• 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!

Gitmo inmate: My treatment shames American flag [W:508,759]

So somehow being a low level guy assigned to a security detail means he's responsible for 9/11? Well, since I guess we cant actually prosecute the Saudi's who helped create all those guys (they sell us cheap oil! Great guys!) we need to find some scapegoat.

Works for me. Call it a message in a goat bladder to others with similar aspirations.
 
He admitted that some CIA officers' actions were "not authorized, were abhorrent and rightly should be repudiated by all. And we fell short in holding some officers accountable for their mistakes.".....snip~


Just curious, how do we hold them 'accountable' if their acts are buried and kept secret?

And I'm sorry, but the "not authorized" BS is weak. It's called CYA and a fave of the elites so they can shift the blame to some grunt whose actions were applauded and encouraged till they were found out by the wrong people. The clue there is people engaged in allegedly 'unauthorized' acts but SURPRISE!! weren't "held accountable" through normal channels - probably because they were authorized, just not formally.
 
It goes back to my original argument about terrorists and saving lives.



He admitted that some CIA officers' actions were "not authorized, were abhorrent and rightly should be repudiated by all. And we fell short in holding some officers accountable for their mistakes.".....snip~


Disgrace: Senate Democrats' Flawed, Reckless CIA Interrogation Report.....

What did this accomplish? It may fire up the lefty base and sate ideologues' political bloodlust after a brutal election, but this issue isn't a major advantage to posturing Democrats. Why? Americans overwhelmingly believe that "torture" is sometimes justified:
torture2.png


Disgrace: Senate Democrats' Flawed, Reckless CIA Interrogation Report - Guy Benson

Great. We now have national policy being done because people watch "24" and think its real.
 
Yes I did. All that you needed to read?

Actually, yes. When you call a person a "thing" there really isn't a need to read any more. And rational discussion is obviously not going to happen.
 
Let me help you out.

Showing someone pornography isn't torture in my book. Pouring gasoline down someone's throat and setting her ablaze is torture. Cutting off someone's ears and legs before killing them is torture. Taking a knife and slowly cutting someone to bits is torture.

To you pornography is torture.

My post was clear. And very brief.

Your post was akin to claiming that emotional pain isn't real pain. It's a cruel heartless position that has no basis in reality. Numerous scientific studies have concluded that emotional pain and emotional anguish are just as real as the pain of losing a limb. In fact when it comes to torture, mental torture is probably more painful and damaging than physical pain. Watch the myth busters episode on Chinese water torture. Despite being able to stop it at any time, the person exposed was going through a mental breakdown after a few hours.

Also your post ignores the fact that torture can depend on the individual. Serving a prisoner bacon would usually be a treat, but what about a devout Jew? Would that not be torture to force someone to eat something that they believed to be a sin against their god? Devout Muslims (and many others) view watching pornography as evil. And again, we're not even talking about normal stuff. I doubt many people could be forced to watch something like 2 girls 1 cup and not consider it to be torture.

As for it's brevity, that's not a valid defense. It would be like reading the Diary of Anne Frank and saying only, "Being locked in a room isn't that bad". Claiming that this statement was brief would not excuse the entire lack of human empathy it took to say it. It's not just brief, it's intentionally ignoring tremendous human suffering.

Finally, something can be torture and not be the worst possible thing ever. Otherwise it would be clear that your definition of torture pales in comparison to the real thing. Burning? Cutting off someone’s ears? Decapitation? Those are positively luxurious compared to some thinks we've thought up over the years. Judas' cradle, flaying, the breaking wheel, the pear of anguish, the head crusher, the iron maiden, the Spanish tickler, and many many other torture devices are on an entirely different level of cruelty.
 
Actually, yes. When you call a person a "thing" there really isn't a need to read any more. And rational discussion is obviously not going to happen.

Ok. So if that is the case, your decision to have a discussion means you're going to be irrational too?
 
Great. We now have national policy being done because people watch "24" and think its real.

Yeah, but we do have some actually go out there and put their ass on the line. Die for it too.

Not to many can handle whats out there. That's why they get to sit back and watch TV shows.
 
