• 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!

The Christmas attack interrogation

Emotional? Hardly.

Don't break your arm patting yourself on the back for knocking down your own straw men, okay spanky? :roll:

The 'spanky' name calling proves me right, you're upset...emotional.

And I apologize for making you so. Your argument however, leaks like an old faucet. Brutality decisions cannot sit with the domestic authorities, C....anyway you slice that idea, it's still poppycock.
 
The 'spanky' name calling proves me right, you're upset...emotional.

And I apologize for making you so. Your argument however, leaks like an old faucet. Brutality decisions cannot sit with the domestic authorities, C....anyway you slice that idea, it's still poppycock.
Okay bright boy, tell me how running around bombing the **** out of countries that look at us wrong will fix anything.
 
Okay bright boy, tell me how running around bombing the **** out of countries that look at us wrong will fix anything.

Number one I'm not a boy, two, "bright" is a massive understatement.

But one doesn't habe to be bright, one looks to history and merely reads...to know your theory here is poppycock.

And btw...where is it I'm suggesting bombing the **** out of countries fixes things? I beleive I suggested brutal violence has its obvious effects and cannot be omitted. I actually support the carrot and stick method but...if yer afriad or hesitant to use the stick...don;t even take it. And if yer not gonna even take it, we don't want you negotiating. Savvy?
 
But one doesn't habe [sic] to be bright, one looks to history and merely reads...to know your theory here is poppycock.
Not what I asked.
And btw...where is it I'm suggesting bombing the **** out of countries fixes things? I beleive I suggested brutal violence has its obvious effects and cannot be omitted. I actually support the carrot and stick method but...if yer afriad or hesitant to use the stick...don;t even take it. And if yer not gonna even take it, we don't want you negotiating. Savvy?
Why the hell should I take the time to figure out your theory when it is so much easier to misrepresent it as you have done mine?

Anyway, running around bombing countries that disagree with us is no way to conduct ourselves. I don't know why you keep suggesting that it is.
 
Meaning it would not be unreasonable to think violence and brutal at that would have to be engaged...and it's what you called for and now wish washing back and forth to other's domestic decisions. And I couldn't care less if you remember or not, JD3, I remember. You were a perfect posterchild for the Left, it's perfect example war opposition. I remember it quite well. And take joy in your attempts to redefine yourself, a badge of honor I wear proudly, you hardly sound like the same Cat and don't respond when I ask you about your positions on such things as Jumah Al-Dossari. What a difference a year makes.

No, meaning that in the cost of any capture, **** happens. It does not mean that we can bag him and beat him to death, torture him or commit any other overt form of brutality.

As for responding to you, you hold on to errors like death. The fact that you have it wrong is enough for me. No need to go over it again.

The "not likes" are needed as your argument isn't consistent. It is your and C's argument that any decision for brutality be taken by the domestic government. I point out where that's idiocy and yer both making "it's different" excuses. Sorry, you're both dead wrong.

You seem again to have the arguments wrong.
 
No, meaning that in the cost of any capture, **** happens. It does not mean that we can bag him and beat him to death, torture him or commit any other overt form of brutality.

But, you'd need the domestic authorities permission or decision to **** happens it...wouldn't you? Isn't it your position...and that of C's.....that the decider to use violence remains with the domestic authority. Unless it's Afghanistan cause...well...it's "different." So I back up to USS Cole days and ask again......do we wait to strike back with brutality only on the domestic authorities' decision?

What utter poppycock.

No need to go over it again.

You dare not go over it again, you won't touch Jumah, he makes you look so soft on terror now, especially following the Xmas bomber. You would have let the Cat go, JD, and you know it. Even told me there was no other choice. Don't be unproud to remain exactly who you were, again, your attempt to redefine under a different moniker I take as a personal honor.;)
 
Last edited:
But, you'd need the domestic authorities permission or decision to **** happens it...wouldn't you? Isn't it your position...and that of C's.....that the decider to use violence remains with the domestic authority. Unless it's Afghanistan cause...well...it's "different." So I back up to USS Cole days and ask again......do we wait to strike back with brutality only on the domestic authorities' decision?

What utter poppycock.

Don't confuse the two of us. His position is his. I only noted for you that Afghanistan is not completely sovereign.

As for OBL, he might well have been a rare case in which you go in, get him and get out. Afghanistan would be rightly upset. And there would have been an uproar. But it would have ended much sooner than what we did. Compared to invading and occupying, it is a lesser of the evils.


You dare not go over it again, you won't touch Jumah, he makes you look so soft on terror now, especially following the Xmas bomber. You would have let the Cat go, JD, and you know it. Even told me there was no other choice. Don't be unproud to remain exactly who you were, again, your attempt to redefine under a different moniker I take as a personal honor.;)

As I said, there's no reason to repeatedly address your misreadings. You seldom get the argument right and seem incapable of addressing them as they are. I will no longer spend time playing that game with you.
 
Don't confuse the two of us. His position is his. I only noted for you that Afghanistan is not completely sovereign.
He has confused himself beyond our ability to disentangle him. It is probably best to leave him to his own delusions.
 
As for OBL, he might well have been a rare case in which you go in, get him and get out. Afghanistan would be rightly upset. And there would have been an uproar. But it would have ended much sooner than what we did. Compared to invading and occupying, it is a lesser of the evils.

You just simply cannot say it would be the lesser of two evils, not invading would have left much of their leadership intact, we could have had another catastrophic domestic attack for all we know. Guessing JD....you know I ain't into supposition and less this or that.

As I said, there's no reason to repeatedly address your misreadings.

You won't bring the issue up at all....ever again...despite my "misreadings." We will never speak to Jumah, Lancet will never be referred by you again as an above board study, we're not even going to go into rights you grew up with.

