It's been interesting

[Guest]

to watch the Obama/Cheney back and forth on Americas security.

Obama seems to think that terrorists will respect us more if we go back to our "values" as a nation. I guess that he just doesn't get it! We Americans are HATED "because" of our values! As we all know, our nation was built on religion (Christian for the most part), Democracy, Freedom, rule of law, etc. and the terrorists want the world to join them in the dark ages of society.

The terrorists used airplanes to kill thousands of Americans on 9/11, use beheading and physical maiming to torture people that don't follow their beliefs,use children and woman to blow themselves up to kill Americans, and Obama is worried about water boarding? Who was killed ,maimed or otherwise injured by
American interrogation practices?

As John Stossel says "give me a break!:cus:

[Guest]

I find it funny. I think more reporters have been water boarded than terrorists. They seem to be lining up to try it.

It's typical liberal thinking. They simply do not get it when it comes to national defense.

[Guest]

I find it funny. I think more reporters have been water boarded than terrorists. They seem to be lining up to try it.

It's typical liberal thinking. They simply do not get it when it comes to national defense.

As I understand it...THREE PEOPLE....THREE VERY BAD PEOPLE...were all that were waterboarded and because of who they were and the info they had and for years we have heard how our country is so very very bad (and most of that from the party in power)

[Guest]

I find it funny. I think more reporters have been water boarded than terrorists. They seem to be lining up to try it.

It's typical liberal thinking. They simply do not get it when it comes to national defense.

Those darn liberals. The source of all that's evil and bad.
Those darn conservatives. The source of all that's pure and good.

[Guest]

:agree:

[Guest]

Those darn liberals. The source of all that's evil and bad.
Those darn conservatives. The source of all that's pure and good.


Your sarcasm is noted as I am sure you know that was not what was said or even implied. The subject is national defense !

[Guest]

Those darn liberals. The source of all that's evil and bad.
Those darn conservatives. The source of all that's pure and good.

When you're right you're right.

Yoda

A member of the loyal opposition

[Guest]

:agree:

No truer words.............

Yoda

A member of the loyal opposition

[Guest]

Those darn liberals. The source of all that's evil and bad.
Those darn conservatives. The source of all that's pure and good.

Kinda sounds like that dont it... But not sure if it was actually said up front. But there is a hint of it.
Sarcasm or not. If it looks like duck, walks like a duck and quacks like a duck. Darn sure isnt a sheep?

And I promised I would not venture back into this throw the liberal lamb to the conservative wolves watering hole again. But National Defense, I dont believe this quote:
"We Americans are HATED "because" of our values! As we all know, our nation was built on religion (Christian for the most part), Democracy, Freedom, rule of law, etc. and the terrorists want the world to join them in the dark ages of society."

Is the total truth. There is alot more to why we are not wanted or liked by other countries. In my time spent in Iraq, there are alot of people that just do not want us to tell them they have to be like us, Tell them they have conform to our laws, and on and on. There is alot more to it, alot more than we understand. You got to protect our country first, and that starts here at home, not overseas.

Wait what I am doing. I think I heard a quote before:

Fear is the path to the Dark Side. Fear leads to anger, anger leads to hate, hate leads to suffering.

YODA, Star Wars Episode I: The Phantom Menace




Money Out.

[Guest]

So far he has only to "un-do" those things be them war, terrorist or economy related that will appeal to his voters (past/future) and the leaders around the world.
He has yet to have handed to him a 911 like event....or any other event that puts him in a :cus: if you do or :cus: if you don't.

If he does the wrong thing on the economy it won't matter too much because the media will insulate it from sounding or smelling too bad plus we the people won't care much as we have proven to be too apathetic about almost everything.

The war; well we will see how "his war" Afganistan turns out. So far it looks and sounds the same as before he showed up. And of course the ever present media will not focus on the minute details on a daily basis as they have for the opposition. We most certainly will not hear the cries of the partisans as it is their guy's war.

