http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/04/23/AR2006042301027.html

Quote :

"Pace said at a news conference Nov. 29 with Defense Secretary Donald H. Rumsfeld, "It is absolutely the responsibility of every U.S. service member, if they see inhumane treatment being conducted, to intervene to stop it." Turning to Pace, Rumsfeld responded: "I don't think you mean they have an obligation to physically stop it; it's to report it." "If they are physically present when inhumane treatment is taking place, sir, they have an obligation to try to stop it," Pace answered."

Quote :

"At the time of the inspection, most of the apparent injuries were months old; however, there were indications that three cases of abuse occurred within a week of the inspection. No detainee required immediate hospitalization for injuries at that site," Curry said."

Quote :

""In these facilities that we did inspect unannounced, we saw no signs of abuse," Lynch told reporters at a briefing March 30. "The facilities were, by our standards, overcrowded, but the people being held at those facilities were being properly taken care of; they were being fed, they had water, they were taken care of. So no abuse, no evidence of torture in those facilities." Khalilzad, the U.S. ambassador, said in an interview that when Americans find abuse, "we document it, we investigate, we do a report, and we ultimately pass that report to the government.""

4/24/2006 1:49:06 AM

so what. its not as bad as what saddam did.

besides, the war on terror is more important than some old quaint geneva conventions.

and they wouildnt apply anyhow, since these guys werent wearing a uniform.





[Edited on April 24, 2006 at 2:22 AM. Reason : devils advocate, yo]

4/24/2006 2:20:30 AM

Quote :

"and they wouildnt apply anyhow, since these guys werent wearing a uniform."

i'm pretty sure that's the fuckin point

4/24/2006 8:00:52 AM

Quote :

" so what"

feel free to ignore the question of torture, and what effects it will have upon democracy and instead focus upon the fact that this is another case of our officers and rumsfeld being at odds over what to do in iraq.

or you could care about that whole freedom and torture is not the american way stuff. whatever you think is best.

4/24/2006 8:36:27 AM

A little power drill to the kneecaps never killed anybody...

4/24/2006 9:26:49 AM

^

...a butterfly flaps its wings in Tokyo...

4/24/2006 12:09:21 PM

as a result an airliner crashes into the Pentagon?

4/24/2006 1:02:13 PM

Quote :

" and they wouildnt apply anyhow, since these guys werent wearing a uniform."

then they would have more rights afforded to them, not fewer

I'm always surprised how this hybrid war/law model of justice doesn't scare people. I mean i shouldn't be surprised, but I always am.

[Edited on April 24, 2006 at 1:18 PM. Reason : .]

4/24/2006 1:11:55 PM

^ no shit

we behave like this and then wonder why people "hate our freedom" and want to blow our asses up

I'd like a new foreign policy based on something other than brutality, neocolonialism and profit

please?

4/24/2006 1:16:58 PM

from now on

anytime i travel abroad

i'm hitting up thrift stores and getting some old uniforms

because according to some you fuckers

that makes being held hostage a fucking cake walk

4/24/2006 1:19:27 PM

john mccain would agree with them.

4/24/2006 4:54:35 PM

Quote :

"^ ...a butterfly flaps its wings in Tokyo..."

Quote :

"as a result an airliner crashes into the Pentagon?"

gg Snewf

also gg for this:

^ no shit

we behave like this and then wonder why people "hate our freedom" and want to blow our asses up

I'd like a new foreign policy based on something other than brutality, neocolonialism and profit

please?

4/24/2006 8:11:57 PM

Quote :

""Pace said at a news conference Nov. 29 with Defense Secretary Donald H. Rumsfeld, "It is absolutely the responsibility of every U.S. service member, if they see inhumane treatment being conducted, to intervene to stop it." Turning to Pace, Rumsfeld responded: "I don't think you mean they have an obligation to physically stop it; it's to report it." "If they are physically present when inhumane treatment is taking place, sir, they have an obligation to try to stop it," Pace answered.""

god, that's fucking awesome

LISTEN YOU POLITICAL HACK, CALL ME WHEN YOU GET SOME GODDAMN MORALS

4/24/2006 8:15:11 PM

Quote :

"gg Snewf"

haha, you fucker...yeah, it's good that Snewf caught where I was going...but don't I, 2nd Lt Duke, USMC, get any credit for making the point to begin with?

oh, and that Pace guy they're talking about is General Pace, USMC.

