From the "No shit, Sherlock" file

[jakee 1,254]

Quote

I didn't see anything about anybody being beaten much less to death.

Then you haven't been paying attention.

Quote

Why should the enemy be given better treatment than what our soldiers are having to endure?

Because we're supposed to be better than they are.

Do you want to have an ideagasm?

[billvon 2,400]

>I didn't see anything about anybody being beaten much less to death.

I think this is one of the big problems trying to discuss this with many americans. They simply don't know what has happened, and have no incentive to find out. That way they can maintain the illusion that the US is never the bad guy, and can say things like:

>Why should the enemy be given better treatment than what our soldiers
>are having to endure?

Treat others as you wish to be treated. The most basic law of my morality, and of some people's religions. (Not that many people follow their own religions, of course.)

[blueskybug 0]

So you feel that people are too stupid to figure it out ? I guess I could use that logic to explain Nov 4th...Prop 8 ? the election ? Alot of other things as well.

I agree 100% with you that you treat people like you wish to be treated, but what if they don't do the same ? What if they are violent ? Is the U.N. the answer ? Should we turn the other cheek ?

[billvon 2,400]

>So you feel that people are too stupid to figure it out ?

Not at all. Many people simply choose not to see what they do not want to see. With so many sources of information catering to so many political viewpoints it's not hard to choose a website and see only good things about the US (or only bad things.)

>I agree 100% with you that you treat people like you wish to be treated,
>but what if they don't do the same ?

Then you treat them like you want them to treat you. This is something most people learned in the third grade. If someone starts calling your mother a whore, you do not therefore have every right to call their mother a whore. That's lowering yourself to their level.

> What if they are violent ?

If they are violent towards you, you defend yourself from them. However, you don't pick out ten people in a crowd who you think might be violent and kill them. You don't find their families and kill them all just in case they get mad at you for defending yourself. You don't go around beating the crap out of people that look like them just in case.

[chadkal 0]

You are very nieve,... I will agree that in some cases, wrong things may have been done to pow's. however, this is isolated and not the policy of the gov. This is done by individuals who got out of control. as far as defending yourself against those that are violent, that is to be done at whatever means necessary. When you are at war and you have the potential to save lives, but in the process someone has to be tortured, so be it. It's not pretty, it's war, it's ugly, but it's often a necessary evil.

--------------------------------------------------
I am a greek midget

[DanG 1]

Quote

but it's often a necessary evil.

That would be a convincing argument if torture were not consistently shown to be a much less reliable means of obtaining information than rapport building.

Here's the scrorecard against torture: it doesn't work, it's morally reprehensible, it's against the law, and it reduces our international prestige. Here's the scrorecard for: . . . still waiting.

It is crazy to even be having this debate.

- Dan G

[billvon 2,400]

>You are very nieve . .

Why thank you!

>I will agree that in some cases, wrong things may have been done to
>pow's. however, this is isolated and not the policy of the gov.

=================
DECEMBER 12, 2008
Top Officials Cited in Abuse of Detainees

By SIOBHAN GORMAN

WASHINGTON -- Abuse of detainees in U.S. custody was a direct result of decisions by top administration officials, according to a bipartisan Senate report released Thursday.
================

> as far as defending yourself against those that are violent, that is to be
> done at whatever means necessary.

Agreed. If you're a US soldier, and a guy runs at you with a gun in a war zone, blow him away.

If you are a prison guard, and you have already beaten an innocent man who is chained to the wall half to death - then no, you have no justification whatsoever to swing that bat again.

> When you are at war and you have the potential to save lives, but in the
> process someone has to be tortured, so be it.

Nope. We were torturing innocent people to death. No amount of whining about "but . . . but . . . it's for the good of the country!" makes that OK.

[frequentfaller 0]

Quote

Nope. We were torturing innocent people to death. No amount of whining about "but . . . but . . . it's for the good of the country!" makes that OK.

we are torturing people to death. which is very wrong, probably very few are innocent.

"U.S. Navy SEALs had apprehended al-Jamadi as a suspect in the October 27, 2003, bombing of Red Cross offices in Baghdad that killed 12 people. His role in the bombing, if any, is unknown. His status was that of a ghost prisoner, whose imprisonment and death would not normally have been included in official prison records."

Born ok 1st time.

[billvon 2,400]

>we are torturing people to death. which is very wrong, probably very
>few are innocent.

We know for sure some are; generally these are the ones who have the (good) fortune of having people who knew them, who then make a case for them and clamor for their release. Dilawar is a good example. Innocent guy, a taxi driver whose only crime was driving too near an american checkpoint. Tortured to death.

Most of them are, no doubt, covered up, in the interest of 'national security.'

[frequentfaller 0]

i am definitely devils advocate here. i some how have ended up on the torturers side. torture is wrong period. no reasons for exceptions. my agruement is hopefully its rare occurrence. your arguement is, it is a common occurrence. do you have proof of this? not just the 1 or 2 horrific stories i have read.

Born ok 1st time.

[Amazon 7]

Quote

You are very nieve,... I will agree that in some cases, wrong things may have been done to pow's. however, this is isolated and not the policy of the gov. This is done by individuals who got out of control. as far as defending yourself against those that are violent, that is to be done at whatever means necessary. When you are at war and you have the potential to save lives, but in the process someone has to be tortured, so be it. It's not pretty, it's war, it's ugly, but it's often a necessary evil.

Talk about a case of severe naiveté

You really have swallowed the propaganda completely and utterly haven't you.

I would suggest you go look up the key word RENDITION

Edited to add....

AND before you ....you know who you are.....start with the hate America bullshit.. I EXPECT my country to be better than this. I once took an oath that I truely do believe in... and this kind of bullshit lessens ALL OF US as Americans.

