“Jack Bauer”

Obsess much?

Like or Dislike: 0  0

Good for him! Waterboarding is much nicer than what I would inflict on these animals…

Like or Dislike: 0  0

Steve,

How does one answer an illogical question based on your “Jack Bauer” fictional scenario?

The rules and laws exist to enforce standards, help ensure your paranoid fiction does not become a reality, and punish any who try to make it a reality. Why even have the UCMJ, Laws of Land Warfare, ethics, or laws at all if Soldiers “with an American Flag patch on his shoulder” are going to do it anyways according to your assertion? What is the point of rules and regulations or laws in general then? Why even have civilian laws if reality follows the logical fallacy you posed?

As for Bin Laden, or any of his dwindling number of henchmen and wannabes, using your fiction as a “recruiting poster”: These barbarians do not need real actions for their “posters”. If they cannot photo-shop or cherry pick something to twist for their goals, they simply make it up. Numerous examples exist of these actions by them. No matter WHAT we do, they will always have recuiting posters claiming we eat kids, drink blood, rape women, that our NVGs see through clothes, that we dance with demons, etc. What they do not show is that we punish those who break the rules why their side turns their own demons into ‘martys’.

People in Iraq and Afghanistan (and now Algeria and other places) are slowly awakening to AQ’s (and the Shia’s also) lies and manipulations. Enforcing standards and regulations combats exactly what your fiction portrays happening.

Like or Dislike: 0  0

Re: “Why should I answer a slanted and loaded question which only presents part of an issue and ignores the legal and procedural regulations and safeguards?”

Because pointing to all the rulebooks will not matter one bit when some budding Jack Bauer decides to save the world with an American Flag patch on his shoulder. And Osama bn Laden will have another grand recruiting poster.

Like or Dislike: 0  0

Again, the question is posed as a “when did you stop beating your wife” logical fallacy. “Torture is ok” as your source defines it ignores the aspect that it is not a normal aspect of interrogation and NOT for protected persons and legal POWs and must be done ONLY after all other methods are exhausted and under authority and supervision of over watch agencies (i.e. congress and the executive branches) and ONLY when clear and pressing evidence is given of impending actions. You make it sound like the CIA just does this for fun and as a matter of routine.

Why should I answer a slanted and loaded question which only presents part of an issue and ignores the legal and procedural regulations and safeguards?

I predict you will somehow think this vindicates your holier than thou ‘predictions’ and feeds more into your ‘conservative this/that” BS.

Like or Dislike: 0  0

No.

My further question was,

“Regardless of the punishment that is meted out to those at the lowest level who perpetrated torture, if torture of innocents did occur in the climate of “torture is OK” that Spectator Magazine promulgates, would you admit that the damage to the image of the United States as standing for something slightly above that of the torturers of the world (Saudi Arabia) would be massive and take decades to repair?”

That is my question. I made a prediction as to your answer. Go ahead and prove me wrong by answering it.

Like or Dislike: 0  0

Steve,

You are truly a paranoid projectionist unworthy of much “debate”. Your “conservative this” and Conservative that” diatrabe is moronic and wrong. Again, your “debate” style, if not based in wild fantasies, is akin to “so when did you stop beating your wife”.

What do your masters feed you to come up with this crap?

IF someone is wrongfully treated as a protected person or POW, THEN those who mistreated that person must face trial under applicable regulations and laws.

In fact, they have. So the “guarantee” is that IF something is done wrong, the defendents are investigated and if guilty, punished.

Like or Dislike: 0  0

If those standards that you describe were the only standards for torturing prisoners, then I would be moved to change my stance.

However.

I have had many years of the Bush Administration revealing only sufficient information to make their case, and the Conservative media filtering it for Bush-favorable spin.

My point is, and remains, that torture is wrong, and we darned-well better be able to justify it. And speeches from Conervative thought-leaders such as Spectator magazine will, in my opinion, lead to the renegade actions that will take decades to repair. Conservatives pretend these things will never happen because they declare they don’t want them to happen. That is the Ivory Tower Conservative philosophy that may exist in the “we create our own reality” White house, but leads to strings of disasters.

