Middle East Discussion

[Al-Dog]

I was thinking we could use an open ended thread to discuss the various aspects of the Middle East situation.

This editorial was in last Sunday’s edition of my local paper.

Iraq exit strategy's only halfway there (http://postbulletin.com/newsmanager/templates/localnews_story.asp?z=12&a=294312)

I'm glad Democrats are keeping the pressure on President Bush for a withdrawal date from Iraq. It's the only way to keep him and Iraqis focused on the endgame. But if Democrats really want to be taken seriously on foreign affairs, they need to recognize that they have only half a policy on Iraq. And it's the easy half.

You can't be in favor of setting a date to withdraw from Iraq without also being in favor of a serious energy policy to radically reduce our dependence on oil -- now. To call for withdrawing from Iraq by a set date, no matter what the situation is on the ground there -- without a serious energy plan here -- is reckless. All we would be doing is making ourselves more dependent on an even more unstable Middle East, because any U.S. withdrawal from Iraq is likely, in the short run, to be destabilizing.

The Middle East today is deeply troubled. If we determine that our efforts to tilt that region in a different direction -- by building a decent Iraq -- have failed, then our efforts to minimize our exposure to that region have to begin. But the last thing we can afford to do is walk away from the Middle East militarily while remaining chained to it economically.

More important, if Iraq totally fails, but we still believe it is in our interest to promote reform in the Middle East, a serious U.S. energy policy that permanently brings down the price of oil -- by developing scalable alternative energies -- is actually the best Plan B there is. You will see reform in the Arab-Muslim world only when regimes there can't survive just by extracting oil, but have to extract the talents of their people by educating, empowering and connecting them.

[SinisterPryde]

It seems that our Government is still focusing on maintaining a status-quo. Not to mention, too many politicians are owned by big oil to come up with an alternative energy source. No, our reliance on oil as an energy source will not stop until every last drop has been squeezed from the Earth.

[Senormac]

There is TONS of oil......TONS. I don't see the problem as being searching for alternative fuel sources.......its making the people who are standing in the way of us getting the oil that is here already......GET OUT OF THE WAY !!

I did hear something this last weekend. It was the possibility that there is a strategy in place, to buy up.......and keep using mid east oil till they run out. Then we would have to start bringing up more oil or come to a screeching halt. I don't think thats too good of a plan myself....since we have no idea when them running out will happen. Plus, while we are buying from them they are collecting tons and tons of MONEY.....which makes them a power player.

[Nostromo]

Good idea. Allow me to contribute this opinion piece from today's on-line edition of
The Economist. N

http://www.economist.com/opinion/displaystory.cfm?story_id=9225670

[Space Tycoon]

Guys, don't think for one minute that North America is dependent on the Mideast for it's energy supply. That is a myth, a classic example of the Big Lie that people believe when it is repeated often enough. Truth is, we could get by without it.

The US relies more on Western Hemispheric sources of oil than ME sources, which are relatively minor. However, the economies of East Asia, Europe, and increasingly India are very dependent on it. This will only increase as China and India continue their meteoric industrial rise.

Oil companies are ass-deep in the Mideast, and Central Asia, for precisely this reason. The game has never been about securing lots of cheap oil for Americans' personal use. See the "Gas Prices" thread for evidence of this. It's about controlling the flow of oil at the source. If we didn't get in there, the Russians surely would.

I agree that alternate energy is long past due for being developed and marketed. But that wouldn't suit the purposes of a few billionaire Petrol-igarchs, now would it?

Then there's the Israel factor. Israel's far right wing has always been sympatico with the neo-conservative movement in Washington. When the Bush Administration faced the aftermath of 9/11, the neocons saw their chance and went for it. They've been in the driver's seat ever since the towers fell and have only recently been humbled by scandals and failure.






.

[Space Tycoon]

But if Democrats really want to be taken seriously on foreign affairs, they need to recognize that they have only half a policy on Iraq. And it's the easy half.
Well, at least he's right about that.