That leaves a terrorist event. Which any one with a pulse knows from history and the terrorists promises to kill as many of us as possible. We all hope (the real hope not the political empty promise) and pray it never happens again.....but it will.

Let us not forget, there is not one single action Obama has taken to change the belief of nor the intents of those who have vowed to kill us and cripple our way of life.

Does any thinking American really believe the rest of the world really cares how we treat those who have killed Americans? Been caught planning to kill more Americans? As a matter of fact they quietly go about their business hoping that what ever we do or don't do affects them as little as possible.
While snickering at our continued intent and constant preaching that all will treat humanity as we would have it...while the rest of the world continues to go about it's business, DOING WHAT EVER IT TAKES, WHEN EVER DEEMED NECESSARY for the preservation of their way of life....NOT OURS.

We have earned that assignation of "the paper tiger" as applied to the USA before Pearl Harbor. Recall (as I paraphrase) Japanese military leadership after the event...I fear we have awakened the paper tiger.

The current leadership, administration, media, special interest groups may have emasculated the USA to a point it can no longer rise to the call again.

We are losing strength and precious time while our enemies grow in strength....they are much more consistent than the pied piper populist polticos and their sheeple!!!!

Hopefully the intent of Memorial Day will get it's due this weekend...remember the true warriors who did rise to the the call.

BTK

[Guest]

As I understand it...THREE PEOPLE....THREE VERY BAD PEOPLE...were all that were waterboarded and because of who they were and the info they had and for years we have heard how our country is so very very bad (and most of that from the party in power)I believe there were MORE than 3 public beheadings by Islamic radicals....

[Guest]

Kinda sounds like that dont it... But not sure if it was actually said up front. But there is a hint of it.
Sarcasm or not. If it looks like duck, walks like a duck and quacks like a duck. Darn sure isnt a sheep?

And I promised I would not venture back into this throw the liberal lamb to the conservative wolves watering hole again. But National Defense, I dont believe this quote:
"We Americans are HATED "because" of our values! As we all know, our nation was built on religion (Christian for the most part), Democracy, Freedom, rule of law, etc. and the terrorists want the world to join them in the dark ages of society."

Is the total truth. There is alot more to why we are not wanted or liked by other countries. In my time spent in Iraq, there are alot of people that just do not want us to tell them they have to be like us, Tell them they have conform to our laws, and on and on. There is alot more to it, alot more than we understand. You got to protect our country first, and that starts here at home, not overseas.

Wait what I am doing. I think I heard a quote before:

Fear is the path to the Dark Side. Fear leads to anger, anger leads to hate, hate leads to suffering.

YODA, Star Wars Episode I: The Phantom Menace




Money Out.Not only a Star Wars quote..... it is the same message of Ron Paul.

[Guest]

It's been reported on the news that the water boarding of Khalid Sheik Mohammed directly produced information that lead to the arrest of several terrorists planning an immanent attack on the Brooklyn Bridge. Death toll they say during rush hour could have been ten thousand people.

Say goodbye to our national defense.

[Guest]

I just read a news item on Yahoo, with the headline which reads "Bush-era officials reject Cheney security stance".

The officials are Robert Gates (Sec. Of Defense) and Tom Ridge (former head of Homeland Security).

[Guest]

I just read a news item on Yahoo, with the headline which reads "Bush-era officials reject Cheney security stance".

The officials are Robert Gates (Sec. Of Defense) and Tom Ridge (former head of Homeland Security).



I think that if you went beyond the headline.....

You would find that both men said what they disagree with is that the country is not safer now than it was but add things like this comment from Ridge...
______________________________________--

""I'm surprised that President Obama, who I really, truly believe knows better, would make such a statement," said Ridge. "The men and women in charge of America's security, whether they're military, or the intelligence community — the president, the vice president, the attorney general, the FBI director — did everything they could at the time to prevent another attack on America. And did it consistent with the Constitution and the rule of law."

Ridge, who served as the country's first homeland security secretary in the aftermath of the September 11 attacks, said he's "disappointed in the president" for spending time criticizing past actions of the Bush administration."

