AbuGrab take 2? Will the left persecute Obama like they did Bush?

[Remodeling Maidiac]

Who's deflecting? You're the one who came up with this idiotic brain fart. If you want to compare apples to apples, where is the torture and prisoner abuse?

This thread is about our soldiers acting poorly and how Obama escapes ridicule for it when the right was blasted. You can cite your facts and spin all you want but it just goes to prove my point. Stop targeting me and look within. I simply posted the story and a couple of you are going nuts. Show some spine for once.

I'm hardly going nuts over your silly attempt to compare apples and oranges. I'm just pointing out how silly it is to compare this stupid behavior with the systematic torture and abuse at Abu Ghraib.

The Secretary of Defense and already condemned the behavior. I agree with him. He also said that these soldiers will face disciplinary actions. I hope he doesn't go overboard. That's a far cry from Rumsfeld and Cheney trying to argue that torture is not torture, and personally authorizing it.

The thread is still a silly brain fart. Try digging up something more of substance, and use intelligence and logic. This is no more than a feeble attempt to attack, and makes you look stupid.

Still missed the point. Typical liberal.

 

[Remodeling Maidiac]

That is beyond the pale, asshole.

Negged

Carry on with your pointless insults and diversions.

What are you claiming, asshole? That murder of sleeping civilians is now part of our policy? Are you accusing the whole of the US Military of having a policy of War Crimes?

Asshole, Abu Gharib was Bush and Cheney's policy in action. That murder was the action of one soldier gone over the edge. Your accusation of the whole of the military is beyond the pale, and you know it.

So the cic is only responsible for his subordinates when he has an R next to his name. Got it....

 

[Dr.Drock]

Those are not "opinions". Did you read the declassified memo? Interesting wasn't it. Thought not. I will not argue with stupid. What does that conversation re: insurance have to do with anything? Are you saying that all those who don't have obscene resources to live a dignified life in this country should just pay up and shut up - and take their suffering, or pile on the roomates and get 3 jobs? Or should we try to change things to make them better for everyone (remember my non-profit insurance co-op idea as well)?

I didn't read the convo you guys had, but just one little point. If you said you couldn't get insurance, you'd be lying, if you said you wouldn't get insurance because you believed the benefits of having it weren't worth as much to you as the benefits of not having a roommate, than that would make sense.

 

[Dick Tuck]

This thread is about our soldiers acting poorly and how Obama escapes ridicule for it when the right was blasted. You can cite your facts and spin all you want but it just goes to prove my point. Stop targeting me and look within. I simply posted the story and a couple of you are going nuts. Show some spine for once.

I'm hardly going nuts over your silly attempt to compare apples and oranges. I'm just pointing out how silly it is to compare this stupid behavior with the systematic torture and abuse at Abu Ghraib.

The Secretary of Defense and already condemned the behavior. I agree with him. He also said that these soldiers will face disciplinary actions. I hope he doesn't go overboard. That's a far cry from Rumsfeld and Cheney trying to argue that torture is not torture, and personally authorizing it.

The thread is still a silly brain fart. Try digging up something more of substance, and use intelligence and logic. This is no more than a feeble attempt to attack, and makes you look stupid.

Still missed the point. Typical liberal.

You made no point. You manufactured a bullshit comparison, in the idiotic hope of exposing hypocritical behavior. Did you find any Democrats that supported the behavior of these soldiers, like the wingnuts did with Abu Ghriaib? Nope. Huge fail.

 

[patrickt]

NYT: U.S. Condemns Photos of Soldie

KABUL - Photographs apparently showing United States soldiers posing with body parts of dead insurgents drew strong condemnation on Wednesday from American officials including Defense Secretary Leon E. Panetta and the commander of international forces in Afghanistan.

The Los Angeles Times published on the front page of its early editions a photograph of what it described as a soldier from the Army's 82nd Airborne Division with a dead insurgent's hand on his shoulder. It said the photograph was one of 18 of soldiers posing with the corpses of insurgent fighters given to the newspaper by a soldier who served in Afghanistan with the 82nd Airborne's Fourth Brigade Combat Team from Fort Bragg, N.C. The newspaper said the Afghan died planting a bomb, citing police.


