I pretty much feel the same as before.
Just a note that ralph124c is exactly the type of American GWB is hoping to step up and save his ass come November elections.
I do not intend that to be an endorsement of either, however. .
Ralph124c:
I almost hate to pile on the mentally challenged, YOU CANT HAVE IT BOTH WAYS! The administration claims that the abuses were commited by a few bad apples among under-trained resevest on a lark. But if you say it was part of a policy to systematically extract information for use in the war on terrorism, then you’re admitting that top officials are responsible.
My own personal opinion is it’s a non-issue.
It is much better then ANYTHING that came before we helped free Iraq.
It is just a small # of troops that did these abuses, and not should not be taken as S.O.P. of our military.
It was under investigation by the milliatary long before it was made public.
The press violate the G.C. by showing those photos, the reporters should be brought up on war crimes.
It pales by not only an order of magnitude but by a goggleflex of magnitude to sawing the head off of a civilian while saying ‘God is great’. and that by itself should be case closed.
It goes to reinforce the believe that the US mainstream media is severely liberally biased.
And most of all
I don’t care!!!
Oh, the irony. :rolleyes:
What you miss is, if WE torture prisoners, we have no right to throw stones at anyone else.
Absolutely. Better us torturing Iraqis, than them torturing each other. I don’t mean to insult, but this last sentence comes across very much like, “I don’t want to hear you, la la la la!!!”
True. On the other hand, how many soldiers are assigned to a prison? How many knew what was going on? And where’d the orders come from?
Also true. We notice, however, that very little seems to have been DONE, aside from “investigation,” before the public got wind of it.
Are you insane? Or is there some part of the Geneva Convention of which the rest of us are unaware?
The word you are looking for is “googolplex.” And while I agree that kidnapping and butchering civilians is a great evil, I fail to see how it justifies the use of torture, either before or after the fact. Bush might agree with you, though, considering his statements yesterday about how the Justice Department apparently gave his administration the right to waive any laws or agreements regarding torture of war prisoners.
I know what you mean, bud. Rush Limbaugh, Ann Coulter, George Will… whiny Democratic Clinton buttlickers, every one of 'em.
Good. Stay home on election day, and the rest of us will elect a real president, as opposed to having the supreme court appoint a Supreme Plutocrat…
To clarify my own personal opinion, I shouls amend my last post to read
I think Donald Rumsfeld should be fired and face war crime charges. If you accept the documents released by the White House and Pentagon at face value, the techniques he authorized IMO are prohibited by treaty and he knew it, and the Pentagon and Justice Department had this sham, tissue thin legal opinion to justify doing whatever they wanted.
I also believe that, if Bush is re-elected, we are heading down the road to another impeachment hearing. Everything the White House releases casts different angles to an already sensational story.
Writing a memo deciding NOT to exercise his presidential authority? HTF likely is that, unless there were already parts of the goverment acting on the assumption that GWB had indeed suspended the rules of the Geneva Convention? Not fuckin’ likely, I’ll tell you that. Either that , or he was rescinding a previous order.
But in a better world, the whole crew will get the boot in November. The newly empowered Democrats will quickly pass some new Special Prosecutor legislation, and America’s best hired-gun prosecutor will hound Messers Bush, Rumsfeld, Wolfowitz, et al, unto penury, social ostracism, and ultimately a few years as prison bitches at Marion Penitentiary.
Oh, and then the International Tribunal can shake loose whatever shreds of dignity they might have remaining and shove them in the same cell as Milosevic.
Oh, yeah, the OP question.
Well, I don’t really feel one way or the other about the prisoner issue. I mean, I’m against torture, certainly. I’m also not in favor of this cockeyed “enemy combatant” crap that the Bush Administration seems to wanna use as an end run around the Geneva Convention.
Then again, I was against the war.
Then again, I was against electing Bush president.
Am I ashamed of my country? No. Do I hate America? No. Do I support “Our Boys Overseas?” Sure.
Do I support my government? Hell, no. I voted against Bush, I campaigned against Bush, and I did everything I could to keep the bastard out of the Oval Office short of illegal action.
But he got there anyway, partly by virtue of slipperiness, and partly by virtue of enough stupid people voting for him.
And so long as he is in there, we can expect plenty more of this nonsense.
Next time a member of the US services is deployed and someone asks for prayers, I’ll remember that the enemy, whoever he may be, has copies of the Ashcroft memos on the Torture of Detained Persons.
**Master Wang-Ka
[/quote]
thank you for trying to answer my question honestly, and thanks for the correct mathmatical term. but it is well known that the GC prevents the showning of EPW’s (enemy prisoners of war) in a public display.
Also Just for your general info, I have NEVER missed a vote - National, State, Local even school budget, and unless something dramatic comes to light, I will be proudly pulling the lever for Dub-ya, and if you value freedom you will too.
If so, then the Geneva Convention MUST apply to ALL prisoners and detainees.
A civilized society treats its prizoners and detainees the way they would like their own treated. They DO NOT let themselves stoop down to the level of their enemy.
I am ashamed that the US has in little less than two years managed to squander the good will that we have slowly been recovering for decades. I can remember the time years ago that “Yankee go home” was common in the world. Iam saddened that we have come back to it again.
kanicbirdYou’re telling us you don’t care, again!
Redunancy’s a no-no. Off to post to the Mods!
What?
[QUOTE=kanicbirdI will be proudly pulling the lever for Dub-ya…[/QUOTE]
Redundancy.
How about beating a guy for three days and leaving him to die in his own shit? Where’s that on your “goggleflex” scale?
How about stripping and beating a twelve-year old girl?
And WTF do the beheadings have to do with the AG abuses anyway? You do know the AG victims were innocent, don’t you?
And it is a ‘no-no’ because…?
The example set by this country in treating prisoners, most notably in Iraq has been disgraceful. The connivance and/or lack of oversight by senior officials (Rumsfeld is the latest whose actions have come to light) are another big reason to dump this Administration in November. Will that do you?
I suppose if one chants “USA Evil” consistently enough, something is bound to happen eventually to justify a portion of one’s rants, at least on GWB’s watch.
What he posted was largely crap borne of xenophobic hatred and deserved the response it got at the time. As to current knowledge, I have not seen confirmation of serious, widespread abuse of inmates at Guantanamo, your minimal cites not withstanding.
Although that could change the instant some guard turns in a couple rolls of snapshots to be developed. :rolleyes:
Can anyone explain the logic leading to “an order of magnitude” difference between relatively quick execution style of a beheading and:
Personally, if I’m going to die “in custody”, give me a beheading over death under suspicious circumstances after likely torture, thanks very much…
To the OP - my sentiments are similar to the majority expressed here so far.
First of all we don’t know the AG vitcims were innocent. In a court of law they are assumed to be but not nessecarily in my mind.
Second are you saying that the people who were beheaded were not innocent?
Why do you ask? Do you know they were?