W couldn't say, "I'm sorry."

Why is the administration that thought being in power was never having to say you were sorry now tripping over themselves to apologize?

I support them and even I don't think it signifies a change in disposition, a softening of their usual arrogance.

While I'm sure they regret that the abuse took place and I believe Bush when he says the photos disgusted him, I can't believe that there isn't a political component to all of these sudden mea culpas.

Nothing particularly sordid about this. Every adminsitration since Washington's has considered the political implications of each and every official decision.

I am curious though as to what their political conclusion might be. Are they engaged in political jujitsu? Using the force of their opponents attacks against them? At some point Moderate America may very well respond to the constant Dem attacks with "Hey, they apologized! What more do you want?" Perhaps that's the administration's calculation.

I might agree with the Arab scholar, referenced previously by another poster, who suggested that we are running the risk of over-apologizing. If the Arab culture is so macho that it equates, in severity, sexually oriented humiliation of Arab men with feeding women to Uday's dogs, then surely there will come a point where it perceives all of these apologies as weakness. Not a good perception to engender in people who are willing to become suicide bombers.

Without making any excuses for or condoning the reprehensible behavior of this group of prison guards, I do find it hard to believe that the folks who were fed to Saddam and his sons' dogs and plastic chippers would not have been more than willing to trade their fate for parading around in the nude or wearing women's panties.

An argument can be made (as it has been made by no less a leading Liberal light than Alan Dershowitz) that under extraordinary circumstances, extraordinary measures to "soften" hardboiled prisoners are acceptable. However under such circumstances, the parties responsible for giving the OK to such measures have an extraordinary duty to make sure they remain within some prescribed limits. If the guards in Iraq were ordered to "soften up" the prisoners, extraordinary care to keep it under some control was not taken.

0 Replies

Finn D'Abuzz glosses over the ultimate insult to Iraqi men--that is of forcing them to take off their clothes and simulate homosexual sex. The Muslim culture knows of no greater insult. This was premeditated by the powers that be and the President, as Commander in Cheif, is directly responsible

0 Replies

mporter wrote:

Finn D'Abuzz glosses over the ultimate insult to Iraqi men--that is of forcing them to take off their clothes and simulate homosexual sex. The Muslim culture knows of no greater insult. This was premeditated by the powers that be and the President, as Commander in Cheif, is directly responsible

Would it be too presumptuous to ask of your qualifications for expertise on Muslim culture and particularly the ultimate insult?

But, let's assume that you are right, and this sort of humiliation is worse than death to a Muslim man. Wouldn't it follow that at least some of them would have refused their captors demands even if it meant their deaths?
But then I suppose you can claim that is precisely what happened after the photos were taken and the administration is covering up that these outraged Muslim men were murdered by the guards.

0 Replies

Finn, Italgato (poorly disguised as mporter) has a fascination with homosexuality. Ignore it.

0 Replies

Finn D'Abuzz- I never pay attention to ignorance.

Note: At least six Islamic nations have laws prescribing capital punishment for homosexual acts.

There are at least eight relevant provisions in the Koran--all of them strongly negative against homosexuality. To those who do not thing the Islamic world is very strongly opposed to homosexuality, I propose an experiment. Go to a Middle Eastern country( try Syria) declare yourself a Muslim and an overt homosexual--see what happens.
Again--one of the most heinous acts allowed by President Bush was the forcing of Muslim prisoners into acts of simulated sex.

0 Replies

mporter wrote:

Finn D'Abuzz- I never pay attention to ignorance.

I'm afraid I don't understand this comment at all. I guess it's my ignorance.

mporter wrote:

Note: At least six Islamic nations have laws prescribing capital punishment for homosexual acts.

There are at least eight relevant provisions in the Koran--all of them strongly negative against homosexuality.

And this is proof that there is no greater insult in Muslim culture than to force Muslim men to simulate homosexual sex?

mporter wrote:

To those who do not thing the Islamic world is very strongly opposed to homosexuality, I propose an experiment. Go to a Middle Eastern country( try Syria) declare yourself a Muslim and an overt homosexual--see what happens.

First of all there is a huge distinction between not accepting your claim on the greatest insult in the Muslim Culture and contending that the "Islamic World" embraces homosexuality.

Seconding, being "strongly opposed" to homosexuality is not tantamount to believing that forcing Muslim men to simulate homosexual sex is the single most heinous insult possible.

Thirdly...Gosh, if they are such ignorant homophobes then maybe they need a little forced panty wearing.

mporter wrote:

Again--one of the most heinous acts allowed by President Bush was the forcing of Muslim prisoners into acts of simulated sex.

