Fucked up...

[mkporwit]

Yes, it definitely would be good if the Indians got intel from him. What's that have to do with torturing him?

 

There's lots of doubts that torture is even effective at eliciting intel. And that's assuming the guy even knows anything -- if the attackers were as well trained, organized and prepared as the media suggests, then they probably compartmentalized their operations.

[tvashtarkatena]

While we're talking about 'forcing' other religions and societies to conform to our idea of what we think they should be, based on our misperception of what they actually are, it's probably helpful to keep in mind that the United States is one of the most violent societies in the world. Of the 60 nations tracked by the U.N., we rank #1, by far, in the total number of crimes committed and #8 in the per capita crimes committed, for example. We have proven our willingness to use extreme violence to start 2 regional wars in the past 5 years. We currently our infamous for kidnapping and torturing our prisoners, whom we've completely stripped of any semblance of human rights. We are the only nation to use nuclear weapons on completely civilian populations, or populations of any kind, for that matter. We purchase 40% of the world's weaponry, and produce a similar percentage. We have, by far, the largest aresenal in the world, spending more on weaponry than the next 10 countries combined.

 

I think if any reform is to take place, we might look at ourselves first to make the badly needed changes for providing a more wise, just, and moral example for the rest of humanity.

Edited November 30, 2008 by tvashtarkatena

[billcoe]

.......Maybe "rogue state" would be closer to the mark but however you label it, clearly we did the wrong thing. We should not have invaded a nation that did not attack us in the first place, against the wishes of our allies and without UN backing, based on lies.

 

We are in total agreement on this Matt. Well spoken yourself sir. My wife was shocked that I was so pissed when they went running into Iraq like that I was yelling and damn near throwing things against the wall. As the initial victorys unfolded, I was even more shocked that my countrymen all seemed to be supporting it 100%. Then when our allies didn't back our bullshit play, we started giving them shit for it. Remember "Freedom Fries"? Interestingly, my wife and I went to Paris not long after this f*ing invasion, at a time when the French were supposedly pissed at us, however, I found them to be very gracious and kind hosts. So some of that must have been media frenzy. My son had shown me a U-Tube video which totally cracked him up about the same time which I will link here. It was a multi-player rollplaying computer game. Everyone is sitting at their computers trying to plan a strategy (like the world an the UN was doing re: Iraq). Leroy Jenkins so reminded me of the administration's rush to get in there. Total disregard of what everyone else is doing and thinking. Poor planning. Like when they fired General Shinseki, chairman of the joint chiefs, when he disagreed with Donald Rumsfelt and suggested they needed more troops before the attack. This is Leroys screen, his perspective: look how distracted he is as the planning occurs.

 

[video:youtube]LkCNJRfSZBU

 

Goddammit Leroy Bush. Fu*ing moron.

 

I have no excuses for our behavior about that, the failure of politicians, or of our treatment of prisoners or the additional powers granted to the President by congress. Rudy's original post was not about Iraq, but about the attacks on, and murders of, innocents in India. My earlier post was addressing that and things like that. But check out this video and tell me that you don't see the entire administrations being Leroy.

[pc313]

It looks like India has captured one of the gunmen alive. To what degree of discomfort, if any, should this terrorist be subjected? Seems to me it would be helpful to know who his benefactors are or if more attacks are in the works.

 

India court and prison system has not changed much in the past 50 yrs and its not unusual for someone to be held for years with out a court date.

Physical abuse and torture is commom,waterboarding,sleepdepriviation,and beatings are the least of his problems for India has been dealing with terrorist for along time over the Kashmir conflict and have prisons just for them. He should have died,he might have been better off!

 

In the U.S. we have right to have a arraignment hearing with in 72 hours not counting weekends and charged or setfree and not to be tortured,and thats the problem with Guantanamo and holding prisoners on U.S soil with out rights. If they had not brought them to U.S. soil it would not be an issue. Even the Oklahoma bombers had rights!

 

Its hard to talk about human rights issues with other countries when we are doing damm near the same things,its the old DO AS I SAY NOT AS I DO THING!

Edited December 1, 2008 by pc313

[pc313]

I totally agree with you and thought the no fly zones,scantions and working with in the U.N. and Nato was far better then an oil grabbing move!

 

I remember telling people get ready for a 2 day war and a 10 year retreat!

[mattp]

I'm not sure I get your Leroy video there, Bill, but back to the show at hand: yes, Rudy's initial post was about the attack in Mombay. As far as I can tell, nobody here much commented on that. Fairweather and KK posted that the liberals are responsible for the attack but they weren't really talking about that incident so much as just poking their friends here in the eyes. JayB then came up with one of his straw-man arguments, suggesting that anybody who has been critical of the war on terror must believe that all terrorists are acting in tandem and their actions are taken only in response to U.S. policy, and then things took a turn downward from there.

