Jump to content

I can just see lefties banging their heads against walls


flaps15

Recommended Posts

Good statement, I would agree with it. Two things, has nothing to do with the decision to go after potential violations of inhanced or torture techniques BASED ON WHAT WE KNOW SO FAR. It does no good and plenty of bad.

 

Obama had it right in the beginning, don't look back. Well now they are going to look back. They are NOT going to find anything prosecutable. They are going to keep the issue in the forefront. They are going to stifle future initiatives of those whose job it is to protect us.

 

They are going to cut off their collective noses, to spite their faces, and it will be a bad move for this administration.

 

Right or wrong, that is what will go down.

 

Cheers,

 

KG

 

This investigation was prompted by reports that the interrogations

went beyond even Yoos definition of non-torture. Reports from

the CIA. That is what we know so far, KAG.

 

This administration was working diligently to brush it under

the rug, but this is bringing up something that requires

Holders to ignore his oath for him to sit on his thumbs about.

 

Damn shame. The CIA should have told Dick to fuck off

and left interrogation to professionals, like they did with

direct action staffing.

 

Horseshit. Obama is behind this plain and simple and it's gonna bite him in the ass. Moving forward, if that's truly what he wants, just pull his attack dog AG off of something they've known since briefing for his Presidency. Interrogation was done legally. It worked. Quit trying to appease the leftwing loonies, the campaign is over. For such a smart guy, Obama is killing himself.

 

Thou doth protest too much. The legality is an open question

at best for you.

 

This is going to hurt him, and Holder, but their oaths were

to uphold the Constitution, not public opinion.

Link to post
Share on other sites
Thou doth protest too much. The legality is an open question

at best for you.

 

This is going to hurt him, and Holder, but their oaths were

to uphold the Constitution, not public opinion.

Now wait just a cotton picking minute here...and no, I'm not making a racist reference. This matter has been reviewed by the Bush administration, who adjudicated themselves innocent in a startlingly brilliant display of single branch efficiency. Why must we dig into this again, and why can our system of checks and balances not reign the Obama administration in on this?

Link to post
Share on other sites

Good statement, I would agree with it. Two things, has nothing to do with the decision to go after potential violations of inhanced or torture techniques BASED ON WHAT WE KNOW SO FAR. It does no good and plenty of bad.

 

Obama had it right in the beginning, don't look back. Well now they are going to look back. They are NOT going to find anything prosecutable. They are going to keep the issue in the forefront. They are going to stifle future initiatives of those whose job it is to protect us.

 

They are going to cut off their collective noses, to spite their faces, and it will be a bad move for this administration.

 

Right or wrong, that is what will go down.

 

Cheers,

 

KG

 

This investigation was prompted by reports that the interrogations

went beyond even Yoos definition of non-torture. Reports from

the CIA. That is what we know so far, KAG.

 

This administration was working diligently to brush it under

the rug, but this is bringing up something that requires

Holders to ignore his oath for him to sit on his thumbs about.

 

Damn shame. The CIA should have told Dick to fuck off

and left interrogation to professionals, like they did with

direct action staffing.

 

Horseshit. Obama is behind this plain and simple and it's gonna bite him in the ass. Moving forward, if that's truly what he wants, just pull his attack dog AG off of something they've known since briefing for his Presidency. Interrogation was done legally. It worked. Quit trying to appease the leftwing loonies, the campaign is over. For such a smart guy, Obama is killing himself.

 

Thou doth protest too much. The legality is an open question

at best for you.

 

This is going to hurt him, and Holder, but their oaths were

to uphold the Constitution, not public opinion.

 

Isn't it about time for KAG to remind us that he doesn't like either party?

 

Seems like it's been a while.

Link to post
Share on other sites
Two things,

1. Torture works. If it did not work people would not be doing it. Name one thing, anything that people have been doing for thousands of years that does not work.

 

2.Does not matter if torture works, we should not be torturing people. There are countries that torture and ones that don't. Which country would you like to live in?

 

 

Good statement, I would agree with it. Two things, has nothing to do with the decision to go after potential violations of inhanced or torture techniques BASED ON WHAT WE KNOW SO FAR. It does no good and plenty of bad.

 

Obama had it right in the beginning, don't look back. Well now they are going to look back. They are NOT going to find anything prosecutable. They are going to keep the issue in the forefront. They are going to stifle future initiatives of those whose job it is to protect us.

 

They are going to cut off their collective noses, to spite their faces, and it will be a bad move for this administration.

 

Right or wrong, that is what will go down.

 

Cheers,

 

KG

 

This investigation was prompted by reports that the interrogations

went beyond even Yoos definition of non-torture. Reports from

the CIA. That is what we know so far, KAG.

 

This administration was working diligently to brush it under

the rug, but this is bringing up something that requires

Holders to ignore his oath for him to sit on his thumbs about.

