D
djw
Guest
On 26 Mar 2007 20:31:26 -0700, "American Jesus" <zz99z@netscape.net>
wrote:
>On Mar 26, 10:11 pm, djw <wells.fam...@insightbb.com> wrote:
>> On 26 Mar 2007 16:43:19 -0700, "American Jesus" <z...@netscape.net>
>> wrote:
>>
>>
>>
>> >On Mar 25, 9:24 am, djw <wells.fam...@insightbb.com> wrote:
>> >> On Sat, 24 Mar 2007 20:23:44 -0600, timeOday
>>
>> >> <timeOday-UNS...@theknack.net> wrote:
>> >> >djw wrote:
>> >> >> On Sat, 24 Mar 2007 12:19:44 -0600, timeOday
>> >> >> <timeOday-UNS...@theknack.net> wrote:
>>
>> >> >>> Torture, never!
>>
>> >> >>> Just waterboarding, sexual degradation, stress positions, attack dogs,
>> >> >>> and sleep deprivation.
>>
>> >> >>> But you approve of all those tactics, right?
>>
>> >> >> Stress techniques are not torture. Stress techniques aim at
>> >> >> psychological fear short of actual physical suffering. They say
>> >> >> waterboarding is as close as it gets though and could arguably be a
>> >> >> form of torture.
>>
>> >> >> The only reason why we began to consider using them in the WOT
>> >> >> (post-9/11) is because Islamists had shown they know Western
>> >> >> governments won't torture you because of observation of the Geneva
>> >> >> Convention as well as a general regard for silly notions of human
>> >> >> rights, both of which Islamists do not recognize. So you can avoid
>> >> >> cooperation with no fear. And since al Qaeda DOES use torture as
>> >> >> evidenced in their captured training manual you have much more to fear
>> >> >> from your own organization than the enemy.
>>
>> >> >> With possibly thousands of lives at stake it seemed we should consider
>> >> >> approaching the line, but not crossing over to torture. Not enough to
>> >> >> hurt but enough to scare and make them think their interrogator might
>> >> >> be crazy to go all the way. And in so doing extract information which
>> >> >> could save many lives.
>>
>> >> >> Also the GCs don't even cover non-uniformed, enemy combatants that
>> >> >> serve no government and operate across many sovereignties.
>>
>> >> >> But you seem to be confusing legitimate stress techniques with the
>> >> >> shennanigans at Abu Graib where people were court martialed for
>> >> >> abusing the prisoners.
>>
>> >> >> Even so barking dogs, sexual degradation or fooling some poor schmuck
>> >> >> into thinking you have live electrical wires attached to him isn't
>> >> >> like breaking bones, removing fingernails and fingers and burning with
>> >> >> lit cigarettes to name a few. All of the latter of which are in the
>> >> >> al Qaeda training manual, were used by Hussein's thugs and are likely
>> >> >> used throughout most if not all of the Islamic controlled nations.
>>
>> >> >So does Iran have your go-ahead to waterboard the Brits or not?
>>
>> >> Those guys were uniformed soldiers representative of Britain and they
>> >> were not carrying out terror attacks (unlike Iranian backed
>> >> Hezbollah). Sothey're covered by the Geneva convention.
>>
>> >Excuse me. The people we tortured and murdered were not part of
>> >Hezbollah.
>>
>> The abuses at Abu Graib were prosecuted. People are doing serious
>> time over those abuses. That's not we. I don't approve of that but I
>> do approve of their conviction and incarceration.
>>
>> >The CIA said that about 90% of the people there had
>> >nothing to do with Saddam or any insurgency or terrorism. The US
>> >tortured and murdered innocent people.
>>
>> No some dumbshit hooligans did. And they went to jail for it.
>>
>
>As I recall many rightwing radio and TV show hosts tried to justify
>it. In fact the Red Cross told the Bush admin they were concerned
>about these issues several months before the infamous photos emerged.
are you arguing with me or are arguing with some on the right?
>Only then did Bush denounce it.
How could he denounce it before he saw it? I know you hate Bush and
all but he hadn't been monitoring Iraqi jails that closely I'm sure.
Only liberals moan and simper about the treatment of the enemy but
care about their own soldiers only as a weapon against their political
enemies.
>Furthermore, it wasn't a few
>hooligans who did it, rather it was systemic, and ordered. There were
>rules for things such as how long a person could be left hanging by
>their arms or whatever, or subjected to cold temperatures. That is
>not a sign of only a few hooligans.
