Hard Light Productions Forums
Off-Topic Discussion => General Discussion => Topic started by: Flipside on January 22, 2009, 04:55:03 pm
-
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/americas/7845585.stm
So far he's keeping his word, hopefully it will last....
There may just be a tiny ray of sunshine coming through the gloom.
-
Let's give him a year or 2, and then judge if he's keeping his promises, and if he is, how good are they for the US and the rest of the world.
-
As I said elsewhere. If I'd been asked for something Obama could do in one day to drag America's international reputation out of the toilet, I'd have said closing Gitmo.
Whether he can keep it out is another matter but in one day he's already done more for America's reputation with the rest of the world than Bush did in 8 years.
-
Seriously.
I hope this gets a lot more publicity. As far as I'm concerned he's already justified his election.
-
HOLY ****.
I mean, wow... President Barack Obama is actually fixing America!!!
Threats, coercion, physical abuse and waterboarding are now all banned.
HOLY ****! I mean, I knew we elected him and he's in office now but... I didn't actually expect him to have power.
I can't believe it. These sorts of things have been a disgrace for so long... and... he's just... getting rid of them? Just like that? That's all it takes?
Why the hell has it taken so long? Sith's blood, if this is the way things are gonna go for the next four years I might actually be happy with my government.
-
Well, I think he's just earned you some serious brownie points with the rest of the world ;)
Edit: Funniest part is, by moving back some of the trials of 9/11 suspects in order to investigate, he absolutely infuriated them, so basically, by being nice to them, he pissed them off in a way that the world cannot possibly find fault with ;) That is somewhat hilarious :D
-
As I said elsewhere. If I'd been asked for something Obama could do in one day to drag America's international reputation out of the toilet, I'd have said closing Gitmo.
Whether he can keep it out is another matter but in one day he's already done more for America's reputation with the rest of the world than Bush did in 8 years.
I wouldn't say he's done more, the direction just happens to be different.
Also, humour.
(http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3214/2986097317_7f7e613730.jpg?)
-
I will say, I can see a test of his leadership arising pretty soon, you can be sure that at least one radical group are going to see what they can get away with, and I get the feeling they'll have quite a shock at the response.
-
I am very hopeful of the new president. I only pray that he will come through for America when the country really needs it...and that he continues this early trend of Doing The Right Thing Because It's Right, Dammit.
-
Seems to be a smart and level headed sort of guy and I'm very impressed so far. I am waiting for the other shoe to drop but maybe thats just cynical me.
I'm encouraged that Obama seems to have a solid grip on what needs to be done and doing things for the right reasons. See if that holds true.
-
I will say, I can see a test of his leadership arising pretty soon, you can be sure that at least one radical group are going to see what they can get away with, and I get the feeling they'll have quite a shock at the response.
Yeah, he will call his best buddy Jack Bauer.
-
I will say, I can see a test of his leadership arising pretty soon, you can be sure that at least one radical group are going to see what they can get away with, and I get the feeling they'll have quite a shock at the response.
Yeah, he will call his best buddy Jack Bauer.
(http://images.encyclopediadramatica.com/images/8/86/Thatnocat.jpg)
-
I will say, I can see a test of his leadership arising pretty soon, you can be sure that at least one radical group are going to see what they can get away with, and I get the feeling they'll have quite a shock at the response.
From their own people too. Right now most of the world is seeing Obama as a chance for America to stop doing all the **** that has made them so hated by the radicals. IF the radicals start the trouble then like the world mostly sympathised with America after 9/11 he'd probably get backing from the rest of the world for his actions.
And that's the real irony, Bush did have that support from the rest of the world after 9/11 and he pissed it away.
-
I don't think a President elected right after Bush can be worse than Bush, since even our "fellow" americans understood what a mentally ill person he is.
I think Obama has the right ideas, now let's wait if he can put them to good use. In other words, wait for the next crisis :sigh:.
-
I will say, I can see a test of his leadership arising pretty soon, you can be sure that at least one radical group are going to see what they can get away with, and I get the feeling they'll have quite a shock at the response.
Yeah, he will call his best buddy Jack Bauer.
Aww, and there I was ready to comment how impressive I found the first few days of president Palmer, but you just stole my funny. ;)
OT: About damn time.
-
I chatted a while with a person who was almost obsessed by Obama.
Now I understand her.