 

Damn shame. The CIA should have told Dick to fuck off

and left interrogation to professionals, like they did with

direct action staffing.

 

So, you already know what happened and that Cheney was in charge. Why have any investigation, off with his head!

 

Mark, it did not have to go down. Now it will. I feel a litle bit sorry for Obama, it will be one more promise that he breaks, and it will be one more nail in his coffin because the American public will not be grateful for the probe. It will NOT produce anything that most Americans will be upset about.

 

Dirty little secret, if you captured OBL and executed him live on national TV, the outcry would be minimal. It is the nature of the beast.

 

Cheers,

KG

Link to post
Share on other sites

Good statement, I would agree with it. Two things, has nothing to do with the decision to go after potential violations of inhanced or torture techniques BASED ON WHAT WE KNOW SO FAR. It does no good and plenty of bad.

 

Obama had it right in the beginning, don't look back. Well now they are going to look back. They are NOT going to find anything prosecutable. They are going to keep the issue in the forefront. They are going to stifle future initiatives of those whose job it is to protect us.

 

They are going to cut off their collective noses, to spite their faces, and it will be a bad move for this administration.

 

Right or wrong, that is what will go down.

 

Cheers,

 

KG

 

This investigation was prompted by reports that the interrogations

went beyond even Yoos definition of non-torture. Reports from

the CIA. That is what we know so far, KAG.

 

This administration was working diligently to brush it under

the rug, but this is bringing up something that requires

Holders to ignore his oath for him to sit on his thumbs about.

 

Damn shame. The CIA should have told Dick to fuck off

and left interrogation to professionals, like they did with

direct action staffing.

 

Horseshit. Obama is behind this plain and simple and it's gonna bite him in the ass. Moving forward, if that's truly what he wants, just pull his attack dog AG off of something they've known since briefing for his Presidency. Interrogation was done legally. It worked. Quit trying to appease the leftwing loonies, the campaign is over. For such a smart guy, Obama is killing himself.

 

Thou doth protest too much. The legality is an open question

at best for you.

 

This is going to hurt him, and Holder, but their oaths were

to uphold the Constitution, not public opinion.

 

Isn't it about time for KAG to remind us that he doesn't like either party?

 

Seems like it's been a while.

 

Nothing partisan here Rabbit.....truth, but not patisan.

 

I don't like what either party is doing, what is your beef with that.

 

Do you like what your party is doing and how they are handling their POWER? If you do,you are an idiot. If you don't give us some critique of the Obamanation.

 

KG

Link to post
Share on other sites
Nothing partisan here Rabbit.....truth, but not patisan.

 

I don't like what either party is doing, what is your beef with that.

 

You can't bring yourself to criticize anything the former administration did.

 

You are still the same old party loyalist that you've always been.

Link to post
Share on other sites
Nothing partisan here Rabbit.....truth, but not patisan.

 

I don't like what either party is doing, what is your beef with that.

 

You can't bring yourself to criticize anything the former administration did.

 

You are still the same old party loyalist that you've always been.

 

 

 

 

Can you answer a question?

 

Troubling :(

Link to post
Share on other sites
I searched this entire thread for the words "suspects", "suspected", and "alleged" and found no occurances.

 

The explorer search tool is great. It sure saved me the time to read through posts that are complete bullshit.

 

Ben

 

 

Start a thread on prisoners of war and see how many times those words are used. I know it doesn't apply to these individuals....they are ememy combatants, no nation, no uniform, just an idiology.

 

KG

 

So why did you mention the term "prisoners of war"?

 

Ben

 

Two reasons, multiple references to POW John McCain, and POW is the group protected by the oft mentioned Geneva Conventions. The point being, these pricks do not rise to the level of POW, which is honorable and to be respected with certain rights.

 

They are lower. Killers who hide behind a religion. Enemy combatants. Most likely something we have never had to deal with on such a grand scale as now.

 

My point still stands. They are not suspects, not suspected, not alleged.

 

Cheers,

KG

 

You are the fuckin criminal.

 

These people are either POWs or Civilians. There is no middle fucking ground. If they are civilians they are accountable to the local laws of where they were caught -- at the time they were caught. Just like here in the USA. You want to urinate all over that I will urinate all over you. And then you can call the cops and I will declare I wasn't torturing you and get off scot free. We just can't go around making shit up!

 

Fuck off........the only appropriate response to your ranting.

 

KG

 

 

Ok , can I torture you? I sure as shit don't like your philosophy. And I think your philosophy needs an adjustment -- and torture is an awesome options for altering your subhuman mind. So you fuck off douchy douche bag. Or come out and plaayyyyyy...........

Link to post
Share on other sites
Two things,

1. Torture works. If it did not work people would not be doing it. Name one thing, anything that people have been doing for thousands of years that does not work.

 

2.Does not matter if torture works, we should not be torturing people. There are countries that torture and ones that don't. Which country would you like to live in?

