1
   

Harping On Abu Ghraib and Gitmo is Highly Misguided

 
 
engineer
 
  1  
Reply Mon 20 Jun, 2005 04:35 pm
A bit off topic
Quote:
You know, if I were a man from Mars with no political axes to grind at all and were to come down here and try to figure out that last election, the thing I'd most likely notice about Kerry is that I'd never once seen a picture of him doing any sort of a middle class thing. It's always doing something on a 75' yacht, something or other on a ski resort for the wealthy, leading a pig around on a leash looking for truffles, posing in a tutu, or shooting skeets with a $15000 Barretta over/under type shotgun.

All of that's totally aside from being an outright traitor of course...

And then, the other guy on the ticket is a bonafide member of the trial lawyers' guild and, basically, part of the larger problem. What I mean is, that the dem party is supposed to represent the common man and, yet, the two most major financial pillars of the dem party are now trial lawyers and government workers' unions, i.e. the two interest groups whose interests most directly conflict with those of the ordinary citizen.

How can you stand it? I mean, what are you going to do to try to top that ticket next time around? A Benedict Arnold/Judas Iscariot ticket perhaps??


Maybe you could start a new thread to try and sway the election. If it makes you feel any better, a coworker saw Edwards in the local Target last week, so he does his own shopping. Of course it's not Wal Mart. Darn uppity Democrats!
0 Replies
 
gungasnake
 
  1  
Reply Mon 20 Jun, 2005 06:07 pm
Re: A bit off topic
engineer wrote:
If it makes you feel any better, a coworker saw Edwards in the local Target last week, so he does his own shopping. Of course it's not Wal Mart. Darn uppity Democrats!


That might work for Edwards, if you get real lucky. What about the gigolo though? Have you thought about trying to consolidate the image, i.e. have him pose in a tutu with the truffle pig on the leash in one hand and the $15,000 Barretta in the other hand?
0 Replies
 
chiczaira
 
  1  
Reply Mon 20 Jun, 2005 11:07 pm
And, of course, Edwards, as a highly successful PI lawyer, who won a couple of cases in which he came away with 8 or 9 Million dollars each time, hardly qualifies as one of the middle class bourgeoise. Fifteen or Twenty Million dollars go a long way in North Carolina.
0 Replies
 
Finn dAbuzz
 
  1  
Reply Mon 20 Jun, 2005 11:36 pm
goodfielder wrote:
Brandon - from outside the US it looks pretty crook. When sufficient Americans wake up to the fact that it's pretty crook and also counter-productive they'll toss out the Republicans. Mate they've got it wrong. They went about it the wrong way completely. They haven't made America safe, they've made you more vulnerable and they've made you scared.

Let me give you an example. Earlier this year I flew from Australia to Toronto. I went via Hong Kong. I spent a night in Hong Kong. Great place. The airport is fantastic. And totally relaxed. Security was as one would expect from any major international airport but not intrusive. Then I flew to San Francisco. I spent a night in San Francisco. I was searched, had to take my shoes off etc. That didn't fuss me but I did note how different it was from Hong Kong. There was fear. The pleasant voice of the woman over the pa warning me every ten minutes or so to keep a watch for unattended baggage and what have you got really annoying after a while. But it also made me think "well, if it takes this it has to be done." Then onto Chicago O'Hare and on to Pearson. On the way back I was shunted into the US security at Pearson and while technically still in Canada was welcomed to the US and went through immigration and security. Searched again. Shoes off etc. Then back through O'Hare and back through San Francisco. Searched, shoes off, voice of the lady warning me about unattended baggage. Pretty soon it disappeared into the background. I've been to North America a few times but never have I seen the fear I saw on this trip.

Your enemies don't have to lift a finger. Your administration has done the work for them.


A flimsy argument at best.

First of all, Hong Kong is hardly on the top ten target list of Islamic terrorists, but if and when they should be the target of terrorists, watch the change in security.

Secondly, there is hardly a paralyzing wave of fear produced by the requirement of removing one's shoes at a check point. If you were personally searched it was either a random occurrence or precipitated by some red flag trigger. I travel by air to different points in this country and others with excessive frequency, and I have never been personally searched in a US airport, and frisked only twice (both times were when I had a one way ticket).

On the other hand, I was personally searched in Gatwick and Sydney, and I have noted the presence of sub-machine gun armed soldiers in most European airports.

I have also yet to be in an airport throughout the world where there are not warnings about unattended baggage, and that included Canada. I should add, though, that I have never yet seen anyone gasp or sweat in fear whenever such an announcement was made, no matter where the airport.

I do see fear from time to time in American airports, but most often it is simply the usual fear of flying. People do tend to get a bit edgy whenever young men of obvious Middle Eastern origins stand in line to board, but I doubt that has much to do with the Bush administration.