-
I will say, I can see a test of his leadership arising pretty soon, you can be sure that at least one radical group are going to see what they can get away with, and I get the feeling they'll have quite a shock at the response.
Yeah, he will call his best buddy Jack Bauer.
No comment
-
Personally we cannot really pass any judgment on Obama until he has served for at least 2yrs, by then we will see what plans he has for the country and what bills have been passed on his watch. I don't think his acceptance speech on Tuesday was that inspiring, people know the economy isn't that good so you don't need to bring them down more by talking about how bad it is. And it's not as bad as the 1980's, 1970's or 1930's, so it could be worse. He should have been totally positive and motivating in a way to least for a brief time make people forget what the status of the US economy really is. And really go into what he has planned for America in the next 4 yrs.
-
Well, he's also just told an abortion rally that he has no intention of interfering with private decisions made by families....
http://deseretnews.com/article/1,5143,705279757,00.html
-
Well, he's also just told an abortion rally that he has no intention of interfering with private decisions made by families....
http://deseretnews.com/article/1,5143,705279757,00.html
Wow... I have respect for the guy now
-
I have mixed feelings about all of this....
-
Well, in all honesty, a lot of your views are very Conservative in nature, so that's not too surprising.
For my part, I'm glad he's giving people options back, rather than simply dictating to the populous based on what other people feel is correct, this way people have choice, if they feel abortion is wrong, there is nothing stopping them from refusing to have an abortion, if, however, people don't feel that way, then that option is open to them. That, to me, is as much as part of Freedom as the right to state your opinion about it in the first place.
It's like the argument for Euthanasia, which has flared up again recently in the UK, it's a question of evaluating the reasons why the person wants to do it, and making sure they have assessed every other option before making that decision.
I'm not in favour of Abortion as a Contraceptive, I feel making people aware of other options, such as Condoms or the Pill is important, but then, even those have religious taboos set on them as well, so they catch people coming and going, if you'll pardon the pun, but that does not mean the option should be removed entirely.
-
Sure, everybody gets a choice...except for the one crucial party in the affair. But that can of worms is best left closed here.
I'm taking a very "wait and see" approach with Obama, largely because I voted against the guy in the first place. I was admittedly impressed by his inauguration speech, for what it was worth. I do agree with shutting down Guantanamo, if for no other reason than the fact that it was an utter public-relations fiasco and fundamentally didn't make much sense. What I'm most curious about is whether all his talk of "bringing people together" was so much lip service, or whether he'll make an effort to move beyond partisanship and draw ideas and input from both sides of the aisle. If nothing else, I hope he succeeds for the sake of the country as a whole, because I don't really want to contemplate where things will stand in four years if he fails.
-
I'm taking the wait and see approach and I voted for him. My mom is in the Obama can do no wrong camp, but my dad and I are taking a much more level approach to this whole thing. So far, it looks good, and I'll say that.
As for being less partisan and such, there are groups that I really don't want to be closer to, namely rednecks and evangelicals. Ideally, our differences make us stronger, but I don't see how adding ignorance and willful ignorance to the mix is going to do anything but weaken us.
-
Well, I always bear in mind that Blair was all for 'Change' and 'New Directions' when he started, so I'm not quite counting my Chickens, but it is a promising start.
-
Well, he seems to be wanting to keep defense spending reasonably high, even if it is because of withdrawing from Iraq. For that, I'm fairly happy.
Also I agree with closing Gitmo for all the aforementioned reasons.
-
Well, I always bear in mind that Blair was all for 'Change' and 'New Directions' when he started, so I'm not quite counting my Chickens, but it is a promising start.
Well right from the first moment I became aware of Blair, it was quite obvious that he was a smarmy wanker who had decided whether to join Labour or the Tories based on a coin toss. So either Obama isn't one or is just much better at hiding it than Blair was. :)
-
What I'm most curious about is whether all his talk of "bringing people together" was so much lip service, or whether he'll make an effort to move beyond partisanship and draw ideas and input from both sides of the aisle.
Hm. Well, that depends on whether the Christian Right can actually have the ethical fortitude to follow through with the 'He's the President and he knows what's best and anyone who criticizes him is un-American' mantra they've been parroting for the past eight years.
From what I've seen Obama has been far more willing than Bush or McCain to be inclusive, not exclusive, of people who disagree with his policies but are nonetheless devoted to making the country (and the world) a better place. I honestly believe he's willing to listen to smart people who know their stuff, and not just people who tell him what he wants to hear.
