IS AMERICA A BULLY?

@revelette2,

Maybe one way out would be for the US to hand them over to their own countries for trial, that way the US could wash their hands of them at last

1 Reply

@Romeo Fabulini,

Romeo Fabulini wrote:

Maybe one way out would be for the US to hand them over to their own countries for trial, that way the US could wash their hands of them at last

Be sorta like handing German prisoners of war during WWII...back to Hitler for punishment...wouldn't you say?

0 Replies

@Frank Apisa,

I don't expect to agree completely with or even like any president, but I'm more than willing to give a Democrat president a fair shot. I actually looked forward to Obama rising in his party after his convention keynote speech, but it didn't take very long to realize that speech was utter bullsh*t in terms of what the man actually believes and how he has acted.

I don't subscribe to liberal/progressive ideology and so I am not going to find many policies coming from that ideology to be attractive. I also don't expect people who do subscribe to the ideology to be keen on a conservative president, and so I don't expect that any president will ever have close to the full backing of the American people with the possible exception of wartime or a truly natural catastrophe. I make no apologies for not wishing for such a consensus.

I didn't have such a strong negative feeling about Bill Clinton, although I think he is basically an immoral cad, and I agree with anyone who believes the entire impeachment fiasco was petty and ridiculous. Clinton obviously has a huge ego as well, but at least he, at times, displayed humility (even if he was faking it), and he clearly was able to work with a congress which was GOP controlled rather than blaming all of his failures on them. He also didn't seek to divide the nation into factions; clearly denigrating those who didn't support him.

Obama is a Narcissist, with very little reason for thinking so highly of himself.

Of course I have just opened the door for the usual suspects to swoop in a declare I've revealed my inherent racism because of my hatred and fear for the uppity n*gger, but I couldn't care less. Such arguments are intellectually low and lazy.

Your expressed animus for Gov. Christie is quite strong Frank and so, with all respect possible, I would suggest you not yourself aloof from "people like me."

(And I would never accuse you of hating obsese people Smile

)

1 Reply

Quote:

Romeo said: Maybe one way out would be for the US to hand [the Guantanamo prisoners] over to their own countries for trial, that way the US could wash their hands of them at last
Frank Apisa said: Be sorta like handing German prisoners of war during WWII...back to Hitler for punishment...wouldn't you say?

Depends which countries the Guant detainees came from, there's a list of 558 here-
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_Guantanamo_Bay_detainees

which shows many are British, Spanish, Danish, Chinese, Russian etc, so I'm sure their governments would be happy to try them on the evidence.
Other countries have pro-western govts so they too could try their own terrorists.

0 Replies

@revelette2,

That's old news, some spin to placate the effect on opinion of the Gitmo inmates' hunger strike. The issue is now out of media focus, and hence forgotten by all.

0 Replies

@Frank Apisa,

Quote:

to suppose that it has not been closed because of low moral standards is presumptuous.

Is it presumptuous to assume that it is immoral to keep something like a hundred people, most of them innocent of any crime, in state of permanent bondage and torture?

1 Reply

@Finn dAbuzz,

Finn dAbuzz wrote:

I don't expect to agree completely with or even like any president, but I'm more than willing to give a Democrat president a fair shot. I actually looked forward to Obama rising in his party after his convention keynote speech, but it didn't take very long to realize that speech was utter bullsh*t in terms of what the man actually believes and how he has acted.

I don't subscribe to liberal/progressive ideology and so I am not going to find many policies coming from that ideology to be attractive. I also don't expect people who do subscribe to the ideology to be keen on a conservative president, and so I don't expect that any president will ever have close to the full backing of the American people with the possible exception of wartime or a truly natural catastrophe. I make no apologies for not wishing for such a consensus.

I didn't have such a strong negative feeling about Bill Clinton, although I think he is basically an immoral cad, and I agree with anyone who believes the entire impeachment fiasco was petty and ridiculous. Clinton obviously has a huge ego as well, but at least he, at times, displayed humility (even if he was faking it), and he clearly was able to work with a congress which was GOP controlled rather than blaming all of his failures on them. He also didn't seek to divide the nation into factions; clearly denigrating those who didn't support him.

Obama is a Narcissist, with very little reason for thinking so highly of himself.

Of course I have just opened the door for the usual suspects to swoop in a declare I've revealed my inherent racism because of my hatred and fear for the uppity n*gger, but I couldn't care less. Such arguments are intellectually low and lazy.

Your expressed animus for Gov. Christie is quite strong Frank and so, with all respect possible, I would suggest you not yourself aloof from "people like me."

(And I would never accuse you of hating obsese people )

I did not accuse you of hating them...nor would I. You are entitled to your opinions about any person or policy...just as I am entitled to that same thing.

I do not hold myself aloof from "people like you"...although my personal bias causes me to think of myself as a bit more open-minded than conservatives.

I may be wrong on that.

