Switch to English Language Passer en langue française Omschakelen naar Nederlandse Taal Wechseln Sie zu deutschen Sprache Passa alla lingua italiana
Members: 70,531   Posts: 1,543,977   Online: 1070
      
Page 9 of 11 FirstFirst ... 34567891011 LastLast
Results 81 to 90 of 102
  1. #81
    Ed Sukach's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2002
    Location
    Ipswich, Massachusetts, USA
    Shooter
    Medium Format
    Posts
    4,520
    Images
    26
    Quote Originally Posted by blansky
    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.
    I you are asking for debate, by labeling this as a "hypothetical question", you should not adamantly place the restriction of "Yes or No - nothing else". That closes the door to debate.

    You answered mine as "no". Knowing the motivation behind that answer, I will NOT assume that you are in favor of child molestation.

    I am *sure* you have read my response - where I "split" the question into two parts.

    I'll answer your original question as you did mine - "No".

    The "hypothetical" expansion: I disagree with the original premise: Torture would NOT prevent anyone - my children of someone else's from bing killed.
    Carpe erratum!!

    Ed Sukach, FFP.

  2. #82
    noseoil's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2003
    Location
    Tucson
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    2,898
    Images
    17
    JDEF, is this not germane to the current topic?

    "Finally, the terrorists were called "cowards" for the 9/11 attacks, those who died have been given appropriate respects; but each day countless people die in third world countries because the developed world... the North American world, for the most part are too selfish to assist our fellow human beings who are less fortunate. The vast majority does not care, does not respect those who die each day, but we make a big deal over some people who had a lifetime of riches and vast fortune that so many never have even 1/16th of over seas. The more fortunate countries are cowards for ignoring those who need assistance. Suicide attacks are cowardly? It takes much more courage to give up your life than to wear a suit and push a button to destroy something on the other side of the planet."

  3. #83
    L Gebhardt's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2003
    Location
    NH - Live Free or Die
    Shooter
    Large Format
    Posts
    1,678
    Blog Entries
    1
    Images
    18
    Noseoil, I happen to agree. That probably makes me a "liberal" for thinking we should try and understand our enemy, but I truely think it is the only way to win a war.

    While we are on this controversial subject, can anyone tell me how Iraq is linked to 9/11 and our "War on Terror"? From what I have seen there were no terrorists in Iraq until we eliminated Sadam. Now the tribal wars can continue in Iraq, and we have been brought into the middle of it. We have also created the ideal recuitment cause for the original terrorists we were after.

  4. #84
    noseoil's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2003
    Location
    Tucson
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    2,898
    Images
    17
    We were attacked because we don't care enough.

    This is the why, according to the author. I cite this reasoning as a case in point. Perhaps it is not correct. Perhaps it is. I disagree with this stilted reasoning, but then again, I'm a knuckle dragger with limited intellectual skills, education, and libido (oh, I almost left out spineless). I'm trying to keep up, but I guess my limited right wing view of the world does limit my understanding of stilted logic.

  5. #85
    Eric Rose's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2002
    Location
    Calgary AB, Canada
    Shooter
    4x5 Format
    Posts
    4,256
    Images
    73
    What better way for Jr. to stay in power than to maintain this "state of urgency" associated with a terrorist threat. It keeps everyone from really looking at what he is doing or not doing at home. Approval rating go down, within days there is a "new and credible" threat of domestic terrorism. Geez how stupid does he and his people really think the American public is? Has about as much truth as WMD in Iraq.
    www.ericrose.com
    yourbaddog.com

    "civility is not a sign of weakness" JFK

    "The Dude abides" - the Dude

  6. #86
    Eric Rose's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2002
    Location
    Calgary AB, Canada
    Shooter
    4x5 Format
    Posts
    4,256
    Images
    73
    Jdef, while I don't necessarily agree with the sentiment, there are many around the world that feel the US got what it deserved with 9/11. They feel for the innocent people killed, but were not surprised it happened. I travel internationally alot, and I do mean alot, talk to many different people from all walks of life etc. so this is not second hand information.
    www.ericrose.com
    yourbaddog.com

    "civility is not a sign of weakness" JFK

    "The Dude abides" - the Dude

  7. #87
    Ed Sukach's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2002
    Location
    Ipswich, Massachusetts, USA
    Shooter
    Medium Format
    Posts
    4,520
    Images
    26
    Would I commit atrocities to protect my wife and children?

    No.

    I would kill, If I had to - but that is not an atrocity. An atrocity, to me indicates prolonged suffering - insane delight in causing pain to others - meaningless death of another.

    That is *NEVER* justified - or necessary.
    Carpe erratum!!

    Ed Sukach, FFP.

  8. #88
    noseoil's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2003
    Location
    Tucson
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    2,898
    Images
    17

    URGENCY

    Eric,

    "What better way for Jr. to stay in power than to maintain this "state of urgency" associated with a terrorist threat."

    This is an old political ploy. How many times have we heard "We have to fix social security."

    My question would be "Who was it that screwed it up?" Let them fix it.

  9. #89
    Ed Sukach's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2002
    Location
    Ipswich, Massachusetts, USA
    Shooter
    Medium Format
    Posts
    4,520
    Images
    26
    Quote Originally Posted by blansky
    Ed wrote:

    THINK - If anything becomes apparent after a study of the histories of war, it is that the side that treats their prisoners most humanely ALWAYS is the most successful. If you know of an exception, I'd like to hear it.
    Without having to think too hard, how about this one.
    World War II --The Soviets/Russians.
    Viet Nam Police action --- the North Vietnamese/Viet Cong
    Michael
    The first - From what I've been able to learn from those who were there - my uncle was a Colonel in the Military Police all through the European Campaign - and he took part in the liberation of many POW and Concentration Camps - the Nazis were more brutal than the Russians - although there was a degree of "retaliation" - and it was - not really "close", but not a great deal farther apart, either.

    Viet Nam was another story - another "Undeclared" action, that was abruptly ended after exploration groups could find *NO* oil (there's that word again) off the Vietnamese Coast. From what I've heard - and I've had some contact with really "screwed up" veterans of this conflict - neither side was very "pretty".
    Carpe erratum!!

    Ed Sukach, FFP.

  10. #90
    Ed Sukach's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2002
    Location
    Ipswich, Massachusetts, USA
    Shooter
    Medium Format
    Posts
    4,520
    Images
    26
    Quote Originally Posted by noseoil
    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?
    I've read a few publications, including Army FM's on Interrogation.
    Nowhere was the use of force, and certainly not torture, advocated. The general theme was to establish rapport, with the idea of getting the prisoner to "loosen up" and drop their guard. Surprisingly easy to do ... communicate with them - talk about their problems as prisoners, and ... LISTEN!! - all the time. They will subconsciously divulge "bits and pieces" - which may not make sense at the time ... but the material furnished by a number of prisoners can be integrated to supply valuable information -- and be, at the same time, VERIFIED.

    There is another larger question: How should the whole conflict be handled?"

    I was against this mess from the beginning. Asides, I wonder what our attitude towards the United Nations is NOW - and how it compares to our flat-out rejection of the UN at the beginning...?

    If we actually DID what the government said we were going to do ... bring justice and self-rule (a.k.a. "democracy") to the Iraqis; to re-build their economy, to "make it better" for the average Iraqi in the street - I doubt that we would have the animosity and underground violence we see now.

    In short - we should have then - and should NOW -- live up to our "press."
    Carpe erratum!!

    Ed Sukach, FFP.

Page 9 of 11 FirstFirst ... 34567891011 LastLast


 

APUG PARTNERS EQUALLY FUNDING OUR COMMUNITY:



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