 

 

Good statement, I would agree with it. Two things, has nothing to do with the decision to go after potential violations of inhanced or torture techniques BASED ON WHAT WE KNOW SO FAR. It does no good and plenty of bad.

 

Obama had it right in the beginning, don't look back. Well now they are going to look back. They are NOT going to find anything prosecutable. They are going to keep the issue in the forefront. They are going to stifle future initiatives of those whose job it is to protect us.

 

They are going to cut off their collective noses, to spite their faces, and it will be a bad move for this administration.

 

Right or wrong, that is what will go down.

 

Cheers,

 

KG

 

This investigation was prompted by reports that the interrogations

went beyond even Yoos definition of non-torture. Reports from

the CIA. That is what we know so far, KAG.

 

This administration was working diligently to brush it under

the rug, but this is bringing up something that requires

Holders to ignore his oath for him to sit on his thumbs about.

 

Damn shame. The CIA should have told Dick to fuck off

and left interrogation to professionals, like they did with

direct action staffing.

 

So, you already know what happened and that Cheney was in charge. Why have any investigation, off with his head!

 

Mark, it did not have to go down. Now it will. I feel a litle bit sorry for Obama, it will be one more promise that he breaks, and it will be one more nail in his coffin because the American public will not be grateful for the probe. It will NOT produce anything that most Americans will be upset about.

 

Dirty little secret, if you captured OBL and executed him live on national TV, the outcry would be minimal. It is the nature of the beast.

 

Cheers,

KG

 

You are not paying attention. Please read what I write and

respond to that and not what you may wish my thinking to be.

 

Your prediction of what the investigation will reveal shows

that it's you who are the one who claims to know what

happened, not me.

 

Yes, I guess that secret couldn't be kept much longer..

Link to post
Share on other sites
Two things,

1. Torture works. If it did not work people would not be doing it. Name one thing, anything that people have been doing for thousands of years that does not work.

 

2.Does not matter if torture works, we should not be torturing people. There are countries that torture and ones that don't. Which country would you like to live in?

 

 

Good statement, I would agree with it. Two things, has nothing to do with the decision to go after potential violations of inhanced or torture techniques BASED ON WHAT WE KNOW SO FAR. It does no good and plenty of bad.

 

Obama had it right in the beginning, don't look back. Well now they are going to look back. They are NOT going to find anything prosecutable. They are going to keep the issue in the forefront. They are going to stifle future initiatives of those whose job it is to protect us.

 

They are going to cut off their collective noses, to spite their faces, and it will be a bad move for this administration.

 

Right or wrong, that is what will go down.

 

Cheers,

 

KG

 

This investigation was prompted by reports that the interrogations

went beyond even Yoos definition of non-torture. Reports from

the CIA. That is what we know so far, KAG.

 

This administration was working diligently to brush it under

the rug, but this is bringing up something that requires

Holders to ignore his oath for him to sit on his thumbs about.

 

Damn shame. The CIA should have told Dick to fuck off

and left interrogation to professionals, like they did with

direct action staffing.

 

So, you already know what happened and that Cheney was in charge. Why have any investigation, off with his head!

 

Mark, it did not have to go down. Now it will. I feel a litle bit sorry for Obama, it will be one more promise that he breaks, and it will be one more nail in his coffin because the American public will not be grateful for the probe. It will NOT produce anything that most Americans will be upset about.

 

Dirty little secret, if you captured OBL and executed him live on national TV, the outcry would be minimal. It is the nature of the beast.

 

Cheers,

KG

 

 

well now that we have a president that does not have a history of business relationships with the accused's family... that may happen

Link to post
Share on other sites
Two things,

1. Torture works. If it did not work people would not be doing it. Name one thing, anything that people have been doing for thousands of years that does not work.

 

2.Does not matter if torture works, we should not be torturing people. There are countries that torture and ones that don't. Which country would you like to live in?

 

 

Good statement, I would agree with it. Two things, has nothing to do with the decision to go after potential violations of inhanced or torture techniques BASED ON WHAT WE KNOW SO FAR. It does no good and plenty of bad.

 

Obama had it right in the beginning, don't look back. Well now they are going to look back. They are NOT going to find anything prosecutable. They are going to keep the issue in the forefront. They are going to stifle future initiatives of those whose job it is to protect us.

 

They are going to cut off their collective noses, to spite their faces, and it will be a bad move for this administration.

 

Right or wrong, that is what will go down.

 

Cheers,

 

KG

 

This investigation was prompted by reports that the interrogations

went beyond even Yoos definition of non-torture. Reports from

the CIA. That is what we know so far, KAG.

 

This administration was working diligently to brush it under

the rug, but this is bringing up something that requires

Holders to ignore his oath for him to sit on his thumbs about.

 

Damn shame. The CIA should have told Dick to fuck off

and left interrogation to professionals, like they did with

direct action staffing.

 

So, you already know what happened and that Cheney was in charge. Why have any investigation, off with his head!