For example, Bush's administration edited scientific conclusions made by the EPA because, politically, they disagreed with them. I don't see Obama debating the 'truthiness' of any consensus just because he personally doesn't like the result.
-
What I'm most curious about is whether all his talk of "bringing people together" was so much lip service, or whether he'll make an effort to move beyond partisanship and draw ideas and input from both sides of the aisle. If nothing else, I hope he succeeds for the sake of the country as a whole, because I don't really want to contemplate where things will stand in four years if he fails.
These two sentences are more or less complementary, because the latter demonstrates the former will be true. Obama has a luxury that no President since FDR has had; no one can afford for him to fail.
-
Heh tell that to the zealot talking heads, their partisanship still has them hoping he does an awful job :P Apparently they are still too shortsighted to realize we are past the point were we can afford for him to do a **** job.
-
As in Rush "I hope he fails" Limbaugh?
-
I hope he does a good job, I will not like some of the things he does though. But something I do want to see is the media to stop kissing his butt on both cheeks. "He's called a politician, hello...." :p
-
I think it's more a case of relief than anything else at the moment, wait until that rosy glow wears off and then see what they are saying ;)
-
And it's not as bad as the 1980's, 1970's or 1930's, so it could be worse.
I must have missed all of the economists saying this is the worst thing to happen economically since the great depression........
-
I didn't vote for him. I didn't vote for anyone actually. I just don't care.
'Some men just want to watch the world burn.'
That'd be me. Politics is nothing more than one giant spectator sport to me. And damn is it entertaining at times. Obama will undoubtedly be a better leader, but I doubt he'll provide much comedy. Bush was a gold mine for laughs.
-
(I think) on the last day of Bush being in office, Today Tonight had a short section showing various "Bushisms". :lol: "The Internets", indeed!
-
I didn't vote for him. I didn't vote for anyone actually. I just don't care.
'Some men just want to watch the world burn.'
That'd be me. Politics is nothing more than one giant spectator sport to me. And damn is it entertaining at times. Obama will undoubtedly be a better leader, but I doubt he'll provide much comedy. Bush was a gold mine for laughs.
Your apathy is so edgy and cool.
-
Yes, close gitmo. Then what happens to the next POW camp that happens to get in the news? POW camps never put a good taste in anyones mouths. But, i only see this as a temporary measure until america just starts utilizing the next POW camp for normal operations that used to happen at gitmo.
You'd have to do a better job at making sure information about POW camps doesn't get out to the media in the future, or this could possibly start a slow and systematic POW camp shutdown. You need to have a place to put your POW's. They can't just go no where. America's POW camps are in the news and scrutinized, what about other countries POW camps and similar? I guess this is what happens when you put a face on something that didn't need a face in the first place.
-
Yes, close gitmo. Then what happens to the next POW camp that happens to get in the news? POW camps never put a good taste in anyones mouths. But, i only see this as a temporary measure until america just starts utilizing the next POW camp for normal operations that used to happen at gitmo.
You'd have to do a better job at making sure information about POW camps doesn't get out to the media in the future, or this could possibly start a slow and systematic POW camp shutdown. You need to have a place to put your POW's. They can't just go no where. America's POW camps are in the news and scrutinized, what about other countries POW camps and similar? I guess this is what happens when you put a face on something that didn't need a face in the first place.
Or, y'know, we could not have detainment centers to hold people illegally.
At all.
As a matter of fact, other rendition centers ARE being shut down. And it's a damn good thing.
-
Gitmo wasn't a POW camp. It was a prison for 'enemy combatants.' Since we aren't fighting a war against a nation, people we capture aren't technically POWs, allowing the US to get around that pesky Geneva Convention and do all the horrible stuff it wants. :blah:
-
Exactly. The problem with Gitmo was that it wasn't a POW camp. Had it been one it wouldn't have been the complete disgrace that it was to America. Instead Bush's government invented a whole new class of people that weren't military and weren't civilian in order to avoid the rules surrounding the treatment of either.
Don't ever try to pass off Gitmo as a POW camp. It only proves that you weren't paying attention.
-
Instead Bush's government invented a whole new class of people that weren't military and weren't civilian in order to avoid the rules surrounding the treatment of either.
They didn't really invent them so much as attempt to codify them in a way favorable to the adminstration. The existing rules for such people favor simply shooting them out of hand. This is not a desireable outcome from anyone's point of view. However, such rules also implicitly assume they are spies, which is clearly not the case.