The notion that Americans, whether in their airports or malls, are fearful is simply ridiculous. One might argue that Americans have become too complacent about terrorism, but not that they are too fearful.

The notion that the Administration has made America more vulnerable is even more than ridiculous, and I would be most interested in your providing us with some support of this claim beyond personal impressions about two trips through American airports...Mate.
0 Replies
 
goodfielder
 
  1  
Reply Tue 21 Jun, 2005 06:08 am
Quote:
from outside the US it looks pretty crook. When sufficient Americans wake up to the fact that it's pretty crook and also counter-productive they'll toss out the Republicans. Mate they've got it wrong. They went about it the wrong way completely. They haven't made America safe, they've made you more vulnerable and they've made you scared.


It seems a bit strange quoting myself but I will. You want evidence Finn? Look around you.
0 Replies
 
chiczaira
 
  1  
Reply Tue 21 Jun, 2005 05:32 pm
Scared? We aren't scared, goodfielder. We are angry that people are getting their heads cut off by savages who blow themselves up in a market and kill scores of innocent civilians. We are angry that cowards lay down hidden bombs to assault our soldiers.

Do you remember what the brilliant Japanese Admiral Yamamoto said in the second year of World War II?

quote:

"We( Japan) have awoken a sleeping giant( USA)".
0 Replies
 
Finn dAbuzz
 
  1  
Reply Tue 21 Jun, 2005 05:51 pm
goodfielder wrote:
Quote:
from outside the US it looks pretty crook. When sufficient Americans wake up to the fact that it's pretty crook and also counter-productive they'll toss out the Republicans. Mate they've got it wrong. They went about it the wrong way completely. They haven't made America safe, they've made you more vulnerable and they've made you scared.


It seems a bit strange quoting myself but I will. You want evidence Finn? Look around you.


I thought I had made it clear that I have had a multitude of opportunities to "look around" me, and I do not see anything approaching the scenario you claim to have developed from two experiences in US airports.

Because you are inclined to believe something, doesn't make it so.
0 Replies
 
cicerone imposter
 
  1  
Reply Tue 21 Jun, 2005 06:09 pm
"You position is naive to these facts." ROFLMAO

Have you ever heard about the Nuremberg Trials?

http://www.law.umkc.edu/faculty/projects/ftrials/nuremberg/nuremberg.htm
0 Replies
 
chiczaira
 
  1  
Reply Tue 21 Jun, 2005 06:20 pm
Whose position is naive to what facts?

Why don't you make yourself clear, Cicerone?
0 Replies
 
cicerone imposter
 
  1  
Reply Tue 21 Jun, 2005 06:22 pm
That POWs are not afforded a trial.
0 Replies
 
chiczaira
 
  1  
Reply Tue 21 Jun, 2005 06:46 pm
What Prisoners of War? You mean those covered by the Geneva Convention or those not covered by the Geneva Convention.

Certainly, you don't mean that the people being held in Gitmo fall under the regulations of the Geneva Convention. do you?

If you do, you should read the qualifications for people to be treated as Prisoners of War under the Geneva Convention.

Minor items like Uniforms, centralized command, etc, those sorts of interesting trivia.
0 Replies
 
gungasnake
 
  1  
Reply Tue 21 Jun, 2005 07:56 pm
chiczaira wrote:
What Prisoners of War? You mean those covered by the Geneva Convention or those not covered by the Geneva Convention.

Certainly, you don't mean that the people being held in Gitmo fall under the regulations of the Geneva Convention. do you?

If you do, you should read the qualifications for people to be treated as Prisoners of War under the Geneva Convention.

Minor items like Uniforms, centralized command, etc, those sorts of interesting trivia.


The whole objective here is to destroy the Bush presidency. Demokerrats do not feel they can afford a successful republican presidency after KKKlinton. In my estimation, the people making all this noise about Gitmo probably view the destruction of one and possibly even two large American cities as an acceptable price to pay for the destruction of George W. Bush.

At the very least, they behave as if that were the case. Dickless Durban, in particular, needs to be censured and expelled from the US senate.
0 Replies
 
Lightwizard
 
  1  
Reply Tue 21 Jun, 2005 08:19 pm
Successful? Surely you jest. I can easily imagine Bush leaving office with a less than 35% approval rating. His will go down as one of the most mediocre (if not tragic) administrations in history.
0 Replies
 
Finn dAbuzz
 
  1  
Reply Tue 21 Jun, 2005 08:29 pm
Lightwizard wrote:
Successful? Surely you jest. I can easily imagine Bush leaving office with a less than 35% approval rating. His will go down as one of the most mediocre (if not tragic) administrations in history.


Mediocre? Unlikely. 9/11 and the invasion of Iraq assures him of anything but a legacy of mediocrity.

Tragic? The world and the US needs a bit more of a wash of fire and brimstone for that to be the case.

