The war on terror is lost

[puurpaul]

By the publication of the abuse pictures, you have lost any moral high ground you thought you may have had. For those who hate the USA, this justifies their hatred, and for those that didnt hate you, well it gives them just cause. Iraq should now be handed over to the UN immediately, the US has overstayed their welcome, they have abused their position, and have lost respect from the rest of the world - for whom the war on terror is supposed to protect, its time to go.

 

[SpidermanTuba]

Originally posted by puurpaul
By the publication of the abuse pictures, you have lost any moral high ground you thought you may have had. For those who hate the USA, this justifies their hatred, and for those that didnt hate you, well it gives them just cause. Iraq should now be handed over to the UN immediately, the US has overstayed their welcome, they have abused their position, and have lost respect from the rest of the world - for whom the war on terror is supposed to protect, its time to go.

I think you're overreacting. While I agree Iraq should be handed over to the UN, I believed that before this scandal came out.

Read your history book, there are atrocities committed in every war by both sides. The mere fact that this has happened does not make us any worse than anyone else, what matters is how we deal with it. In other countries, knowledge that this has happened would have never come to light. In the Soviet Union, or in Iran, or (to use an overused example to satisfy the neocons) in a Hussein controlled Iraq, the media can't just talk about how the government is torturing people, and anyone who leaked such information would be killed. What makes us different is we have a system by which when atrocities such as this occur, those responsible for it can and will be brought to justice and, much to this disappointment of many conservatives, the full extent of the atrocities can be eventually known to the public.

Honestly, I hate to say it because so many conservatives have falsely accused me of this, but you are just looking for a good reason to hate America. Nice try.



(Conservative warmongering Shrub lovers: Fire away, he's all yours now!)

 

[puurpaul]

Sorry but that is so weak, you are only saying this because you hate america. What a load of crap. I dont at all. This is a typical knee-jerk blinkered american response.

Atrocities do happen in every war, women get raped, people get tortured, kids get killed, towns get destroyed. Even in Vietnam you were doing worse. But this isnt about any other war, this is about nowand the big difference now is that it is being filmed and broadcast to the world. the reason you went to war in Iraq was because you had taken the moral high ground that Saddam Hussein was a bad man and had to go. These pictures really show you to be exactly of the same stock. It seems america lied about the weapons of mass destruction, and they also lied about their way being better than that of saddam. If you dont yet see the magnitude of the problem I think that is because you are blinkered. Every time the US goes on about a war on this or a war on that, every time in the future your nation decides to play gods world cop these pictures will come back to haunt you. They disgust me and everyone I know.

 

[jimnyc]

Originally posted by puurpaul
These pictures really show you to be exactly of the same stock. It seems america lied about the weapons of mass destruction, and they also lied about their way being better than that of saddam.

First off, there were over 200,000 soldiers in Iraq. Yes, some have committed crimes and will be tried and likely severely punished for those crimes. To imply that all of America is just like Saddam was is ridiculous.

Secondly, I defy you to find any lies. Both George Bush and Blair reported to their respective countries on intel that was gathered throughout the world. It appears thus far that this intel was obviously faulty. That hardly makes their words lies.

 

[SpidermanTuba]

Originally posted by jimnyc
First off, there were over 200,000 soldiers in Iraq. Yes, some have committed crimes and will be tried and likely severely punished for those crimes. To imply that all of America is just like Saddam was is ridiculous.

Secondly, I defy you to find any lies. Both George Bush and Blair reported to their respective countries on intel that was gathered throughout the world. It appears thus far that this intel was obviously faulty. That hardly makes their words lies.

16 words in the State of the Union address - you know what I'm talking about.

 

[jimnyc]

Originally posted by SpidermanTuba
16 words in the State of the Union address - you know what I'm talking about.

And again, I doubt you can prove what GWB spoke was a lie. If anything, there was poor communication between the CIA and upper elements of the government. GWB reads speeches that were written for him and reports what he was told. I highly doubt he was responsible for the intel provided.

 

[SpidermanTuba]

Originally posted by puurpaul
Sorry but that is so weak, you are only saying this because you hate america. What a load of crap. I dont at all. This is a typical knee-jerk blinkered american response.

Atrocities do happen in every war, women get raped, people get tortured, kids get killed, towns get destroyed. Even in Vietnam you were doing worse. But this isnt about any other war, this is about nowand the big difference now is that it is being filmed and broadcast to the world. the reason you went to war in Iraq was because you had taken the moral high ground that Saddam Hussein was a bad man and had to go. These pictures really show you to be exactly of the same stock. It seems america lied about the weapons of mass destruction, and they also lied about their way being better than that of saddam. If you dont yet see the magnitude of the problem I think that is because you are blinkered. Every time the US goes on about a war on this or a war on that, every time in the future your nation decides to play gods world cop these pictures will come back to haunt you. They disgust me and everyone I know.