"He keeps looking backwards to justify what he's doing now and I don't think at the end of the day — I think that becomes more politics than policy, and I don't think it's the kind of approach that we need to bring America together on this very important issue," he said.

http://politicalticker.blogs.cnn.com/2009/05/22/ridge-i-disagree-with-cheney/
____________________________________________----

Gates said basically that he does not thing the USA defense is "in jeopardy" which he better say given his position.


I hope they are correct....actually I pray that they are correct about the security, but am really finding fault with this constant waterboard crap about THREE ....THREE....early on prisoners (early being defined shortly after this country was attacked) being subjected to this treatment to insure that we could stop any other attacks.

This is politics plain and simple and the President knows it !

[Guest]

One of your own thought waterboarding was nothing. So he decided to under go the procedure to prove it. It was on the MSP but perhaps not on Fox Noise.

He lasted 6 seconds... came up and declared he was wrong IT IS TORTURE. This guy had a drowning experience as a kid.

In reponse Keith Obermann donated $10,000 to Vet Charity. Sean Hannity would said he would be waterboarded for charity has not yet done so.

The United States does not Torture....it is a basic value of this country.

Bush and Cheney broke that trust. Them's the facts.

[Guest]

One of your own thought waterboarding was nothing. So he decided to under go the procedure to prove it. It was on the MSP but perhaps not on Fox Noise.

He lasted 6 seconds... came up and declared he was wrong IT IS TORTURE. This guy had a drowning experience as a kid.

In reponse Keith Obermann donated $10,000 to Vet Charity. Sean Hannity would said he would be waterboarded for charity has not yet done so.

The United States does not Torture....it is a basic value of this country.

Bush and Cheney broke that trust. Them's the facts.


I respect your feelings COLOGAL......and ask you this question (actually TWO questions)....

We waterboarded THREE (3) people and only 3. It was shortly after the attack on our country. It was on 3 people who could have info on other planned attacks.

Question ONE...under those circumstances am I understanding you would NOT waterboard to get this information in order to protect our values ?

QUESTION TWO.....when you allude to "One of your own" as you did...what are you referrring to...color, religion, nationality...what exactly does "One of your own" mean ? Are you a member of some select organization and others are on the outside ?

[Guest]

So you're saying you'd rather see thousands of innocent people killed in an attack rather than to water board a terrorist who has information about it?

I guess Obama does.

It's been reported on the news that the water boarding of Khalid Sheik Mohammed directly produced information that lead to the arrest of several terrorists planning an immanent attack on the Brooklyn Bridge. Death toll they say during rush hour could have been ten thousand people.

It's typical bleeding heart liberal double speak... until it's their family.

[Guest]

[QUOTE=cologal;205233]The United States does not Torture....it is a basic value of this country.


I agree that this has been a value of this country for many many years. But times and people change. And when we find that our enemies now are flying planes into buildings or plotting to blow up bridges in rush hour or tunnels at rush hour or exploding dirty bombs on US soil then I suggest we maybe should look at how that impacts our long standing values and find out what we need to do to protect ourselves as best we can.

[Guest]

Is it torture if the individual could die, be permanently injured, or endured significant pain? or

Is it torture if the individual is scared s******* during the procedure, even though the individual is in no danger of being injured or killed?

Those who have voluntarily endured water boarding as an experiment or out of curiosity are not credible in their assessment of the procedure, as they had nothing at stake. They knew the procedure would be terminated as soon as they said it would be, and thus had full control of the situation.

When time is of the essence to acquire information valuable to save lives and prevent additional victims of terrorism, debating with a terrorist or criminal over opinions on morality and/or politics is rarely successful due to the immorality of the terrorist/criminal and/or zealot-like political stance and the time window of need for the imfornation. So, non-lethal, non-injurious but darned-right frightening procedures are applied to "get the information" before more deaths/injuries occur from further terrorist/criminal actions.

In a perfect world, the captured individual would simply say, "Okay, you got me, here's everything I know so that no one else becomes a casualty." Unfortunately, the "perfect" scenario doesn't exist.