And ask yourself a simple question:

What have the Democrats actually done to turn this war around since they were elected in November on a strong wave of protest sentiment?

Answer: NOTHING.

They have authorized more funding for Iraq, instead of using their Congrerssional authority granted them under the Constitution to de-fund it.

They have also authorized the use of force against Iran, should that nightmare scenario come to pass. Even the "peace candidates," Obama and Edwards, have stated that "all options are on the table."

Edwards has even recently come out in favour of bringing back conscription!!

And where is the impeachment movement? Isn't it time for the Democrats in Congress to enforce the law and bring this rogue President, and his Svengali-like VP, to justice?


The Bushies may be drunk with power, but the Dems have so far done little except enable this intemperance. The Democrats talk a big game, but their performance, thus far, has been a disappointment.

[Senormac]

And where is the impeachment movement? Isn't it time for the Democrats in Congress to enforce the law and bring this rogue President, and his Svengali-like VP, to justice?.

Ha.....what a joke. The impeachment movement has about as much value as a bowel movement. They got nothin but alot of hot air and hurt feelings, so they try to stir the pot and scrape the sides looking for something with enough clout to actually do something........they got nothin.


The Bushies may be drunk with power, but the Dems have so far done little except enable this intemperance. The Democrats talk a big game, but their performance, thus far, has been a disappointment.

I agree with what the Dems have really done.....and it kinda makes me mad spacey. The Dems talk alot, but upon further investigation it seems to be little more than talk. The part that makes me mad is that they are so "drunk with hate" they have lost focus on the country and the victory. They are self destructive. About Bush being drunk with power.......well , he IS power. Hes the dang president of the United States !!

[Gentlemen Death]

Ha.....what a joke. The impeachment movement has about as much value as a bowel movement. They got nothin but alot of hot air and hurt feelings, so they try to stir the pot and scrape the sides looking for something with enough clout to actually do something........they got nothin.




I agree with what the Dems have really done.....and it kinda makes me mad spacey. The Dems talk alot, but upon further investigation it seems to be little more than talk. The part that makes me mad is that they are so "drunk with hate" they have lost focus on the country and the victory. They are self destructive. About Bush being drunk with power.......well , he IS power. Hes the dang president of the United States !!


I did not want to get into this conversation and will try not too, but what this man said right here makes the most sense i have heard in awhile. And with that said and done, i can leave this thread knowing i have said something, thank you and goodnight.

[Space Tycoon]

Ha.....what a joke. The impeachment movement has about as much value as a bowel movement. They got nothin but alot of hot air and hurt feelings, so they try to stir the pot and scrape the sides looking for something with enough clout to actually do something........they got nothin.

Famous last words...

Unfortunately the President will not be impeached, because that would leave us with Dick Cheney's drunken hand on the nuclear trigger. Unless you took 'em both out at once, which would be the closest thing to a living wet dream I can think of...

Still, I would welcome it. The Bush Administration needs to be brought to justice one way or another. And I don't mean throwing flunkies like "Scooter" Libby to the wolves. You have to go right to the top.

I agree with what the Dems have really done.....and it kinda makes me mad spacey. The Dems talk alot, but upon further investigation it seems to be little more than talk. The part that makes me mad is that they are so "drunk with hate" they have lost focus on the country and the victory...

The victory? I'm curious as to what victory you speak of. The war in Iraq is over. It's lost. There never was a clear objective beyond ending Saddam Hussein's regime, and as such there can be no victory. Q.E.D.

If you're talking about victory against al Qaida, well that moment may have been lost as well, since we are now dealing with a plethora of armed groups all over the world, as opposed to just a relatively small group numbering in the hundreds, as was the case before the war in Iraq.




.

[omicron]

Ok Spacey, I'm curious.

What do you think are the reasons behind Bush & Co "power mad, constitution destroying, empire building" actions?

Is it simple imbecilic blundering? Is it a misguided but thoughtful plan? Is is "Emperor Palpatine planning on destroying the Senate and taking over the Galaxy" meglomania?

[Al-Dog]

Famous last words...

