Switch to English Language Passer en langue française Omschakelen naar Nederlandse Taal Wechseln Sie zu deutschen Sprache Passa alla lingua italiana
Members: 69,963   Posts: 1,523,207   Online: 822
      
Page 8 of 11 FirstFirst ... 234567891011 LastLast
Results 71 to 80 of 102
  1. #71
    Ed Sukach's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2002
    Location
    Ipswich, Massachusetts, USA
    Shooter
    Medium Format
    Posts
    4,520
    Images
    26
    Quote Originally Posted by Francesco
    Blansky's question is plausible - i.e. will the practice of interrogating in such a manner depicted by the painting help in keeping alive coalition soldiers.
    If the question was, in fact that - "Do you think that interrogating in such manner will help in keeping coaltion slodiers alive?" I would have answered. That is not what was asked - the essence was, "Do you want our soldiers to die or not? Yes or no. If I had answered "no", I condone torture; if I answer "Yes" I am in favor of killing OUR troops.

    Let me ask it a little more succinctly:

    a. Do you condone torture?
    b. Do you want our troops to die?

    My answers:

    A: No!!
    B: No!!

    I say that there are better ways of conducting this WAR, than by forcing, by torture, anyone to say what we want them to say. THAT is, inevitably, flawed intelligence.
    Carpe erratum!!

    Ed Sukach, FFP.

  2. #72
    noseoil's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2003
    Location
    Tucson
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    2,898
    Images
    17

    A better way

    Ed, you stated "I say that there are better ways of conducting this WAR" with respect to the gathering of intellegence. I am certainly interested in your input on this subject. Would you mind expanding on this theme?

    Thanks, tim

  3. #73

    Join Date
    Sep 2002
    Location
    Omaha, Nebraska
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    2,512
    Images
    4
    I have never understood the war for oil analogy. if we want the oil why not just take it? We have the most powerful military in the world, we could wipe out the resistance against us with conventional weapons in a few days. Then again I agree that if the war is for oil why go to war at all. Why not just give Sadam his bag money like the French, Germans and Russians and keep the oil flowing. Sadam was a gangster and thug, with a primary interest in holding power and accumulating wealth. I don't think he gave a s**t about the Palestinians or anyone other arabs long as the dollars rolled in.

    Why care about the people being tortured and murdered. We did nothing about Genocide in Rawanda, the UN stood by and did nothing to prevent it.
    Why try to install a democratic governemnt. Le them have a civil war and kill each other in the thousands. Why leave US troops there in harms way untill that time.

    After years of doing nothing about terrorism and appeasment we have paid a heavy price. There are those on the left who blame the US for 9/11 and said we got what we deserved. If we had never invaded Iraq they would be whinning about our efforts to democratize Afganistan. In thier fuzzy thinking if you try to understand the terrorists feelings, understand where they are coming from we could all get along.

    But reality is different. The various terrorist groups have one agenda. To homogenize the middle east into a radical form of Islam which believes it is the duty of a husband to murder his wife if she commits adultery, Forbids women from having an education and forces upon men what they wear and how they should be groomed.
    Extermination of the Jews would be a top priority, and they may tolerate Christians as long as they eventually convert to Islam. If you are Agnostic or atheist better plan on publically praying to Allah. Spreading this kind of hatred to the rest of the world is the final objective. And yet the left tolerates it and even embraces it all for political gain playing right into the terrorist's hands.

    If we pull out of Iraq and Afganistan, quit supporting Isreal and quit propping up the Saudi royal family,it would not be enough. Attacks would continue because they believe they can control US foreign and domestic policy through violence and intimidation. Put liberals in control and they will simply accept the fact that terrorst attacks are going to be a way of life in the US.
    "Fundamentally I think we need to rediscover a non-ironic world"
    Robert Adams

  4. #74

    Join Date
    Sep 2003
    Location
    Düsseldorf, Germany
    Shooter
    8x10 Format
    Posts
    1,021
    Images
    1
    Up to this point, the arguments in this were heated yes but certainly worth the read - I love a good debate. Namecalling is completely uncalled for. However, is this how this thread is going to be played? I alluded to a character from the movie Saving Private Ryan - Upham I believe was his name. An intellectual, a romantic (he could translate Edith Piaff singing Je ne regrette rien or some such song), but ultimately spineless and impotent. He does change though - but too little too late. Please no name calling.

  5. #75
    noseoil's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2003
    Location
    Tucson
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    2,898
    Images
    17
    "I can be thankful that he is as spineless and impotent as he is ignorant and cynical."

    My, my, it seems both my libido and skeletal structure have been impuned in one complete thought. But what do you really mean? Name calling in an erudite forum?

    Nuke the middle east? Only for their own good, not ours. "Hell yeah" and stop trying to make friends with me.