My how the tables have turned....

Your post is as dumb as the actions of those soldiers. Abu Gharib was about actions under a policy that condoned torture. This is about actions taken by soldiers under combat conditions that do not involve live opponents. Dumb actions, since they create even more animosity.

The fact that you even try to equate this with the actions at Abu Gharib is an indiction of the lack of morality on your part.

And, to accomplish their goal they had to redefine torture to include a woman rubbing her breats on a prisoner and saying rude things about a prisoners mother.

 

[grunt11b]

NYT: U.S. Condemns Photos of Soldie

KABUL - Photographs apparently showing United States soldiers posing with body parts of dead insurgents drew strong condemnation on Wednesday from American officials including Defense Secretary Leon E. Panetta and the commander of international forces in Afghanistan.

The Los Angeles Times published on the front page of its early editions a photograph of what it described as a soldier from the Army's 82nd Airborne Division with a dead insurgent's hand on his shoulder. It said the photograph was one of 18 of soldiers posing with the corpses of insurgent fighters given to the newspaper by a soldier who served in Afghanistan with the 82nd Airborne's Fourth Brigade Combat Team from Fort Bragg, N.C. The newspaper said the Afghan died planting a bomb, citing police.


My how the tables have turned....

No, obamas stank as cant do nothing wrong in the retarded drone eyes.

 

[gallantwarrior]

The pictures at Abu Ghraib were pictures of soldiers posing with live prisoners being tortured and humiliated (AND a photo of one that they had tortured to death). This is different. Disgusting, and a sad showing of the callousness of members of our military, but inherently different.

For some, I am sure their will be some excuse to mitigate the horrible and revolting nature of actions like the one described. Alive, dead, the disrespect is blatantly obvious. Do you really think that muslims will be less offended because the body in question was already deceased?
So, just what is inherently different? Other than the figurehead to bear the blame for actions of military forces under his ultimate control?

 

[Dick Tuck]

NYT: U.S. Condemns Photos of Soldie

KABUL - Photographs apparently showing United States soldiers posing with body parts of dead insurgents drew strong condemnation on Wednesday from American officials including Defense Secretary Leon E. Panetta and the commander of international forces in Afghanistan.

The Los Angeles Times published on the front page of its early editions a photograph of what it described as a soldier from the Army's 82nd Airborne Division with a dead insurgent's hand on his shoulder. It said the photograph was one of 18 of soldiers posing with the corpses of insurgent fighters given to the newspaper by a soldier who served in Afghanistan with the 82nd Airborne's Fourth Brigade Combat Team from Fort Bragg, N.C. The newspaper said the Afghan died planting a bomb, citing police.


My how the tables have turned....

Your post is as dumb as the actions of those soldiers. Abu Gharib was about actions under a policy that condoned torture. This is about actions taken by soldiers under combat conditions that do not involve live opponents. Dumb actions, since they create even more animosity.

The fact that you even try to equate this with the actions at Abu Gharib is an indiction of the lack of morality on your part.

And, to accomplish their goal they had to redefine torture to include a woman rubbing her breats on a prisoner and saying rude things about a prisoners mother.

That's what you believe the extent of the torture was? Yes, sexual humiliation is considered torture under the Geneva Accords treaty we signed. If that was all that happened at Abu Grhaib, I'd say big deal. That was far from the worst of the abuses.

 

[Dick Tuck]

The pictures at Abu Ghraib were pictures of soldiers posing with live prisoners being tortured and humiliated (AND a photo of one that they had tortured to death). This is different. Disgusting, and a sad showing of the callousness of members of our military, but inherently different.

For some, I am sure their will be some excuse to mitigate the horrible and revolting nature of actions like the one described. Alive, dead, the disrespect is blatantly obvious. Do you really think that muslims will be less offended because the body in question was already deceased?
So, just what is inherently different? Other than the figurehead to bear the blame for actions of military forces under his ultimate control?