Unfortunately the President will not be impeached, because that would leave us with Dick Cheney's drunken hand on the nuclear trigger. Unless you took 'em both out at once, which would be the closest thing to a living wet dream I can think of...

Still, I would welcome it. The Bush Administration needs to be brought to justice one way or another. And I don't mean throwing flunkies like "Scooter" Libby to the wolves. You have to go right to the top.I’m not trying to defend Bush, but I’m just wondering what did he do illegal? Doesn’t the President have to be involved with some sort of crime in order to be impeached?

While I think invading Iraq wasn’t the smartest idea, I’m not sure how that it could be considered illegal. The Iraq War Resolution was passed by the House and Senate and signed by the President, so under the laws of the United States, it was a legal act. While it was stupid, I do not see how it is illegal.

If he’s committed a crime that I had missed, please let me know.

And no, I’m not a Republican and I didn’t vote for Bush. The first election I voted for Gore and the second I voted for who ever ran for the Libertarian party.

[Gentlemen Death]

What is so wrong with voting for Bush. Everyone has to justify themselves that they ARE NOT a republican or voted for Bush in the last two elections for fear of being outed here.

Well you know what, i voted for Bush, yeah thats right i did. So what, i have my views and respect everyone elses as i am sure they should respect mine. And by the way i am a republican, i am not rich, and i do not hate gays. I am not the sterotypical republican and as much as i do think that Bush is an idiot, i am not going to back down for who i voted for and what i believe because that would make me a democrat(:lol: no i am just playing:lol:) ....thank everybody and goodnight!

[Nostromo]

John Dean knows a lot about the impeachment process including the articles of and, the grounds for. This is from the CNN Law site. N

http://www.cnn.com/2003/LAW/06/06/findlaw.analysis.dean.wmd/

[Al-Dog]

Meanwhile, back in Iran. . .
Nobel laureate: Iranian-Americans political prisoners ( http://www.cnn.com/2007/WORLD/meast/05/25/nobellaureate.iran/ )

-- An Iranian-American woman detained in Tehran is being held illegally and has been repeatedly denied access to an attorney, Iranian Nobel Peace Prize winner Shirin Ebadi told CNN on Friday.
Ebadi said that Haleh Esfandiari and other Iranian-Americans held in Iran are political prisoners.
"Iran doesn't observe laws," she said through an interpreter in an exclusive interview while visiting the United States.
Iranian officials have said Esfandiari, a scholar with dual citizenship, is being held in prison in Tehran while under investigation for "crimes against national security."
Ebadi, one of Esfandiari's attorneys, said her client is innocent.
The Nobel laureate said that two of her colleagues went to try to see Esfandiari but officials at a judge's office would not let them in.
When they asked to read Esfandiari's file, they were denied access, she said.
"And when they asked what the charges were, they did not get an answer," she said.
Esfandiari, who works for the Woodrow Wilson International Center for Scholars in Washington, was detained in Tehran on May 8. Her husband, Shaul Bakhash, said she had been questioned for weeks before her arrest.
Esfandiari's problems began in December, when her passports were stolen as she was on her way to catch a flight home. When she applied for a new passport, authorities began questioning her about her work. The Woodrow Wilson Center says the questioning was conducted by officials of the Ministry of Intelligence and Security.
Earlier this month, Esfandiari was locked up in Tehran's Evin Prison, which houses many Iranian dissidents and political prisoners.
In 2000, Ebadi was held in the same prison.
"This is a small room with cement walls and no windows," she said. "There is a fluorescent light that's on 24 hours. And since one's watch is taken from one, you can never tell the time."
Ebadi said she will return to Iran early next month to take up Esfandiari's case -- and try to visit her in prison. "I will go there two or three times per week. I will challenge the court, and I will make them understand that they are violating my client's human rights."
Ebadi, who won the 2003 Nobel Peace Prize, is the founder of the Center for Defense of Human Rights in Tehran. She is the first Muslim woman to win the coveted award.
In a statement issued Friday, Human Rights Watch demanded the Iranian authorities "should immediately release the three Iranian-Americans and the dozens of activists, teachers and scholars arbitrarily detained."