It's obvious to me you hate america, you refuse to recognize the difference between a system where atrocities are covered up and never found out by the populace and a system where atrocities are made public and those guilty brought to justice. If you don';t value that difference then you don't value what makes America America and hence hate America. Unlike myself, who merely hates our government, you hate America herself because you apparently think our justice system and freedom of the press is no better than totalitarian justice and state run censored press.

And to your point about atrocities in previous wars not coming up in the media, is that how you would prefer it? You would prefer that the torture of unarmed Iraqi "detainees" have never been made public?

 

[SpidermanTuba]

Originally posted by jimnyc
And again, I doubt you can prove what GWB spoke was a lie. If anything, there was poor communication between the CIA and upper elements of the government. GWB reads speeches that were written for him and reports what he was told. I highly doubt he was responsible for the intel provided.

I can't prove OJ did it either, but I'm pretty damn sure.

If GWB doesn't bother to get his facts checked in the most important speech made every year, that's kind of his problem for being a dumb Shrub and/or having idiots working for him.

So which is it? A lie, or incompetence? Because it has to be one of those two.

 

[jimnyc]

Originally posted by SpidermanTuba
I can't prove OJ did it either, but I'm pretty damn sure.

If GWB doesn't bother to get his facts checked in the most important speech made every year, that's kind of his problem for being a dumb Shrub and/or having idiots working for him.

So which is it? A lie, or incompetence? Because it has to be one of those two.

The same could be said for the intel on WMD within Iraq. Since none have been found to date, does that mean it was either a lie or incompetence by GWB? Do we really expect our CIC to micromanage our entire government and military? At some point he has to have some faith in those beneath him. Unfortunately, sometimes they are wrong. To me, the important thing is that he also reported to the nation later that the info provided was false. (regarding Nigeria)

 

[SpidermanTuba]

Originally posted by jimnyc
The same could be said for the intel on WMD within Iraq. Since none have been found to date, does that mean it was either a lie or incompetence by GWB? Do we really expect our CIC to micromanage our entire government and military? At some point he has to have some faith in those beneath him. Unfortunately, sometimes they are wrong. To me, the important thing is that he also reported to the nation later that the info provided was false. (regarding Nigeria)

No, but we do expect our President to actually make sure that the words he is speaking in the only Constitionally required speech are TRUE. That's part of HIS JOB as laid out in the Constitution.


You never answered my question. Was Shrub lying or just incompetent?

 

[jimnyc]

Originally posted by SpidermanTuba
No, but we do expect our President to actually make sure that the words he is speaking in the only Constitionally required speech are TRUE. That's part of HIS JOB as laid out in the Constitution.


You never answered my question. Was Shrub lying or just incompetent?

Please point out to me the portion of the constitution that states it is the presidents duty to verify each and every statement told to him before reporting to the people.

Your answer is neither. I believe he reported what he believed to be the truth at the time.

 

[puurpaul]

>> To imply that all of America is just like Saddam was is ridiculous

No not at all, as I see it the tacit reasons for going to war were

1. Because he was hiding or creating weapons of mass destruction.

2. Because chemical and biological weapons were being hidden

3. Because he was a danger to the region

4. Because he was a cruel dictator who terrorised the Iraqi people

1. Never proven

2. Never proven

3. And bombing mosques is an endeavour to create peace in the region, raping female prisoners is an endeavour to create peace in the region, abusing prisoners is an endeavour to create peace in the region. Iraq is so much more peaceful now right.

4. And the US has proven to be fair and decent, with the full support of the Iraqi people. Oh do me a favour. The cameras arent lying. What has happened is a disgrace, the UN did not give you their support to treat people like that. You went in there to prevent that kind of behaviour.

Look these people are soldiers, soldiers act to order, the way the army works is soldiers get their orders from seniors who got their order from seniors all the way up the line. How much autonomy do your soldiers have? and where does that level of autonomy begin? At the bottom, "Private Benjamin welcome to the army feel free to do what you like today coz that is how we work here in the US Army, hey soldier: Its up to you". Bollocks!!! I dont buy it.

If these soldiers were behaving like this, then, why werent their seniors aware, Id go all the way up to the PM/Pres, I really believe that it is totally unacceptable that those accountable should have got away with this, everyone in line should be removed from their position they should have the case dealt with by the International Criminal Court.



>>It appears thus far that their intel was obviously faulty.
>>That hardly makes their words lies.

Blair is reknowned for truth and honesty right, and Bush was never a warmonger at all. right?