 

I don't see anyone seriously suggesting the U.S. is responsible for what happened in Mombay, and now we're back to the more general discussion of how folks should view and talk about all of this and I got the impression you were suggesting that those who speak critically of U.S. policy are somehow misguided or hurting our efforts but, in going back to re-read your post I think it was really the harsh rhetorical language like "Americans are the real terrorists" that you were referring to. The "Islam is cancer" type firebranding falls into the same category, no? It is fun to say provocative things on the Internet and, yes, there may even be a tiny element of truth to both statements but one gets the impression that the writers revel in these statements of blind hatred.

[tvashtarkatena]

There's not much to say about the India attacks other than the fact that they were horrific. The situation in Kashmir is horrific. The partition of India was horrific. The colonial rule of India was horrific.

 

The lesson here is that war nearly always begets more war. The "we surrender, we'll be nice now" ending in Germany and Japan were extreme rarities. Much more common is the ongoing, never ending situation in Kashmir, which has come close to, and and may one day, play a central role in the nuclear devastation of both sides, in addition to being a prime motivator in the recent attacks.

 

If you push people around, as several on this forum continually suggest we continue to do, they usually find a way to push back. Best just not to push them around at all and find a better way to establish a more positive, stable, and reciprocal relationship.

[RuMR]

Damn.....I think Bug just bitch slapped FW.

 

uhhh...tha happens quite frequently by many people...there's a reason he's nicknamed fairypinkcheeks!

[ivan]

This is pointless. Go climb something and have some fun.

i tried - i just got very wet and very wasted

[mike1]

This is pointless. Go climb something and have some fun.

i tried - i just got very wet and very wasted

Sounds like fun to me...

[STP]

Here's a different take on the situation from that presented in our news sources:

 

Signs Of An Attempted Coup In New Delhi--Pakistan Daily (biased source??)

 

Seems to be common thread, a connection between elements in the intelligence services, military, and the purported terrorists. Basically what may be happening is a struggle between a right-wing ideologues against the current Indian government. Or maybe, everything is just as it appears.

 

 

This is also an interesting comment from an Indian writer and activist:

[video:youtube]Z2Ok6apsHlg

“I think, the thing that I’m thinking the most about, the question that occupies me a lot these days is, what kind, what form of resistance is effective, and acceptable to us?

 

“Because, I see all over and all around us, that obviously resistance, whether it’s in Palestine, or Iraq, or Kashmir, or in the north eastern states of India, or now all over India, there is a kind of armed struggle rising up, being put down viciously by the State, and at the same time non-violent resistance movements are given a lot of air time, a lot of publicity, a lot of space, but it’s also because it makes the State comfortable, it makes the comfortable comfortable.

 

“So between non-violent resistance and armed struggle, where do we go? What is effective? What is the right thing to do, or do we need a bio-diversity of resistance? Do we need all kinds of resistance? And do we need to stop this search for being pristine? Do we need to be able to accept that whatever form we choose and all the various ways in which we decide to resist will not be pure, and we accept that impurity with some kind of generosity?

 

“So really the strategies of resistance and what they ought to be is what occupies my time a lot these days.”

Suzanna Arundhati Roy

 

 

 

 

[mattp]

Fairweather:

this guy probably thinks that the bad guy from Mombay should not be tortured. He served 14 years in the Air Force and served as an interrogator in Iraq. He has concluded that not only does torture rarely succeed in gaining good intelligence, but that our use of torture has in fact caused legions of foreign fighters to flock to Iraq with the sole goal of killing Americans - in other words, he says, it has led to increased American casualties.

 

You and KK and JayB may think that anyone who criticizes American use of torture is misguided and encourages terrorism. Us libtards on cc.com don't see it that way, and neither does Matthew Alexander. I rather suspect there are a lot of other members of the U.S. military that don't agree with you either.

 

 

[tvashtarkatena]

Fortunately, we are soon to be lead by a more principled person with higher moral values than FW, JayB, and their low culture friends. American torture will become a shameful memory rather than a nightmarish reality.

Edited December 1, 2008 by tvashtarkatena

[kevbone]

It all seems very simple to me. Once we start torturing people we become what we hate the most. We lower ourselves to “their” level. We should not torture ANYBODY, EVER FOR ANY REASON. Civil liberties must extent to everyone always. We must lead by example. Closing our version of a concentration camp (Guantanamo) is a great idea. That place is a laughing stock of the world. Just the fact that it is in Cuba is the biggest joke. Don’t we have an embargo with Cuba? Simply because they will not bend to the US’s wishes? Then we go and hold “enemy combatants” there indefinitely which is a blatant disregard for Habeas Corpus, our constitution and our way of life.

 

Why does the US have bases in over 140 countries around the world? World peace? Right…..

 

I would put money on the fact that if we withdrew our forces from ALL Arab nations and Muslim countries….that the US would not be the main target anymore. Did anyone see the video of Osama Bin Laden in 1993 (I think) where he tells the US to take there bases out of Sadia Arabia or else? IMO that is all he wanted. So……why don’t we? Because of money. Well….money and greed are getting innocent Americas killed. Stop the insanity.