Others reportedly detained

Besides Esfandiari, Human Rights Watch said an Iranian-American sociologist, Kian Tajbakhsh, also is being held at Evin Prison after being arrested May 11. Tajbakhsh works for the Open Society Institute. The Iranian authorities have not confirmed his arrest.
Associates of Ali Shakeri, another Iranian-American who recently had traveled to Iran, told Human Rights Watch that he is also being detained by the Iranian authorities. The Iranian government has not provided any public information about his whereabouts.
The authorities also have confiscated the passport of Parnaz Azima, a reporter for Persian-language broadcaster Radio Farda who holds both Iranian and American citizenship. The prosecutor's office told her that she would be charged with working for an "institution spreading publicity against the Iranian Islamic Republic."

[Al-Dog]

What is so wrong with voting for Bush. Everyone has to justify themselves that they ARE NOT a republican or voted for Bush in the last two elections for fear of being outed here.You are right I’m a little gun shy about even giving the perception of defending Bush, after someone jumped on me with both feet after one of my sarcastic remarks that gave someone the impression that I was conservative.

But, I really didn’t vote for Bush and (aside from voting against Cynthia McKinney) I’ve only voted for a hand full of Republicans. Depending on how the primaries shake out, I might vote for a Republican this time.

Yeah I said it.

[Gentlemen Death]

Feel the force flowing thorugh you

[Senormac]

Feel the force flowing through you


:D :D :D :D :D :D :D :D :D :D :D :D :D

p.s. yea, I fixed your spelling error. I didn't want the wrath of NEGLET coming down on you :lol:

[hawklord]

I was thinking we could use an open ended thread to discuss the various aspects of the Middle East situation...
We're like a football team that's losing 3-0 with 10 minutes to go. Do we go for the win, and risk losing 7-0 as a result of stretching ourselves, or do we grimly hang on and hope the score still looks vaguely respectable when the final whistle blows?

I didn't ever approve of the action against Saddam. But, we're there. Fact. So, dealing with the existing situation:

So far, i've felt that premature withdrawal could cause more problems than it solves. But an open-ended bogged-down state is no use either.

I know "if only's" are no use, but if only the Coalition had behaved sensibly at the start, and prevented the looting, and bust a gut to restore electricity, and a few other things like that, then perhaps we might have been able to win the "hearts and minds" that we've heard so much about.

But we didn't. And those "hearts and minds" now either hate us, or are too busy hating opposing factions in their own district to worry about hating us. Either way, it's a balls-up so far as bringing democracy to Iraq goes.

Really, it's probably gone too far now, for us to turn the game around. Perhaps the debate now needs to be about the mechanics of a dignified withdrawal before a VietNam-type scrambled exodus happens.

[Space Tycoon]

I’m not trying to defend Bush, but I’m just wondering what did he do illegal? Doesn’t the President have to be involved with some sort of crime in order to be impeached?

....If he’s committed a crime that I had missed, please let me know.

You're joking, right?

Lying to Congress, and the American people, (http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Yellowcake_forgery) about Saddam's attempts to purchase yellowcake uranium from Niger, in order to make a case for invading the sovereign nation Iraq;

Exposing CIA Agent Valerie Plame (http://www.antiwar.com/justin/j100303.html) as punishment when her husband went public with the revelation of the cooked intelligence;

Prisoner abuse at Guantanamo bay and Abu Ghraib, (http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A20986-2004Dec22.html) which contravene the Geneva Convention to which the US is a signatory;

And this is just the tip of the iceberg. Please don't tell me you have been blissfuly unaware of these "high crimes and misdemeanours," which are surely treasonable offenses...



And no, I’m not a Republican and I didn’t vote for Bush. The first election I voted for Gore and the second I voted for who ever ran for the Libertarian party.

Doesn't matter. There have been principled conservatives against this foreign policy (http://www.fullquivermission.com/Iraq_War.htm)from the get go...