-
Too much cult of personality. My natural skepticism kicks in and big red flags raise when there are so many people 'enchanted' by somebody.. before he had even done anything or was elected or inaugurated.
What really raises red flags is when he puts himself in the rafters with lincoln, or FDR, or JFK, or superman.
Too much cult of personality...
-
Too much cult of personality. My natural skepticism kicks in and big red flags raise when there are so many people 'enchanted' by somebody.. before he had even done anything or was elected or inaugurated.
What really raises red flags is when he puts himself in the rafters with lincoln, or FDR, or JFK, or superman.
Too much cult of personality...
Well, it's not like you can compare him to Hitler and somehow envisage Obama is going to **** the world up (even more) by using his charisma, power, and mind to wage some kind of impossible war against the rest of the world. IMO his proving ground (or finest hour if you will) will his handling of the economy
-
... horrible stuff ...
This (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mass_graves_in_Iraq) is (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chechnya_mass_graves) horrible (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mass_graves_in_the_Soviet_Union).
Gitmo isn't politically correct, but it sure as hell ain't horrible.
-
Gitmo wasn't a POW camp. It was a prison for 'enemy combatants.' Since we aren't fighting a war against a nation, people we capture aren't technically POWs, allowing the US to get around that pesky Geneva Convention and do all the horrible stuff it wants. :blah:
Hmmm, yeah you're right. My country totally gets around the geneva convention just as much as saddam did.
-
Hmmm, yeah you're right. My country totally gets around the geneva convention just as much as saddam did.
So basically, you're of the opinion that Saddam pretty ok in the end? Then why invade him in the first place? In case you didn't know, you never come off well when you compare yourself to the bad guy and say "He did it too", because what you just did is show everyone just how bad you really are yourself. Oh, and when are you going to hang Bush for what he did? That's what they did to Saddam, after all.
-
... horrible stuff ...
This (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mass_graves_in_Iraq) is (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chechnya_mass_graves) horrible (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mass_graves_in_the_Soviet_Union).
Gitmo isn't politically correct, but it sure as hell ain't horrible.
Tell you what. Let's waterboard you for 7 years and see if you still have the same opinion. :p
-
... horrible stuff ...
This (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mass_graves_in_Iraq) is (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chechnya_mass_graves) horrible (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mass_graves_in_the_Soviet_Union).
Gitmo isn't politically correct, but it sure as hell ain't horrible.
Tell you what. Let's waterboard you for 7 years and see if you still have the same opinion. :p
Seriously.
The damage inherent in what they did in Gitmo is certainly horrible.
A number of citizens in the US volunteered to be waterboarded as part of an experiment. Most of them reported afterward that they would prefer to die than to go through that again.
-
Well, everyone in the US Special Forces was waterboarded, as part of survival training. Hell, the US even took the methods used in Gitmo from USSF boot camp.
Also- where did you read that the Gitmo inmates were waterboarded for 7 years?
-
Well, everyone in the US Special Forces was waterboarded, as part of survival training. Hell, the US even took the methods used in Gitmo from USSF boot camp.
Also- where did you read that the Gitmo inmates were waterboarded for 7 years?
Do you know what the washout rate in Special Forces training is?
As a matter of fact, waterboard training for Special Forces was (at one point) discontinued (http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/10/04/AR2006100402005.html) because it was so effective it hurt morale.
(Plus, they've already been self-selected for mental toughness, so those are already the people most likely to endure it.)
A strong article on the subject, including the author's post-traumatic reactions to a relatively mild experience of waterboarding. (http://www.vanityfair.com/politics/features/2008/08/hitchens200808?currentPage=2)
Being waterboarded once is enough. Victims suffer long-term depression, panic attacks, and PTSD, which are among the most horrendous conditions that can be visited upon a human being. Some waterboarding victims panic and gasp for breath every time it so much as rains -- along with tachycardia and all the physical responses of a body preparing itself for death.
These are not experiences that most people can survive intact. What's more, we as a nation shouldn't have to stoop that low. We're better than terrorists.
-
Well, everyone in the US Special Forces was waterboarded, as part of survival training. Hell, the US even took the methods used in Gitmo from USSF boot camp.
Also- where did you read that the Gitmo inmates were waterboarded for 7 years?
Do you know what the washout rate in Special Forces training is?