Assuming he did allow it (Which you have a long way to go to prove) as far as "heinous" acts go (Death March of Battan, Nazi Concentration Camps, Soviet Gulags, Feeding people to dogs...) this one wasn't all that "heinous."

0 Replies

FinnD' Abuzz It is all very well to pretend that the prisoners were not treated very very badly. Indeed, one Haiden Sabban Abed, a prisoner, said that he had been stripped of his dignity as well as his clothes. Abed asks: Will the supposed punishment of the guards return my dignity to me?

Abed reports his extreme anguish at being stripped and left naked for hours. This is clearly extreme torture inasmuch as rendering Muslims naked is tantamount to stripping them of their dignity. We in the West may not understand this. But we cannot be so provincial if we want to win hearts and minds.

0 Replies

mporter wrote:

FinnD' Abuzz It is all very well to pretend that the prisoners were not treated very very badly. Indeed, one Haiden Sabban Abed, a prisoner, said that he had been stripped of his dignity as well as his clothes. Abed asks: Will the supposed punishment of the guards return my dignity to me?

Abed reports his extreme anguish at being stripped and left naked for hours. This is clearly extreme torture inasmuch as rendering Muslims naked is tantamount to stripping them of their dignity. We in the West may not understand this. But we cannot be so provincial if we want to win hearts and minds.

mposter

I've now slept on your comments overnight, and I have to admit that you've convinced me of your position. Who am I to question the depth of pain and suffering experienced by someone from an entirely foreign culture? Just because I can't equate being forced to simulate homosexual acts with being fed feet first into a wood chipper, I shouldn't minimize their suffering.

It's rare when a forum like this contains insight capable of altering fundamental views. This is one of those times, and I thank you.

0 Replies

Bi-Polar Bear wrote:

Tarantulas wrote:

Bi-Polar Bear wrote:
Tarantulas wrote:
See? No apology at any time would ever be good enough for some people.

a sincere and timely apology that didn't have to be pulled out of him like an infected tooth would have been more than satisfactory.

First people are angry because he didn't apologize. Now they're angry because he did. Make up your mind.quote]

please note the qualifiers timely and sincere and quit backpeddling, you're going to hurt yourself.

Typically, you attempt to wrap reality in your own unspecified standards so you can bend it to be what you want. You get to decide what is "timely" and what is "sincere", which puts us back where we were before... there's nothing the administration could do to dissuade you and those like you from latching onto this issue and playing political football with it for as long as possible.

I keep wondering where all your angst was when four American contractors were ripped to pieces by a crowd, their bodies dragged through the streets, one hung from a bridge like a trophy. Where are your calls for an apology from that murderous mob? Where is your concern for what happened to Americans? None of these prisoners were even physically harmed, and you are acting like Bush personally raped them with a chainsaw.

The media circus around this event is just one more last-ditch effort by the DNC and the media to make Bush look bad before the election, but once again, America is watching, they see what's happening, and the backlash has already begun. Meanwhile, Kerry is already fading from the minds of the electorate as someone who turned out not to live up to his packaging.

0 Replies

Scrat wrote:

Bi-Polar Bear wrote:
Tarantulas wrote:

Bi-Polar Bear wrote:
Tarantulas wrote:
See? No apology at any time would ever be good enough for some people.

a sincere and timely apology that didn't have to be pulled out of him like an infected tooth would have been more than satisfactory.

First people are angry because he didn't apologize. Now they're angry because he did. Make up your mind.quote]

please note the qualifiers timely and sincere and quit backpeddling, you're going to hurt yourself.

Typically, you attempt to wrap reality in your own unspecified standards so you can bend it to be what you want. You get to decide what is "timely" and what is "sincere", which puts us back where we were before... there's nothing the administration could do to dissuade you and those like you from latching onto this issue and playing political football with it for as long as possible.

I keep wondering where all your angst was when four American contractors were ripped to pieces by a crowd, their bodies dragged through the streets, one hung from a bridge like a trophy. Where are your calls for an apology from that murderous mob? Where is your concern for what happened to Americans? None of these prisoners were even physically harmed, and you are acting like Bush personally raped them with a chainsaw.

The media circus around this event is just one more last-ditch effort by the DNC and the media to make Bush look bad before the election, but once again, America is watching, they see what's happening, and the backlash has already begun. Meanwhile, Kerry is already fading from the minds of the electorate as someone who turned out not to live up to his packaging.