.

[Space Tycoon]

Why Congress caved... (http://www.antiwar.com/pat/?articleid=11021)

The antiwar Democrats are crying betrayal – and justifiably so.

For a Democratic Congress is now voting to fully fund the war in Iraq, as demanded by President Bush, and without any timetable for a U.S. troop withdrawal. Bush got his $100 billion, then magnanimously agreed to let Democrats keep the $20 billion in pork they stuffed into the bill – to soothe the pain of their sellout of the party base.

Remarkable. If the Republican rout of 2006 said anything, it was that America had lost faith in the Bush-Rumsfeld conduct of the war and wanted Democrats to lead the country out.

Yet, today, there are more U.S. troops in Iraq than when the Democrats won. More are on the way. And with the surge and retention of troops in Iraq beyond normal tours, there should be a record number of U.S. troops in country by year's end.

Why did the Democrats capitulate?

Because they lack the courage of their convictions. Because they fear the consequences if they put their antiwar beliefs into practice. Because they are afraid if they defund the war and force President Bush to withdraw U.S. troops, the calamity he predicts will come to pass and they will be held accountable for losing Iraq and the strategic disaster that might well ensue.





.

[Space Tycoon]

Candidate Paul assigns reading to Giuliani
(http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/05/24/AR2007052401013_pf.html)

WASHINGTON (Reuters) - Longshot Republican presidential candidate Ron Paul on Thursday gave front-runner Rudy Giuliani a list of foreign-policy books to back up his contention that attacks by Islamic militants are fueled by the U.S. presence in the Middle East.

"I'm giving Mr. Giuliani a reading assignment," the nine-term Texas congressman said as he stood behind a stack of books that included the report by the commission that examined the attacks on the United States on September 11, 2001.

Giuliani was mayor of New York when Islamic militants slammed two commercial airliners into the World Trade Center, a role that has vaulted him to the front of the Republican presidential pack despite his liberal social positions.

"I don't think he's qualified to be president," Paul said of Giuliani. "If he was to read the book and report back to me and say, 'I've changed my mind,' I would reconsider."

Paul advocates a limited U.S. foreign policy, including an end to the war in Iraq and a reduction in troop levels abroad.

Paul said he was unfairly attacked during last week's debate by 10 Republican presidential hopefuls, when Giuliani dismissed his contention that U.S. policies in the Middle East had contributed to the attacks in New York and Washington.

"I don't think I've ever heard that before, and I've heard some pretty absurd explanations for September 11th," Giuliani said to wild applause.

A spokeswoman for Giuliani derided Paul's latest comments.

"It is extraordinary and reckless to claim that the United States invited the attacks on September 11th," Maria Comella said in an e-mail.

"And to further declare Rudy Giuliani needs to be educated on September 11th when millions of people around the world saw him dealing with these terrorist attacks firsthand is just as absurd."

OUTSIDE THE MAINSTREAM

Paul barely registers in opinion polls of Republicans hoping to win their party's nomination to contest the November 2008 presidential election.

An obstetrician-gynecologist from the Houston area, Paul frequently strays far outside the Republican mainstream.

He voted against the Iraq war resolution in 2002 and has proposed abolishing the Homeland Security Department and diminishing the Federal Reserve. His 1988 bid for president as the Libertarian candidate drew just slightly more than 400,000 votes nationwide.

Paul said it was irresponsible of Giuliani and other leaders to not examine the motivations of al Qaeda and other radical Islamic groups.

Among the books on Paul's reading list were: "Dying to Win," which argues that suicide bombers only mobilize against an occupying force; "Blowback," which examines the unintended consequences of U.S. foreign policy; and the 9/11 Commission Report, which says that al Qaeda leader Osama bin Laden was angered by the presence of U.S. troops in Saudi Arabia.

Another book on the list was "Imperial Hubris," whose author appeared at the press conference to offer support for Paul.

"Foreign policy is about protecting America," said author Michael Scheuer, who used to head the CIA's bin Laden unit. "Our foreign policy is doing the opposite."