  6. #76
    Eric Rose's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2002
    Location
    Calgary AB, Canada
    Shooter
    4x5 Format
    Posts
    4,238
    Images
    73
    Just as a historical note, the UN did try and intervene in Rawanda. The Americans would not help by sending in troops so the outgunned Canadians among others had to retreat. It has been said before that the American political will is never there when it comes to saving or acting on horrific problems in countries that are predominacally black. There was no strategic reason (oil, pineapples, bananas and/or major property holdings) for the US to get involved so they didn't. So much for humanity driven politics.

    30,000 people a day outside of the G8 die from starvation and AIDS related illnesses. Why is there no action? Simple, these countries have nothing the G8 countries want so therefore they don't need cheap labor to get it. These people also don' t have any money to fuel the G8 so why both, right?

    Why does the US cozy up to China and invade Iraq. All for the same reason - money. In one case they ignore a regime that is notorious for torturing their people and in the other use it as an excuse to invade. Talk about two faced.

    But hey the ends justify the means - right.

    I would like to know how many of our members have actually served in the military and seen combat. And I mean real combat, not that button pushing killing done 1000's of miles from the front lines. I bet these people have a very different view on things than the armchair types.

    In answer to the original question - no. At some point we have to draw a line in the dirt and say we won't cross it. Yes it may be tough, it may cost lives, but we will not lower ourselves to the level of animals.
    www.ericrose.com
    yourbaddog.com

    "civility is not a sign of weakness" JFK

    "The Dude abides" - the Dude

  7. #77
    blansky's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2002
    Location
    Wine country in Northern California
    Posts
    5,029
    Ed wrote:

    No!! Not "Just the ones who did it." I said ALL!

    After all, it's only hypothetical


    Good point, you are right. I altered it. The answer then is no.

    You still haven't answered mine.

    A hypothetical question is a question that asks for a debate surrounding that question. It is not a trap, or trick question. It my case it is merely a question of in a war, any war, would you condone this form of humiliation (in the 4 specific photos) to help save the life of your son/daughter serving in the military, if information was obtained.

    It is not a question of, is this a just war, do I hate Bush, do I hate Muslims.

    It is simply a question of in a war, not peacetime, but in a war would you condone this behavior.

    I have no doubt that intelligent people can have differing positions on this but when it comes down to my loved one vs my principles , which would I choose.

    I'm sure that there are people on this site that deplore all war. That would not fight for their country no matter what. Many during WWII tried not to serve because they didn't believe in the war just as many don't believe in this one.

    Many people didn't fight in the war for American independence either. Although now both WWII and the War of Independence would be considered just wars.


    Michael
    I couldn't think of anything witty to say so I left this blank.

  8. #78
    blansky's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2002
    Location
    Wine country in Northern California
    Posts
    5,029
    On the Rawanda issue.

    During a Frontline documentary on the subject when a member of the Rawandan delegation went to the UN, they had the chance to talk to a member of the American delegation in private.

    He told her that they would not get help for the situation in Rawanda because "America does not have friends, America has interests".


    Michael
    I couldn't think of anything witty to say so I left this blank.

  9. #79
    noseoil's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2003
    Location
    Tucson
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    2,898
    Images
    17
    What we did to deserve it. Here's one link.

    http://www.uoguelph.ca/~rksiadz/911.htm

  10. #80

    Join Date
    Sep 2002
    Location
    Omaha, Nebraska
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    2,512
    Images
    4
    I did hear a story on NPR that told of how the UN troops stayed in their compound while the slaughter took place.

    And yes the US did not intervene. I guess the president at the time had other pressing matters on his mind or his groin.

    As far as the military goes, no I did not serve. Although had I been of draft age during Vietnam and my number came up I would have went. Unlike Clinton I would not have had the pull with the draft board to get out of it or like Al Gore have a Congressman daddy to make sure I was in some cushy
    non-combat job. Or like George Bush have the pull to get into the Gaurd. Of course Clinton's lack of military experience did not keep him from killing many civilians in Bosnia or in cruise missle attacks on the Sudan. So please don't play the combat vs behind the lines or I was in the military and you were not cards.. Clinton has shot those arguments all to hell for both parties.


    Eric,
    In all sincerity I do thank you and respect you for your service to all of us. the same goes for John Kerry. I may not vote for him for president but I have the utmost respect for his serving the country and respect his right for protesting when he returned.

    Now I am going to return to regular programing where the most controversial topic may be if it is better to mix developer with a right or left hand motion.
    "Fundamentally I think we need to rediscover a non-ironic world"
    Robert Adams

Page 8 of 11 FirstFirst ... 234567891011 LastLast


 

APUG PARTNERS EQUALLY FUNDING OUR COMMUNITY:



Contact Us  |  Support Us!  |  Advertise  |  Site Terms  |  Archive  —   Search  |  Mobile Device Access  |  RSS  |  Facebook  |  Linkedin