• 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!

Do you support Obama's continuation of Bush's policies on the War on Terror?

Do you support Obama's continuation of Bush's policies on the War on Terror?

  • Yes

    Votes: 12 54.5%
  • No

    Votes: 10 45.5%

  • Total voters
    22

zimmer

Educating the Ignorant
Banned
DP Veteran
Joined
Dec 19, 2008
Messages
24,380
Reaction score
7,805
Location
Worldwide
Gender
Undisclosed
Political Leaning
Conservative
Yes or no?

Except for enhanced interrogation techniques, all is in place, and it was advanced interrogation techniques that set the stage for blowing the top off Osama von Fishfood.


.
 
I supported them when Bush utilized the same tactics. Listen, I do not care how much people want to think that our soldiers will be treated right by the enemy if captured and we do not employ advanced techniques, the truth is that terrorists are going to torture and most likely decapitate them either way. So if you want to win a war you have to do some uncomfortable things, and I for one could care the least what happens to those who wish to harm this country.
 
Neither.

He's between a rock and hard place.

:) Ahhhhhhhhh... another confused Lib. Need time for some think tank dweeb to help twist the truth to get you out of your moment of discomfort?

.
 
I supported them when Bush utilized the same tactics. Listen, I do not care how much people want to think that our soldiers will be treated right by the enemy if captured and we do not employ advanced techniques, the truth is that terrorists are going to torture and most likely decapitate them either way. So if you want to win a war you have to do some uncomfortable things, and I for one could care the least what happens to those who wish to harm this country.
So, Abu Graib did not bother you? Just curious?

Well, I do care, but I do not see waterboarding as torture. Folks don't die from waterboarding, and if an odd terrorist does, well... too bad. People think we use this as a first line of action... when in reality it is very, very rare.

.
 
:) Ahhhhhhhhh... another confused Lib. Need time for some think tank dweeb to help twist the truth to get you out of your moment of discomfort?

.

My opinons are my own. I am completely fine with recognizing that the world, and reality, is not a black-vs.-white, yes-and-no type of world. Anyone who thinks in such simplistic terms needs to get a grip. Some of Obama's strategies and tactics I begrudgingly support, some I don't.
 
My opinons are my own. I am completely fine with recognizing that the world, and reality, is not a black-vs.-white, yes-and-no type of world. Anyone who thinks in such simplistic terms needs to get a grip. Some of Obama's strategies and tactics I begrudgingly support, some I don't.

ROTFLOL... I can understand if you have not thought it through, but it really is not a difficult question, unless it reveals you support Bush 43 where most of your type (and perhaps you too) had bashed and smashed him for his actions to protect this nation and its citizens from harm by terror idiots.

It is not a difficult question... unless... (major league spin icon).

.
 
So, Abu Graib did not bother you? Just curious?

Well, I do care, but I do not see waterboarding as torture. Folks don't die from waterboarding, and if an odd terrorist does, well... too bad. People think we use this as a first line of action... when in reality it is very, very rare.

.

The only problem with prison's such as Abu Graib is that they lead to turning those who are not involved into involved. The White House admitted that Abu Graib created more terrorists than it stopped. What they did in general, had it worked I would have no problem with because folks, war is messy. If you do not have the stomach to do what must be done to stop the enemy, then stay home and don't play. War is killing and destroying, and if you tie your hands then it is you who will be destroyed.
 
......and the vital information that led to the dispatching of Osama......came straight out of Gitmo.

Good thing it wasnt shut down huh Libs?
.
.
.
.
 
ROTFLOL... I can understand if you have not thought it through, but it really is not a difficult question, unless it reveals you support Bush 43 where most of your type (and perhaps you too) had bashed and smashed him for his actions to protect this nation and its citizens from harm by terror idiots.

It is not a difficult question... unless... (major league spin icon).

.

The problem with your question is not that it's too difficult. It is that it's too simplistic. If you are done being a partisan hack, I would appreciate debating this topic with people who can actually act like adults.
 
Last edited:
......and the vital information that led to the dispatching of Osama......came straight out of Gitmo.

Good thing it wasnt shut down huh Libs?
.
.
.
.

I didn't support closing Gitmo. However, are you seriously suggesting that location somehow has a bearing on how prisoners are interrogated? If a prisoner can be beat up and tortured in Gitmo, the same can be done in a supermax prison stateside.
 
The White House admitted that Abu Graib created more terrorists than it stopped.

Anyone have a link for that? Please, thanks.
 