Except not a single Democrat has excused or mitigated it. A very different end result than how Republicans excused what occurred at Abu Grhaib. Your attempt at projection of your own cognitive dissonance has failed.

 

[gallantwarrior]

NYT: U.S. Condemns Photos of Soldie

KABUL - Photographs apparently showing United States soldiers posing with body parts of dead insurgents drew strong condemnation on Wednesday from American officials including Defense Secretary Leon E. Panetta and the commander of international forces in Afghanistan.

The Los Angeles Times published on the front page of its early editions a photograph of what it described as a soldier from the Army's 82nd Airborne Division with a dead insurgent's hand on his shoulder. It said the photograph was one of 18 of soldiers posing with the corpses of insurgent fighters given to the newspaper by a soldier who served in Afghanistan with the 82nd Airborne's Fourth Brigade Combat Team from Fort Bragg, N.C. The newspaper said the Afghan died planting a bomb, citing police.


My how the tables have turned....

Your post is as dumb as the actions of those soldiers. Abu Gharib was about actions under a policy that condoned torture. This is about actions taken by soldiers under combat conditions that do not involve live opponents. Dumb actions, since they create even more animosity.

The fact that you even try to equate this with the actions at Abu Gharib is an indiction of the lack of morality on your part.

While I usually try to maintain my patience, you morons are really stretching it...

You mean you freakin' libtard shitballs really, really fail to see how this is as inflammatory as the previous incidents? REALLY!?
It's getting just about as ridiculous and repulsive as anything can be, the extent to which you all will go to excuse, obfuscate, and otherwise gloss over actions taking place during this regime's governance that incited cries of outrage and calls for impeachment of the previous one.

 

[gallantwarrior]

It's no different in the eyes of our enemies.

No it doesn't, and it says a lot about us as people, but Abu Ghraib was all about the questionable
interrogation practices allowed to be implemented (amd encouraged, we found out) by the Bush administration. THAT is why he was in the hot seat when those pictures emerged. How does this set of pictures reflect on Obama... did he require the soldiers to take these pictures in order to get false intelligence out of them like they did at Abu Ghraib? Was this the result of one of his policies? I don't see the connection to Obama that you referred to in the title.

No more than Bush was responsible for the previous incident, heh?
Like it or not, obama is CinC. Ultimate responsibility for the actions of the military lies squarely in his lap. He's the boss. Policies made and policies executed come back to roost in his house. Just like Bush, right?
And if obama is not responsible for establishing proper policies, he's not doing his job...still.

 

[Old Rocks]

NYT: U.S. Condemns Photos of Soldie

KABUL - Photographs apparently showing United States soldiers posing with body parts of dead insurgents drew strong condemnation on Wednesday from American officials including Defense Secretary Leon E. Panetta and the commander of international forces in Afghanistan.

The Los Angeles Times published on the front page of its early editions a photograph of what it described as a soldier from the Army's 82nd Airborne Division with a dead insurgent's hand on his shoulder. It said the photograph was one of 18 of soldiers posing with the corpses of insurgent fighters given to the newspaper by a soldier who served in Afghanistan with the 82nd Airborne's Fourth Brigade Combat Team from Fort Bragg, N.C. The newspaper said the Afghan died planting a bomb, citing police.


My how the tables have turned....

Your post is as dumb as the actions of those soldiers. Abu Gharib was about actions under a policy that condoned torture. This is about actions taken by soldiers under combat conditions that do not involve live opponents. Dumb actions, since they create even more animosity.

The fact that you even try to equate this with the actions at Abu Gharib is an indiction of the lack of morality on your part.

And, to accomplish their goal they had to redefine torture to include a woman rubbing her breats on a prisoner and saying rude things about a prisoners mother.

You are clearly a lying bastard.

Abu Ghraib Abuse Photos - by news

 

[Old Rocks]

It's no different in the eyes of our enemies.

