Forums » Off-Topic
LMAO Gav. Here's another:
© Ted Rall, UPS
(Ted Rall is an obnoxious lefty, but usually funny as all hell.)
© Ted Rall, UPS
(Ted Rall is an obnoxious lefty, but usually funny as all hell.)
Quote from Dr. Lecter:
Shaddup, Tosh. There's nothing wrong with this thread.
No, you shut up, please. :P
There is something inherently wrong with this thread, since the discussion has not reached any conclusion whatsoever, no compromise has been agreed upon, and neither will that be the case in the future. Thus, I dare say that this thread is a fruitless effort on both sides. I won't even go into the fact that it would have mattered very little even if there had been a compromise.
Luckily, it's been derailed and humorized now.
Shaddup, Tosh. There's nothing wrong with this thread.
No, you shut up, please. :P
There is something inherently wrong with this thread, since the discussion has not reached any conclusion whatsoever, no compromise has been agreed upon, and neither will that be the case in the future. Thus, I dare say that this thread is a fruitless effort on both sides. I won't even go into the fact that it would have mattered very little even if there had been a compromise.
Luckily, it's been derailed and humorized now.
You're welcome.
[EDIT] I think the Ted Rall cartoon says it all, really. That's why I posted it. [/EDIT]
[EDIT] I think the Ted Rall cartoon says it all, really. That's why I posted it. [/EDIT]
Heh, Tosh.... you think this ones bad. You should sift through the backlogs of political threads that have popped up in this forum. Quite entertaining actually.
I had a hand in THOSE as well!
Snax, it was exactly because I knew about the other threads that I asked (twice) for this thread to be locked... to no avail. Ah well.
Simply because a thread in the off topic forum may not conform to your personal ideal of a debate hardly makes it pointless. Nor is reaching a definite conclusion or compromise position any measure of a good debate.
Olberman pretty much summed up my sentiments on the subject, a lot better than I could:
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/15321167/from/ET/
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/15321167/from/ET/
Our government didn't crash planes into a couple well-known buildings five years ago. (I know, now the conspiracy kooks will say I'm wrong.)
Sorry, I tried to stay out of this thread....
By the way, thank you Dr. Lecter, for being so well-spoken in this thread. It helped me to stay out so long that you've been arguing so well. On this topic at least, you've got an ally who strongly agrees with you. This is a just war (no such thing as legal when war's concerned, only right and wrong). I voted for Bush twice, and I hope whoever's next will continue to be strong. That's what really annoys the left, that Bush hasn't buckled to the pressure of their obviously superior intellect.
Also, North Korea had better not test another nuke, or the UN will unanimously vote to send them another polite letter saying, "please don't!"
Sorry, I tried to stay out of this thread....
By the way, thank you Dr. Lecter, for being so well-spoken in this thread. It helped me to stay out so long that you've been arguing so well. On this topic at least, you've got an ally who strongly agrees with you. This is a just war (no such thing as legal when war's concerned, only right and wrong). I voted for Bush twice, and I hope whoever's next will continue to be strong. That's what really annoys the left, that Bush hasn't buckled to the pressure of their obviously superior intellect.
Also, North Korea had better not test another nuke, or the UN will unanimously vote to send them another polite letter saying, "please don't!"
Please don't get me started on the failures of W. While I advocate torturing of unlawful foreign combatants in order to obtain intelligence, my views on civil liberties for American citizens make me more than a little opposed to the current administration. Not to mention the utterly unnecessary (though throughly moral--but we're a nation with interests, not a goddamn church group) democracy building exercise in Iraq, which is both an unwelcome drain on our resources and wasted on a people who, if they disliked their situation, should have done more on their own.
W's one saving grace is that his instincts are in the right place with respect to use of force. He's not a minimalist, and grasps the basic distinction between moral and immoral use of violence by nations. Unfortunately, that's about the extent of what he does right in foreign policy (in his defense, eight years of Clinton foreign policy is enough to give him a shitty starting position; but still)...fortunately, that's more than we'd have gotten from a Kerry or a Gore administration.
So, thank you; but let's not cloud what I'm supporting in this thread.
W's one saving grace is that his instincts are in the right place with respect to use of force. He's not a minimalist, and grasps the basic distinction between moral and immoral use of violence by nations. Unfortunately, that's about the extent of what he does right in foreign policy (in his defense, eight years of Clinton foreign policy is enough to give him a shitty starting position; but still)...fortunately, that's more than we'd have gotten from a Kerry or a Gore administration.
So, thank you; but let's not cloud what I'm supporting in this thread.
Didn't mean to, I just meant I'm glad at least someone else around here understands what you just stated about moral and immoral use of violence. Peace comes through victory.
The second statement was simply me taking my beliefs further. Didn't mean to imply you agreed with me there, sorry. I fully support Bush in this war. There are a few things (like outrageous spending) that I disagree with him on, but he's a great guy and I support him.
The second statement was simply me taking my beliefs further. Didn't mean to imply you agreed with me there, sorry. I fully support Bush in this war. There are a few things (like outrageous spending) that I disagree with him on, but he's a great guy and I support him.
