posted
I think it's a bit ridiculous for people to say "I listen to rap music all the time, it's not torture" or "It's hot in Texas, that's where I love, that isn't torture."
Until you actually live through whatever they live through, day after day, against your will, with no reprieve, and possibly fear of death, I don't think anyone has any room to talk. I've been outside all day in 100 degree heat, I certainly didn't like it, and as I was dehydrated, I almost fainted from heat stroke. It's not something I would care to repeat, especially every day of the week. Or to have the other extreme of cold with little clothing, shackled to the cement ground.
I say put up or shut up. If you've been through it, fine, talk about it. If you haven't stop pretending you know what it's like.
Posts: 21898 | Registered: Nov 2004
| IP: Logged |
Is this true? Is this is what's really going on? This is how it starts. It starts with a disregard for people's rights, which turns into people being tormented and tortured, and a majority of people saying, "They deserve it. They are {insert terrorist, a different race, a threat here}" Our president is leading us down a path of destruction I don't want to go down. This war, detaining these people, it's all wrong...
Posts: 9942 | Registered: Mar 2003
| IP: Logged |
posted
I did like McCain, but its too bad he seems to have gotten pretty wonky -- federally mandated sports steroid testing?!
Posts: 15770 | Registered: Dec 2001
| IP: Logged |
quote: Sen. Richard J. Durbin (D-Ill.) yesterday offered a tearful apology on the Senate floor for comparing the alleged abuse of prisoners by American troops to techniques used by the Nazis, the Soviets and the Khmer Rouge, as he sought to quell a frenzy of Republican-led criticism.
Durbin, the Democratic whip, acknowledged that "more than most people, a senator lives by his words" but that "occasionally words will fail us and occasionally we will fail words." Choking up, he said: "Some may believe that my remarks crossed the line. To them, I extend my heartfelt apologies."
He singled out the victims of the Holocaust, which Durbin called "the greatest moral tragedy of our time," as well as U.S. troops.
posted
What a shameful apology. I could have lived with the gentle Godwining; the crocodile tears and mea culpas are just pathetic.
Posts: 37449 | Registered: May 1999
| IP: Logged |
quote: Sen. Richard J. Durbin (D-Ill.) yesterday offered a tearful apology on the Senate floor for comparing the alleged abuse of prisoners by American troops to techniques used by the Nazis, the Soviets and the Khmer Rouge, as he sought to quell a frenzy of Republican-led criticism.
Durbin, the Democratic whip, acknowledged that "more than most people, a senator lives by his words" but that "occasionally words will fail us and occasionally we will fail words." Choking up, he said: "Some may believe that my remarks crossed the line. To them, I extend my heartfelt apologies."
He singled out the victims of the Holocaust, which Durbin called "the greatest moral tragedy of our time," as well as U.S. troops.
I posted a link from Yahoo in my post up there. Democrats can be such... wimps sometimes. Perhaps Nazi was a bit strong, but, as I said up there, this is how it begins. Eroding someone's rights because they are "Terror suspects" or a threat or whatever. But, really you become no better than your enemy you claim to want to fight.
Posts: 9942 | Registered: Mar 2003
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by TomDavidson: I'm deeply disappointed in Durbin for knuckling under.
I know. How the hell is anything supposed to change? Right now the Republican party is like a bunch of Rotteweillers and the Democrats are yapping little poodles that put their tails between their legs with the slightest little growl. They should be calling the Republican party on their wrong doings. The Republicans would do the same to the Democrats. Like back in the days of Clinton. All they could do is attack the slightest things he did. Now we have someone even worse than Clinton was. Someone who manipulates the public with false patriatism and piety, and what to the Democrats do? Instead of calling him on it, they wimp out. And this country ends up losing its honour as a result. I hate politicians.
Posts: 9942 | Registered: Mar 2003
| IP: Logged |
quote:In the president's place I would have never taken the focus off of Bin Laden...
America is capable of doing more than one thing at a time, Syn. Holding press conferences reiterating how we're focused on OBL does not mean we will apprehend him any sooner.
Posts: 17164 | Registered: Jun 2001
| IP: Logged |
posted
Of course, that he's become a lower priority (as the President has said he has become) does mean we'll apprehend him much less sooner than if he were a higher priority, most likely.
Posts: 15770 | Registered: Dec 2001
| IP: Logged |
posted
He apologized? Looked to me he said he was sorry if he offended anyone. I never heard him say that anything he said was wrong.
Posts: 2845 | Registered: Oct 2003
| IP: Logged |
posted
How many resources can you spend hunting someone before you encounter diminishing returns, fugu?
I'm not saying you're wrong, but I am saying that no one here is in a position to suggest that Bush will never or much later capture OBL because of a change in priorities.
Posts: 17164 | Registered: Jun 2001
| IP: Logged |
posted
He apologized for using language that offended people. He had no reason to apologize for being wrong about the facts he described or the outrage he felt.