I remember you telling me you were going to give Obama as least as much time to solve the Gitmo and enemy combatant issue as you gave Bush...here we are a year away from his promise and...as predicted by me on WS......the prison remains open. And your silence Sir, is predictably deafening.

ANd no matter how long he keeps men there, no matter how many he adds to the expanding prison in Bagram, this man you'll vote for again in 2012. I already know the score, JD, you need not raise these issues again. You were wrong then, today's reality more than prioving that.
 
He has confused himself beyond our ability to disentangle him. It is probably best to leave him to his own delusions.

Don't underestimate your abilities, you two simply cannot back your previous statements. Challenged to do so, it's the :surrender from both of you, accusations I've misread.

It's clear you've made miscalculations, I'm merely correcting the both of you, neither of you are liking it, we move on.
 
Last edited:
Yeah, stupid rights ain't for them brown people anyway, just for us red-blooded Americans. :roll:


Hmmm....Is that what I said? You wouldn't be trying to misrepresent me here now would you? :cool:


j-mac
 
Hmmm....Is that what I said? You wouldn't be trying to misrepresent me here now would you? :cool:
I dunno, you tell me: does your copy of the Declaration of Independence say, "We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all citizens of the United States who are in possession of the proper paperwork and/or permits at the time of their arrest and trial are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness"?

Mine doesn't ...
 
You just simply cannot say it would be the lesser of two evils, not invading would have left much of their leadership intact, we could have had another catastrophic domestic attack for all we know. Guessing JD....you know I ain't into supposition and less this or that.



You won't bring the issue up at all....ever again...despite my "misreadings." We will never speak to Jumah, Lancet will never be referred by you again as an above board study, we're not even going to go into rights you grew up with.

I remember you telling me you were going to give Obama as least as much time to solve the Gitmo and enemy combatant issue as you gave Bush...here we are a year away from his promise and...as predicted by me on WS......the prison remains open. And your silence Sir, is predictably deafening.

ANd no matter how long he keeps men there, no matter how many he adds to the expanding prison in Bagram, this man you'll vote for again in 2012. I already know the score, JD, you need not raise these issues again. You were wrong then, today's reality more than prioving that.

Their leadership, being meaningless to the system they run, wasn't really disrupted that much. Again, the CIA says they are as strong as ever. All that price paid and no gain. Yes, I think I can say it would have been the lessor of two evils.


As for Gitmo, progress is being made. We can't for get Bush's people had mishandled the files and made Obama spend months trying to find those files. Nor can we for get the scare American's campaign concerning moving them. But keep playing the game of trying to treat unequal things as if they were equal. ;)
 
I dunno, you tell me: does your copy of the Declaration of Independence say, "We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all citizens of the United States who are in possession of the proper paperwork and/or permits at the time of their arrest and trial are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness"?

Mine doesn't ...

True, not to mention it also regulates conduct as much as it enumerates rights.
 
Yes, I think I can say it would have been the lessor of two evils.

It's just another one of your guesses.

As for Gitmo, progress is being made.

You told me values you'd grown up with had been dismissed, "progress" shouldn't be the bar. You told me you'd give Obama as much time as you gave Bush, this prison will be open when as much time as you gave Bush expires and it won't cost Obama your vote nor will you make such grandoise accusations. I told you your outrage was selective and false, I read your argument like an inexpensive easy to comprehend novel, I predicted reality today...to the tee. And not because I'm smart...but because your arguments were so selective, I easily exposed them as disingenuous. Sorry, we've probably little cred left with each other's arguments, your arguments have absolutely none with me your record of grave error and Lancet wagon jumping style of argument a clear testament to that.

And it doesn't stop at Gitmo. Obama continues to spy on America, access company records, he has extended the Patriot Act the Left wanted Bush impeached for. Obama continues to expand the prison abroad(a topic you never discuss, JD, another deafening silence highlight as your arguments are selective) at Bagram. Bush's policy followed to the tee in Iraq(humorous Obama takes credit for ending the war, he's following exactly the SOFA agreement between Iraq and the Bush Administration and both you and I know it).

Selective and fake outrage always easy to see.;)
 
Last edited:
It's just another one of your guesses.



You told me values you'd grown up with had been dismissed, "progress" shouldn't be the bar. You told me you'd give Obama as much time as you gave Bush, this prison will be open when as much time as you gave Bush expires and it won't cost Obama your vote nor will you make such grandoise accusations. I told you your outrage was selective and false, I read your argument like an inexpensive easy to comprehend novel, I predicted reality today...to the tee. And not because I'm smart...but because your arguments were so selective, I easily exposed them as disingenuous. Sorry, we've probably little cred left with each other's arguments, your arguments have absolutely none with me your record of grave error and Lancet wagon jumping style of argument a clear testament to that.

And it doesn't stop at Gitmo. Obama continues to spy on America, access company records, he has extended the Patriot Act the Left wanted Bush impeached for. Obama continues to expand the prison abroad(a topic you never discuss, JD, another deafening silence highlight as your arguments are selective) at Bagram. Bush's policy followed to the tee in Iraq(humorous Obama takes credit for ending the war, he's following exactly the SOFA agreement between Iraq and the Bush Administration and both you and I know it).

Selective and fake outrage always easy to see.;)

I gave Bush a lot of time, up until he lost his mind on Iraq. Obama deserves as much.
 
I gave Bush a lot of time, up until he lost his mind on Iraq. Obama deserves as much.

How much time did you give Bush again...JD? Bush invaded Iraq in March of 03, how much time did you give him now? March of 04 would have been one year...March of 05, two years. How long before you were being critical on prisoner policies now?

:Oopsie

Your renewed effort to redine yourself simply delicious.:)
 
Last edited:
Back
Top Bottom