As a matter of fact, waterboard training for Special Forces was (at one point) discontinued (http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/10/04/AR2006100402005.html) because it was so effective it hurt morale.
(Plus, they've already been self-selected for mental toughness, so those are already the people most likely to endure it.)
Being waterboarded once is enough. Victims suffer long-term depression, panic attacks, and PTSD, which are among the most horrendous conditions that can be visited upon a human being. Some waterboarding victims panic and gasp for breath every time it so much as rains -- along with tachycardia and all the physical responses of a body preparing itself for death.
These are not experiences that most people can survive intact. What's more, we as a nation shouldn't have to stoop that low. We're better than terrorists.
Death suddenly seems like a far more attractive prospect to capture. I'd rather go down fighting or fly my plane into a troop position or enemy asset over being drowned with a hood over my head strapped to a board or being forced to stand for in excess of 40 hours or any of that crazy ****.
And seriously, What the hell!? http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Survival,_Evasion,_Resistance_and_Escape#1995_U.S._Air_Force_Academy_scandal
Sexual Assault as part of SERE training?
-
Well, everyone in the US Special Forces was waterboarded, as part of survival training. Hell, the US even took the methods used in Gitmo from USSF boot camp.
So? Since when do criminal civilians/POW's deserve to get US SpecOps training?
-
I should point out that Obama has signed a separate order that specifically bans (http://www.whitehouse.gov/the_press_office/EnsuringLawfulInterrogations/) torture and coercive interrogation methods. All US agents are now required to follow the interrogation procedures described in the Army Field Manual. So a lot of this stuff is going away even before Gitmo and the other CIA prisons are shut down.
-
Your apathy is so edgy and cool.
I know you'll find this hard to believe, but I don't think that way to be 'cool'. I think that way because I honestly don't give a crap.
-
I should point out that Obama has signed a separate order that specifically bans (http://www.whitehouse.gov/the_press_office/EnsuringLawfulInterrogations/) torture and coercive interrogation methods. All US agents are now required to follow the interrogation procedures described in the Army Field Manual. So a lot of this stuff is going away even before Gitmo and the other CIA prisons are shut down.
woot
-
Well, he also overturned that ****in ban on funding clinics overseas that happen to do abortions. :]
-
Well, he also overturned that ****in ban on funding clinics overseas that happen to do abortions. :]
That was pleasing.
-
Hopefully enough of those clinics survived the last seven years...
-
Obama's biggest political impacts are going to be in funding and political manipulation of science. Removing the bull**** political barriers on research, enforcement of scientific findings, aid, and medical intervention will go a long way toward making the world as a whole a better place.
-
Agreed, so long as he can also make sure that at the same time he reduces the power of mega-corps to exploit that research for profit rather than for healing. Obviously, they can't go without making any money at all, but, like most large corporations, they need some degree of a leash put on them.
-
They arguably need to be under more control than some other mega-corps, seeing as they directly impact our standard of living and such.
This made me giggle, though. (http://politicalwire.com/archives/2009/01/23/bonus_quote_of_the_day.html)
-
Gitmo memorabilia. Authentic jump suits. extraordinary rendition orders, water boards! Available on ebay now.
-
Well, everyone in the US Special Forces was waterboarded, as part of survival training. Hell, the US even took the methods used in Gitmo from USSF boot camp.
Also- where did you read that the Gitmo inmates were waterboarded for 7 years?
yeeeeeees
there's absolutely no difference between being shown what kind of physical torture you could be subjected to and then torturing other people with it
Ladies and gentlemen, BengalTiger
-
Well, everyone in the US Special Forces was waterboarded, as part of survival training. Hell, the US even took the methods used in Gitmo from USSF boot camp.
Also- where did you read that the Gitmo inmates were waterboarded for 7 years?
yeeeeeees
there's absolutely no difference between being shown what kind of physical torture you could be subjected to and then torturing other people with it
Ladies and gentlemen, BengalTiger
oh and by the way voluntary service and being held as captive, pretty much the same thing
"i got spanked in my S/M sessions i don't understand how me spanking you every now and then for a few years while you are held captive could be different"
-
The people held captive in Gitmo knew that death or serious injury could occur when you play war with the USMC.
In other words- if you sign up for an SM session, bear in mind you could get spanked, and if you do, I won't feel really bad about it.
If anyone spanks you for no good reason, I will feel bad for you.