 

Mark, it did not have to go down. Now it will. I feel a litle bit sorry for Obama, it will be one more promise that he breaks, and it will be one more nail in his coffin because the American public will not be grateful for the probe. It will NOT produce anything that most Americans will be upset about.

 

Dirty little secret, if you captured OBL and executed him live on national TV, the outcry would be minimal. It is the nature of the beast.

 

Cheers,

KG

 

You are not paying attention. Please read what I write and

respond to that and not what you may wish my thinking to be.

 

Your prediction of what the investigation will reveal shows

that it's you who are the one who claims to know what

happened, not me.

 

Yes, I guess that secret couldn't be kept much longer..

 

No, I am predicting no matter the outcome or revelations, there will be no prosecutions and no sympathy for the "victims". That will translate into a belief by a lot that this was done for political reasons. Depending on how many believe that, it could be real trouble for the administration that promised to look forward not back.

 

BTW you have used that "wish my thinking to be" a few too many times. Perhaps you are the one that is misreading and not paying attention.

 

Cheers,

 

KG

Link to post
Share on other sites
Thou doth protest too much. The legality is an open question

at best for you.

 

This is going to hurt him, and Holder, but their oaths were

to uphold the Constitution, not public opinion.

Now wait just a cotton picking minute here...and no, I'm not making a racist reference. This matter has been reviewed by the Bush administration, who adjudicated themselves innocent in a startlingly brilliant display of single branch efficiency. Why must we dig into this again, and why can our system of checks and balances not reign the Obama administration in on this?

 

It's a mystery. All's we ask of our Justice Department is that they obey

the Presidents orders as if they were the will of God. Here

they are ignoring his instructions to let it be, which tells me

they are not on board for the big win. We have to keep our

heads until this check and balance craze blows over.

Link to post
Share on other sites
Political party Absolution for me but not for thee ?

 

In war people are killed --Obama has escalated war in Afghanistan , he has sent 30,000 more troops there --war is kill or be killed so please spare us the preachy absolutism and self rightious politically motivated morality .

That's pretty rich coming from you. My absolutism is anti-war. I was against it when Bush started it; I'm against Obama continuing it.

 

What about you? You were clearly for it when Bush started it; does that mean you are in favor of Obama policies in continuing it? Or, as seems to be the case, you're absolutely for Bush policies but absolutely against Obama? Smells like Political party absolutism to me.

 

Tell me I'm wrong. Tell me how you think Obama's escalation is A-OK with you. Or tell me how anti-war you were when Bush was in office. Otherwise, you're just a bullshit hypocrite.

You failed to answer the question about Clinton's imilitary intervention in the former Yugoslavia {KOSOVO BOSNIA ETC } seem to not comprehend Clinton also bombed Iraq extensively and US backed UN sanctions in Husein Iraq caused the deathes of nearly half million Iraqis , mainly children from starvation and related deseases .

I don't recall being asked a question. Frankly, when any conversation here devolves to "Clinton did it too," the odds of sentient dialog following are pretty low and I tune it out.

 

As for a half million dead Iraqis, I'm inferring that you think that's a bad thing. I sense an inconsistency that a half million dead Iraqis from starvation and disease is bad; but that as many as a million dead Iraqis from direct and indirect consequences of Bush's war is, well, okay, because Hussein was a bad guy and Bush is a good guy.

 

You seem to be trying to selectively apply a false politically motivated self rightious preachy morality because you have been force fed so much party line propaganda and the ever present false L narratives and villifications , A { bush wars bad Obama wars good}

You seem to have completely ignored the first paragraph of my reply: "I was against it when Bush started it; I'm against Obama continuing it."

Link to post
Share on other sites
Two things,

1. Torture works. If it did not work people would not be doing it. Name one thing, anything that people have been doing for thousands of years that does not work.

 

2.Does not matter if torture works, we should not be torturing people. There are countries that torture and ones that don't. Which country would you like to live in?

 

 

Good statement, I would agree with it. Two things, has nothing to do with the decision to go after potential violations of inhanced or torture techniques BASED ON WHAT WE KNOW SO FAR. It does no good and plenty of bad.

 

Obama had it right in the beginning, don't look back. Well now they are going to look back. They are NOT going to find anything prosecutable. They are going to keep the issue in the forefront. They are going to stifle future initiatives of those whose job it is to protect us.

 

They are going to cut off their collective noses, to spite their faces, and it will be a bad move for this administration.

 

Right or wrong, that is what will go down.

 

Cheers,

 

KG

 

This investigation was prompted by reports that the interrogations

went beyond even Yoos definition of non-torture. Reports from

the CIA. That is what we know so far, KAG.

 

This administration was working diligently to brush it under

the rug, but this is bringing up something that requires

Holders to ignore his oath for him to sit on his thumbs about.

