If you still believe that 9/11 and the invasion of Iraq are related, I’m afraid you are hopelessly unqualified to operate a pencil.
Just because there is no evidence that they *are *related, that is not evidence that they are *not *related.
That’s logic…TRM
So you think “we have not absolutely proven that Saddam wasn’t behind 9/11” is a reasonable pretext for an invasion", then?
“There are known knows, known unknowns, andOHMYGODtrailerscarryingWMDwenttoSyria!!!”
9/11 didn’t force us to torture anyone. Pearl Harbor was worse, and we managed to get through WW II without torture. And the problem would be much reduced today if Bush had finished the job in Afghanistan instead of diverting our resources to Iraq.
The reason the first set of pictures were important was that it revealed the problem in a way that practically no one (besides Rummy) could deny.
If Obama were equivocating about torture and the definition thereof, I’d be ranting about the need to release the new pictures. Since he agrees we did it and says we aren’t going to do it anymore, the downside of releasing new pictures outweighs the upside.
Not that I think he is or will be doing everything perfectly. There are some Wall Street CEOs who could use a bit of waterboarding. And even though I’ve read some opinions saying that there is no way the lawyers who justified torture can be charged, the thought of John Yoo going to the slammer would make me smile.
You can substitute my dog, Miss California USA or Oprah for Saddam and have an equally valid statement. That’s burden of proof. Or, extraordinary invasions require extraordinary evidence.
No, that’s what people afflicted by *conservatism *think is logic. Poor stupid bastards. 
I agree with your general premise here, but I think you are wrong in this case…I think we (as well as everyone else) DID torture people by today’s definition, both officially and unofficially. Not asking you for a cite, as it would be impossible to prove a negative…but from what I recall we definitely interrogated prisoners and spy’s during the war.
-XT
What I think the right wing critics of Obama cannot stand most of all is the credibility and trust that people have in this man. When I heard about Obama pushing back against releasing the pictures, or considering indefinite detention, I was appalled. However, unlike how Fox News and their ilk have put it so flippantly, I’ve given him a pass. I do so because I have trust and confidence in him that he will do the right thing, and that simply considering an idea is not the same as implementing it and defending it against facts to the contrary
Lets be clear, if Obama and Bush are doing the same thing, then I would demonize Bush because I consider him an idiot, a tool, and dishonest. However, due to the credibility Obama has built up, I can stand back and take a “wait-and-see” attitude.
Consider this: If you and your friends were hanging out, laughing, drinking, and having a good time and making fun of each other, that’s be fine right? But lets say a stranger walks over and starts making fun of you, wouldnt you take that differently?
From what we know of Bush and Obama, they come from radically different points of view, and because of that, the same action done by one can be said to be coming from a dishonest and immoral place while the other is not. There are no mental gymnastics required when one is honest with oneself and acknowledge that the intent of an action matters in addition to the physical outcome. Ask yourself whether 2 men are equal morally if one shuts prisoners away to cover up their own crimes, and the other shuts them away because we can be reasonably sure of guilt and want to protect Americans from further hostilities.
I’m still cautiously optimistic that all of this is simply a smokescreen, a bone thrown to the right wing to coddle their torture sensibilities before springing on them a Truth Comission and possible prosecutions. Because he’s shown himself to be a capable and honest leader, I’m willing to wait to see how it plays out instead of reacting immediately to every little thing.
You have to ask this? Who knew more about what was really happening at school when you were a kid, you or your parents? In my experience, parents are clueless.
The problem is that your formulation above does not lead logically to the conclusion you’ve already asserted. Can you prove that Miley Cyrus wasn’t connected to 9/11? Just because there’s no evidence doesn’t mean there’s no connection. We’d better invade and occupy Miley Cyrus just to be sure.
And not for nothing, but there is AMPLE evidence that Iraq and 9/11 were not related.
FWIW, I could change a few words here and there and this would sound exactly like a Bush apologist on the SDMB in the early 2000’s comparing “their guy” to Clinton. And I say this as a person who opposed Bush and the Bush Administration, and who supported Obama and his Administration (the odious and mendacious Joe Biden pointedly excepted.)
The logic is twisted. Releasing pictures of detainee torture will put our troops in danger. I believe torturing is what puts them in danger., not the pictures But better yet, if they believe that these pictures will be a danger to our troops ,they were lying when they said torture was going to make us safer.
Obama should release the pictures with a huge apology for us doing it.
And see, I think it’s the whole putting them in a war zone with a bunch of crazy religious nutballs that puts them in danger. I think that if we actually took them out of the war zone with all those crazy religious nutters we’d be lowering the danger level by some large non-zero factor…whether we subsequently tortured anyone or not.
YMMV of course.
Who is ‘they’, kimosabe? You realize the ones who authorized the initial torturing aren’t the same ‘they’ as the one’s who are now wanting to block the pictures…right?
Well, he’s the one who doesn’t want to release the pictures…and I’m failing to see why he should apologize, since he didn’t have any hand in the policies of the previous administration.
-XT
I must say, even as an Obama guy I find that a bit of an odd thing to say. What credibility has he built up? All we’ve really heard or seen from him are excellent speeches, which are nice, but it’s not like he has some great track record of achievement.
Praising him for not really having done that much is as silly as castigating him (as the conservative bobbleheads have) for not having done that much. It’s been 100 days - chill.
It is common for a government to officially apologize for something a past government of their country did.
Indeed it is pretty much the norm as no politician can admit wrongdoing so it takes a future government to apologize on their behalf.
Well, YMMV of course Whack-a-Mole…I’m just not really keen to hear Obama apologize for shit the Bush administration did. But that will be Obama’s call, obviously.
-XT
Yeah, there’s some twisted reasoning going on.
On one side they say America’s enemies should be dealt with ruthlessly to set an example, so the world can see what awaits them if they cross America. Shock and awe and shit in your pants and bring it on because we’re the toughest and we’ll kill you if you so much as look at us the wrong way and that’ll teach you.
But then it’s no, we can’t release these photos because it would endanger American lives and we’re not ready to risk anything, much less for doing the right thing like would be showing the world what we did and apologising for it.
It is not Obama but America who lacks the guts to do the right thing.
I believe the right thing to do is to release the photos, apologize to the world, prosecute the criminals and face all the consequences. But it will be a while before America has the guts for that.
Way to misstate the poster’s point. What he was saying, and what I agree with, is that Bush demonstrated a long history of misjudgment, obtuseness, and a general indifference to the concerns of America’s allies. Obama has yet to demonstrate any of these things. Therefore, until his judgment is revealed to equally poor, he gets the benefit of the doubt.
Besides, there is a big difference between claiming that what you are doing isn’t torture and acknowledging that what happened was indeed torture but that it’s probably not a good idea to release pictures of it.