If anyone spanks you for no good reason, I won't feel really bad for them if you spank them back.
If you kill them for spanking you, I will feel bad for them, hence my position on Gitmo being far less evil than mass executions and burying bodies in a roadside ditch (which is truly horrible).
You feel bad for someone getting spanked on an SM session.*
You also feel bad for the spankers when the spankees (is that even a word?) spank them back, no matter if the spankees were spanked for a good reason or not.*
You also want to ban spanking back, no matter what the case, right?*
*-Correct me if I'm wrong, or we'll never reach a consensus.
BTW- why did we go from politics to spanking?
-
Uh, seriously, what the hell.
But, uhm. See, we're supposed to be the morally superior ones, right? We're bringing freedom to the poor muzzie dogs in the world, right?
So how does them doing low **** make it okay for us to?
-
Not to mention that many of the people in Gitmo were handed over for rewards, many on only the accusation of the person who was collecting the reward (who is, of course, going to be totally non-self motivated and didn't do it for the cash in the slightest).
-
The people held captive in Gitmo knew that death or serious injury could occur when you play war with the USMC.
You're kidding me right? Are you even the slightest bit aware that one of the people who was released from Gitmo after more than two years was "captured" from an Afghani jail cell where he was being held on charges of spying for the Americans?
No of course you aren't. You seem to believe the world is divided into the good guys and the bad guys. And you seem to have the delusional belief that you can put America on the good guy list even when they torture people who probably aren't even guilty and simply happened to be in the wrong place at the wrong time with a big dollar sign over their head.
-
The people held captive in Gitmo knew that death or serious injury could occur when you play war with the USMC.
You're kidding me right? Are you even the slightest bit aware that one of the people who was released from Gitmo after more than two years was "captured" from an Afghani jail cell where he was being held on charges of spying for the Americans?
No of course you aren't. You seem to believe the world is divided into the good guys and the bad guys. And you seem to have the delusional belief that you can put America on the good guy list even when they torture people who probably aren't even guilty and simply happened to be in the wrong place at the wrong time with a big dollar sign over their head.
You beat me to it.
-
Seriously, BengalTiger. In a lot of cases other people signed these folks up for their S/M sessions. Or they were grabbed off international flights for no particular reason -- they were wearing a suspicious watch, for instance.
-
Also, the fact that they weren't parted of any nation's armed forces and WEREN'T GIVEN TRIALS is kind of significant.
-
The people held captive in Gitmo knew that death or serious injury could occur when you play war with the USMC.
lol.
I love people who think that Marines are somehow the ultimate in ground troops. Glorified grunts who are stationed on boats is all they are. Get your head out of your ass.
-
The people held captive in Gitmo knew that death or serious injury could occur when you play war with the USMC.
lol.
I love people who think that Marines are somehow the ultimate in ground troops. Glorified grunts who are stationed on boats is all they are. Get you head out of your ass.
Don't troll. This is a very mature forum -- respect and consideration are valued here, even in political debates.
-
Don't troll. This is a very mature forum -- respect and consideration are valued here, even in political debates.
:lol:
Uh, seriously, what the hell.
But, uhm. See, we're supposed to be the morally superior ones, right? We're bringing freedom to the poor muzzie dogs in the world, right?
So how does them doing low **** make it okay for us to?
Because moral superiority has always been used to justify horrible actions.
-
Believe it or not, our political debates are actually much classier than those at most forums.
-
Uh, seriously, what the hell.
But, uhm. See, we're supposed to be the morally superior ones, right? We're bringing freedom to the poor muzzie dogs in the world, right?
So how does them doing low **** make it okay for us to?
Because moral superiority has always been used to justify horrible actions.
No, I get that that's bull****. Just pointing out that if we're going to justify ourselves that way, we can't *also* justify ourselves with "well they're doing it too!!"
-
Alright folks...starting to sense the tensions rising. Lets take it down a notch. Please and thank you.
-
The people held captive in Gitmo knew that death or serious injury could occur when you play war with the USMC.
lol.
I love people who think that Marines are somehow the ultimate in ground troops. Glorified grunts who are stationed on boats is all they are. Get you head out of your ass.
Yeah, because volunteering to die for your country makes you a "glorified grunt who is stationed on a boat." Nor does the original poster say they are "the ultimate in ground troops." He says that death or serious injury could occur when you tangle with marines, which is pretty much a fair description of any army.
Get your head out of your ass.