 

Damn shame. The CIA should have told Dick to fuck off

and left interrogation to professionals, like they did with

direct action staffing.

 

So, you already know what happened and that Cheney was in charge. Why have any investigation, off with his head!

 

Mark, it did not have to go down. Now it will. I feel a litle bit sorry for Obama, it will be one more promise that he breaks, and it will be one more nail in his coffin because the American public will not be grateful for the probe. It will NOT produce anything that most Americans will be upset about.

 

Dirty little secret, if you captured OBL and executed him live on national TV, the outcry would be minimal. It is the nature of the beast.

 

Cheers,

KG

 

You are not paying attention. Please read what I write and

respond to that and not what you may wish my thinking to be.

 

Your prediction of what the investigation will reveal shows

that it's you who are the one who claims to know what

happened, not me.

 

Yes, I guess that secret couldn't be kept much longer..

 

No, I am predicting no matter the outcome or revelations, there will be no prosecutions and no sympathy for the "victims". That will translate into a belief by a lot that this was done for political reasons. Depending on how many believe that, it could be real trouble for the administration that promised to look forward not back.

 

BTW you have used that "wish my thinking to be" a few too many times. Perhaps you are the one that is misreading and not paying attention.

 

Cheers,

 

KG

 

 

Public opinion? He's screwed either way. The left is outraged by his

not seeking prosections from day one, and limiting it to the lower

levels on this is bringing much anger as well.

Link to post
Share on other sites
*** Incoherent Nonsense *** Incoherent Nonsense *** Incoherent Nonsense *** Incoherent Nonsense {*** Incoherent Nonsense *** Incoherent Nonsense ***}

That's pretty rich coming from you. My absolutism is anti-war. I was against it when Bush started it; I'm against Obama continuing it.

 

What about you? You were clearly for it when Bush started it; does that mean you are in favor of Obama policies in continuing it? Or, as seems to be the case, you're absolutely for Bush policies but absolutely against Obama? Smells like Political party absolutism to me.

 

Tell me I'm wrong. Tell me how you think Obama's escalation is A-OK with you. Or tell me how anti-war you were when Bush was in office. Otherwise, you're just a bullshit hypocrite.

*** Incoherent Nonsense *** Incoherent Nonsense *** Incoherent Nonsense *** Incoherent Nonsense

I don't recall being asked a question. Frankly, when any conversation here devolves to "Clinton did it too," the odds of sentient dialog following are pretty low and I tune it out.

 

As for a half million dead Iraqis, I'm inferring that you think that's a bad thing. I sense an inconsistency that a half million dead Iraqis from starvation and disease is bad; but that as many as a million dead Iraqis from direct and indirect consequences of Bush's war is, well, okay, because Hussein was a bad guy and Bush is a good guy.

 

*** Incoherent Nonsense *** Incoherent Nonsense {*** Incoherent Nonsense *** Incoherent Nonsense }

You seem to have completely ignored the first paragraph of my reply: "I was against it when Bush started it; I'm against Obama continuing it."

 

Please don't quote the Carl. I end up with stupid on my shoes then.

Link to post
Share on other sites
Two things,

1. Torture works. If it did not work people would not be doing it. Name one thing, anything that people have been doing for thousands of years that does not work.

 

2.Does not matter if torture works, we should not be torturing people. There are countries that torture and ones that don't. Which country would you like to live in?

 

 

Good statement, I would agree with it. Two things, has nothing to do with the decision to go after potential violations of inhanced or torture techniques BASED ON WHAT WE KNOW SO FAR. It does no good and plenty of bad.

 

Obama had it right in the beginning, don't look back. Well now they are going to look back. They are NOT going to find anything prosecutable. They are going to keep the issue in the forefront. They are going to stifle future initiatives of those whose job it is to protect us.

 

They are going to cut off their collective noses, to spite their faces, and it will be a bad move for this administration.

 

Right or wrong, that is what will go down.

 

Cheers,

 

KG

 

This investigation was prompted by reports that the interrogations

went beyond even Yoos definition of non-torture. Reports from

the CIA. That is what we know so far, KAG.

 

This administration was working diligently to brush it under

the rug, but this is bringing up something that requires

Holders to ignore his oath for him to sit on his thumbs about.

 

Damn shame. The CIA should have told Dick to fuck off

and left interrogation to professionals, like they did with

direct action staffing.

 

So, you already know what happened and that Cheney was in charge. Why have any investigation, off with his head!

 

Mark, it did not have to go down. Now it will. I feel a litle bit sorry for Obama, it will be one more promise that he breaks, and it will be one more nail in his coffin because the American public will not be grateful for the probe. It will NOT produce anything that most Americans will be upset about.

 

Dirty little secret, if you captured OBL and executed him live on national TV, the outcry would be minimal. It is the nature of the beast.

 

Cheers,

KG

 

You are not paying attention. Please read what I write and

respond to that and not what you may wish my thinking to be.