Is my point made, 0EPII1?



to clarify, though, my "butterfly flaps its wings in Tokyo" comment wasn't specifically about terrorism being the end result...it can also (and probably more likely) be something as direct as enemies fighting to the death instead of surrendering, which will result in more deaths. THAT was the point of my response to the "drill to the kneecap never killed anyone" remark.






oh, and one more thing I want to go back to...

theDuke866:

Quote :

" It's your job to butt heads with the powers that be when you feel it to be necessary, anyway."

Id hit it:

Quote :

"No its not. The president doesn't want to replace Rummy thats it. Period. Generals are not politicians, they're still sub-ordinates when it comes to the President."

theDuke866:

Quote :

"Subordinate and "yes man" are two totally different things. General officers the ones who are tasked to advise the civilians who ultimately make the decisions, and they are not only within their rights to butt heads and argue with politicians behind the scenes, they are doing their job by doing so when they feel it to be necessary."

http://brentroad.com/message_topic.aspx?topic=401790

[Edited on April 24, 2006 at 10:32 PM. Reason : asdfasd]

4/24/2006 10:03:40 PM

Why don't people actually read the geneva conventions before quoting it?

4/24/2006 10:20:38 PM

Quote :

"RevoltNow : feel free to ignore the question of torture, and what effects it will have upon democracy"

i think you missed my sarcasm. I've been against BushCo's immoral subversion of the Geneva Convention since the day Gitmo Bay was retasked as an "enemy combatant" detention center. I've been railing against it for 3 years now. Completely ineffective of course. Mabye using the Administration's defenders' arguments as a sort of ad absurdum will be better? anything greater than zero is something, i s'pose.

Quote :

"Excoriator : i'm pretty sure that's the fuckin point"

not sure what you mean, or what you think I mean... but maybe you remember back in Spring 03 when you and I were in Senior Design, and the whole transfer of "enemy combatants" to Gitmo occured, with the announcment that they wouldnt be afforded the protections of the Geneva Conventions. Critics said that meant they could be subject to torture. The official response was "no, that will never happen". and I was like "oh yes it will, and this is totally fucked up. Shits going to go to hell real quick".

When we (America) begin violating the basic human dignity of our enemies for a short-term tactical advantage (of increasingly questionable value, BTW), whether we think our enemies "deserve" human dignity or not, we are just fucking ourselves in the long term.

I mean jesus christ, never mind the higher morality. Even from the lowest common denominator of just protecting your self-interest, torturing prisoners is such an amazingly stupid thing to do.




[Edited on April 25, 2006 at 1:37 AM. Reason : ]

4/25/2006 1:21:20 AM

Quote :

"I mean jesus christ, never mind the higher morality. Even from the lowest common denominator of just protecting your self-interest, torturing prisoners is such an amazingly stupid thing to do."

and you win the thread.

Torture is the most un-american act I can think of.

4/25/2006 2:30:19 AM

when i was a little kid, my dad would explain the vietnam war to me. he was in the service during vietnam.

he would describe how U.S. POWs/MIAs were regularly tortured, often to their death, by their North Vietnamese captors. And he would parallel this with how the Japanese also did hateful stuff to allied prisoners in WWII, such as the Baatan Death March, et. al.

He explained how the Geneva Conventions were developed to prohibit the most barbaric atrocities of war, but that the NVA routinely and blatantly violated the conventions but would deny it and circumvent the International Red Cross, so they kept getting away with it.

all this was his sort of lesson on why America Is Great, and why The Slopes And Communists Are Evil.

Of course I asked "so if they did it to us, why didnt we do it to them back?".

His reply was soemthing like that "If we did it, even in revenge, then we would be no better than them. And unlike them, America does the right thing because we believe in individual human rights and we follow the laws even if they dont".

.........

now fast forward about 20 years, and my dad is firmly entrenched in teh religious right, a faithful follower of the Brother Rush Limbaugh and Deacon Bill O'Reiley, et. al...

he parrots the official propaganda as delivered by the likes of Dick Cheney and Alberto Gonzales, and actaully defends the Administration as being within the legal right to "distress" prisoners. He scoffs at the accusations of torture, and basically says that we arent doing anything near as bad as what Saddam did to his prisoners.