A Giuliani campaign official could not confirm whether he had read any of the books on Paul's list.





.

[rappites]

Can I ask a favor from all of you that are really discussing this topic? Can you break it down to lamans terms for me if anything serious is going on.







Just joking. It is like I am asking you all to give the cliff notes on a history book. :D

[Gentlemen Death]

:headscratch: That can be arranged.....:headscratch:

[whitetemplar78]

Prisoner abuse at Guantanamo bay and Abu Ghraib, which contravene the Geneva Convention to which the US is a signatory;


The Geneva Convention, only covers UNIFORMED foreign personal, see when I was in the military when we were issued our ID's on the back, there was a Geneva Code letter, mine was "I" these letters tell what part of the convention we are covered, and how much a foreign government is allowed to do to us, for information, or other Intel. The terrorists that have been captured are not covered under those guidelines, and in a way, that allows the U.S. Government to do what they want to them since they are considered outside the laws governing these situations, in fact the way most other countries deal with these types of individuals, makes what we do to them look like play time in the park.

Does that make what we have done right?.......no in a way America has always stood as the "good guys" in any conflict, and its hard to appear that way, when things like this tarnish our name. My self on a personal level could care less what happens to these animals, most of these guys would blow up a school of western children in a heartbeat, and wash their hands of it, by claiming it was the will of Allah. I have lost several friends to this conflict, to men much like the detainees that we have right now, so one can say that I have a biased view of the problem, no doubt that’s right, but im an Old Testament kind of person....an eye for an eye......

[Space Tycoon]

The Geneva Convention, only covers UNIFORMED foreign personal, see when I was in the military when we were issued our ID's on the back, there was a Geneva Code letter, mine was "I" these letters tell what part of the convention we are covered, and how much a foreign government is allowed to do to us, for information, or other Intel.

So you'd be okay with allowing civilian "contractors," ie., mercenaries, to be exempt from the code? They're not uniformed personell...

...in fact the way most other countries deal with these types of individuals, makes what we do to them look like play time in the park.
Ah yes. The old, "at least we're not as bad as the terrorists" defence. Some of us think we should set higher standards. Today it's "terrorists," tommorrow it could be anyone the government considers subversive-- including you or I.

but im an Old Testament kind of person....an eye for an eye......Old Testament? Maybe you should join the IDF...





.

[SinisterPryde]

There are no "good guys" in a war. There are soldiers on both sides shooting at each other because their commanders told them to.

Since I am so politically naive, could someone tell me who or what we are fighting now? It was my understanding that after 9/11 we were going after a terrorist cell lead by Bin Laden. Then, for some reason, we decide to tag Hussein (who needed to be brought down, no doubt) and we seem to be fighting a group larger than a terrorist cell (unless I am mistaken, its seems we're fighting someone's army.

I am not attacking opinions or trying to make a statement. It is just clear from reading this board that there are things going o0n that I don't know enough about to comment on.

[whitetemplar78]

So you'd be okay with allowing civilian "contractors," ie., mercenaries, to be exempt from the code? They're not uniformed personell...

Mercenaries they are, lets be blunt on that point, when you fight for money only, your taking a risk, if your captured by the US more then likely you'll be treated humanly, and in time released, if your captured by another country...your chances aren't as good, since your not protected under any type of International law at all....they are adults, people like that know what they are doing its part of the risk they run, so to answer your question, no they should not be covered under the Geneva Convention.

Ah yes. The old, "at least we're not as bad as the terrorists" defence. Some of us think we should set higher standards. Today it's "terrorists," tommorrow it could be anyone the government considers subversive-- including you or I.