 

Your prediction of what the investigation will reveal shows

that it's you who are the one who claims to know what

happened, not me.

 

Yes, I guess that secret couldn't be kept much longer..

 

No, I am predicting no matter the outcome or revelations, there will be no prosecutions and no sympathy for the "victims". That will translate into a belief by a lot that this was done for political reasons. Depending on how many believe that, it could be real trouble for the administration that promised to look forward not back.

 

BTW you have used that "wish my thinking to be" a few too many times. Perhaps you are the one that is misreading and not paying attention.

 

Cheers,

 

KG

 

 

Public opinion? He's screwed either way. The left is outraged by his

not seeking prosections from day one, and limiting it to the lower

levels on this is bringing much anger as well.

 

Pretty much my point. It is a stupid move, it will not bring anything positive and the potential for real damage is great, especially when his approvals are heading down.

 

Cheers,

 

KG

Link to post
Share on other sites
Pretty much my point. It is a stupid move, it will not bring anything positive and the potential for real damage is great, especially when his approvals are heading down.

 

Here's a novel idea for you:

 

Maybe this administration cares more about upholding the Constitution than our last one, "approvals" be damned.

Link to post
Share on other sites
Pretty much my point. It is a stupid move, it will not bring anything positive and the potential for real damage is great, especially when his approvals are heading down.

 

Here's a novel idea for you:

 

Maybe this administration cares more about upholding the Constitution than our last one, "approvals" be damned.

Things were much simpler with a unitary executive.

Link to post
Share on other sites
Two things,

1. Torture works. If it did not work people would not be doing it. Name one thing, anything that people have been doing for thousands of years that does not work.

 

2.Does not matter if torture works, we should not be torturing people. There are countries that torture and ones that don't. Which country would you like to live in?

 

 

Good statement, I would agree with it. Two things, has nothing to do with the decision to go after potential violations of inhanced or torture techniques BASED ON WHAT WE KNOW SO FAR. It does no good and plenty of bad.

 

Obama had it right in the beginning, don't look back. Well now they are going to look back. They are NOT going to find anything prosecutable. They are going to keep the issue in the forefront. They are going to stifle future initiatives of those whose job it is to protect us.

 

They are going to cut off their collective noses, to spite their faces, and it will be a bad move for this administration.

 

Right or wrong, that is what will go down.

 

Cheers,

 

KG

 

This investigation was prompted by reports that the interrogations

went beyond even Yoos definition of non-torture. Reports from

the CIA. That is what we know so far, KAG.

 

This administration was working diligently to brush it under

the rug, but this is bringing up something that requires

Holders to ignore his oath for him to sit on his thumbs about.

 

Damn shame. The CIA should have told Dick to fuck off

and left interrogation to professionals, like they did with

direct action staffing.

 

So, you already know what happened and that Cheney was in charge. Why have any investigation, off with his head!

 

Mark, it did not have to go down. Now it will. I feel a litle bit sorry for Obama, it will be one more promise that he breaks, and it will be one more nail in his coffin because the American public will not be grateful for the probe. It will NOT produce anything that most Americans will be upset about.

 

Dirty little secret, if you captured OBL and executed him live on national TV, the outcry would be minimal. It is the nature of the beast.

 

Cheers,

KG

 

You are not paying attention. Please read what I write and

respond to that and not what you may wish my thinking to be.

 

Your prediction of what the investigation will reveal shows

that it's you who are the one who claims to know what

happened, not me.

 

Yes, I guess that secret couldn't be kept much longer..

 

No, I am predicting no matter the outcome or revelations, there will be no prosecutions and no sympathy for the "victims". That will translate into a belief by a lot that this was done for political reasons. Depending on how many believe that, it could be real trouble for the administration that promised to look forward not back.

 

BTW you have used that "wish my thinking to be" a few too many times. Perhaps you are the one that is misreading and not paying attention.

 

Cheers,

 

KG

 

 

Public opinion? He's screwed either way. The left is outraged by his

not seeking prosections from day one, and limiting it to the lower

levels on this is bringing much anger as well.

 

Pretty much my point. It is a stupid move, it will not bring anything positive and the potential for real damage is great, especially when his approvals are heading down.

 

Cheers,

 

KG

 

 

--and you are correct as usual KG --this will only reserve back in on themselves given Obamas escalation of war and dismal results thus far with his handling of it .

 

He was very good from the cheap seats as Jr senator but now he has to deal with the reality and very hypocriotical types like Holder who has little credibilty left .

 

http://corner.nationalreview.com/

 

Eric Holder, at some point, is going to realize that his position on going after interrogators is morally and politically untenable, and that he himself will become a sacrificial pawn. Why?