[Guest]

Let me get this straight: if waterboarding is torture, then the policy of the US is to torture members of our own armed services but not the 3 people who hold the keys to future terrorist attacks against our country. It would seem that those are very distorted morals if you ask me.

[Guest]

If the individual could die, be permanently injured, or endured significant pain.....that is torture.....water boarding is none of those. It is a political escapade that the world is once again watching and laughing at us.

As I have said before, many who elect to stay the high ground on the issue of whether to waterboard or not or even torture or not. For those who have nothing invested....it is so easy to inteelectualize the concepts.

Now let's hypothesize an individual has information leading to the where abouts of YOUR family member(s) who are about to be beaten, raped, tortured and then beheaded. Now I wonder how far one would want the authorities to go to find the information needed to save the family.

Or how about he knows the where abouts of a nuclear device that may be planted in your home location.

I am all for do what ever it takes to get the information to save American lives.....for all you others I hope and pray you are never put in a position to have to EAT CROW on the subject.

BTK

[Guest]

I respect your feelings COLOGAL......and ask you this question (actually TWO questions)....

We waterboarded THREE (3) people and only 3. It was shortly after the attack on our country. It was on 3 people who could have info on other planned attacks.

Question ONE...under those circumstances am I understanding you would NOT waterboard to get this information in order to protect our values ?

QUESTION TWO.....when you allude to "One of your own" as you did...what are you referring to...color, religion, nationality...what exactly does "One of your own" mean ? Are you a member of some select organization and others are on the outside ?

The answer to #2 is.. Erich Mancow Muller, a conservative radio talk show host, was waterboarded. He repeatedly stated that waterboarding was NOT torture and wanted to prove that. Oh well... now he understands what this really was. The one of your own comment referred to the fact he was a conservative....

As for #1...What good are our values if we abandon them so quickly? We tried people for war crimes on this same issue. How can we hold the moral high ground now? Also, there are various claims out there about the value of the information....one reports Cheney's office demanded this procedure to prove a link between Hussein and Al-Qaeda existed. It didn't exist. If this is true then the waterboarding of at least one terrorist was done for self serving reasons.

I have two nephews in the military...one of which has been to Iraq 4 times, wounded once. These tactics put them at risk should they be captured.

My mother used to always say this to me...."Don't sink to their level"

Seems to be a good point here.

[Guest]

My mother used to always say this to me...."Don't sink to their level"

It's not about sinking to their level, it's about saving thousands of American lives through intel gained from interrogation of captured terrorists... which already has saved thousands of lives and apparently will no longer save thousands of lives.

I guess water boarding can be pretty scary to the terrorist who's getting wet. Wonder how the people felt in the twin towers as they plummeted to their death? Or the passengers on the planes who had time to ponder their fate? Or the kids who's daddy or mommy didn't come home from work that day? Or the mothers and fathers who would never see their children again?

Sorry, everything changed after that and I hold no sympathy for terrorists and as far as I'm concerned they have lost all rights to anything.

[Guest]

I believe it was John McCain who said, that's who THEY are, it's not who WE are.

[Guest]

John McCain got just about every bone in his body broken not to mention that his arms are practically crippled from the years of torture and beatings.

What we are taking about here is totally different. We are talking about a group of people who's entire goal in life is to kill as many innocent men, woman and children as they possibly can and ways that we have at our disposal to prevent that.

I am not interested in protecting the rights of terrorists over our own families.

Water boarding directly prevented the death of thousands of people on the Brooklyn Bridge.

Are you willing to trade???

[Guest]

On this morning's George Stephanapolous show, the panel of commentators ranging from far right (George Will) to far left (Donna Brazile) and a couple in the right and left middle (David Brooks and E.J. Dionne), all agreed on what President Obama's current position was relative to national security in general and the jailed terrorists in Guantanamo. They agreed that Obama's current position is almost exactly the same as President Bush's on the same issues.