What pisses me off is the fact that making FUN OF SOMEONE is considered torture. Gotta wear your undies on your head because you decided to shoot people? OH FUCKING WELL GET OVER IT! YOU SHOULDNT HAVE BEEN SHOOTING PEOPLE AND TRYING TO KILL THEM!
WAAH FUCKIN WAAH! Many of our troops are now just not taking people into custody because they are afraid they'll do something that would be considered "torture" so they're simply killing them.
Sounds good to me..
WAAH FUCKIN WAAH! Many of our troops are now just not taking people into custody because they are afraid they'll do something that would be considered "torture" so they're simply killing them.
Sounds good to me..
Man I'm glad Leber steered this thread onto a more humourous avenue, these jokes are hilarious! Keep em comin boys and girls!
I think the 'undies on the head' and most of the other Abu Ghraib scandals fall outside the torture realm and into the 'random abuse by the shallow end of the military' realm (an exception being the Iraqi general who exprired while being interrogated inside a sleeping bag).
Torture, as long as we're willing to use it professionally, is fine. Letting the rank and file amuse themselves with their charges is less so. Not because the prisoners deserve much better, but because it's purely malicious behavior for its own sake.
Torture, as long as we're willing to use it professionally, is fine. Letting the rank and file amuse themselves with their charges is less so. Not because the prisoners deserve much better, but because it's purely malicious behavior for its own sake.
To be honest, I dunno what toshiro expects from us in the off-topic forum. Reasoned discourse?
If he wants a calm and orderly debate point-by-point on the merits of torture, I think he's in the wrong forum.
To make toshiro happy, I will now launch into "diatribe mode." My position's pretty clear on this. If we capture anyone in wartime acting against our interests in a military theatre, then those people are not POW's, but spies & infiltrators, and different rules apply.
They're not participating in a war as defined by the "oh-so-superior" Geneva convention, they're not wearing uniforms, they're not part of an organized military or paramilitary group, there's been no declaration of war, etc. These points have been hashed and re-hashed over the last 4 years or so.
If the United States would behave as our adversaries did, we'd be rampaging through civilian population centers, grabbing women and children, and executing one of them every hour until the terrorists all gave themselves up. Then we'd publicly behead them and do a little preaching afterwards, just to show 'em that God's on OUR side.
Of course that's ridiculous. However, there's definitely an undercurrent of that kind of sentiment coursing through the United States right now. Trying to always take the high road becomes difficult when your enemies take the low road every time and don't play with the same rulebook.
It's frustrating to all Americans to see that we've gone in, kicked their ass all over the place militarily, but they just don't know when to give up! What's up with their absurdly high commitment level? It's obvious to me that there was no planning for "what to do after we won" in Iraq and Afghanistan. The "keeping the peace" part we can do, but the "winning the hearts and minds" part we fail at miserably, essentially because I think the Americans in charge at Centcom operate continually from a "Boy I bet you're glad we came all the way over here to save your sorry ass" kind of attitude.
Kind of like the way we treated the French (and still treat them) after WWII. I mean, yeah they got completely "PWNED" by Hitler, and we swooped in to save them, but you know we can knock off the attitude by now, right? I mean, it's fun to say "If not for us you'd all be speaking German!" for 60 years, but the whole "you owe us for LIFE, bitches" attitude really grates on the French. Which is why they take their potshots at US foreign policy and make their snide remarks when they get a chance, when we're busy with other stuff.
So, anyway, this "let's change our laws so we can torture" thing isn't going to go over well with the countries we're currently occupying. We're not providing any kind of leadership on what kind of government they think they should have, we're just coasting, expecting the people of Iraq and Afghanistan to just embrace democracy because, well, it's so much better than what they had before, right? Please. These people are so used to being told how to act by the government that they've built in ways of non-reliance on the central government, and the fact that it's changed doesn't impact them all that much. That's why Afghanistan's Hamid Karzai is known as the "Mayor of Kabul" in a joking fashion, and that's why the Iraqi parliament can't seem to get any momentum. If the United States is going to nation-build, then I think we'd better start by reading the assembly instructions and making sure we've got all the pieces.
If he wants a calm and orderly debate point-by-point on the merits of torture, I think he's in the wrong forum.
To make toshiro happy, I will now launch into "diatribe mode." My position's pretty clear on this. If we capture anyone in wartime acting against our interests in a military theatre, then those people are not POW's, but spies & infiltrators, and different rules apply.
They're not participating in a war as defined by the "oh-so-superior" Geneva convention, they're not wearing uniforms, they're not part of an organized military or paramilitary group, there's been no declaration of war, etc. These points have been hashed and re-hashed over the last 4 years or so.
If the United States would behave as our adversaries did, we'd be rampaging through civilian population centers, grabbing women and children, and executing one of them every hour until the terrorists all gave themselves up. Then we'd publicly behead them and do a little preaching afterwards, just to show 'em that God's on OUR side.