0 Replies

@Olivier5,

Me too.

0 Replies

@Olivier5,

Olivier5 wrote:

Quote:
to suppose that it has not been closed because of low moral standards is presumptuous.

Is it presumptuous to assume that it is immoral to keep something like a hundred people, most of them innocent of any crime, in state of permanent bondage and torture?

Yes...it is.

1 Reply

@Frank Apisa,

Frank Apisa wrote:

Olivier5 wrote:

Quote:
to suppose that it has not been closed because of low moral standards is presumptuous.

Is it presumptuous to assume that it is immoral to keep something like a hundred people, most of them innocent of any crime, in state of permanent bondage and torture?

Yes...it is.

Interesting... Out of which moral precept do you think it's ok to torture the innocent? Did Jesus say on the cross: Verily I say to thou, thou shall torture the meek and the innocent?

1 Reply

@Olivier5,

Olivier5 wrote:

Frank Apisa wrote:

Olivier5 wrote:

Quote:
to suppose that it has not been closed because of low moral standards is presumptuous.

Is it presumptuous to assume that it is immoral to keep something like a hundred people, most of them innocent of any crime, in state of permanent bondage and torture?

Yes...it is.

Interesting... Out of which moral precept do you think it's ok to torture the innocent? Did Jesus say on the cross: Verily I say to thou, thou shall torture the meek and the innocent?

Jesus does not determine what I consider moral...and neither do you.

1 Reply

@Frank Apisa,

So, would you dare say why torturing innocent people is the moral thing to do? Or not?

1 Reply

@Olivier5,

Olivier5 wrote:

He didn't have such weapons, and the US government lied to make people believe he did. I call that bullying; you can call it as you like.

We only know he didn't have the WMD because we went in. The UN had repeatedly declared him in breach of his treaty obligation to cooperate with inspectors. Interesting that you accuse us of lying without even alluding to what the lie was. If you're going to say we lied, please specify what the lie was.

1 Reply

@Olivier5,

Olivier5 wrote:

So, would you dare say why torturing innocent people is the moral thing to do? Or not?

I simply would not pretend, as you do, that I know who is and who is not innocent...nor would I pretend, as you do, that you know all the facts behind what is going on a Gitmo.

Some of the things happening have been considered by people of both parties...people both in the executive and legislative branches...and people who lean both to the left and to the right in the American political spectrum. If you want to think that your considerations trump theirs...fine.

I don't.

If you have a problem with that...take it up with a chaplain.

1 Reply

@Brandon9000,

Oh please. The facts are out there. If you have resisted them for so long, you're a hopeless case.

1 Reply

@Frank Apisa,

Quote:

I simply would not pretend, as you do, that I know who is and who is not innocent...nor would I pretend, as you do, that you know all the facts behind what is going on a Gitmo.

Some of the things happening have been considered by people of both parties...people both in the executive and legislative branches...and people who lean both to the left and to the right in the American political spectrum. If you want to think that your considerations trump theirs...fine.

I don't.

If you have a problem with that...take it up with a chaplain.

This crime is being committed in your name, whether you care to look up the facts or not. Whether you wash your hands of it or not.

1 Reply

@Olivier5,

Olivier5 wrote:

Oh please. The facts are out there. If you have resisted them for so long, you're a hopeless case.

So, to summarize, you say that we lied, but are unable or unwilling to specify the lie. Therefore, by an rational debating rules, you lose. When you can defend your position, look me up.

2 Replies

@Brandon9000,

Olivier5 wrote:

Oh please. The facts are out there. If you have resisted them for so long, you're a hopeless case.

Brandon9000 wrote:

So, to summarize, you say that we lied, but are unable or unwilling to specify the lie.
Therefore, by an rational debating rules, you lose. When you can defend your position, look me up.

The foundation of liberalism is emotion,
not a clear-headed logical rationale.

Liberals feel abused when called upon to have recourse to logic.

David

0 Replies

@Brandon9000,

Lets make it really simple for you. Saddam had weapons of mass destruction. That was a lie. Got it now.

Now before you trot out your mantras like a good little drone, lets have a few more facts. UN weapons inspector Hans Blix wanted more time but was not allowed to by America. What evidence there was of WMDs was laughable including comments by Baghdad taxi drivers. Halliburton made **** loads of money out of Iraq.

Those are the facts, and if you had a brain you'd see that Iraq was all about oil money and bloodlust. You just allow yourself to be told what to think by your masters at Fox News.

1 Reply

I gotta say:
I did my best to be one noisy citizen
to get the overthrow of Saddam.

I thought and think that Bush made a very foolish error
in allowing Saddam 's regime to remain intact.

I believed that there was too much danger
that Saddam wud avenge himself upon us
for Kuwait by sailing a mini-nuke into an American harbor (like mine).

David

1 Reply

IS AMERICA A BULLY?

Related Topics

Quick Links

My Account

able2know