring that fact and freely tossing around the words "fascist" "gulag" and "Hitler" as if they were frisbees at a Grateful Dead concert?
1) Those that toss around those words are parroting without fully understanding history.
2) They want to slingn mud while sitting on their high and mighty moral throne and like to say I told you so.
3) They ignore what sacrifices that have been made to allow then the freedom of doing #2. (Pun intended )
How did you come to this conclusion?Originally posted by: charrison
Most of what has been claimed is not torture.
Yeah, they're being punished. Good. I never denied that, but good. :confused (BTW-anybody else find it comical that some here say no torture occurred, but yet people are being 'punished for it'? BTW2-how come none of the 'they are being punished for it' people ever jump in and chastize the 'no torture occurred' people?)Originally posted by: charrison
By reading what has actually been done to these prisoners... It is not that difficult. And I will point out again, those that were guilty of abusing prisoners are being punished.Originally posted by: Gaard
How did you come to this conclusion?Originally posted by: charrison
Most of what has been claimed is not torture.
Originally posted by: Gaard
Yeah, they're being punished. Good. I never denied that, but good. :confused (BTW-anybody else find it comical that some here say no torture occurred, but yet people are being 'punished for it'? BTW2-how come none of the 'they are being punished for it' people ever jump in and chastize the 'no torture occurred' people?)Originally posted by: charrison
By reading what has actually been done to these prisoners... It is not that difficult. And I will point out again, those that were guilty of abusing prisoners are being punished.Originally posted by: Gaard
How did you come to this conclusion?Originally posted by: charrison
Most of what has been claimed is not torture.
But anyways charrison, I was just wondering what definition of 'toture' you are using. I'm not saying that you are wrong, I'm just curious as to what criteria you used to determine that "most of what has been claimed is not torture".