[frequentfaller 0]

before you start throwin me under the bus, show me its not just a few isolated incidents. i don't want hear, well you it is they just covered it up. it gets out it always does. even the famous naked iraq prisoner pyramid.

Born ok 1st time.

[Amazon 7]

Quote

Start here

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Extraordinary_rendition

The US program prompted several official investigations in Europe into alleged secret detentions and unlawful inter-state transfers involving Council of Europe member states. June 2006 report from the Council of Europe estimated 100 people had been kidnapped by the United States' Central Intelligence Agency (CIA) on EU territory, with the cooperation of Council of Europe members and rendered to other countries, often after having transited through secret detention centers ("black sites") used by the CIA, some sited in Europe. According to the separate European Parliament report of February 2007, the CIA has conducted 1,245 flights, many of them to destinations where suspects could face torture, in violation of article 3 of the United Nations Convention Against Torture.[4] A large majority of the European Union Parliament endorsed the report's conclusion that many member states tolerated illegal actions of the CIA and criticized several European governments and intelligence agencies for their unwillingness to cooperate with the investigation.

[frequentfaller 0]

key words: alleged estimated conclusion. not a proven fact in it. The CIA was granted permission to use rendition in a presidential directive signed by President Bill Clinton in 1995, and the practice has grown sharply since the September 11 terrorist attacks. The first well-known rendition case involved the Achille Lauro hijackers in 1985

Born ok 1st time.

[Amazon 7]

Quote

and the practice has grown sharply since the September 11 terrorist attacks.

There is your answer right there.

When a group of men decide they are above all the laws of men... we have a severe problem.

[kallend 1,623]

Quote

You are very nieve,... I will agree that in some cases, wrong things may have been done to pow's. however, this is isolated and not the policy of the gov. This is done by individuals who got out of control. as far as defending yourself against those that are violent, that is to be done at whatever means necessary. When you are at war and you have the potential to save lives, but in the process someone has to be tortured, so be it. It's not pretty, it's war, it's ugly, but it's often a necessary evil.

Apparently you didn't bother to read the OP.

www.dropzone.com/cgi-bin/forum/gforum.cgi?post=3420413#3420413

Your comment above (in bold) says something very unpleasant about YOU, IMO.

...

The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one.

[frequentfaller 0]

it was ok till then.

Born ok 1st time.

[kallend 1,623]

Quote

bush haters, look for any and all stones to throw at him. even if those issues are something he or his administration are not responsible for.

A BIPARTISAN Senate committee thinks the Bush administration bears responsibility.

On the whole, I find their opinion more credible than yours.

...

The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one.

[Ion01 1]

Quote

Aren't you the devout Christian that spends most of his posts arguing for the validity of the Bible? You might want to go back and read it.

You know, the Golden Rule, love thy neighbor, thou shalt not kill.

"They're baddies," is not an excuse to be a baddie yourself.

I can't believe I have to explain something so simple.

Actually you have it wrong as christ said " "You have heard that it was said to those of old,'You shall not murder; and whoever murders will be liable to judgment.' But I say to you that everyone who is angry with his brother will be liable to judgment; whoever insults his brother will be liable to the council; and whoever says, 'You fool!' will be liable to the hell of fire."
Theres a lot more there than just don't kill!

In addition, In romans the 13:4 it says that the goverment is "an agent of wrath to bring punishment on the wrongdoer.”

There is more to it than just that but I won't go into detail but I think you have seen your initial assesment is incorrect.

[frequentfaller 0]

Quote

Quote

Aren't you the devout Christian that spends most of his posts arguing for the validity of the Bible? You might want to go back and read it.

You know, the Golden Rule, love thy neighbor, thou shalt not kill.

"They're baddies," is not an excuse to be a baddie yourself.

I can't believe I have to explain something so simple.

Actually you have it wrong as christ said " "You have heard that it was said to those of old,'You shall not murder; and whoever murders will be liable to judgment.' But I say to you that everyone who is angry with his brother will be liable to judgment; whoever insults his brother will be liable to the council; and whoever says, 'You fool!' will be liable to the hell of fire."
Theres a lot more there than just don't kill!

In addition, In romans the 13:4 it says that the goverment is "an agent of wrath to bring punishment on the wrongdoer.”

There is more to it than just that but I won't go into detail but I think you have seen your initial assesment is incorrect.

uhh..yup he is

Born ok 1st time.

[frequentfaller 0]

Quote

A BIPARTISAN Senate committee thinks the Bush administration bears responsibility.

On the whole, I find their opinion more credible than yours.

you do? bipartisan sentae? no such thing

Born ok 1st time.

[kallend 1,623]

Quote

Quote

A BIPARTISAN Senate committee thinks the Bush administration bears responsibility.

On the whole, I find their opinion more credible than yours.

you do? bipartisan sentae? no such thing

And how do your credentials compare? How many witnesses did you interview under oath?

...

The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one.

[kallend 1,623]

“What sets us apart from our enemies in this fight… is how we behave. In everything we do, we must observe the standards and values that dictate that we treat noncombatants and detainees with dignity and respect. While we are warriors, we are also all human beings”
-- General David Petraeus
May 10, 2007

...

The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one.

[frequentfaller 0]

dont have any credentials. no witnesses interviewed. only difference is their opinon was bought and paid for. mine is just my opinon.

Born ok 1st time.

[billvon 2,400]

>your arguement is, it is a common occurrence. do you have proof of this?

Per Human Rights Watch, 46 US prisoners have been tortured to death since the beginning of the war in Afghanistan. That's not just prisoners who have been tortured, that's prisoners who have been tortured to death. Does that make it common? I think it makes it far _too_ common, personally.