Page 12 of 19 FirstFirst ... 27891011121314151617 ... LastLast
Results 221 to 240 of 379
  1. #221  
    Quote Originally Posted by clairegrrl
    His comment was "Supposedly that was a direct result of intelligence gathered from the interrogation of captured Al Qaeda operatives." I dont see anything in what jmill72x said, or anything in the press that would lead me to believe that the statement you made was accurate. "Its great that torture and prisoner abuse helped us to get the #3 al queda person."

    It's great to "be fair", but probably more important to be accurate, which is what this thread was about.
    CG - thanks for the feedback,

    Yes you are right, and I am done being fair around here, no more mister nice guy!

    But probably you know that whether the statement is accurate or not has absolutely no bearing on the point I was trying to make, and this side discussion just serves to distract the issue.

    cheers,

    cell
  2.    #222  
    I dont know about distracting from the issue, but I do know that you spend a great deal of time preparing and editing your responses. I just looked back a few and your last 3 responses were edited after you posted them. To me, that means that you are very careful in how you "craft" what you say. With that in mind, I can only assume that with your statement, you were trying to make us believe that people had been tortured to obtain information so that this capture could be made.

    I could be wrong, but that's my opinion.

    Cheers, back at ya!
    Well behaved women rarely make history
  3. #223  
    Quote Originally Posted by clulup
    Sorry for the misunderstanding, I am glad we could sort it out.That is precisely the point. The prisoners in Guantanamo are NOT treated as prisoners of war, they do not even enjoy the very limited rights of the Geneva Convention. The US government invented a totally new status simply to circumvent the Geneva Convention, they call them "enemy combatants". That's a totally new term, so small wonder no right whatsoever is assigned to them. The US government holds them in Guantanamo for one reason alone: because basically, no jurisdiction at all applies there, so they can act as it pleases them: in a lawless environment.

    Is is sure that the Koran was treated exactly as described in the Newsweek article: No, not sure.
    Does it sound likely that these sort of things happen in an environment such as Guantanamo, when knowing what has happened in Iraq (including things far worse than just a book mistreated): it sure does.
    Get off you high horse already - I'm sure it's more than just me that thinks you constant rant about the US, espousal of opinion as fact, and holier-than- thou attitude are more than tired......
    Last edited by treo2die4; 05/19/2005 at 09:12 PM.
  4. #224  
    Quote Originally Posted by t2gungho
    I am not sure of the relevancy here? Just because someone does something that another group gets away doesnt mean that they didnt break the law when our soldiers committed the acts. At most colleges, hazing is against the school policy/regulation.

    That is like saying "I ran the red light because the other car did."
    This above makes no sense.

    Here which is worse?

    1. One of our people, unclothing and humiliating a combatant.

    2. Severing a person's head off on TV ?

    That's the point.
  5. #225  
    Quote Originally Posted by clairegrrl
    I dont know about distracting from the issue, but I do know that you spend a great deal of time preparing and editing your responses. I just looked back a few and your last 3 responses were edited after you posted them. To me, that means that you are very careful in how you "craft" what you say. With that in mind, I can only assume that with your statement, you were trying to make us believe that people had been tortured to obtain information so that this capture could be made.

    I could be wrong, but that's my opinion.

    Cheers, back at ya!
    yeah I admit that is my problem, I post, then I revise afterwards. Probably if you notice, my first post is usually a little strong and potentially offensive. Then I revise and try to be more conciliatory and objective. I should just do this before I submit the post in the first place. Its funny, I do a lot of writing as part of my work too, and I do the same thing, I think that my writing ability rate-limits my ability to express my thoughts, a sort of dyslexia. Well I am baring my soul too much here, anyway, even though I strongly disagree with many of the things you and the other conservatives say, I do enjoy trading jabs, even if I am not as journalisticaly glib as you are.

    cheers back at ya again - you conservative maven!

    cell
  6. #226  
    Quote Originally Posted by cellmatrix
    t2gungho

    Only the first sentence of my post was directed at your comment. The rest of the argument was directed towards the generic "you" because I hate to use the passive third person "one" if I can avoid it. But I have edited the post and put in the passive "one". There is no need at all to defend anything you said earlier. I do appreciate your well thought out comments in this forum.

    regards,

    cell
    No problem. But I am still confused that you would associate the first sentence to me?

    Quote Originally Posted by cellmatrix
    You can equate sexual humiliation in your own mind with frat hazing if you wish, or as was hypothetically said here that the Koran is just a book, who cares if it goes in the toilet.
    How did I "equate sexual humiliation in your own mind with frat hazing"?

    I am not trying to beat a dead horse, I just am not clear on it.
  7. #227  
    MaxiMunK.com The Forum That Asks, "Are You Not Entertained?"

    Remember: "Anyone that thinks the Treo should just work right out of the box, shouldn't own a Treo..."
  8. #228  
    Quote Originally Posted by t2gungho
    No problem. But I am still confused that you would associate the first sentence to me?



    How did I "equate sexual humiliation in your own mind with frat hazing"?

    I am not trying to beat a dead horse, I just am not clear on it.
    Man, this is getting to be confusing, I guess it is my fault. Anyway I meant the first sentence in my original post, not the first sentence in the quote.
  9. #229  
    There has been so much confusion about my original post, I will just repeat the main point of it here. I think it is at least something for us to think about. Peace to all.