Mmmmmm......well we're not, but that’s another point. What I meant though, is im tired of people jumping all over America's back at just the mere rumor of us mistreating captured terrorists, when countries like China, Burma (cause I can't remember how to spell its new name...sorry..lol) Indonesia, Sudan, Niger, Chad, Senegal, Angola.....hell the list goes on, commit crimes against combatants, and POW's alike, and nery a word, article, or eyebrow is raised.........the type of people we are fighting in this war, are zealots, you know that Space, hell your one of the smartest guys I’ve seen in most blogs, so you know that they will stop at nothing to win against whoever they perceive as the enemy, be it us, or a Sunni, or so on. Fighters of this ilk will stop at nothing to win a war, and never give up, unless their dead, my God, the roots of this conflict in Islam was hundred of years ago when Mohammad died with a clear cut Heir.....and here we are today, with Islam on the brink of civil war, and the only thing holding it back is us sitting smack dab in the middle of this whole mess with our Army.

Can you not see the strain this puts our intelligence people under??.....the need to get intel, to help protect our country, and troops at all cost?...we can't forget that they are American's like many of us on this board and want to help our country as much as anyone, hell that’s no doubt why they do what they do, but they have to deal with a enemy that’s willin to die before giving in.......this creates a perfect setting for misdeeds to occur.

Old Testament? Maybe you should join the IDF...

LOL, ok this one had me laughing I’ll admit, since im the most unreligious person you'll meet

[tstone]

This thing was a fiasco from the get-go, from ill chosen policy violating principles we say we believe in as a nation, to policy based on fantasies entertained by the policy makers and lies foisted on the public.

But we are there and a pullout at this point would be more disasterous than sticking it out longer and trying to make it work.

Timetables? No. Benchmarks? Yes!

Light a fire under the fat asses of the Iraqi Parliamentarians who wanted to vacation for a month while there was a war on, with Americans and their own people dying in the street daily.

Talk about your devil and the deep blue sea. We must try to make this work. But never forget the no good bastards who got us here and the no good policy they got us into.

[Space Tycoon]

Ah yes. The old, "at least we're not as bad as the terrorists" defence. Some of us think we should set higher standards. Today it's "terrorists," tommorrow it could be anyone the government considers subversive-- including you or I.

Mmmmmm......well we're not, but that’s another point. What I meant though, is im tired of people jumping all over America's back at just the mere rumor of us mistreating captured terrorists, when countries like China, Burma (cause I can't remember how to spell its new name...sorry..lol) Indonesia, Sudan, Niger, Chad, Senegal, Angola.....hell the list goes on, commit crimes against combatants, and POW's alike, and nery a word, article, or eyebrow is raised.........

Excuse me? I see denunciations of those very countries on a regular basis, nearly every day, in the world press. Those countries are indeed rampant abusers of human rights. And not incidentaly, many of those countries are close allies of the United States, and recipients of considerable financial and military aid. More than a few of them actually do the torturing for us. (http://www.newyorker.com/archive/2005/02/14/050214fa_fact6) Off the books.

If America is to change the world and keep the flame of liberty alive, she must do so first by example. That means not getting lazy, or sloppy, or living down to the standards of savage third world tyrannies.


Can you not see the strain this puts our intelligence people under??.....the need to get intel, to help protect our country, and troops at all cost?...we can't forget that they are American's like many of us on this board and want to help our country as much as anyone, hell that’s no doubt why they do what they do, but they have to deal with a enemy that’s willin to die before giving in.......this creates a perfect setting for misdeeds to occur.

Ask anyone knowledgeable in the gathering of good intelligence, and they will tell you that 99% of the best work is accomplished through subtle professionalism. Research, paid informants, studying the object of interest. Not Jack Bauer-style cruelty. Such tactics accomplish very little useful results, if any. People will say and do anything under duress.

...zealots, you know that Space, hell your one of the smartest guys I’ve seen in most blogs...

Thanks, but I'm not that smart, I just have good sources. And a lot of time on my hands. Too much, if it comes down to it... :OhWell:







.

[tstone]

Excuse me? I see denunciations of those very countries on a regular basis, nearly every day, in the world press. Those countries are indeed rampant abusers of human rights. And not incidentaly, many of those countries are close allies of the United States, and recipients of considerable financial and military aid. More than a few of them actually do the torturing for us. (http://www.newyorker.com/archive/2005/02/14/050214fa_fact6) Off the books.