 

[tvashtarkatena]

Not to mention that every time we torture we violate U.S. law (we have ratified the Geneva Conventions, which explicitly prohibits mistreatment of prisoners, including humiliation, anywhere, anytime. Under the Constitution, ratified treaties become federal law). Question: are there those among us who do not believe we should abide by the rule of law? If so, how would our democracy function if our rulers can do whatever they feel like?

Edited December 1, 2008 by tvashtarkatena

[kevbone]

If so, how would our democracy function if our rulers can do whatever they feel like?

 

It would not function. AKA....look at the last 8 years.

[Fairweather]

Fortunately, we are soon to be lead by a more principled person with higher moral values than FW, JayB, and their low culture friends.

 

A.K.A. "The Naive". Read Woodrow Wilson for clarification. While you're up there on the pedestal you've built for yourself, you should carefully re-read my question.

[Fairweather]

Should the bodies of the dead gunmen be dumped at sea?

[JayB]

Fairweather:

this guy probably thinks that the bad guy from Mombay should not be tortured. He served 14 years in the Air Force and served as an interrogator in Iraq. He has concluded that not only does torture rarely succeed in gaining good intelligence, but that our use of torture has in fact caused legions of foreign fighters to flock to Iraq with the sole goal of killing Americans - in other words, he says, it has led to increased American casualties.

 

You and KK and JayB may think that anyone who criticizes American use of torture is misguided and encourages terrorism. Us libtards on cc.com don't see it that way, and neither does Matthew Alexander. I rather suspect there are a lot of other members of the U.S. military that don't agree with you either.

 

 

I think that misinformed is a more fitting adjective. I invite you to provide links to the threads where I've made either argument.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

[mattp]

this one for starters. I've got to admit, though, that I haven't taken careful note of your specific nuance with regard to torture and what you would or would not exactly approve of. It is often tedious to wade through your posts and figure out exactly where you stand on specific issues, but you are consistently derisive of those who criticize the war effort, and this thread is a perfect example. Liberals who disapprove of the war are soft on terror and naive.

 

Now get back over to the other thread and tell me whether you actually believe your arguments or is it for you simply a game of "gotcha."

[JayB]

Fortunately, we are soon to be lead by a more principled person with higher moral values than FW, JayB, and their low culture friends. American torture will become a shameful memory rather than a nightmarish reality.

 

I'll extend the same invitation to you that I extended to Matt.

[KaskadskyjKozak]

Fairweather:

this guy probably thinks that the bad guy from Mombay should not be tortured. He served 14 years in the Air Force and served as an interrogator in Iraq. He has concluded that not only does torture rarely succeed in gaining good intelligence, but that our use of torture has in fact caused legions of foreign fighters to flock to Iraq with the sole goal of killing Americans - in other words, he says, it has led to increased American casualties.

 

You and KK and JayB may think that anyone who criticizes American use of torture is misguided and encourages terrorism. Us libtards on cc.com don't see it that way, and neither does Matthew Alexander. I rather suspect there are a lot of other members of the U.S. military that don't agree with you either.

 

 

I think that misinformed is a more fitting adjective. I invite you to provide links to the threads where I've made either argument.

 

 

Mattp's MO is to manufacture fictitious arguments of others with whom he disagrees and attribute statements to them which they never made.

[mattp]

Nope. That is JayB's tactic.

 

I try to make an effort to understand what the other guy said, and when I restate what it is that I think they posted I am often actively inviting them to "correct" my interpretation because sometimes it is hard to understand what some folks around here mean from reading their posts. If in fact I have misunderstood you, please correct my misinterpretation. Do you think we who criticize the Bushies' authorization of torture are "soft on terror" or not?

[Bug]

Sounds to me like you are angry at him for what you perceive as him copying your MO.

Cheerio!

[JayB]

this one for starters. I've got to admit, though, that I haven't taken careful note of your specific nuance with regard to torture and what you would or would not exactly approve of. It is often tedious to wade through your posts and figure out exactly where you stand on specific issues, but you are consistently derisive of those who criticize the war effort, and this thread is a perfect example. Liberals who disapprove of the war are soft on terror and naive.

 

Now get back over to the other thread and tell me whether you actually believe your arguments or is it for you simply a game of "gotcha."

 

Since you linked to this very same post as an example what - exactly - have I said in this thread that would justify including my name in your previous post? Just for a reminder, I'm talking about this:

 

"You and KK and JayB may think that anyone who criticizes American use of torture is misguided and encourages terrorism."

 

statement. Let's call this statement "A." Let's call the set of statements that you put forward in the second iteration statement "B." B does not logically entail A.

 

With regards to nuance, is there something that you'd recommend as a substitute when dealing with complicated topics?