No it doesn't, and it says a lot about us as people, but Abu Ghraib was all about the questionable
interrogation practices allowed to be implemented (amd encouraged, we found out) by the Bush administration. THAT is why he was in the hot seat when those pictures emerged. How does this set of pictures reflect on Obama... did he require the soldiers to take these pictures in order to get false intelligence out of them like they did at Abu Ghraib? Was this the result of one of his policies? I don't see the connection to Obama that you referred to in the title.

No more than Bush was responsible for the previous incident, heh?
Like it or not, obama is CinC. Ultimate responsibility for the actions of the military lies squarely in his lap. He's the boss. Policies made and policies executed come back to roost in his house. Just like Bush, right?
And if obama is not responsible for establishing proper policies, he's not doing his job...still.

Asshole. Torture was a Bush policy. Murder of civilians is not a policy of President Obama.

 

[Dr.Drock]

No it doesn't, and it says a lot about us as people, but Abu Ghraib was all about the questionable
interrogation practices allowed to be implemented (amd encouraged, we found out) by the Bush administration. THAT is why he was in the hot seat when those pictures emerged. How does this set of pictures reflect on Obama... did he require the soldiers to take these pictures in order to get false intelligence out of them like they did at Abu Ghraib? Was this the result of one of his policies? I don't see the connection to Obama that you referred to in the title.

No more than Bush was responsible for the previous incident, heh?
Like it or not, obama is CinC. Ultimate responsibility for the actions of the military lies squarely in his lap. He's the boss. Policies made and policies executed come back to roost in his house. Just like Bush, right?
And if obama is not responsible for establishing proper policies, he's not doing his job...still.

Asshole. Torture was a Bush policy. Murder of civilians is not a policy of President Obama.

What the hell are all these unmanned drone strikes that liberals love so dearly? Are those fair trials? Do they only kill terrorists?

 

[Dick Tuck]

NYT: U.S. Condemns Photos of Soldie

KABUL - Photographs apparently showing United States soldiers posing with body parts of dead insurgents drew strong condemnation on Wednesday from American officials including Defense Secretary Leon E. Panetta and the commander of international forces in Afghanistan.

The Los Angeles Times published on the front page of its early editions a photograph of what it described as a soldier from the Army's 82nd Airborne Division with a dead insurgent's hand on his shoulder. It said the photograph was one of 18 of soldiers posing with the corpses of insurgent fighters given to the newspaper by a soldier who served in Afghanistan with the 82nd Airborne's Fourth Brigade Combat Team from Fort Bragg, N.C. The newspaper said the Afghan died planting a bomb, citing police.


My how the tables have turned....

Your post is as dumb as the actions of those soldiers. Abu Gharib was about actions under a policy that condoned torture. This is about actions taken by soldiers under combat conditions that do not involve live opponents. Dumb actions, since they create even more animosity.

The fact that you even try to equate this with the actions at Abu Gharib is an indiction of the lack of morality on your part.

While I usually try to maintain my patience, you morons are really stretching it...

You mean you freakin' libtard shitballs really, really fail to see how this is as inflammatory as the previous incidents? REALLY!?
It's getting just about as ridiculous and repulsive as anything can be, the extent to which you all will go to excuse, obfuscate, and otherwise gloss over actions taking place during this regime's governance that incited cries of outrage and calls for impeachment of the previous one.

No, it means that the conservatrash expected the Democrats on this board to condone this stupid behavior, and they didn't. Of course it's inflammatory. Not as inflammatory as systematic torture and pissing on peoples' holy books, but it's not to be excused. So far, the Administration has not excused it. To the contrary, they've stated that they'll punished for their stupidity.

Don't you feel like a shit for brains failure?

 

[gallantwarrior]

I think we really need to start bringing our men and women home, or we will continue to keep seeing stories like this.

Boy, isn't that the truth! Frankly, I'm long past the point where I could give a rat's patootie what happens if we pull out of those sandboxes. Just make sure we use Gen. Grant's tactics as we go. We leave them nothing we are responsible for providing. They killed each other for generations before we got there, there's little doubt they will continue after we leave.
Wait, didn't the CinC guarantee he'd pull the troops out of the ME by now? Maybe he needs to wait until he has more flexibility after November?