Whats a little nudity and a few broken bones? its not like we're beheading people, right? maybe one or two died, but hey, thats gonna happen no matter what.

It really makes me sad




(and I was in the service during Gulf I... I remember having several lessons on the Geneva Conventions. this stuff was drilled into us as being A Good Thing. we all understood that the Geneva Conventions regardign treatment of Prisoners protected us as much as it protected our potential enemies)



[Edited on April 25, 2006 at 3:09 AM. Reason : ]

4/25/2006 2:59:30 AM

Quote :

"haha, you fucker...yeah, it's good that Snewf caught where I was going...but don't I, 2nd Lt Duke, USMC, get any credit for making the point to begin with? oh, and that Pace guy they're talking about is General Pace, USMC. Is my point made, 0EPII1?"

NO, he DIDN'T catch where you were going with it, because you were NOT going there, as you admit yourself, and as I knew from reading your half comment about the butterfly:

Quote :

"to clarify, though, my "butterfly flaps its wings in Tokyo" comment wasn't specifically about terrorism being the end result"

And that's why, you get no credit, and he does, for steering your comment.

I don't care what your or this Pace guy's position is in the US Military. I don't even know the difference between Lt. and General, and I don't care. Don't waste your time italicizing them.

P.S. BTW, I am not a "fucker" (as you are, self-admittedly, in the literal sense), I make love.

[Edited on April 25, 2006 at 8:52 AM. Reason : ]

4/25/2006 8:51:39 AM

Neither did I exclude terrorism being a result, although I do think the more immediate danger (in a pragmatic, strategic sense--i.e., not even accounting for our obligation to do what is right, and not accounting for the psychological toll that would likely fall on many U.S. servicemen as a result of our administering torture) is that our enemies will be much more reluctant to surrender, which is infinitely preferable to their fighting to the last man.

also, the point of the italics wasn't anyone's respective rank. it was because you seem to think that almost everyone in the U.S. military is barbaric and without a soul. Here we have two Marines speaking against torture (one being the top military man in America, and being rather short with the Secretary of Defense about the subject). also add joe_schmoe to that list, as well as all 3 of my roommates.

4/25/2006 9:58:54 AM

considering where he lives, we should all just ignore OEPII1's comments on any subject related to rights

4/25/2006 10:40:45 AM

^ well, he might have insight on human rights, but considering he "doesnt know and doesnt care" about the difference between Lieutenant and General, we should at least disregard anything he has to comment on about military issues.



[Edited on April 25, 2006 at 11:17 AM. Reason : ]

4/25/2006 11:14:14 AM

so in essence

he is ignorant about who he hates

wow, hypocrite, and a complete dick drip

4/25/2006 11:15:12 AM

^ i think much of America (including our leadership) is ignorant about Islam and the greater Middle East.

yet they would likely say that this is where our enemy is.

that's much more scary than OEP's uninformed ranting.

4/25/2006 11:21:12 AM

so youre saying the middle east and islam have nothing to do with our enemies?

or that terrorism doesnt stem from the middle east and isnt associated in anyway with islam?

being ignorant of what section of islamics (extremists) or why they hate us (some reasons valid, others batshit crazy) is one thing.

but to think our enemies have nothing to do with the middle east or islam is a completely new level of crazy.

4/25/2006 11:27:43 AM

the kid isn't even allowed to be talking on this site, he has to go through proxies so they don't catch him

4/25/2006 11:47:29 AM

Quote :

"so youre saying the middle east and islam have nothing to do with our enemies? or that terrorism doesnt stem from the middle east and isnt associated in anyway with islam?"

I'm going to say that

prior to September 11th, 2001 DOMESTIC terrorism was the biggest threat to this country
(Oklahoma City bombing, Atlanta Olympic bombing, various abortion clinic bombings, etc)

TERRORISM doesn't stem from the Middle East... its a practice that can be employed by almost anyone - and it is

however, certain elements of radical Islam are associated with terrorist acts

4/25/2006 12:13:26 PM

the biggest threat to our country is the erosion of liberty in the name of safety.