The intelligence organisations are directly appointed by, led by and accountable to the government. for whom they serve. They arent exactly independent, open, accountable organisations. They do what the government tell them.

Its the political equivalent of creative accounting.

 

[SpidermanTuba]

Originally posted by jimnyc
Please point out to me the portion of the constitution that states it is the presidents duty to verify each and every statement told to him before reporting to the people.

Your answer is neither. I believe he reported what he believed to be the truth at the time.

Well the Constitution doesn't say the President has the duty to ensure he's telling us the TRUTH in the State of the Union Address, so the Founding Fathers obviously must have really meant the President is to give the State of the Union address and it doesn't really matter if its actually TRUE or not. Right. Sure. In a Democratic society, the President doesn't have to make sure he's telling the truth, its not explicitly required by the Constitution, so screw it, he can just tell all the untruths he wants, it makes no difference.

Lie or incompetence? Are you going to answer or ignore the question?

 

[SpidermanTuba]

Originally posted by puurpaul
>> To imply that all of America is just like Saddam was is ridiculous

No not at all, as I see it the tacit reasons for going to war were

1. Because he was hiding or creating weapons of mass destruction.

2. Because chemical and biological weapons were being hidden

3. Because he was a danger to the region

4. Because he was a cruel dictator who terrorised the Iraqi people

1. Never proven

2. Never proven

3. And bombing mosques is an endeavour to create peace in the region, raping female prisoners is an endeavour to create peace in the region, abusing prisoners is an endeavour to create peace in the region. Iraq is so much more peaceful now right.

4. And the US has proven to be fair and decent, with the full support of the Iraqi people. Oh do me a favour. The cameras arent lying. What has happened is a disgrace, the UN did not give you their support to treat people like that. You went in there to prevent that kind of behaviour.

Look these people are soldiers, soldiers act to order, the way the army works is soldiers get their orders from seniors who got their order from seniors all the way up the line. How much autonomy do your soldiers have? and where does that level of autonomy begin? At the bottom, "Private Benjamin welcome to the army feel free to do what you like today coz that is how we work here in the US Army, hey soldier: Its up to you". Bollocks!!! I dont buy it.

If these soldiers were behaving like this, then, why werent their seniors aware, Id go all the way up to the PM/Pres, I really believe that it is totally unacceptable that those accountable should have got away with this, everyone in line should be removed from their position they should have the case dealt with by the International Criminal Court.



>>It appears thus far that their intel was obviously faulty.
>>That hardly makes their words lies.

Blair is reknowned for truth and honesty right, and Bush was never a warmonger at all. right?

The intelligence organisations are directly appointed by, led by and accountable to the government. for whom they serve. They arent exactly independent, open, accountable organisations. They do what the government tell them.

Its the political equivalent of creative accounting.

First off, you can take your international criminal court and shove it, here in America we take care of our own. Which is why WE are going to prosecute and punish those responsible, as high up as it goes. And I have always maintained that Shrubs war crimes should be dealt with by the Congress (see thread Article 45.1), believe it or not that's actually more likely than having an international court deal with them.



Second off, you didn't answer my question. Would you prefer these abuses have remained secret?

 

[jimnyc]

Originally posted by SpidermanTuba
Lie or incompetence? Are you going to answer or ignore the question?

Did you miss this part in my last reply?

"Your answer is neither. I believe he reported what he believed to be the truth at the time."

And again, your attitude in your replies to me are becoming tiresome. Your deabting skills are admirable at times, but your attitude sucks. It's not a matter of right or wrong when I debate, but I'm not going to waste my time with someone who is going to try and belittle me and be sarcastic in every reply.

You can now enjoy debating with those who you state do nothing but engage in namecalling with you when replying. I tried to have a reasonable and civil debate. It's quite obvious you would rather antagonize. Sorry, I'm just not up to that right now.

 

[puurpaul]

Originally posted by SpidermanTuba
It's obvious to me you hate america, you refuse to recognize the difference between a system where atrocities are covered up and never found out by the populace and a system where atrocities are made public and those guilty brought to justice.

No I dont hate America at all, that is a typical knee-jerk reaction. I never said I hated America. Neither am I in any way supporting regimes where atrocities are covered up, I never once mentioned anything of the sort, the only reason you could be coming out with this is because you are simply reacting. Listen to me, any regime that behaves in this way should be removed, the behaviour is unacceptable, public or secret. regardless. If the regime does not support this kind of behaviour then those responsible should go. If that does not happen then this regime will be seen as tacitly condoning the whole affair.


you apparently think our justice system and freedom of the press is no better than totalitarian justice and state run censored press.

Looking at whats been happening in Iraq, that sounds about right just at this very moment. They dont seem to make a very big difference to what was happening before.