Scrat, I can't believe you make the narrow minded asumption that because I feel sympathy for the tortured Iraqis and disgust toward those responsible that I don't have the same sympathy for our own people and disgust for those who tortured and murdered them, and that I feel nothing for them.

I happen to know you are smarter and better than that, and I'll assume your statement to be a slip up caused by intense feelings.

0 Replies

If America came to my country, took prisoners, and then abused, raped and murdered them, I wouldn't be in the least bit interested in an apology. But I am pretty sure that my government would want to track down the offenders and try them according to our law. And that, as I see it, is the only way that America can regain any slight credibility with the rest of the world - hand the offenders over to the authorities of the country where they committed the offence. Nothing else is enough. If a civilian American went to a foreign country and did these things would the American government protect him? So why offer any protection to these people who, more than any other, should have been demonstrating human decency.

0 Replies

If my country had an overly oppressive dictator and another country came in with promises of freedom and kicked out the oppressive dictator and then arrested people who were putting my family at risk oppsoing the very freedom that the invaders were promising I would care very little what they did to those people.

You, and many others seem to equate their country with Iraq and that just doesn't work. It's not equitable.

0 Replies

McGentrix wrote:

If my country had an overly oppressive dictator and another country came in with promises of freedom and kicked out the oppressive dictator and then arrested people who were putting my family at risk oppsoing the very freedom that the invaders were promising I would care very little what they did to those people.

You, and many others seem to equate their country with Iraq and that just doesn't work. It's not equitable.

I dont believe you could care less about anything or anybody unless it or they are to your direct benefit....you are bushs' ideal demographic through and through

0 Replies

Well, you would believe wrongly. I am sorry you are a terrorist sympathizer and I am sorry that you feel compassion for them but have such a hardened heart for your own country men.

You are Saddam and Osama's ideal demographic. I hope it helps you sleep at night.

0 Replies

Why do you presume that you can imagine how you would feel in the Iraqi situation but I cannot? Americans are not the only ones with brains you know.

0 Replies

Because you wrote this.

Eve wrote:

If America came to my country, took prisoners, and then abused, raped and murdered them, I wouldn't be in the least bit interested in an apology. But I am pretty sure that my government would want to track down the offenders and try them according to our law. And that, as I see it, is the only way that America can regain any slight credibility with the rest of the world - hand the offenders over to the authorities of the country where they committed the offence. Nothing else is enough. If a civilian American went to a foreign country and did these things would the American government protect him? So why offer any protection to these people who, more than any other, should have been demonstrating human decency.

I don't recall saying that Americans are the only ones with brains. What I did was take your comment about someone invading New Zealand to be not quite the same as the US efforts in Iraq.

Handing US soldiers over to an unorganized mob in Iraq is just not an option.

0 Replies

Ignorant
Iraq has courts. Your views of Iraqis are vile just as you are vile. No one here said that they sympathize with terrorists. Aprehending "suspects" then placing no charges on them, granting them zero rights and humiliating, abusing, raping and beating them to death is the way that the Right Wing deal with humans and that seems fine with the Right Wing zealots, such as you. It isn't fine with most others.

0 Replies

I do realize that handing US soldiers over to Iraqi courts is not an option that is ever going to happen, but it would be justice.
And what has this to do with terrorists - America went looking for MWD - or so we were told when we were asked to support their bombing of Iraq. But somehow, disapproving of appaling treatment of prisoners makes us terrorist sympathisers. The war on terrorism has given the American warmongers an easy way out of any argument but it is wearing a bit thin.

0 Replies

McGentrix wrote:

Well, you would believe wrongly. I am sorry you are a terrorist sympathizer and I am sorry that you feel compassion for them but have such a hardened heart for your own country men.

You are Saddam and Osama's ideal demographic. I hope it helps you sleep at night.

Ah of course. Anyone who recognizes the weaknesses in his own country and their policies hates his country and loves the others. The Gospel according to McGentrix. My heart is only hard towards my countrymen who are like you, because you do not represent the ideals this country purports to be based on, but in reality are more and more driven by the very ideals you claim to abhor.

0 Replies

Quote:

So why offer any protection to these people who, more than any other, should have been demonstrating human decency.

Interesting form of the verb Eve. You seem to be presupposing some good intentions towards the people of Iraq. The murders rapes and humiliation were deliberate techniques employed in R2I to extract intelligence and suppress the guerrillas. America and Britain are in Iraq for oil and gas, not humanitarian reasons.

0 Replies

W couldn't say, "I'm sorry."

Related Topics

Quick Links

My Account

able2know