 

1) Given his disreputable role in the Clinton pardons of both the odious, pay-for-play Mr. Rich, and the creepy Puerto Rican terrorists (tied by the FBI to at least 130 bombings, serial armed robberies, six murders, and general mayhem), Holder ever since has had little moral authority on anything to do with attorney general office prerogatives, and especially no standing to begin reopening cases of those who were trying to jail and question terrorists in the national interest, rather than, as in his own past efforts, free terrorists for careerist purposes.

 

2) He is already on record in a CNN interview once explaining why the terrorist detainees at Guantanamo and elsewhere are neither prisoners of war nor are they warranted protection under the Geneva accords. The only thing that has changed since that admission is his job.

 

3) He already lost a great deal of public support with his silly collective slurring of Americans as “cowards,” who purportedly do not wish to talk of race ad nauseam in terms defined by Holder's elite identity politics.

 

I think Holder is one or two outbursts or one more inept decision away from being Obamized under the bus.

Link to post
Share on other sites
Political party Absolution for me but not for thee ?

 

In war people are killed --Obama has escalated war in Afghanistan , he has sent 30,000 more troops there --war is kill or be killed so please spare us the preachy absolutism and self rightious politically motivated morality .

That's pretty rich coming from you. My absolutism is anti-war. I was against it when Bush started it; I'm against Obama continuing it.

 

What about you? You were clearly for it when Bush started it; does that mean you are in favor of Obama policies in continuing it? Or, as seems to be the case, you're absolutely for Bush policies but absolutely against Obama? Smells like Political party absolutism to me.

 

Tell me I'm wrong. Tell me how you think Obama's escalation is A-OK with you. Or tell me how anti-war you were when Bush was in office. Otherwise, you're just a bullshit hypocrite.

You failed to answer the question about Clinton's imilitary intervention in the former Yugoslavia {KOSOVO BOSNIA ETC } seem to not comprehend Clinton also bombed Iraq extensively and US backed UN sanctions in Husein Iraq caused the deathes of nearly half million Iraqis , mainly children from starvation and related deseases .

I don't recall being asked a question. Frankly, when any conversation here devolves to "Clinton did it too," the odds of sentient dialog following are pretty low and I tune it out.

 

As for a half million dead Iraqis, I'm inferring that you think that's a bad thing. I sense an inconsistency that a half million dead Iraqis from starvation and disease is bad; but that as many as a million dead Iraqis from direct and indirect consequences of Bush's war is, well, okay, because Hussein was a bad guy and Bush is a good guy.

 

You seem to be trying to selectively apply a false politically motivated self rightious preachy morality because you have been force fed so much party line propaganda and the ever present false L narratives and villifications , A { bush wars bad Obama wars good}

You seem to have completely ignored the first paragraph of my reply: "I was against it when Bush started it; I'm against Obama continuing it."

 

 

We look at history {inc. recent history and yes the 90s and military use then and failures of past policies }so we learn from it and hopefully don't repeat them .

 

I prefer no one die from starvation and deseases nor in war but the reality is human history is filled with it and it is ongoing everyday and little has changed in human natures as much as some were falsely lead to believe with hopeychangey empty political slogans .

 

Parroting party line and old MOVE on mantras isn't very usefull now and about as usefull as endless personal attack by D party line types here . BJ is stupid bla bla bla etc etc etc {THEY CAN'T HELP mimicing and emulating their politicians who see others as "stupid " or swaztika carrying unamerican organized mobs etc etc etc .

 

You are saying you are against Obama escalating war in Afghanistan , I may actually start to agree on that soon unless they can achieve similar results the surge did in Iraq that is enabling us to draw down troop numbers .

 

Obama seems to be bungling the efforts there and has not apparently learned from the lessons in Iraq or applyng the same or similar strategies including turning local populas and remote tribes to support the causes and help eliminate AQ and Taliban forces .

 

I believe McCain campaigned on not adding any more troops in Afghanistan and instead making due with the numbers there and training more Afghan forces along with employing the successfull strategies used by general Patraeus in Iraq .

 

Instead Obama seems to have first put in 20,000 more ---then another 10,000 -- and now talk of many more with no clear goals or bench marks and exit strategy much less similar results and turning the tide .

 

We may both agree soon should things continue to deteriorate under commander in chief Obama --George Will is already calling for withdrawl from Afghanistan {or will be soon } I will give Obama more time however which seems only fair and believe the ideals behind the military actions and moral causes just .

 

I still really don't know how you can apply out of context absolute selective moral judgements and reconcile them in your confused contridictory state of current truthes based on conveinient party cause applications --they do not seem consistant nor moral .

 

The Will Column [NRO Staff]

 

 

This appears to be it; in part:

 

 

U.S. strategy — protecting the population — is increasingly troop-intensive while Americans are increasingly impatient about “deteriorating” (says Adm. Mike Mullen, chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff) conditions. The war already is nearly 50 percent longer than the combined U.S. involvements in two world wars, and NATO assistance is reluctant and often risible.