But then, he did restore the Concentration Camps of Hitler, the Gulag of Stalin and the Killing Fields of Pol Pot in Gitmo so perhaps you're right.
0 Replies
 
JTT
 
  1  
Reply Tue 21 Jun, 2005 08:38 pm
Finn d'Abuzz wrote:
Lightwizard wrote:
Successful? Surely you jest. I can easily imagine Bush leaving office with a less than 35% approval rating. His will go down as one of the most mediocre (if not tragic) administrations in history.


Mediocre? Unlikely. 9/11 and the invasion of Iraq assures him of anything but a legacy of mediocrity.

Mediocre? No, to reach that august position, Finn, he'd have to climb way way up. Is that likely given how things are going? NBL! We're probably looking at abysmal but, arguably, he does have a few years left, so who knows.

Tragic? The world and the US needs a bit more of a wash of fire and brimstone for that to be the case.

But then, he did restore the Concentration Camps of Hitler, the Gulag of Stalin and the Killing Fields of Pol Pot in Gitmo so perhaps you're right.

You're "disasembling" again, Finn. Misdirection, smoke and mirrors seems to be your stock in trade. Do you think that they've got OBL stashed somewhere to effect a turnaround?
0 Replies
 
Finn dAbuzz
 
  1  
Reply Tue 21 Jun, 2005 09:03 pm
JTT wrote:
Finn d'Abuzz wrote:
Lightwizard wrote:
Successful? Surely you jest. I can easily imagine Bush leaving office with a less than 35% approval rating. His will go down as one of the most mediocre (if not tragic) administrations in history.


Mediocre? Unlikely. 9/11 and the invasion of Iraq assures him of anything but a legacy of mediocrity.

Mediocre? No, to reach that august position, Finn, he'd have to climb way way up. Is that likely given how things are going? NBL! We're probably looking at abysmal but, arguably, he does have a few years left, so who knows.

Tragic? The world and the US needs a bit more of a wash of fire and brimstone for that to be the case.

But then, he did restore the Concentration Camps of Hitler, the Gulag of Stalin and the Killing Fields of Pol Pot in Gitmo so perhaps you're right.

You're "disasembling" again, Finn. Misdirection, smoke and mirrors seems to be your stock in trade. Do you think that they've got OBL stashed somewhere to effect a turnaround?



I notice that you have developed quite an affection for "disasembling," (sic), but beyond that observation, I don't have a clue as to what you are trying to suggest.

Smoke and mirrors? Where?

Misdirection? How?

OBL stashed? How pertinent?
0 Replies
 
JTT
 
  1  
Reply Tue 21 Jun, 2005 09:28 pm
Finn d'Abuzz wrote:

I notice that you have developed quite an affection for "disasembling," (sic), but beyond that observation, I don't have a clue as to what you are trying to suggest.

Smoke and mirrors? Where?

Misdirection? How?

OBL stashed? How pertinent?

It was a question with a measure of tongue in cheek contained within. You didn't get it, no problem, Finn.



In your own words, Finn.

"But then, he did restore the Concentration Camps of Hitler, the Gulag of Stalin and the Killing Fields of Pol Pot in Gitmo ..."

I'm sure you'd agree that the test of what's acceptable and what's not acceptable is what civilized people would do. What a second, if I recall correctly, that isn't the standard you want to see upheld. Forget the question, Finn.

If the accords developed by civilized people do not apply, then there are no standards for the other side, the unlawful combatants. It astounds me that you'd want to put your troops in such a perilous position. I would want them to be treated with respect following the rules established by civilized people. But that's just me.

Further, how could the USA have supported all these "unlawful combatants" for all those years that they fought the Soviets. Not only did the US support with the talk, they also supported them with the walk; they supplied them with myriad arms.

Let's venture down memory lane a bit. Remember the contras, and before them the non-uniformed terrorists supported in Vietnam, and then there was that rag tag group sent to invade Cuba.

Can you help me out here? How many other non-uniformed "freedom" fighters has the US supported, how many does the US now support around the world. Go ahead, demand proof of me, please.

Does this represent anything approaching hypocrisy to you, Finn?

And pretending that you didn't understand me. That's either dissembling or stupidity. Take your pick.
0 Replies
 
Finn dAbuzz
 
  1  
Reply Tue 21 Jun, 2005 09:42 pm
JTT wrote:
Finn d'Abuzz wrote:
JTT wrote:
Finn d'Abuzz wrote:
Lightwizard wrote:
Successful? Surely you jest. I can easily imagine Bush leaving office with a less than 35% approval rating. His will go down as one of the most mediocre (if not tragic) administrations in history.


Mediocre? Unlikely. 9/11 and the invasion of Iraq assures him of anything but a legacy of mediocrity.

