erynthered Posted April 24, 2009 Posted April 24, 2009 Well, I wonder what the man from glad will say about this. http://a1135.g.akamai.net/f/1135/18227/1h/...topresident.pdf
BillsFan-4-Ever Posted April 24, 2009 Posted April 24, 2009 Well, I wonder what the man from glad will say about this. http://a1135.g.akamai.net/f/1135/18227/1h/...topresident.pdf Interesting... I'd almost say he watched too many Nave SEALS movies.
Keukasmallies Posted April 24, 2009 Posted April 24, 2009 Any time one introduces reason or a factually correct sequence of events into a political discussion, elected officials run for literal and figurative cover....
drnykterstein Posted April 24, 2009 Posted April 24, 2009 Lol. Obama had a hearty debate on this issue before releasing the memo's. He did not take it lightly. For every person he find with the opinion of this guy, he can find someone of the opposite view just as easy. but erynthered won't read those opinions
IDBillzFan Posted April 24, 2009 Posted April 24, 2009 but erynthered won't read those opinions Neither will Obama. Obama didn't weigh all the issues. He though it was a bad idea, and it is, and the left that got him elected made him change his mind. Open your eyes, Conner. Think for yourself.
VABills Posted April 24, 2009 Posted April 24, 2009 Neither will Obama. Obama didn't weigh all the issues. He though it was a bad idea, and it is, and the left that got him elected made him change his mind. Open your eyes, Conner. Think for yourself. the left motto: "The brain is a terrible thing to use"
bartshan-83 Posted April 24, 2009 Posted April 24, 2009 I don't know anything about the military's training techniques, so taking this guy at his word, he makes some interesting points. But "Barak"?? Really? Misspelling your addressee's first name in the header of your letter is not a good start. And I'm not trying to be a smart ass.
finknottle Posted April 24, 2009 Posted April 24, 2009 True irony will be achieved when the CIA joins the class action suit. I'm sure agent training is even worse.
drnykterstein Posted April 24, 2009 Posted April 24, 2009 Here's a sad story http://www.editorandpublisher.com/eandp/co...t_id=1003965876
drnykterstein Posted April 24, 2009 Posted April 24, 2009 Neither will Obama. Obama didn't weigh all the issues. He though it was a bad idea, and it is, and the left that got him elected made him change his mind. Open your eyes, Conner. Think for yourself. http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/conte...ml?hpid=topnews
DC Tom Posted April 24, 2009 Posted April 24, 2009 I don't know anything about the military's training techniques, so taking this guy at his word, he makes some interesting points. It's not unheard of for soldiers (particularly those at high risk of capture and interrogation) to be trained to understand and resist interrogation. Ironically, that letter weakens the Bush administration's policy: if waterboarding is part of the training to resist torture, then it must be a form of torture, QED.
finknottle Posted April 24, 2009 Posted April 24, 2009 It's not unheard of for soldiers (particularly those at high risk of capture and interrogation) to be trained to understand and resist interrogation. Ironically, that letter weakens the Bush administration's policy: if waterboarding is part of the training to resist torture, then it must be a form of torture, QED. Calling it torture is that's pilot's wording. Maybe DOD calls it training to resist enhanced interroragation techniques that some countries around the world do.
drnykterstein Posted April 24, 2009 Posted April 24, 2009 You know we sentenced the Japanese to prison for 15 for waterboarding... right?
finknottle Posted April 24, 2009 Posted April 24, 2009 You know we sentenced the Japanese to prison for 15 for waterboarding... right? Yeah? We also sentenced people to jail for interracial marriage. I assume you are aware that the American public didn't care much for the Japanese after the war. The Japanese did it, therefore it was a heinous crime. Kamakazi attack, a soldier willingly giving his life in battle against other soldiers? Must be a dirty trick and against the rules of war... Do you really think that petty retribution and the self-serving defining of morality was an invention of Bush and Cheney?
drnykterstein Posted April 24, 2009 Posted April 24, 2009 Yeah? We also sentenced people to jail for interracial marriage. I assume you are aware that the American public didn't care much for the Japanese after the war. The Japanese did it, therefore it was a heinous crime. Kamakazi attack, a soldier willingly giving his life in battle against other soldiers? Must be a dirty trick and against the rules of war... Do you really think that petty retribution and the self-serving defining of morality was an invention of Bush and Cheney? Ok sure. In 1967 a Supreme court decision ruled that interracial marriage was legal. When did anyone rule waterboarding was legal?
BillsFan-4-Ever Posted April 24, 2009 Posted April 24, 2009 the left motto: "The brain is a terrible thing to use" and what's the "rights" motto.. I supposed to use my brain? They touch on SERE Training in the movie G I Jane Resistance and escape Training on how to survive and resist the enemy in the event of capture is largely based on the experiences of past American and allied prisoners of war. The bulk of this aspect of the course is secret. Several official websites, however, give a general overview. Official sources insist that SERE students are not themselves taught how to apply coercive techniques or interrogate prisoners since most are aircrew who would not normally be involved in handling enemy prisoners of war.
DC Tom Posted April 24, 2009 Posted April 24, 2009 You know we sentenced the Japanese to prison for 15 for waterboarding... right? Odds are the Japanese in question did a hell of a lot more than waterboarding. And given that Karl Doenitz was sentenced to 10 years for what Admirals Nimitz and Lockwood received medals for, I wouldn't be holding up the post-war "war crimes" trials as paragons of justice to begin with.
DC Tom Posted April 24, 2009 Posted April 24, 2009 So what would be a paragon of justice? Only if your beloved Reagan convicted someone it's a crime? What precedent would you accept? See other thread. And get it through you're thick skull: we're not talking about international war crimes tribunals here. We're talking about hypothetical violations of domestic law. Don't confuse the two.
DC Tom Posted April 24, 2009 Posted April 24, 2009 So what would be a paragon of justice? Only if your beloved Reagan convicted someone it's a crime? What precedent would you accept? And by the way...not a Reagan fan.
Wacka Posted April 24, 2009 Posted April 24, 2009 Ok sure. In 1967 a Supreme court decision ruled that interracial marriage was legal. When did anyone rule waterboarding was legal? When did anyone rule waterboarding was ILLEGAL?
Recommended Posts