[ June 22, 2005, 12:44 PM: Message edited by: Chris Bridges ]
Posts: 7790 | Registered: Aug 2000
| IP: Logged |
posted
From what I recall from actually hearing his "apology," he spent most of his time apologizing to the people who suffered through the Holocaust for having brought up the analogy in the first place. He didn't apologize for applying his analogy to the troops tortuting the "enemy combattants" in Gitmo.
I know I'm late in signing in to this thread, but I also want to say:
I'm Jewish, and I also believe that the average Nazi soldier was not a monster. Sure, the closer you get to the concentration camps, and the higher up you get in the chain of command; monster, monster, and more monster.
(Upon second reading, that sounds almost like a light-hearted sentence. It's not. I could recount--not from my family's experience, thank goodness--just how monstrous it was, and how monstrous some of the people were, but that's not the point on this thread. The point of this thread, I thought, was to realize the darkness hiding inside of most every human being, while at the same time trying to understand that dehumanizing "the enemy" is a sure way to let such darkness out.)
But the "Average Klaus" out in the field--probably fighting the best way he could, just like our guys. Of course, the more his chain of command lets him know that it's OK to act cruelly towards his enemy...well, we're back to the Stamford Experiment again, aren't we?
I seem to recall, when the whole Gitmo thing first came out, that people were starting to look up the chain of command, and were being met with a stone wall of "Nope! Nothing to see here!" And then (at least as far as I can tell), we stopped worying about who was pulling the strings, and just continued prosecuting the grunts.
posted
I think Democrats need to learn more about selling things (ideas in particular) and teaching. He only need lead the people to his point and let off before actually saying it. He could have said, "I have read about a certain country that has demonstrated how it treats it's prisoners, prioners who have yet to be convicted of anything. These people were chained to the floor for days, left to sit and lie in their own feces and urine, forced to endure extremes in temperature and so on. What nations come to mind when you think of such treatment? Add the United States to that list. Our sons and daughters are being ordered to act in a way that we would call foul and indecent..." And so on and so on. Put the responsibilty where it needs to be, in the laps of people making decisions. Point out that the victims are not only those people accused (not proven) of crimes but also the people ordered to be indecent. The Hitler analogy is a loaded one, that is for sure. But one thing is true of all those nasty leaders, their hands were clean. Hitler didn't turn on the gas chamber. Saudi royalty doesn't cut the heads off people and in this day and age, Cheney and Bush aren't chaining people to floors. We unintentially demonize our own citizen soldiers by condemning the acts and those that perpetuate them, not those that order or fail to stop them. It riles those that have those yellow ribbons on their SUV's and makes the discussion all but impossible to continue.
Durbin was stupid to say Nazi and even more silly for backing off of it like an whipped puppy.
Posts: 896 | Registered: Apr 2003
| IP: Logged |
posted
Why was Trent Lott forced to apologize 5 times to quell a frenzy of Democrat-led criticism? Wasn't he forced to resign? Wasn't he just expressing his opinion? I believe that there is a better way to investigate alleged wrongdoings by US troops than to compare them with the actions in Soviet gulags. Durbin has that responsibility as an elected official not to give propoganda to the enemy. He could have demanded an investigation into the allegations, or he could lead an investigation to Cuba and see for himself what is going on, rather than making comparisions between Gitmo and Gulags. Then again, Democrats are using the Vietnam playbook to try and hurt the Republicans any way they can.
Posts: 1918 | Registered: Mar 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
"Why was Trent Lott forced to apologize 5 times to quell a frenzy of Democrat-led criticism? Wasn't he forced to resign? Wasn't he just expressing his opinion?"
The difference here was that his opinion as most people (rightly or wrongly) understood it was that the South was better under Jim Crow.
Posts: 37449 | Registered: May 1999
| IP: Logged |
posted
Oh, so then there is no difference as most people (rightly or wrongly) understood it was that Durbin was calling our prison camps gulags or deathcamps.
Posts: 1918 | Registered: Mar 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
Those demands have been made, for years now. Requests for investigations have been made. When those requests are consistently ignored or dismissed, how should someone go about trying to get them to happen?
Not being snarky, I'd like to know.
Posts: 7790 | Registered: Aug 2000
| IP: Logged |
posted
No, he never called them that. He said that pictures of certain things done there would make american citizens think of those places.
Also, its rather different to say you see something morally wrong that you want to fix (even if you're incorrect) than to say that it would be better if we were doing something morally wrong.
Posts: 15770 | Registered: Dec 2001
| IP: Logged |
posted
I think we have done investigations? Durbin just has to start calling for one, and it will happen. He could fly to Gitmo if he wanted to and see for himself
Posts: 1918 | Registered: Mar 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
There have been some investigations into specific allegations, but I know of no investigation as to whether the benefits of guantanamo outweigh the incredible PR costs to keeping it open, which is what he called for, and which could only be done by a bipartisan group with decent influence on the actual decision (that is, a congressionally appointed committee/panel).