EDIT: Sorry, tough day.
-
I love people who think that Marines are somehow the ultimate in ground troops. Glorified grunts who are stationed on boats is all they are. Get you head out of your ass.
I have to take exception with this, despite the trolling, because, well, crap, this a subject I actually have a clue about.
Back in '91, in the first round of the Great Quest To Get Rid of Saddam (you know the one, it had the limited aims), the USMC was assigned to stiffen the Gulf States forces that were going to take the direct route through Iraqi defenses to Kuwait City. This was a classically Marine role, mind you; they are in equippage, training, and mentality assault troops. In this role, they performed well by any objective standard, but they were greatly outshone by the Army. They had a more difficult task, true, but the Marines were not happy with their performance in Gulf One.
They consequently devoted a great deal of time and energy to improving themselves, particularly their training, whereas the Army more or less rested on its laurels. The results of this were demonstrated fairly clearly in Afghanistan. The 10th Mountain dropped the ball at Tora Bora. The Airborne were not up to their performances in Gulf One. The Marines exceeded all expectations. It was not an accident that a Marine was given the leadership of the Joint Chiefs shortly after. The Marines made a similar impressive record in Gulf Two and the continuing efforts to return Iraq to a semi-peaceful state. The only other service that has done nearly so well in terms of accomplishing their missions is the Navy, and this is a direct reflection of the fact they accomplished the primary naval mission, to secure the use of the sea-lanes, during the Second World War and haven't been seriously challenged since.
-
Noodle, try living and working with Marines every day and have your same opinion then.
-
In my experience, living with Marines *sucks.*
-
In my experience, living with Marines *sucks.*
aren't you in highschool
-
The people held captive in Gitmo knew that death or serious injury could occur when you play war with the USMC.
You're not serious
you cannot possibly be serious
look at how dumb you are
In other words- if you sign up for an SM session, bear in mind you could get spanked, and if you do, I won't feel really bad about it.
you miss the point entirely
the point is that i sign up for spanking and that makes it ok to **** you with a strap-on dildo as well because __
If anyone spanks you for no good reason, I will feel bad for you.
If anyone spanks you for no good reason, I won't feel really bad for them if you spank them back.
race to the bottom, right here
If you kill them for spanking you, I will feel bad for them, hence my position on Gitmo being far less evil than mass executions and burying bodies in a roadside ditch (which is truly horrible).
What on Earth makes you think that those are the only choices
Jesus Christ.
"Not randomly interning and waterboarding possibly innocent people? WELL IT'S BETTER THAN MASS GRAVES."
You feel bad for someone getting spanked on an SM session.*
of course not
the point is the term "consent"
you know that one
You also feel bad for the spankers when the spankees (is that even a word?) spank them back, no matter if the spankees were spanked for a good reason or not.*
You also want to ban spanking back, no matter what the case, right?*
No I do not and you would do much better if you actually looked at the arguments and didn't try to wash them off with ridiculous amounts of logical fallacies
BTW- why did we go from politics to spanking?[/color]
Because you cannot grasp a goddamn metaphor, that's why
Let's reiterate: being held as POW is ok. They are granted all kinds of protections. That's quite normal.
Being held in custody while trial is on because you are suspected of certain crime? Yes, that is also ok.
Still with me? Right?
Ok, follow this line:
Being held indefinitely without a trial while subjected to waterboarding and stuff while being quite possibly innocent and denied the very rights given to prisoners because one is not POW nor a normal captive?
OK or not?
-
It's not that it's okay, there's nothing really stopping them. In the eyes of people in the US whose opinion matters, each and every one of those men is as big a threat to the nation as the one next to them.
So using this logic, we can assume the same value is given to all these men, however these values are all negative and harmful. So you treat them as such, the complete opposite to innocent until proven guilty. You can draw an analogy between this and your Goody-Goody guy who walks home from work, and gets mugged by a few guys who take his wallet and break his ribs. That's going to absolutely shatter his confidence, so he's going to close up like a clam and take insanely OTT methods to ensure it doesn't happen again. The US got hit hard and unexpectedly (assuming 9/11 wasn't a coverup........don't start), this scared the Joint Chiefs of Staff, secretary of state, and everyone else with confidence issues and everyone else who sits at huge desks giving orders to people who sit at smaller desks. So the culmination of this is a country that won't take any chances, also has their priorities wrong *cough* IRAQ! *cough* (actually that was really just Bush and cheney), and is supposedly all-over anything that wears a rag on it's head (apologies to any Muslims here, just my laymans terms).