They went on to agree that the "debate" between President Obama, Dick Cheney and other members of Congress was essentially political noise-making and that neither side could truly identify substantial differences in the position, beliefs or policy of "their side" versus that of the other.

Mine will be the 26th post in this thread. There have been many "back and forth" comments about which person and which political party truly has the correct slant on national security, when in fact there is virtually no difference in the beliefs and values of either side. I guess we hear what we want to hear from the politicians, depending on which side we're backing.

[Guest]

Enhanced interrogation techniques directly prevented the death of thousands of people on the Brooklyn Bridge.

Who is willing to trade???

[Guest]

If the individual could die, be permanently injured, or endured significant pain.....that is torture.....water boarding is none of those. It is a political escapade that the world is once again watching and laughing at us.

As I have said before, many who elect to stay the high ground on the issue of whether to waterboard or not or even torture or not. For those who have nothing invested....it is so easy to inteelectualize the concepts.

Now let's hypothesize an individual has information leading to the where abouts of YOUR family member(s) who are about to be beaten, raped, tortured and then beheaded. Now I wonder how far one would want the authorities to go to find the information needed to save the family.

Or how about he knows the where abouts of a nuclear device that may be planted in your home location.

I am all for do what ever it takes to get the information to save American lives.....for all you others I hope and pray you are never put in a position to have to EAT CROW on the subject.

BTK

I could not have said it better.:agree:

[Guest]

I understand the whole moral high ground argument but let's take a real world example.

On TV just the other night the head of NY's Counter Terrorism department said information they received as a result of the enhanced interrogation techniques used on the 9/11 mastermind led them to the exact address of a group that was also planning to take down the Brooklyn Bridge at rush hour. There they found all the goodies to carry out the plan including engineering drawings of the bridge with exact explosive placements. According to engineers it would have taken the bridge down killing as many as ten thousand people.

So it's a simple question in regards to using enhanced interrogation techniques on terrorists. Let's get down to the nuts and bolts if we are ever in the same situation again.

Who is willing to trade?

I'll start. NOT ME.

[Guest]

The answer to #2 is.. Erich Mancow Muller, a conservative radio talk show host, was waterboarded. He repeatedly stated that waterboarding was NOT torture and wanted to prove that. Oh well... now he understands what this really was. The one of your own comment referred to the fact he was a conservative....

As for #1...What good are our values if we abandon them so quickly? We tried people for war crimes on this same issue. How can we hold the moral high ground now? Also, there are various claims out there about the value of the information....one reports Cheney's office demanded this procedure to prove a link between Hussein and Al-Qaeda existed. It didn't exist. If this is true then the waterboarding of at least one terrorist was done for self serving reasons.

I have two nephews in the military...one of which has been to Iraq 4 times, wounded once. These tactics put them at risk should they be captured.

My mother used to always say this to me...."Don't sink to their level"

Seems to be a good point here.

Cologal,

We've discussed this before, and with mutual respect. The issue is one where moral concerns intersect with situational practicality, and the lousiest part of it is that the people who would be the recipients of the procedure have full control as to whether there would even be a consideration to apply it.

Your concerns for the welfare of your nephews are sincere, and no comments from anyone (as we are virtually unknown to each other) on this board can (and should) change a sincere feeling of anyone. I would suggest that your nephews, as they sound like good people with considerable experience in dealing with the personalities, and you discuss the issue. Whatever their opinions are on the topic, the opinions will not be based on the theoretical.....

And should you speak to them over this weekend, please inform them that a crusty old vet from TV thanks them for their service in these controversial times.

[Guest]

It's not about sinking to their level, it's about saving thousands of American lives through Intel gained from interrogation of captured terrorists... which already has saved thousands of lives and apparently will no longer save thousands of lives.

I guess water boarding can be pretty scary to the terrorist who's getting wet. Wonder how the people felt in the twin towers as they plummeted to their death? Or the passengers on the planes who had time to ponder their fate? Or the kids who's daddy or mommy didn't come home from work that day? Or the mothers and fathers who would never see their children again?

