Democrats versus Republicans

[RAGNAR]

lll

[PBzeer]

But then .... proof isn't necessary is it?

No conclusions were reached, only supposition. The headline even has a question mark in it, yet we are to take this as "indefensible" fact? And were was the Bush defense of this act?

To be blunt, if this death could have been proven to be a result of torture, rather than occurring at the time it did, the media would have been all over it like flies on ****. But that didn't happen did it?

Facts, those obnoxious, inconvenient things are proveable. Not matters of supposition, or what fits an agenda.

[sck5]

Here are the facts

The guy was in our custody
The body had marks on it indicating he had been beaten. Just look at the pictures.
He is dead

I dont think what I am saying is too much of a stretch.

The media WERE on it like flies on ****. It took about 1 second to find that link and there were pages and pages more. Just google the words prisoner torture death abu ghraib and you will find them. The report I found first was from MSNBC. NBC is not a fringe news organization.

And on waterboarding, doesnt it give you pause, at least a little bit, to be on the same side as the guys who ran the Spanish Inquisition? Most history books seem to think they went too far, even though they were convinced God was on their side.

If you have any doubts about this, just ask your own Presidential candidate. He will set you straight.

[camaraderie]

Yes...McCain is for ending it. It is one of the things we hate about him.

[PBzeer]

Any way you look at, any way you try to spin it, it is still, an ASSUMPTION, not a fact. PERIOD.

To place three cases of waterboarding (though you want to think there's more) in the same context as the Spanish Inquisiton, is not merely ludicrious, but completely disingenious as well. There is no comparision.

As for asking "my" Presidential canidate anything, I can't, because I don't have one. Were I to vote today, it would be for none of the above.

[sck5]

"Yes...McCain is for ending it. It is one of the things we hate about him."

Why? You LIKE torturing people? I just dont get it. Neither, apparently, do most of the military who are dead set against it because they know that if we torture people they will be vulnerable if/when they are captured.

Apart from that, it squanders one of our most important assets - being perceived as the "good guys". It is a lot easier to accomplish our goals when we have allies and people want to help us than it is when they hate us. Even if you dont care about humanitarian concerns, what we lose is far greater than what we gain from torturing people.

And please dont start telling me we are threatened by the worst enemy in history - The Communists and Hitler were far more dangerous to us than a bunch of guys hiding in caves, bad though they may be. We didnt use torture then and in fact when I was growing up I was always told that "Americans dont do things like that."

[sck5]

"To place three cases of waterboarding (though you want to think there's more) in the same context as the Spanish Inquisiton, is not merely ludicrious, but completely disingenious as well. There is no comparision."

They invented waterboarding, so I am told. They certainly used it. Nice company we are keeping.

[PBzeer]

Perhaps you can explain how we can end something we aren't doing? As in, just when was the last waterboarding? And who are we currently torturing? AND, just who is it we have to please in matters of OUR national security?

[PBzeer]

Originally Posted by sck5

"To place three cases of waterboarding (though you want to think there's more) in the same context as the Spanish Inquisiton, is not merely ludicrious, but completely disingenious as well. There is no comparision."

They invented waterboarding, so I am told. They certainly used it. Nice company we are keeping.

Pray tell how you equate actions in the pursuit of dogma, with actions in the pursuit of intelligence of enemy operations? Don't bother, because you can't. Just like facts, context is important to any position.

[sck5]

We dont know who may be doing torturing now. But I have yet to hear any clear condemnation of waterboarding from the administration or from republicans outside (e.g. this site) It is beyond me why anybody feels they ought to defend this in any way whatever.

And the people we need to please is US. I am not advocating being the "good guys" just because I am a touchy feely liberal. It is also because having the good will of the people is a MILITARY ASSET. Just ask anyone who has fought in a guerrilla war whether it is a good idea for the population they are hiding in to hate us and want to give them shelter.

I believe that for better or worse, the Iraq war is an important component of our current national security situation. I also believe that the fight there has many elements common to guerrilla wars everywhere. It is evident that many of the people in Iraq hate us enough to shelter the guerillas and thereby help them plant bombs and set ambushes that kill our soldiers. The torture that went on at Abu Ghraib which we have all seen in numerous pictures, only one of which is in the link above, is a powerful element in why those that hate us came to that opinion.

Why is this so hard? You wont find me defending the Dems when they behave like idiots (which, like all politicians, they do sometimes). Why on earth would you defend THIS? Even when the guy you elected to be your candidate wont? Again, I just dont get it.