If America is to change the world and keep the flame of liberty alive, she must do so first by example. That means not getting lazy, or sloppy, or living down to the standards of savage third world tyrannies.



A-frakkin'-MEN, brother...

[whitetemplar78]

ok here it goes, lets see if I can do a good reply..lol

Excuse me? I see denunciations of those very countries on a regular basis, nearly every day, in the world press. Those countries are indeed rampant abusers of human rights. And not incidentaly, many of those countries are close allies of the United States, and recipients of considerable financial and military aid. More than a few of them actually do the torturing for us. (http://www.newyorker.com/archive/2005/02/14/050214fa_fact6) Off the books.

If America is to change the world and keep the flame of liberty alive, she must do so first by example. That means not getting lazy, or sloppy, or living down to the standards of savage third world tyrannies.

.

I think we are far from third world tyrannies, all the time we check ourselves about our own deeds. My God in our own press we rant on our failings as a country far more then what the world press could do, look at the case where our own justice system granted suspected terrorists the right to a Civil trial, instead of a military tribunial.........for every case where we condem America, I see rays of hope, that we still are one of the good guys, when stuff like that happens




Ask anyone knowledgeable in the gathering of good intelligence, and they will tell you that 99% of the best work is accomplished through subtle professionalism. Research, paid informants, studying the object of interest. Not Jack Bauer-style cruelty. Such tactics accomplish very little useful results, if any. People will say and do anything under duress.

.

I agree, I believe for the most part that this is what our Intelligence people do, but I also believe like I stated that this war just creates CHANCES for misdeeds, and abuses to happen. Go back in history, and you'll find case after case of Intel personal going to extremes to get the information they needed. The same is happening here, sadly a few bad apples, makes the whole system look bad. If anything this conflict I believe will create even more chances for misteps, since Intelligence is vital to fight this war, since the foe we face best defence, is hiding amoung the local people.......not like the conventional war, where the enemy is out on a battlefield wearing a uniform




Thanks, but I'm not that smart, I just have good sources. And a lot of time on my hands. Too much, if it comes down to it... :OhWell:





.

haha, I hear yah on that one, high gas prices means alot more time at home to rant, and rave........lol but oh well, at least we are fixing the worlds problems one thread at a time...lol :D

[Space Tycoon]

I think we are far from third world tyrannies, all the time we check ourselves about our own deeds.We are getting closer with every generation. the apathy makes it all the more likely that things will get worse...





I agree, I believe for the most part that this is what our Intelligence people do, but I also believe like I stated that this war just creates CHANCES for misdeeds, and abuses to happen. Go back in history, and you'll find case after case of Intel personal going to extremes to get the information they needed. Perhaps it would help if we had examples of any cases where torture or coerced confessions produced anything tangible. I keep hearing about how unavoidable this is and how our agents need to do their job, but precious little evidence that this has been effective or useful...


The same is happening here, sadly a few bad apples, makes the whole system look bad.
And yet, surely you know that the policy of rendition, "Guantanamization," and disregard for international rules of engagement were directed straight from the top, from Mr. Rumsfeld, Gonzalez and others. Not just a "few bad apples" deviating from the norm, although they are the only ones who are punished.


If anything this conflict I believe will create even more chances for misteps, since Intelligence is vital to fight this war, since the foe we face best defence, is hiding amoung the local people.......not like the conventional war, where the enemy is out on a battlefield wearing a uniform

Wars of occupation inevitably corrupt and brutalize the military forces sent to do an impossible job. Read about any colonial or guerilla war and you will see this is usually the case. The French in Algeria offer one of the closest parallells.

haha, I hear yah on that one, high gas prices means alot more time at home to rant, and rave........lol but oh well, at least we are fixing the worlds problems one thread at a time...lol :D

A couple hundred thousand more should do the trick. :OhWell:







.

[rappites]

Amazing Etch a Sketch artist video (http://video.yahoo.com/video/play?vid=594257&cache=1)