 

U.S. strategy is “clear, hold and build.” Clear? Taliban forces can evaporate and then return, confident that U.S. forces will forever be too few to hold gains. Hence nation-building would be impossible even if we knew how, and even if Afghanistan were not the second-worst place to try: The Brookings Institution ranks Somalia as the only nation with a weaker state.

 

Military historian Max Hastings says Kabul controls only about a third of the country — “control” is an elastic concept — and “ ‘our’ Afghans may prove no more viable than were ‘our’ Vietnamese, the Saigon regime.”

 

Lawless police

 

Just 4,000 Marines are contesting control of Helmand province, which is the size of West Virginia. The New York Times reports a Helmand official saying he has only “police officers who steal and a small group of Afghan soldiers who say they are here for ‘vacation.’ ”

 

Counterinsurgency doctrine teaches, not very helpfully, that development depends on security, and that security depends on development. Three-quarters of Afghanistan’s poppy production for opium comes from Helmand. In what should be called Operation Sisyphus, U.S. officials are urging farmers to grow other crops. Endive, perhaps?

 

Even though violence exploded across Iraq after, and partly because of, three elections, Afghanistan’s recent elections were called “crucial.” To what? They came, they went, they altered no fundamentals, all of which militate against American “success,” whatever that might mean.

 

No effective government

 

Creation of an effective central government? Afghanistan has never had one. U.S. Ambassador Karl Eikenberry hopes for a “renewal of trust” of the Afghan people in the government, but The Economist describes President Hamid Karzai’s government — his vice presidential running mate is a drug trafficker — as so “inept, corrupt and predatory” that people sometimes yearn for restoration of the warlords, “who were less venal and less brutal than Mr. Karzai’s lot.”

 

Adm. Mullen speaks of combating Afghanistan’s “culture of poverty.” But that took decades in just a few square miles of the South Bronx. Gen. Stanley McChrystal, U.S. commander in Afghanistan, thinks jobs programs and local government services might entice many “accidental guerrillas” to leave the Taliban.

 

But before launching New Deal 2.0 in Afghanistan, the Obama administration should ask itself: If U.S. forces are there to prevent re-establishment of al-Qaeda bases — evidently there are none now — must there be nation-building invasions of Somalia, Yemen and other sovereignty vacuums?

 

U.S. forces are being increased by 21,000 to 68,000, bringing the coalition total to 110,000. About 9,000 are from Britain, where support for the war is waning. Counterinsurgency theory concerning the time and the ratio of forces required to protect the population indicates that, nationwide, Afghanistan would need hundreds of thousands of coalition troops, perhaps for a decade or more. That is inconceivable.

Link to post
Share on other sites
You seem to have completely ignored the first paragraph of my reply: "I was against it when Bush started it; I'm against Obama continuing it."

 

You do not like Bush's policy on Iraq, nor do you like Obama's. Carl loves Bush's policy and hate's Obama's. That being said, the situation is crystal clear to Carl: You are the partisan, not him.

 

When you are done with Carl, look though the closet and pull out a shoe to argue with. It's more productive.

 

Ben

Link to post
Share on other sites
You seem to have completely ignored the first paragraph of my reply: "I was against it when Bush started it; I'm against Obama continuing it."

 

You do not like Bush's policy on Iraq, nor do you like Obama's. Carl loves Bush's policy and hate's Obama's. That being said, the situation is crystal clear to Carl: You are the partisan, not him.

 

When you are done with Carl, look though the closet and pull out a shoe to argue with. It's more productive.

 

Ben

Then take out the matching shoe and argue with them both. It'll be like conversing with both Carly and Polaris the Clown.

Link to post
Share on other sites
You seem to have completely ignored the first paragraph of my reply: "I was against it when Bush started it; I'm against Obama continuing it."

 

You do not like Bush's policy on Iraq, nor do you like Obama's. Carl loves Bush's policy and hate's Obama's. That being said, the situation is crystal clear to Carl: You are the partisan, not him.

 

When you are done with Carl, look though the closet and pull out a shoe to argue with. It's more productive.

 

Ben

Then take out the matching shoe and argue with them both. It'll be like conversing with both Carly and Polaris the Clown.

 

Wouldn't work. You would need two right shoes.

 

Ben

Link to post
Share on other sites
You seem to have completely ignored the first paragraph of my reply: "I was against it when Bush started it; I'm against Obama continuing it."

 

You do not like Bush's policy on Iraq, nor do you like Obama's. Carl loves Bush's policy and hate's Obama's. That being said, the situation is crystal clear to Carl: You are the partisan, not him.

 

When you are done with Carl, look though the closet and pull out a shoe to argue with. It's more productive.

 

Ben

Then take out the matching shoe and argue with them both. It'll be like conversing with both Carly and Polaris the Clown.

 

Wouldn't work. You would need two right shoes.

 

Ben

 

 

 

No, you'd have to go outside and hunt up some dogshit to step in for the Polaris the Clown shoe.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

×
×
  • Create New...