 

[Dick Tuck]

No more than Bush was responsible for the previous incident, heh?
Like it or not, obama is CinC. Ultimate responsibility for the actions of the military lies squarely in his lap. He's the boss. Policies made and policies executed come back to roost in his house. Just like Bush, right?
And if obama is not responsible for establishing proper policies, he's not doing his job...still.

Asshole. Torture was a Bush policy. Murder of civilians is not a policy of President Obama.

What the hell are all these unmanned drone strikes that liberals love so dearly? Are those fair trials? Do they only kill terrorists?

Are you under some delusion that I love collateral damage? I don't. But I'll take a smart drone strike instead of saturation bombing any day of the week.

What you morons don't understand is that I want us to kill al Qaeda scum. They're the ones who did 9/11. Remember? If we can do so without putting our troops at risk, and minimize "collateral damage" good.

Bush On Bin Laden: ‘I Really Just Don’t Spend That Much Time On Him’. Thank God we have an adult in the Whitehouse now.

 

[Dr.Drock]

Asshole. Torture was a Bush policy. Murder of civilians is not a policy of President Obama.

What the hell are all these unmanned drone strikes that liberals love so dearly? Are those fair trials? Do they only kill terrorists?

Are you under some delusion that I love collateral damage? I don't. But I'll take a smart drone strike instead of saturation bombing any day of the week.

What you morons don't understand is that I want us to kill al Qaeda scum. They're the ones who did 9/11. Remember? If we can do so without putting our troops at risk, and minimize "collateral damage" good.

Bush On Bin Laden: ‘I Really Just Don’t Spend That Much Time On Him’. Thank God we have an adult in the Whitehouse now.

On one hand you have terrorizing terror suspects, on the other hand you have blowing up terror suspects with drone strikes. Being the lunatic I am, I find both to be immoral and disgusting.

If you're at peace with using drones to blow up chunks of towns and compounds that guarantees civilian deaths, I'm not sure you can hold the moral highground on this argument.

Immorally torturing terror suspects is disgusting. Blowing up a kid who happens to live close to a terror suspect is far worse.

Edit: All of this is a moot point anyway. During the entire war on terror including present day, the overwhelming majority of torture of U.S. terror suspects has taken place in foreign countries like Saudi Arabia and Egypt so we don't have to get our hands dirty or have the pesky media getting in the way.

 

[gallantwarrior]

No more than Bush was responsible for the previous incident, heh?
Like it or not, obama is CinC. Ultimate responsibility for the actions of the military lies squarely in his lap. He's the boss. Policies made and policies executed come back to roost in his house. Just like Bush, right?
And if obama is not responsible for establishing proper policies, he's not doing his job...still.

Asshole. Torture was a Bush policy. Murder of civilians is not a policy of President Obama.

What the hell are all these unmanned drone strikes that liberals love so dearly? Are those fair trials? Do they only kill terrorists?

Are you referring to the drone strikes that obama and his cronies so proudly tout?

 

[gallantwarrior]

Your post is as dumb as the actions of those soldiers. Abu Gharib was about actions under a policy that condoned torture. This is about actions taken by soldiers under combat conditions that do not involve live opponents. Dumb actions, since they create even more animosity.

The fact that you even try to equate this with the actions at Abu Gharib is an indiction of the lack of morality on your part.

While I usually try to maintain my patience, you morons are really stretching it...

You mean you freakin' libtard shitballs really, really fail to see how this is as inflammatory as the previous incidents? REALLY!?
It's getting just about as ridiculous and repulsive as anything can be, the extent to which you all will go to excuse, obfuscate, and otherwise gloss over actions taking place during this regime's governance that incited cries of outrage and calls for impeachment of the previous one.

No, it means that the conservatrash expected the Democrats on this board to condone this stupid behavior, and they didn't. Of course it's inflammatory. Not as inflammatory as systematic torture and pissing on peoples' holy books, but it's not to be excused. So far, the Administration has not excused it. To the contrary, they've stated that they'll punished for their stupidity.

Don't you feel like a shit for brains failure?

No. But I'm sure you do.