Ok. So if that is the case, your decision to have a discussion means you're going to be irrational too?

I'm not engaging with you on the topic of the thread. No point.
 
Yeah, but we do have some actually go out there and put their ass on the line. Die for it too.

Not to many can handle whats out there. That's why they get to sit back and watch TV shows.

Yes, and many of them who put their asses on the line agree that our EIT/torture program was a national disgrace.
 
Yeah, but we do have some actually go out there and put their ass on the line. Die for it too.

Not to many can handle whats out there. That's why they get to sit back and watch TV shows.

Die for what? For a country where we believe that no one is above or beneath the law? A place where everyone has the right to a fair trial. A place where the government can't just take you away in the middle of the night based on the say so of a neighbor?

That place?
 
Die for what? For a country where we believe that no one is above or beneath the law? A place where everyone has the right to a fair trial. A place where the government can't just take you away in the middle of the night based on the say so of a neighbor?

That place?


Did you want to say they didn't die for what they believed in? Btw at least the Military get a headstone with their Name on it when they die. These guys get something, but nothing to identify them.
 
Where the hell are our ethics? Our principles as a nation given the results we see today from all this?
Do you really believe that the United States is admired for their 'ethics', or principles'? That suggests that other nations don;t believe they are the most ethical in the world, with the greatest number of principles. People around the world are watching the incredibly rapid decline of a once great superpower and laughing at the idea of American 'ethics', as though they are so very 'special'.
 
Did you want to say they didn't die for what they believed in? Btw at least the Military get a headstone with their Name on it when they die. These guys get something, but nothing to identify them.

So what? They were fighting for a country that incarcerates six innocent people in Gitmo for five years, then releases them in South America, never having filed charges. They gave up their lives for a country that allows a captive to freeze to death chained to a concrete floor in the Salt Pit in Afghanistan, then note in passing that his rendition was a case of mistaken identity.
 
Is anybody really taking the advice of GITMO inmates?
 
Where the hell are our ethics? Our principles as a nation given the results we see today from all this?
Americans voted in a serial liar as their President, re-elected him, and have since become ignored and distrusted around the world. America has become a country of domestic strong arm party politics with little talk ever of 'morals' or 'ethics'.
 
No, the US just does business with those who do these things (e.g. Saudis). Certainly America looks the other way with regard to stonings and beheadings when it suits them.
Leftists certainly don;t complain much about these continuing stonings and beheadings. In fact to raise the question is to be called "Islamophobic".
 
Yes, and many of them who put their asses on the line agree that our EIT/torture program was a national disgrace.

Some do.....many don't. You didn't want to say that with many of those coming out of the woodwork that they are sticking up for Feinstein's Report. Did you?
 
So what? They were fighting for a country that incarcerates six innocent people in Gitmo for five years, then releases them in South America, never having filed charges. They gave up their lives for a country that allows a captive to freeze to death chained to a concrete floor in the Salt Pit in Afghanistan, then note in passing that his rendition was a case of mistaken identity.

Say What Skipper, :2wave: England can't run around and point any fingers nor act like they had a better sense of morality. :naughty
 
I don't think we should have 'respect' for our enemy but I think we are just better than that.
Your enemy is certainly amused by that attitude.

Like we should set an example not lay down in the gutter.
What 'examples' have impressed your enemies thus far?

Would you want someone a captured Amercian to get that same treatment?
They behead Americans and other foreigners they capture and have been doing it for years, while Americans complain about terrorists having to watch pornography and will again turn on themselves, just as we see on these related threads.
 
Is anybody really taking the advice of GITMO inmates?

People of a certain political persuasion now believe the terrorists while attacking their own elected government who protected them from terrorists. This goes well beyond stupid.
 
Say What Skipper, :2wave: England can't run around and point any fingers nor act like they had a better sense of morality. :naughty

That's a thin defence of depravity.
 
Some do.....many don't. You didn't want to say that with many of those coming out of the woodwork that they are sticking up for Feinstein's Report. Did you?

I'm sure "they" (if you mean veterans) have wide and varying opinions on the subject, including the report and its release.
 
Back
Top Bottom