If you don';t value that difference then you don't value what makes America America and hence hate America. Unlike myself, who merely hates our government, you hate America

If I dont value the difference I hate america. I really dont see the logic. I am telling you I dont hate America. I wear American clothes, I eat American food, I watch American movies. I dont hate America at all. I like it.

herself because you apparently think our justice system and freedom of the press is no better than totalitarian justice and state run censored press.

CNN is such an unbiased news source

 

[SpidermanTuba]

Originally posted by jimnyc
Did you miss this part in my last reply?

"Your answer is neither. I believe he reported what he believed to be the truth at the time."

And again, your attitude in your replies to me are becoming tiresome. Your deabting skills are admirable at times, but your attitude sucks. It's not a matter of right or wrong when I debate, but I'm not going to waste my time with someone who is going to try and belittle me and be sarcastic in every reply.

You can now enjoy debating with those who you state do nothing but engage in namecalling with you when replying. I tried to have a reasonable and civil debate. It's quite obvious you would rather antagonize. Sorry, I'm just not up to that right now.

My bad, I did miss it.

If he reported what he believed to be the truth at the time and it wasn't the truth there is a reason for that. As you have eliminated the reasons of incompetence and blatant lying, there is one more that I can think of - apathy. He just didn't care if he was telling the truth or not, all he cared was it sounded good.

 

[SpidermanTuba]

Originally posted by puurpaul

Originally posted by SpidermanTuba
It's obvious to me you hate america, you refuse to recognize the difference between a system where atrocities are covered up and never found out by the populace and a system where atrocities are made public and those guilty brought to justice.

No I dont hate America at all, that is a typical knee-jerk reaction. I never said I hated America. Neither am I in any way supporting regimes where atrocities are covered up, I never once mentioned anything of the sort, the only reason you could be coming out with this is because you are simply reacting. Listen to me, any regime that behaves in this way should be removed, the behaviour is unacceptable, public or secret. regardless. If the regime does not support this kind of behaviour then those responsible should go. If that does not happen then this regime will be seen as tacitly condoning the whole affair.


you apparently think our justice system and freedom of the press is no better than totalitarian justice and state run censored press.

Looking at whats been happening in Iraq, that sounds about right just at this very moment. They dont seem to make a very big difference to what was happening before.


If you don';t value that difference then you don't value what makes America America and hence hate America. Unlike myself, who merely hates our government, you hate America

If I dont value the difference I hate america. I really dont see the logic. I am telling you I dont hate America. I wear American clothes, I eat American food, I watch American movies. I dont hate America at all. I like it.

herself because you apparently think our justice system and freedom of the press is no better than totalitarian justice and state run censored press.

CNN is such an unbiased news source

You believe any regime in which atrocities occur should be removed andyou fully admit that in every war both sides are guilty of at least some atrocities, so what you are basically saying is that any government that is waging war should be removed from power. Interesting. In WWII we would have had a new government each year as atrocities are discovered under the old government.


"Looking at whats been happening in Iraq, that sounds about right just at this very moment. They dont seem to make a very big difference to what was happening before. "

Alright then smarty pants, what happens to you if you decide to rob a convenience store? Are you arrested, given a fair trial, and sent to prison, or do you simply disappear or wind up dead? Just because some parts of our system happen to be like Saddam's doesn't mean our system is no different than his. And as I have pointed out, the difference is we are fixing the problem and in Husein's regime the problem would not have been fixed. If you can't see that difference you a blinded by your own beliefs.



"If I dont value the difference I hate america. I really dont see the logic. I am telling you I dont hate America. I wear American clothes, I eat American food, I watch American movies. I dont hate America at all. I like it. "

You're telling me you don't hate America - yet at the same time you're telling me you don't value the difference between the American system and the system of a totalitarian regime. Care to explain?

"CNN is such an unbiased news source "

If you don't want me to think that you don't see the difference between state run media in a place like Syria and the free press here, say so now and explain your comment.

 

[puurpaul]

Originally posted by SpidermanTuba
Second off, you didn't answer my question. Would you prefer these abuses have remained secret?

I would have preferred it didnt happen and America did what they were supposed to do which was liberate the people not torture them. Of course knowledge of this abuse should be public. But is it better that these pictures be shown around the world. I think you would have to ask the victims themselves as to whether they feel that is a further infiringement on their dignity and human rights.

 

[puurpaul]

Oh of course no-one knew about Saddam Hussein's activities, they were so obviously secret that nobody had a clue. Word still leaked, information still passed through and I dont see how having a free open press changes the facts that a) American soldiers were torturing people and b) the people in charge arent taking responsibility (and therefore tacitly condoning those activities). I see squirming support In Rumsfeld from Bush. It makes me sick. You were supposed to be going in there to help these people. Thats what you said.