I have no gripes with Americans, I'm just trying to see it from a very particular part of the US Government's view, carefully ommitting anythign to do with oil etc
-
So I understand that if someone says A is less evil than B, he or she means that A is good and supports A?
I never wrote I support tortures, be it waterboarding, a breaking wheel or an iron maiden. I also never wrote I support capturing "random innocent" (which BTW is untrue in many cases, as many people have been sent from Gitmo to trial in their country and then to prison, some returned to terrorism, one of which killed 7 people in a suicide bombing after he was released) and holding them "with no rights" (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Habeas_corpus) yet everyone tries to prove I do.
Also- I've notice that if someone doesn't have anything creative to write, they just offend the person they're talking with to prove superiority (http://www.positivt.dk/images27/0065.jpg), in some cases without really reading what I write, which makes it kinda hard to continue the debate.
P.S.- Since I've learned that there were people cought for wearing a watch, something to read (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Casio_F91W). And I'd like to ask what are the CIA smoking, if they think that just a watch is a reason for a trip to Gitmo (in other words- they should get spanked, multiple times)...
Claiming people wearing a watch that makes a good detonator are terrorists is like claiming people who own guns are murderers.
-
So I understand that if someone says A is less evil than B, he or she means that A is good and supports A?
Ummmm.
Gitmo isn't politically correct, but it sure as hell ain't horrible.
Do I really need to explain any further? You claimed it simply wasn't politically correct. You gave no indication you didn't support it and then went on to act as if waterboarding is nothing that shouldn't have been done there. You then ended with a comment about how everyone in Gitmo should have known not to mess with the US.
And then you want us to cry tears about how we all got you all wrong? :lol:
-
Mmm. Nothing compares to the toasty-warm literary napalm that are this forum's political discussions.
-
Heh, well, everyone on this Forum seems to have a very short Fuse with regards to Dogma. The minute someone types something that sounds like a Fox News script, it tends to kick off ;)
-
Heh, well, everyone on this Forum seems to have a very short Fuse with regards to Dogma. The minute someone types something that sounds like a Fox News script, it tends to kick off ;)
Well, no one likes fox news anyway :lol:
-
So I understand that if someone says A is less evil than B, he or she means that A is good and supports A?
I never wrote I support tortures, be it waterboarding, a breaking wheel or an iron maiden. I also never wrote I support capturing "random innocent" (which BTW is untrue in many cases, as many people have been sent from Gitmo to trial in their country and then to prison, some returned to terrorism, one of which killed 7 people in a suicide bombing after he was released) and holding them "with no rights" (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Habeas_corpus) yet everyone tries to prove I do.
Oh the comparison to mass graves was just an accident? You absolutely did not try to draw a parallel between mass graves and Gitmo? Especially with the political correctness thing? I think I had problems trying to parse the following part:
... horrible stuff ...
This (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mass_graves_in_Iraq) is (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chechnya_mass_graves) horrible (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mass_graves_in_the_Soviet_Union).
Gitmo isn't politically correct, but it sure as hell ain't horrible.
Also- I've notice that if someone doesn't have anything creative to write, they just offend the person they're talking with to prove superiority (http://www.positivt.dk/images27/0065.jpg), in some cases without really reading what I write, which makes it kinda hard to continue the debate.
I am sorry I read your text as being unable to differentiate between consensual and non-consensual acts of physical violence:
Well, everyone in the US Special Forces was waterboarded, as part of survival training. Hell, the US even took the methods used in Gitmo from USSF boot camp.
Also- where did you read that the Gitmo inmates were waterboarded for 7 years?
[color=orange
P.S.- Since I've learned that there were people cought for wearing a watch, something to read (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Casio_F91W). And I'd like to ask what are the CIA smoking, if they think that just a watch is a reason for a trip to Gitmo (in other words- they should get spanked, multiple times)...
Claiming people wearing a watch that makes a good detonator are terrorists is like claiming people who own guns are murderers.[/color]
I am sorry I thought you tried to generalize people in Gitmo as being definitely criminals, after all, I have some problems trying to pick out the condemnation in phrases like this:
The people held captive in Gitmo knew that death or serious injury could occur when you play war with the USMC.
[metaphor stuff removed]
Truly sorry for the misunderstanding!
also why only USMC?