>
Per Wikipedia:
Brig. General Janis Karpinski, commanding officer at the prison was
demoted to colonel on May 5, 2005, which also effectively ends her
chances for future career advancement. In a BBC interview, Janis
Karpinski said she is being made a scapegoat, and that the top U.S.
commander for Iraq, Gen Ricardo Sanchez, should be asked what he knew
about the abuse, as according to her, he said that prisoners are "like
dogs".[33] However, a spokesman for Geoffrey Miller, who commanded the
Guantanamo camp and now commands Abu Ghraib, called Karpinski's
allegations "categorically false", and said no directive to treat
detainees "like dogs" was made at either Guantanamo or Abu Ghraib.[34]
It also says Donald Rumself made statements taking full responsibility
but only because it happened on his watch. He offered his resignation
to Bush twice over it.
>
>>
>>
>> >> But at any rate, The Islamic Republic of Iran is a signatory of the
>> >> Geneva Conventions so if they have any shred of dignity left they will
>> >> need to abide by that agreement.
>>
>> >Shred of dignity? Is that a ****ing joke? The US no longer has moral
>> >authority after Abu Ghraib.
>>
>> You're just looking for an excuse to equate us with a thuggish
>> Islamist police state. Why don't you go live there for awhile.
>>
>
>I've already lived in a shithole 3rd world country, thank you very
>much. One with Muslims, too. Our difference is one of subject and
>understanding. I think the US is better, but that doesn't justify
>what our soldiers did. Don't play games and pretend the right didn't
>try to justify torture.
>
Some did. You don't see me defending them and I haven't advocated
torture in this thread, have I?
>> >The last time Iranians captured soldiers
>> >they took care of them and then let them go. What does the US do?
>> >Torture and murder.
>>
>> Captured? You mean kidnapped and this time is no different. They're
>> not even hiding it. The UK has proof those guys are innocent but the
>> Islamic fascists couldn't give a **** how obvious it is. They've
>> practically admitted having made comments about capturing some nice
>> blue-eyed boys.
>>
>
>Yes, sure, "kidnapped". I feel confident the british sailors wil be
>returned in good health.
You trust an Islamist police state but savage your own country's
military for the rogue misuse of stress techniques in one instance we
know of.
>What is that blue-eyed comment about? A
>hint of racism?
>
Yes I'm a racist. I have brown eyes (and they're rolling upward right
now) This is what I was referring to:
http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/world/middle_east/article1530527.ece
In an article in Subhi Sadek, the Revolutionary Guard
wrote:
>On Mar 26, 10:11 pm, djw <wells.fam...@insightbb.com> wrote:
>> On 26 Mar 2007 16:43:19 -0700, "American Jesus" <z...@netscape.net>
>> wrote:
>>
>>
>>
>> >On Mar 25, 9:24 am, djw <wells.fam...@insightbb.com> wrote:
>> >> On Sat, 24 Mar 2007 20:23:44 -0600, timeOday
>>
>> >> <timeOday-UNS...@theknack.net> wrote:
>> >> >djw wrote:
>> >> >> On Sat, 24 Mar 2007 12:19:44 -0600, timeOday
>> >> >> <timeOday-UNS...@theknack.net> wrote:
>>
>> >> >>> Torture, never!
>>
>> >> >>> Just waterboarding, sexual degradation, stress positions, attack dogs,
>> >> >>> and sleep deprivation.
>>
>> >> >>> But you approve of all those tactics, right?
>>
>> >> >> Stress techniques are not torture. Stress techniques aim at
>> >> >> psychological fear short of actual physical suffering. They say
>> >> >> waterboarding is as close as it gets though and could arguably be a
>> >> >> form of torture.
>>
>> >> >> The only reason why we began to consider using them in the WOT
>> >> >> (post-9/11) is because Islamists had shown they know Western
>> >> >> governments won't torture you because of observation of the Geneva
>> >> >> Convention as well as a general regard for silly notions of human
>> >> >> rights, both of which Islamists do not recognize. So you can avoid
>> >> >> cooperation with no fear. And since al Qaeda DOES use torture as
>> >> >> evidenced in their captured training manual you have much more to fear
>> >> >> from your own organization than the enemy.
>>
>> >> >> With possibly thousands of lives at stake it seemed we should consider
>> >> >> approaching the line, but not crossing over to torture. Not enough to
>> >> >> hurt but enough to scare and make them think their interrogator might
>> >> >> be crazy to go all the way. And in so doing extract information which
>> >> >> could save many lives.
>>
>> >> >> Also the GCs don't even cover non-uniformed, enemy combatants that
>> >> >> serve no government and operate across many sovereignties.
>>
>> >> >> But you seem to be confusing legitimate stress techniques with the
>> >> >> shennanigans at Abu Graib where people were court martialed for
>> >> >> abusing the prisoners.