    The Bush admin says all arabs want is democracy and freedom. Well they also want wealth and respect. Giving them freedom, when they think we have no respect for their religion or culture and when they think that our real motive is to horn in on their oil is not the best way to get arabs to be our friends.
  10. #230  
    Quote Originally Posted by cellmatrix
    The Bush admin is trying to push the idea that all arabs strive for is democracy and freedom.
    Huh? - not sure where you get you "news" but I've not gotten this impression at all?
  11. #231  
    CM, You must have James Carville sitting next to you, with all the spinning you're doing.
    MaxiMunK.com The Forum That Asks, "Are You Not Entertained?"

    Remember: "Anyone that thinks the Treo should just work right out of the box, shouldn't own a Treo..."
  12. #232  
    Dlbrummels--You said:

    Quote Originally Posted by dlbrummels
    Our soldiers stood trial for things no worse than college kids do at hazing, not comparisons to what they do to our soldiers.
    I said:

    Quote Originally Posted by t2gungho
    I am not sure of the relevancy here? Just because someone does something that another group gets away doesnt mean that they didnt break the law when our soldiers committed the acts. At most colleges, hazing is against the school policy/regulation.

    That is like saying "I ran the red light because the other car did."
    I interpreted what you said as "what our boys did wasnt that bad in comparison to...". If that is what you meant, then my point was if it was illegal, then its illegal. We shouldnt justify what we do because they did something worse (beheading people on tv.)

    If you didnt mean that "what our boys did wasnt that bad in comparison to..." then I appologize for misunderstanding.

    Quote Originally Posted by dlbrummels
    This above makes no sense.

    Here which is worse?

    1. One of our people, unclothing and humiliating a combatant.
    2. Severing a person's head off on TV ?

    That's the point.
    As far as whats worse, I think #2 is worse. (But back to my point...just because what they did was worse does not mitigate what we did.)
    Last edited by t2gungho; 05/19/2005 at 09:35 PM.
  13. #233  
    Quote Originally Posted by Insertion
    Hey thats pretty good. I guess I need to change my vote for the peanut gallery from dutch to you
  14. #234  
    Quote Originally Posted by Insertion
    CM, You must have James Carville sitting next to you, with all the spinning you're doing.
    No seriously, do you doubt that many Iraqis have questions about why we are in Iraq? Why we want to "liberate them"? Do you think that they all believe that getting ahold of their oil has nothing to do with why we are there?
  15. #235  
    Quote Originally Posted by Insertion
    CM, You must have James Carville sitting next to you, with all the spinning you're doing.
    Treo2die4 and Insertion: I dont think its that much 'spinning' to say that Pres. Bush has been on tv (not lately) but in Dec 04-Feb 05 telling America that we are 'doing the right thing' by fighting insurgents and allowing them to have free elections.

    I also predict that this summer he will be saying the same thing when people start grumbling about our troops not coming home and how the Iraqi security forces havent gotten up to speed to replace our troops. Just my .02
  16.    #236  
    Quote Originally Posted by cellmatrix
    Man, this is getting to be confusing, I guess it is my fault.
    Yes, YES! I love a man that admits his mistakes Kisses
    Well behaved women rarely make history
  17.    #237  
    Quote Originally Posted by Insertion
    CM, You must have James Carville sitting next to you, with all the spinning you're doing.
    Just like kerry

    Well behaved women rarely make history
  18. #238  
    Quote Originally Posted by cellmatrix
    No seriously, do you doubt that many Iraqis have questions about why we are in Iraq? Why we want to "liberate them"? Do you think that they all believe that getting ahold of their oil has nothing to do with why we are there?
    I have no idea....it's been nearly 15 years since i was last in Iraq. So, I really have no idea what they think. I do know that for the first time in many of their lifetimes, Saddam wasn't re-elected with 100% of the vote.

    I also don't think oil is the sole reason. The Saudi's have more. Why not go there? Or Kuwait...Hell, we could just send the LA County Sheriff Dept. to take over that tiny country.
    MaxiMunK.com The Forum That Asks, "Are You Not Entertained?"

    Remember: "Anyone that thinks the Treo should just work right out of the box, shouldn't own a Treo..."
  19.    #239  
    Quote Originally Posted by Insertion
    Hell, we could just send the LA County Sheriff Dept. to take over that tiny country.
    Better not...not with that whole Rodney King thingie. Makes current "abuse" look like a Carnival cruise
    Well behaved women rarely make history
  20. #240  
    Quote Originally Posted by Insertion
    I have no idea....it's been nearly 15 years since i was last in Iraq. So, I really have no idea what they think. I do know that for the first time in many of their lifetimes, Saddam wasn't re-elected with 100% of the vote.

    I also don't think oil is the sole reason. The Saudi's have more. Why not go there? Or Kuwait...Hell, we could just send the LA County Sheriff Dept. to take over that tiny country.
    I agree . Its not the sole reason, but a reason nonetheless (and realistically, I dont think anyone can deny that). [Ok, maybe clairegrrl]

    We dont have to worry so much about Saudi Arabia or Kuwait...that oil keeps coming our way and we dont have to worry about another Sadaam invading to interrupt its flow.

Posting Permissions