• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

General Rick Sanchez Calls for War Crimes Truth Commission

goldendog

Banned
Joined
May 15, 2009
Messages
4,695
Reaction score
476
Gender
Undisclosed
Political Leaning
Private
Posted: May 31, 2009 10:58 PM
Huffington Post.

Jack Hidary: General Rick Sanchez Calls for War Crimes Truth Commission


In front of a packed audience tonight at the Times Center in New York City, General Ricardo Sanchez, the former commander of all coalition forces in Iraq, called for a truth commission to investigate the abuses and torture which occurred there.

The General described the failures at all levels of civilian and military command that led to the abuses in Iraq, "and that is why I support the formation of a truth commission."

The General went on to say that, "during my time in Iraq there was not one instance of actionable intelligence that came out of these interrogation techniques."

I interviewed General Sanchez after the event and asked him to elaborate on why he felt the US needed such a commission. "For the American people to really know what happened, " he replied, "...this was an institutional failure, a personal failure on the part of many...."

"If we do not find out what happened," continued the General, "then we are doomed to repeat

So the commander of Iraqi forces says "during my time in Iraq there was not one instance of actionable intelligence that came out of these interrogation techniques."
This is the opposite of what Dick Cheney is saying..who's telling the truth here...Cheney with obvious desires to save his hide? Or the commander of the Iraqi forces who has nothing to hide and obviously wants to reveal the truth?
 
Care to comment on the General's point of View TD?
 
A yes the lefts favorite warcriminal.

Lets see General Richard Sanchez commander in Iraq prior to Patreus an the surge.

Rick Sanchez the mass murdering imperialistic warmonger who lies about everything for the evil Bush administraton!!!

THE GENERAL WHO MUST BE REPLACED TO "CHANGE COURSE"!!!!


When replaced by Petraues he complain but wasn't useful until the USA started WINNING in Iraq then his comments became useful to the trash.


You Far Lefties are such two faced jokes.
 
I'd really be interested to know why these military generals are suddenly changing their stance. Is it because their jobs were in jeopardy if they didn't agree with the sitting administration? Anyone on the left who is applauding what these generals are saying should question their motives and question why they didn't speak up sooner before being so quick to celebrate.
 
Who is applauding these comments? Who is celebrating?
 
Last edited:
I'd really be interested to know why these military generals are suddenly changing their stance. Is it because their jobs were in jeopardy if they didn't agree with the sitting administration? Anyone on the left who is applauding what these generals are saying should question their motives and question why they didn't speak up sooner before being so quick to celebrate.

Moon has already elaborated on this in other threads, and I concur with him. Generals simply do not come out against their Commander in Chief. They soldier, they do their jobs. These men can speak freely now that the administration is not likely to hold their words against them.

Their new Commander in Chief wants to put this nation on the right course with regard to torture and inhumane treatment of our captives. To that end Sanchez and Patraeus' comments are not contrary, but complimentary, to the direction of the new administration.

To make these statements during Bush's tenure as President would have been undermining the highest in the chain of command. Soldiers do not do that. Things have changed now. They are free to critique past strategy and discuss the good and the bad.
 
Last edited:
Moon has already elaborated on this in other threads, and I concur with him. Generals simply do not come out against their Commander in Chief. They soldier, they do their jobs. These men can speak freely now that the administration is not likely to hold their words against them.

Their new Commander in Chief wants to put this nation on the right course with regard to torture and inhumane treatment of our captives. To that end Sanchez and Patraeus' comments are not contrary, but complimentary, to the direction of the new administration.

To make these statements during Bush's tenure as President would have been undermining the highest in the chain of command. Soldiers do not do that. Things have changed now. They are free to critique past strategy and discuss the good and the bad.

That may be so, but we should still remain at least somewhat skeptical.
 
Who is applauding these comments? Who is celebrating?

Are you seriously trying to assert that people on the left aren't celebrating a little that these generals are finally agreeing with what they've thought all along about the Iraq war?
 
That may be so, but we should still remain at least somewhat skeptical.

Oh there will be plenty of skepticism, which is why we should do exactly as General Sanchez suggests and have a commission investigate.
 
Oh there will be plenty of skepticism, which is why we should do exactly as General Sanchez suggests and have a commission investigate.

Well, I agree with that completely. And no doubt a lot of people on the right have already thrown General Patraeus under the bus for making his comments, I'm sure they'll have no qualms about doing it to General Sanchez, if they aren't already doing so.
 
Well, I agree with that completely. And no doubt a lot of people on the right have already thrown General Patraeus under the bus for making his comments, I'm sure they'll have no qualms about doing it to General Sanchez, if they aren't already doing so.

At some point in the process the question of "credibility" will rise to the top of the debate and has already started to happen.

Who is more credible?
Cheney who is lying and throwing troops under the bus in a attempt to save his and Bush's legacies?

OR

THe growing number of Generals who are supporting The President while demanding the truth be told about warcrimes? To come clean?
 
Are you seriously trying to assert that people on the left aren't celebrating a little that these generals are finally agreeing with what they've thought all along about the Iraq war?

I'm not "celebrating" per se, but I'm quite glad that these men are speaking out. You have military leaders under the Bush administration who were directly involved with the planning and running of operations making statements that confirm what many of us had already reasoned based upon the available information. We were called troop haters, anti-American, defeatists...and now this promises to offer some vindication.

And what are our detractors to do now that men such as Colin Powell, General Petraeus,General Sanchez, and General Taguba are validating our positions? Try to force the focus on the assertion that "the left" impugned their reputations in the past but now only use them for partisan political reasons. That doesn't even make sense. If you strip all the partisan politics away, these men have said what they said. It's is critical of the Bush administration and lends credence to what many of us were saying for quite some time.
 