>>
>> >> >> Even so barking dogs, sexual degradation or fooling some poor schmuck
>> >> >> into thinking you have live electrical wires attached to him isn't
>> >> >> like breaking bones, removing fingernails and fingers and burning with
>> >> >> lit cigarettes to name a few. All of the latter of which are in the
>> >> >> al Qaeda training manual, were used by Hussein's thugs and are likely
>> >> >> used throughout most if not all of the Islamic controlled nations.
>>
>> >> >So does Iran have your go-ahead to waterboard the Brits or not?
>>
>> >> Those guys were uniformed soldiers representative of Britain and they
>> >> were not carrying out terror attacks (unlike Iranian backed
>> >> Hezbollah). Sothey're covered by the Geneva convention.
>>
>> >Excuse me. The people we tortured and murdered were not part of
>> >Hezbollah.
>>
>> The abuses at Abu Graib were prosecuted. People are doing serious
>> time over those abuses. That's not we. I don't approve of that but I
>> do approve of their conviction and incarceration.
>>
>> >The CIA said that about 90% of the people there had
>> >nothing to do with Saddam or any insurgency or terrorism. The US
>> >tortured and murdered innocent people.
>>
>> No some dumbshit hooligans did. And they went to jail for it.
>>
>
>As I recall many rightwing radio and TV show hosts tried to justify
>it. In fact the Red Cross told the Bush admin they were concerned
>about these issues several months before the infamous photos emerged.
are you arguing with me or are arguing with some on the right?
>Only then did Bush denounce it.
How could he denounce it before he saw it? I know you hate Bush and
all but he hadn't been monitoring Iraqi jails that closely I'm sure.
Only liberals moan and simper about the treatment of the enemy but
care about their own soldiers only as a weapon against their political
enemies.
>Furthermore, it wasn't a few
>hooligans who did it, rather it was systemic, and ordered. There were
>rules for things such as how long a person could be left hanging by
>their arms or whatever, or subjected to cold temperatures. That is
>not a sign of only a few hooligans.
>
Per Wikipedia:
Brig. General Janis Karpinski, commanding officer at the prison was
demoted to colonel on May 5, 2005, which also effectively ends her
chances for future career advancement. In a BBC interview, Janis
Karpinski said she is being made a scapegoat, and that the top U.S.
commander for Iraq, Gen Ricardo Sanchez, should be asked what he knew
about the abuse, as according to her, he said that prisoners are "like
dogs".[33] However, a spokesman for Geoffrey Miller, who commanded the
Guantanamo camp and now commands Abu Ghraib, called Karpinski's
allegations "categorically false", and said no directive to treat
detainees "like dogs" was made at either Guantanamo or Abu Ghraib.[34]
It also says Donald Rumself made statements taking full responsibility
but only because it happened on his watch. He offered his resignation
to Bush twice over it.
>
>>
>>
>> >> But at any rate, The Islamic Republic of Iran is a signatory of the
>> >> Geneva Conventions so if they have any shred of dignity left they will
>> >> need to abide by that agreement.
>>
>> >Shred of dignity? Is that a ****ing joke? The US no longer has moral
>> >authority after Abu Ghraib.
>>
>> You're just looking for an excuse to equate us with a thuggish
>> Islamist police state. Why don't you go live there for awhile.
>>
>
>I've already lived in a shithole 3rd world country, thank you very
>much. One with Muslims, too. Our difference is one of subject and
>understanding. I think the US is better, but that doesn't justify
>what our soldiers did. Don't play games and pretend the right didn't
>try to justify torture.
>
Some did. You don't see me defending them and I haven't advocated
torture in this thread, have I?
>> >The last time Iranians captured soldiers
>> >they took care of them and then let them go. What does the US do?
>> >Torture and murder.
>>
>> Captured? You mean kidnapped and this time is no different. They're
>> not even hiding it. The UK has proof those guys are innocent but the
>> Islamic fascists couldn't give a **** how obvious it is. They've
>> practically admitted having made comments about capturing some nice
>> blue-eyed boys.
>>
>
>Yes, sure, "kidnapped". I feel confident the british sailors wil be
>returned in good health.
You trust an Islamist police state but savage your own country's
military for the rogue misuse of stress techniques in one instance we
know of.
>What is that blue-eyed comment about? A
>hint of racism?
>
Yes I'm a racist. I have brown eyes (and they're rolling upward right
now) This is what I was referring to:
http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/world/middle_east/article1530527.ece
In an article in Subhi Sadek, the Revolutionary Guard