Mediocre? No, to reach that august position, Finn, he'd have to climb way way up. Is that likely given how things are going? NBL! We're probably looking at abysmal but, arguably, he does have a few years left, so who knows.

Tragic? The world and the US needs a bit more of a wash of fire and brimstone for that to be the case.

But then, he did restore the Concentration Camps of Hitler, the Gulag of Stalin and the Killing Fields of Pol Pot in Gitmo so perhaps you're right.

You're "disasembling" again, Finn. Misdirection, smoke and mirrors seems to be your stock in trade. Do you think that they've got OBL stashed somewhere to effect a turnaround?



I notice that you have developed quite an affection for "disasembling," (sic), but beyond that observation, I don't have a clue as to what you are trying to suggest.

Smoke and mirrors? Where?

Misdirection? How?

In your own words, Finn.

"But then, he did restore the Concentration Camps of Hitler, the Gulag of Stalin and the Killing Fields of Pol Pot in Gitmo ..."

I'm sure you'd agree that the test of what's acceptable and what's not acceptable is what civilized people would do. What a second, if I recall correctly, that isn't the standard you want to see upheld. Forget the question, Finn.

If the accords developed by civilized people do not apply, then there are no standards for the other side, the unlawful combatants. It astounds me that you'd want to put your troops in such a perilous position. I would want them to be treated with respect following the rules established by civilized people. But that's just me.

Further, how could the USA have supported all these "unlawful combatants for all those years that they fought the Soviets. Not only did the US support with the talk, they also supported them with the walk; they supplied them with myriad arms.

Let's venture down memory lane a bit. Remember the contras, and before them the non-uniformed terrorists supported in Vietnam, and then there was that rag tag group sent to invade Cuba.

Can you help me out here? How many other non-uniformed "freedom" fighters has the US supported, how many does the US now support around the world. Go ahead, demand proof of me, please.

Does this represent anything approaching hypocrisy to you, Finn?

And pretending that you didn't understand me. That's either dissembling or stupidity. Take your pick.


OBL stashed? How pertinent?

It was a question with a measure of tongue in cheek contained within. You didn't get it, no problem, Finn.



This response of yours reminds me why I (and others) have taken to ignore your postings.

Never-the-less, having decided to respond I venture forth no matter how hopeless the cause.

LW suggested that the legacy of Bush might be considered tragic. Notably, he failed to provide any reasoning for this assertion. Enter Finn and an, admittedly, sarcastic allusion to the charges of DICK Durbin. This is misdirection?

Thereafter flows all sorts of detrius from the keyboard of JTT.

Why is that I envision you as a snarling poodle?
0 Replies
 
JTT
 
  1  
Reply Tue 21 Jun, 2005 10:00 pm
Quote:
Finn:
This response of yours reminds me why I (and others) have taken to ignore your postings.

Never-the-less, having decided to respond I venture forth no matter how hopeless the cause.

LW suggested that the legacy of Bush might be considered tragic. Notably, he failed to provide any reasoning for this assertion. Enter Finn and an, admittedly, sarcastic allusion to the charges of DICK Durbin. This is misdirection?



Misdirection tending towards mendacity and falling headlong into full out fabrication. I provided some very pertinent facts, that, let me note, you've failed to account for. Yes, this is one of the three above; again take your pick.

The cause, which you believe hopeless, really is hopeless when you veer dramatically away from the issues [been getting lessons from Rayban?] You've addressed nothing that I've raised.

What was that that Kuvasz said about conservatives; it's in someone's signature line? Something like "For conservatives [not all of course] when facts get in the way, they throw out the facts".

Exactly what you've done here, Finn. Take your pick; mendacity, misdirection, dissembling, fabrication. A sense of propriety limits me to those four.



Quote:

Thereafter flows all sorts of detrius [sic] [try spell check, Finn] from the keyboard of JTT.
0 Replies
 
Brandon9000
 
  1  
Reply Tue 21 Jun, 2005 10:10 pm
cicerone imposter wrote:
That POWs are not afforded a trial.

What POWs have ever been afforded a trial? The people tried at Nuremberg were not POWs captured on the battlefied, and they were only tried after the war ended.
0 Replies
 
 

Related Topics

Obama '08? - Discussion by sozobe
Let's get rid of the Electoral College - Discussion by Robert Gentel
McCain's VP: - Discussion by Cycloptichorn
Food Stamp Turkeys - Discussion by H2O MAN
The 2008 Democrat Convention - Discussion by Lash
McCain is blowing his election chances. - Discussion by McGentrix
Snowdon is a dummy - Discussion by cicerone imposter
TEA PARTY TO AMERICA: NOW WHAT?! - Discussion by farmerman
 
Copyright © 2024 MadLab, LLC :: Terms of Service :: Privacy Policy :: Page generated in 0.03 seconds on 12/27/2024 at 01:48:47