I really don't, only because with Obama in place they're not really able to be enforced. The truth is that you need to have an angry, ugly side of foreign policy to push your enemies and make them back down instead of push you back. If they don't fear you, it doesn't really matter. They feared Bush. They don't fear Obama.

It's similar as to why foreign terrorists mocked Carter heartily back in the day, but when Reagan was elected they waived the white flag immediately. Perception is reality.
 
I supported them when Bush utilized the same tactics. Listen, I do not care how much people want to think that our soldiers will be treated right by the enemy if captured and we do not employ advanced techniques, the truth is that terrorists are going to torture and most likely decapitate them either way. So if you want to win a war you have to do some uncomfortable things, and I for one could care the least what happens to those who wish to harm this country.

I could care less about the welfare of the terrorists we have locked up in GITMO and beyond. Most of them probably deserve to be locked away. But my feelings about the enemy should not outweigh my values as an American and as a human being. War is hell, that is clear, and soldiers are required to do some things in the line of duty that many of us would never have nightmares about, and may God bless them and their sacrifice. But our leaders and lawmakers are a different story, and they should be held to a different standard. Being an American isn't easy, or at least it shouldn't be, in that sometimes our adherance to inconvenient rules and values may halt our need for blood vengance and actions that we normally would condemn in others.
 
I could care less about the welfare of the terrorists we have locked up in GITMO and beyond. Most of them probably deserve to be locked away. But my feelings about the enemy should not outweigh my values as an American and as a human being. War is hell, that is clear, and soldiers are required to do some things in the line of duty that many of us would never have nightmares about, and may God bless them and their sacrifice. But our leaders and lawmakers are a different story, and they should be held to a different standard. Being an American isn't easy, or at least it shouldn't be, in that sometimes our adherance to inconvenient rules and values may halt our need for blood vengance and actions that we normally would condemn in others.

Well said.
 
No, we should pull our forces out. Both Saddam and Osama are dead, we have brought democracy to both Iraq and Afghanistan, we have brought relative stability and security to the region, and we have killed most of the terrorists. It's time to call it a victory and head home. The Iraqi and Afghani security forces can take it from here.
 
No, we should pull our forces out. Both Saddam and Osama are dead, we have brought democracy to both Iraq and Afghanistan, we have brought relative stability and security to the region, and we have killed most of the terrorists. It's time to call it a victory and head home. The Iraqi and Afghani security forces can take it from here.

I appreciate your honest opinion, but I don't think these assertions are entirely true. I'd agree with you if they were.
 
......and the vital information that led to the dispatching of Osama......came straight out of Gitmo.

Good thing it wasnt shut down huh Libs?
.
.
.
.

The AP originally reported this, but has backtracked. They recently added to their original story with the detail:

Mohammed did not reveal the names while being subjected to the simulated drowning technique known as waterboarding, former officials said. He identified them many months later under standard interrogation, they said, leaving it once again up for debate as to whether the harsh technique was a valuable tool or an unnecessarily violent tactic.
 
Neither.

He's between a rock and hard place.

Exactly. The answer is not really up there. He's doing somethings I don't support at all, like rendition and exculating Afghanistan. He has some things which are beyond his total control, like closing Gitmo. And somethings that i agree with, like ending the defense of torture and placing the focus on Afghanistan over Iraq. So, it's mixed.
 
Exactly. The answer is not really up there. He's doing somethings I don't support at all, like rendition and exculating Afghanistan. He has some things which are beyond his total control, like closing Gitmo. And somethings that i agree with, like ending the defense of torture and placing the focus on Afghanistan over Iraq. So, it's mixed.

Things I do have a problem with:
- The continuing use of extraodinary rendition
- Gitmo detainees not being afforded due process

Things I think were a positive:
- Drawdown in Iraq

Things I don't particularly lean one way or the other, I just think it's a difficult situation:
- ongoing operations in Afghanistan. If he wants to pull out now, the Afghan government isn't ready to take over the country, and neither are their security forces. On the other hand, if we actually want to do this "nation-building" thing the right way, we may be stuck there for a generation.

That's all I have for now, pretty sure I left some other things out that I can't think of off the top of my head.
 
Last edited:
Well Obama and the majority of Liberals in Washington did.........

.
.
.
.

That's their problem, not mine.

And you still haven't responded to my point. Location has no bearing on the treatment of detainees. You can take them out of Gitmo and interrogate them just as well as you can anywhere else.
 
Back
Top Bottom