Your unwillingness to even acknowledge that such “bad apple” actions can ever take place, or admit what a terrible price the US would pay if (when) they do happen, indicates that you too are living in a fantasy world where “torture works”. That is why I cite the TV movie “24″, because it is just as fanciful, but taken as reality, as my reference to Spectator indicated.

But, neither you, nor any other Conservative, will ever admit that not everything goes perfectly according to your Ivory Tower Plans. Not every Blackwater contractor will hold back until the need is “ironclad”. Becasue you say so.

P.S. Spectator is a civilian magazine. And I would trust the military to follow the Uniform Code. However recall that the Bush Administration wanted everyone else: The CIA, Blackwater contractors, exempt. The world will not make those “nice” distinctions when they judge America. To pretend otherwise is to live in the White Hose Bubble of word parsing.

P.P.S. You have just promised me that torture of “non-evil” people will NEVER HAPPEN. Is that an absolute promise? If, someday, it is revealed that innocents were tortured, would you admit you were wrong? I admitted in my opening sentense that I would change my mind if your standards were guaranteed to always be met. If my nightmare scenario came to pass, would you change?

Of course not. You are a Conservative. You can never change, nor can you ever be wrong. We would just hear a string of alibis as to why you “can’t be held accountable because….”

Along with more streams of venom against those of us who warned you of the risk

Like or Dislike: 0  0

Steve,

Ok, you topped the asinine statement!

For the last damn time, stop with the moronic, infantile “24″ references. The only one propagating that BS is YOU!!!!!!!!!

And for the rest of your idiocy, THESE EXTREME MEASURES WERE ONLY USED ON MAYBE 3 CASES AND ONLY AFTER ALL OTHER METHODS HAD FAILED AND ONLY AFTER COMPELLING EVIDENCE INDICATED AN IMMANENT THREAT OF ATTACK.

Congress was informed through oversight briefings and gave permission. Congress also witnessed some of the interrogations and had no problems with them until certain members of congress thought to use them as a knife in the back. Accountability was maintained and these seldom used tactics were employed as a last resort, not the first course of action. At no time would this fantasy you have of “torturing children” EVER be used as Children (A) are “protected persons” under the CG and US Law of Land Warfare and (B) require caring and love to defeat these fascists we fight.

You, on the other hand, have some delusional fanatasy where “evil conservatives in the Military (which with voting patterns would be 92-95% of us) and the CIA” love to hurt children and gleefully torture anyone and everyone.

Get some help before your paranoia makes you go postal!!!!!!!!

NO ONE advocates what your fragile grasp of reality calls ‘torture’ as the first, second, third or for most cases last resort. Your desperate need to vilify conservatives so that you can have some sort of made up enemy is disgusting and indicitive of serious mental issues.

Honestly, I do not care what your family thinks of you or what you think of them. I do not care if someone beat you up on the playground and you need ‘revenge’. Do not come here and project your delusional, paranoid fantasies on us.

Like or Dislike: 0  0

Re: “It’s not right, but sometimes you have no other choice.”

Especially in the movies and Conservative fantasy situations.

Again, let me make a prediction. One of the days, some Jack Bauer-wannab, will decide to torture some civilians who “a contact’ declared “knew something”. These people will turn out to be children or other innocents and this information will become public, just like Abu Graibe.

From that point on, Osama bin laden (still free, of course) will be turning recruits away for want of room to fit them in. America will be fully classed along with Saudi Arabia as a torture advocate.

And Conservatives, who love to hold Liberals to account for the actions of people who are “inspired” by Liberal commentary, wiss disavow any personal accountability for what they have said here, because personal accountability is anathama to Conservatives, always.

There are certain standards that a country stands for. Once upon a time torture was one of them for America. We might excuse extreme conduct in crisis situatins. But those crises had Darned-well better be real and provable to one and all.

Now Conservatives want to torture on rumours, innuendo and stray comments, just as long as a “cover story” is available.

http://www.spectator.org/dsp_article.asp?art_id=12300

Like or Dislike: 0  0