4/25/2006 3:23:05 PM

^, ^^

4/25/2006 4:40:36 PM

Quote :

"considering where he lives, we should all just ignore OEPII1's comments on any subject related to rights"

Wow, so the truth value of what one says is proportional to the "democratic-ness" (whatever that means) of the place where that person lives?

Is that part of the Bush doctrine?

Quote :

"so in essence he is ignorant about who he hates"

Thanks for chiming in you idiot. So to judge someone, or to decide whether to hate them or like them, rather than look at that person's opinions and beliefs, you two (JonHGuth and Lokken) look at where the person lives, and what their job title is?

Great!

Quote :

"but considering he "doesnt know and doesnt care" about the difference between Lieutenant and General, we should at least disregard anything he has to comment on about military issues."

You are deifintely one of the few enlightened ones here, but I hope you are not saying that I need to know the said difference, to, for example, say that the US shouldn't have invaded Iraq.

4/25/2006 7:41:54 PM

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/04/25/AR2006042501398.html

charges being brought against a Lt. Col. for Abu Ghraib.

[Edited on April 25, 2006 at 8:20 PM. Reason : speeeelling]

4/25/2006 8:19:40 PM

Quote :

"considering where he lives, we should all just ignore OEPII1's comments on any subject related to rights"

I'm not sure whether or not that was sarcasm.

If it's sarcasm, the point would be totally correct. I think 0EPII1 is probably quite in tune with subjects related to rights, largely BECAUSE of where he lives.


Of course, it could also be a "shut the fuck up, 0EPII1." That would generally be the correct thing to say, but in this case, for the wrong reason.

4/25/2006 8:21:57 PM

Quote :

"OEPII1 : I hope you are not saying that I need to know the said difference, to, for example, say that the US shouldn't have invaded Iraq."

no i guess not. point taken.

but you should really try to understand the hierarchical structure inherent in the worlds' military forces, if you want to be able to effectively criticise militarism. it's not just the US.

of course i may be biased, because i grew up in a military family, my dad, both granddads.

it's the same point i was trying to make with Lokken, that you need to understand your enemy. Americans in particular seem to have a bad habit of defining our enemies (us vs. them) yet not bothering to try and learn anything about these people and what motivates them.

Witness Iraq.

Recall Vietnam.

Expect more of the same in Iran.




[Edited on April 25, 2006 at 11:50 PM. Reason : shit. fuck. hell.]

4/25/2006 11:48:47 PM

communism is bad. free markets good.
have you ever read marx or smith or anyone else for that matter?
no. communism is bad.


not saying the people on this board do this, but there are a thousand examples within every society (and probably within every one's life) of people dismissing things for no reason.

4/25/2006 11:52:26 PM

ive always wondered if the explosion of the internet into the mainstream has contributed to both the extreme political/religious divide across, and the dumbing down of our population.

it seems that all people do anymore is line up selected arguments supporting their predetermined conclusions, to the exclusion of anything else.

it's like people say, "im gonna go stand on this side, then collect every argument that agrees with this side that im on, and attempt to beat the other side over the head with it."

while, of course the other side does the same.

i have to admit, im guilty of it to some extent. although i try not to. its dangerous because its so much easier than critical thought.

4/26/2006 12:13:35 AM

at least now we have evidence to prove our side nowadays.

getting back to the topic:

Quote :

"But Broyles is preparing to challenge the case against his client under a Defense Department directive that formally instructs tribunals to prohibit the use of evidence found to result from torture. "I believe there's torture-related evidence in the prosecution's case against my client," he told reporters without elaborating. "It'll be a pretrial motion," Broyles added. "I have to take a specific piece of evidence and say, 'This statement I challenge because I believe it's a result of torture."'"

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/04/25/AR2006042500080.html

4/26/2006 1:07:00 AM

Quote :

"at least now we have evidence to prove our side nowadays."

by that logic, the other side likewise has "evidence" to "prove" their positions.

4/26/2006 2:12:40 AM

Quote :

"Thanks for chiming in you idiot. So to judge someone, or to decide whether to hate them or like them, rather than look at that person's opinions and beliefs, you two (JonHGuth and Lokken) look at where the person lives, and what their job title is? Great!"

speaking of chiming in and idiots, im suprised youre back in the thread. show me where i said a persons location or what their job title is determines my level of 'hate' to them? Who the fuck are you even arguing against you stupid prick?