Posts: 15770 | Registered: Dec 2001
| IP: Logged |
posted
"When the goal of the Bush administration is the destruction of America"
For what conceivable purpose would the Bush adminstration want to destroy America? So I, as a Republican, want to destroy America?
Posts: 1918 | Registered: Mar 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
So we should just release all of the detainees and shut down Gitmo? So the plan for any enemy combatant captured should be make any claim you want against the US, and you will be able to get them to release you, and close down that prison. I wonder how well the hostages, or I guess they should really be called detainees, are being treated? Shouldn't we be calling on them to release the hostages because they are not following the Geneva Convention?
Posts: 1918 | Registered: Mar 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
I suppose it depends whether America, to you, is the country or the ideals of that country. I suppose one could make the argument -- flawed as it is -- that the Bush Administration wants to destroy what makes American special (in Adam's opinion) without destroying the country itself. But since it would cease to be "America" by that point, you could argue that the distinction is irrelevant.
Posts: 37449 | Registered: May 1999
| IP: Logged |
posted
We have other places to put "enemy combatants", including within the US -- where, conveniently, they would immediately gain many rights.
I think it a general rule, at least for myself, that the rights I give somebody should not depend on their current location when I control their location.
Posts: 15770 | Registered: Dec 2001
| IP: Logged |
posted
Oh, and we do call for them to release hostages, strangely.
You have a particular gift for hyperbole; you might find your arguments might improve if you checked your notion of what other people are saying more closely against what they are saying.
Posts: 15770 | Registered: Dec 2001
| IP: Logged |
posted
adam613, you clearly stated that the Bush administration wants to destroy America. You stated that is their goal. Now you are saying something completely different. You believe that they haven't done anything in the past 3 years that didn't furthur the goal of the destruction of America, and that is your belief. My belief is that bringing freedom and democracy to the Middle East will ensure our long term safety and security in America and in the world. So if you were a Congressperson, and stated "When the goal of the Bush administration is the destruction of America, and the Republicans are backing up the Bush administration, hurting the Republicans in any way they can is a worthy goal from the standpoint of Americans" I think you can see why you would be blasted with outrage from Republicans, which is why Durbin is being blasted. Durbin has a right to express his beliefs, as we all do, and we have a right to express our beliefs about his beliefs, and on and on
Posts: 1918 | Registered: Mar 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
We do not send the Red Cross in to make sure the detainees held by the enemy are being treated fairly, I wonder why?
Posts: 1918 | Registered: Mar 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
Democrats have gotten so used to being beaten over the last four years, they are afraid to be themselves for fear of losing even more ground to the Republicans.
They need to get in touch with their base, and realize that they do have supporters out there. If anything, I think they fear for job security, they don't want to get beaten in the mid terms by Republicans coming at them with a more mainstream position.
As far as I'm concerned, if they need to hide their liberalism, they aren't very good liberals. They should be vocal, unapologetically vocal. At least that way they'll have no regrets, and the Republicans might find themselves on their heels for once, rather than on the attack always.
Posts: 21898 | Registered: Nov 2004
| IP: Logged |
posted
Yes. They need to be as strong and tough as the Republicans, not become mini-Republicans. That's why you have a two party system! For balance!
Posts: 9942 | Registered: Mar 2003
| IP: Logged |
posted
Ours is not the Red Cross to send, so I'm not at all surprised we don't send them. They go where they will (and others will let them), being their own organization.
You maintain you typically do your fact checking. Prove it by not saying silly things like that we can send the red cross somewhere.
Posts: 15770 | Registered: Dec 2001
| IP: Logged |
posted
I believe that the current administration honestly wants to help America become strong and morally right, and to help lead the world into a more democratic place.
I also believe they're going about it in an amazingly short-sighted, self-centered manner that ignores the concerns of the rest of the world and many of their own constituents.
Posts: 7790 | Registered: Aug 2000
| IP: Logged |
posted
I'm more cynical. Their economic policies suggest selfishness and caring about their own interests and angrandizement. But, I am bitter that way.
Posts: 9942 | Registered: Mar 2003
| IP: Logged |
posted
The only reason why I'm skeptical about some of the reports coming out of Gitmo -- and why, to a certain extent, I don't necessarily think that everything we're doing there is bad -- is that Al Qaeda manuels actually instruct imprisoned Al Qaeda to immediately report that they were tortured when they are released. I don't know that we can trust the U.S. government accounts, but I also don't know that we can trust the released detainees who claim such torture took place.
Of course, what is actually logged/witnessed is another story. I'm talking about reports of forced sodomy and other, nastier things that have been reported by former prisoners.
Posts: 1784 | Registered: Jun 2001
| IP: Logged |
Printer-friendly view of this topic
![[Frown]](frown.gif)