At some point in the process the question of "credibility" will rise to the top of the debate and has already started to happen.

Who is more credible?
Cheney who is lying and throwing troops under the bus in a attempt to save his and Bush's legacies?

OR

THe growing number of Generals who are supporting The President while demanding the truth be told about warcrimes? To come clean?

I don't trust Cheney at all, but I am certainly not going to trust the generals without a healthy amount of skepticism. Most people are very self serving and are out for their own personal agendas.
 
Well, I agree with that completely. And no doubt a lot of people on the right have already thrown General Patraeus under the bus for making his comments, I'm sure they'll have no qualms about doing it to General Sanchez, if they aren't already doing so.

Spot on. Powell like Petraeus like Sanchez.
 
Sanchez is on Keith Olberman tonight discussing this issue...
 
I am a democrat and I voted for Obama. I also believe that the truth should be found out about the torture techniques, or whatever label you want to put on them, but not for the purpose of crucifing the past administration.

I disagreed with Bush on many things, but I agreed with the surge, with as much as many people within my own party hate to admit, worked in lowering the levels of violence on the ground. We should all be happy about any success either parties president has in keeping our nation safe. The Bush administration did many things that I hated, but I really believed that he, as well as Cheney truly believed that they were doing what was necessary to prevent further attacks on this nation.

It is beyond my serious consideration that the men charged with leading this nation, regardless of party, are truly scheming to torture and kill people just to do it. They followed their heart and made the best judgement they could for what they knew. All in all it is just different practices for different people. Regardless, we are all Americans and in this together. If torture does not work, then lets not employ it. It is definitely not something we would want to engage in if unnecessary.

We should support our president, no matter who that person is. Criticize freely, but please do not suggest that they are working to some hideous goal. They are using the abilities they have and the knowledge at hand to make very difficult decisions in the hardest job I could imagine. Bush was crazy on many things, but I do not question his or Cheney's intentions in trying to protect this country. Whatever comes of any investigations should be used to improve policy, not to attempt to ruin the reputations of men who tried their best, and were only after all human...
 
Are you seriously trying to assert that people on the left aren't celebrating a little that these generals are finally agreeing with what they've thought all along about the Iraq war?

You're making a logical reach here. Saying that there were acts committed that need to be publicly addressed is one thing. But neither Sanchez or Petraeus has come out against the war.
 
Well, I agree with that completely. And no doubt a lot of people on the right have already thrown General Patraeus under the bus for making his comments, I'm sure they'll have no qualms about doing it to General Sanchez, if they aren't already doing so.



You never heard of General Sanchez?..you have never seen the left use any of his comments in the past?
You do not know that he is basically complaining because he got replaced by Petraeus?
 
You never heard of General Sanchez?..you have never seen the left use any of his comments in the past?

Define Left. And don't use the definition of anyone who disagrees with any of my exceedingly narrow and intolerant views.

You do not know that he is basically complaining because he got replaced by Petraeus?

Good luck proving this. If that was true, why didn't he say this earlier?

And to put on my prophet hat, you won't have any replies other than rants and insults.
 
You never heard of General Sanchez?..you have never seen the left use any of his comments in the past?
Irrelevant to the conversation at hand.
You do not know that he is basically complaining because he got replaced by Petraeus?
Completely unsupported speculation. This does not an argument make. Do you have any information that would substantiate your position other than your opinion?
 
Why, you got something against a guy who wants to the truth to be uncovered?
He ran that war for a while didn't he? That makes him a war criminal doesn't it? Well let him be executed. Why do we need a commission, we know criminals like him support torture and other war crimes, don't we?
 
He ran that war for a while didn't he? That makes him a war criminal doesn't it? Well let him be executed. Why do we need a commission, we know criminals like him support torture and other war crimes, don't we?

So you're now saying we did commit war crimes?
 
Their new Commander in Chief wants to put this nation on the right course with regard to torture and inhumane treatment of our captives. To that end Sanchez and Patraeus' comments are not contrary, but complimentary, to the direction of the new administration.

If this were the case. Why are we still sending people to other country's to be tortured? Why did President Obama leave that intact?

"the Obama administration appears to have determined that the rendition program was one component of the Bush administration's war on terrorism that it could not afford to discard..."Obviously you need to preserve some tools -- you still have to go after the bad guys," said an Obama administration official, speaking on condition of anonymity when discussing the legal reasoning. "The legal advisors working on this looked at rendition. It is controversial in some circles and kicked up a big storm in Europe. But if done within certain parameters, it is an acceptable practice." - John V. Santore: What is Obama's Rendition Policy?

And let us not forget Obama's numerous torture loopholes:

"“America does not torture,” Barack Obama recently proclaimed. George Bush said the same thing, and was proven to be lying. An analysis of President Obama’s executive order on torture “may permit cruel abuses of prisoners to continue.” Although the order seems to cover the closing of CIA torture centers, it does not mention torture centers that might be run by other federal agencies or corporate outfits like Blackwater. And, while imposing safeguards on prisoners taken in “armed conflict,” the order pointedly leaves out prisoners seized in “counterrorism operations.” Obama should close these huge loopholes, or “explain why he won’t.” - Obama's Numerous Torture Loopholes | Black Agenda Report

To make these statements during Bush's tenure as President would have been undermining the highest in the chain of command. Soldiers do not do that. Things have changed now. They are free to critique past strategy and discuss the good and the bad.

This is true.
 
Back
Top Bottom