I just noted your ignorance of the US military, something youve shown multiple times on here to have a great deal of disdain or contempt for, even down to individual posters who are in the armed forces.

Quote :

"I'm going to say that prior to September 11th, 2001 DOMESTIC terrorism was the biggest threat to this country (Oklahoma City bombing, Atlanta Olympic bombing, various abortion clinic bombings, etc) TERRORISM doesn't stem from the Middle East... its a practice that can be employed by almost anyone - and it is however, certain elements of radical Islam are associated with terrorist acts"

I think that is a rediculous understatement.

At this point, the major terrorist organizations that pose the major threat DO stem from the middle east. the major attacks DO stem from middle eastern countries. and the majority are based on radical islam. Its not some half-assed association like you would imply. (And I also do not implyl that islam is the cause of terrorism)

Pre 9-11 you may be right, domestic terrorism was what we knew the most of, but thats changed.

Of course, ignorant fucksticks like OEP will take that viewpoint to let their little minds run wild with anti-islamic and anti-arab accusations, and will also take it to mean that I think the US is blameless in the current climate.

But what the fuck does he know, he has to break the law to even read this.

[Edited on April 26, 2006 at 12:53 PM. Reason : *]

4/26/2006 12:45:20 PM

I think you need some reading comprehension skills

please look up the word prior

while you're in the dictionary figure out how to spell "ridiculous"

4/26/2006 1:57:45 PM

Quote :

"Pre 9-11 you may be right"

I am aware that you said prior

and stick ridiculous sideways up your ass

4/26/2006 2:09:13 PM

I'm still having trouble understanding what part you are claiming is an understatement

it seems to me that it is just a "statement"

and a correct one at that

4/26/2006 2:24:36 PM

the part where you implied that there was a loose association between 'certain' parts of radical Islam and terrorism.

The major terrorist outfits in the world are all extrem radical Islamics. saying certain aspects of it are associated is an understatement.

Otherwise the comment is pretty much crap aside from noting when the focus and source changed (9/11). At this point most of the major terrorism does stem from the middle east.

Just because anyone can use it doesnt change that.

Didnt think id have to explain it that much, but then ive never had much faith in the posters on this board to grasp much.

4/26/2006 2:39:44 PM

Quote :

"The major terrorist outfits in the world are all extrem radical Islamics."

i don't think i'd go that far

i mean you've got the IRA, the Basque seperatists, the tamil tigers, that group in japan that i can't think of the name, just of the top of my head and quite a few others i'm sure.

the islamists are getting all the press.

4/26/2006 3:09:28 PM

i think he meant "major terrorist organizations that the U.S. has to be directly concerned with"

plus, didn't the IRA knock off most of their shit a few years ago?

4/26/2006 3:21:21 PM

openly, yeah.

i think it scared the shit out of them when we said, "ok we're going after any and all terrorists" after 911 thinking they'd have to deal with us too

too bad they didn't know we meant "any and all terrorist who are brown"

4/26/2006 3:23:22 PM

^^^ well yeah, but just in a scope of who the US's main priority is at this point, compared to before is what i was going for.

4/26/2006 3:41:02 PM

I pity you Lokken.

You are incapable of making any point without throwing in a liberal dose of profanity, insults, and character assasinations, all unwarranted and aimless.

Perhaps you resort to that because without using such langauge you feel inadequate and stupid. In fact, it is because you use such language, that you come off as inadequate and stupid. Or perhaps you think using such language is a sign of masculinity (delayed puberty perhaps?). But trust me, it is not. It might be acceptable from someone in his mid-teens (still not right), but from a 25 year old alumnus?

Obviously, having being in college hasn't done much for you in terms of teaching you how to express yourself as a normal human being. As if one even needs college to teach one to act civilized.

God help you.

[Edited on April 26, 2006 at 5:23 PM. Reason : Brush up on your spelling while you civlize. Did you sleep through elem., mid., hs and college?]

4/26/2006 5:07:36 PM

whats your job title

4/26/2006 5:16:51 PM

Why is that relevant?

Anyway, I am a high school math teacher.

4/26/2006 5:19:27 PM

do you still use an abacus?

4/26/2006 5:47:14 PM