Sorry, everything changed after that and I hold no sympathy for terrorists and as far as I'm concerned they have lost all rights to anything.

Fortunately you don't get to decide that.....President Bush stood before the American people and said "We don't torture" But he lied.

[Guest]

Cologal,

We've discussed this before, and with mutual respect. The issue is one where moral concerns intersect with situational practicality, and the lousiest part of it is that the people who would be the recipients of the procedure have full control as to whether there would even be a consideration to apply it.

Your concerns for the welfare of your nephews are sincere, and no comments from anyone (as we are virtually unknown to each other) on this board can (and should) change a sincere feeling of anyone. I would suggest that your nephews, as they sound like good people with considerable experience in dealing with the personalities, and you discuss the issue. Whatever their opinions are on the topic, the opinions will not be based on the theoretical.....

And should you speak to them over this weekend, please inform them that a crusty old vet from TV thanks them for their service in these controversial times.

Steve...Thank you. I was visiting my nephew the Marine when he got the orders to Iraq, in advance of the current war. We had long respectful discussions. I was also lucky to be around when he came home from his last deployment. At that time I told him if he went again I would just shoot him myself. (Kidding of course but the stress does get to you).

I certainly forward your message the next time I speak to them. And on this Memorial Day Weekend thank you for your service and the other vets on this board.

[Guest]

Fortunately you don't get to decide that.....President Bush stood before the American people and said "We don't torture" But he lied.

Well said.

[Guest]

On this morning's George Stephanapolous show, the panel of commentators ranging from far right (George Will) to far left (Donna Brazile) and a couple in the right and left middle (David Brooks and E.J. Dionne), all agreed on what President Obama's current position was relative to national security in general and the jailed terrorists in Guantanamo. They agreed that Obama's current position is almost exactly the same as President Bush's on the same issues.

They went on to agree that the "debate" between President Obama, Dick Cheney and other members of Congress was essentially political noise-making and that neither side could truly identify substantial differences in the position, beliefs or policy of "their side" versus that of the other.

Mine will be the 26th post in this thread. There have been many "back and forth" comments about which person and which political party truly has the correct slant on national security, when in fact there is virtually no difference in the beliefs and values of either side. I guess we hear what we want to hear from the politicians, depending on which side we're backing.


GREAT POST VK...you are right on !

The only negative I have is the political hay being made by both sides but I am so tired of hearing the President talk about the "mess" he got from the last adminstration and then continuing the policy.

The Bush administration called it a mess.....amazing how time seems to change people....from 9/11 for a few years there was no political huffing and puffing as these things were put into place....it was done to protect us and the mindset at the time was not what it is today.

I agree...there is very little difference EXCEPT for all the political gains trying to be made !

I just wish that during the campaign Obama had been a bit more forthright because he attacked most of what he is continuing although in his defense perhaps he has learned a few things

[Guest]

GREAT POST VK...you are right on !

The only negative I have is the political hay being made by both sides but I am so tired of hearing the President talk about the "mess" he got from the last adminstration and then continuing the policy.

The Bush administration called it a mess.....amazing how time seems to change people....from 9/11 for a few years there was no political huffing and puffing as these things were put into place....it was done to protect us and the mindset at the time was not what it is today.

I agree...there is very little difference EXCEPT for all the political gains trying to be made !

I just wish that during the campaign Obama had been a bit more forthright because he attacked most of what he is continuing although in his defense perhaps he has learned a few things

Good points. No one is 100% right and no one is 100% wrong. There always has to be some middle ground.

[Guest]

learning there are some things POTUS does that are unpopular, but have to be done. Not exactly a style a professional campaigner is happy or good with.
Some of the about faces he has made reflect this happening.
He will in time....I CERTAINLY HOPE....will do what has to be done for the sake of saving America....regardless the popularity of the issue.
He is very uncomfortable when having to take a position similar to or in support of what Bush said/did.
Obama is a populist.....one cannot be a populist and a good POTUS.
He stands a better chance at faking it when needed with the ready assitance of his media darlings.

BTK