Of course that's ridiculous. However, there's definitely an undercurrent of that kind of sentiment coursing through the United States right now. Trying to always take the high road becomes difficult when your enemies take the low road every time and don't play with the same rulebook.
It's frustrating to all Americans to see that we've gone in, kicked their ass all over the place militarily, but they just don't know when to give up! What's up with their absurdly high commitment level? It's obvious to me that there was no planning for "what to do after we won" in Iraq and Afghanistan. The "keeping the peace" part we can do, but the "winning the hearts and minds" part we fail at miserably, essentially because I think the Americans in charge at Centcom operate continually from a "Boy I bet you're glad we came all the way over here to save your sorry ass" kind of attitude.
Kind of like the way we treated the French (and still treat them) after WWII. I mean, yeah they got completely "PWNED" by Hitler, and we swooped in to save them, but you know we can knock off the attitude by now, right? I mean, it's fun to say "If not for us you'd all be speaking German!" for 60 years, but the whole "you owe us for LIFE, bitches" attitude really grates on the French. Which is why they take their potshots at US foreign policy and make their snide remarks when they get a chance, when we're busy with other stuff.
So, anyway, this "let's change our laws so we can torture" thing isn't going to go over well with the countries we're currently occupying. We're not providing any kind of leadership on what kind of government they think they should have, we're just coasting, expecting the people of Iraq and Afghanistan to just embrace democracy because, well, it's so much better than what they had before, right? Please. These people are so used to being told how to act by the government that they've built in ways of non-reliance on the central government, and the fact that it's changed doesn't impact them all that much. That's why Afghanistan's Hamid Karzai is known as the "Mayor of Kabul" in a joking fashion, and that's why the Iraqi parliament can't seem to get any momentum. If the United States is going to nation-build, then I think we'd better start by reading the assembly instructions and making sure we've got all the pieces.
Dear Friend,
I am Captain Brian James of the US Marine Force on Monitoring and Peace –keeping mission in Baghdad-Iraq.
On the 10th day of October 2006, we were alerted on the sudden presence of some Terrorists camping in a suburb not too far from Karbala here in Iraq. After Immediate intervention, we captured three (3) of the Terrorists, twenty-six (26) were killed leaving seven (7) injured.
In the process of torture they confessed being rebels for late Ayman al-Zawahiri and took us to a cave in Karbala which served as their camp. Here we recovered several guns, bombs and other Ammunitions including some boxes among which two contains nuclear weapons, one filled with hard drugs(cocaine) and the other four to my amazement contain some US Dollars amounting to $7.2M after I and two of my junior intelligent officers counted them. I however instructed them to keep this in high secrecy.
I am in keen need of a “Reliable and Trustworthy” person like you who would receive, secure and protect these boxes containing the US Dollars for me up on till my assignment elapses in here in Iraq. I assure and promise to give you 20% of this fund, however feel free to negotiate what you wish to have as your percentage in this business..
Please assure me of your keeping this topmost secret to protect my job with the US Monitoring and Peace-Keeping mission. Contact me through my personal email capt_bjames@myway.com
Sincere regards,
Capt.Brian James.
I am Captain Brian James of the US Marine Force on Monitoring and Peace –keeping mission in Baghdad-Iraq.
On the 10th day of October 2006, we were alerted on the sudden presence of some Terrorists camping in a suburb not too far from Karbala here in Iraq. After Immediate intervention, we captured three (3) of the Terrorists, twenty-six (26) were killed leaving seven (7) injured.
In the process of torture they confessed being rebels for late Ayman al-Zawahiri and took us to a cave in Karbala which served as their camp. Here we recovered several guns, bombs and other Ammunitions including some boxes among which two contains nuclear weapons, one filled with hard drugs(cocaine) and the other four to my amazement contain some US Dollars amounting to $7.2M after I and two of my junior intelligent officers counted them. I however instructed them to keep this in high secrecy.
I am in keen need of a “Reliable and Trustworthy” person like you who would receive, secure and protect these boxes containing the US Dollars for me up on till my assignment elapses in here in Iraq. I assure and promise to give you 20% of this fund, however feel free to negotiate what you wish to have as your percentage in this business..
Please assure me of your keeping this topmost secret to protect my job with the US Monitoring and Peace-Keeping mission. Contact me through my personal email capt_bjames@myway.com
Sincere regards,
Capt.Brian James.
LeberMac: I don't expect anything from anyone, unless I paid for it and have some way to get what I paid for. I merely said this discussion, and by extension, the thread, was pointless, for reasons I mentioned beforehand.
Now go play.
Now go play.
Ok people. You heard it.
Dr. Lecter threatened me with bodily harm.
That, my friends, is against the law.
Now, I am a deeply conservative person, a stand up republican, which means that I believe in Law and Order. Not as activist judges would have it, but as it is written in black and white.
Now, threatening someone with bodily harm is clearly illegal.
In fact, it is the act of a potential terrorist.
I really think we should be investigating this 'Dr Lecter' person. What are his associations? Does he belong to any extremist groups? Does he visit extremist websites? How about his library record? Does he check out books about guns or revolution? Does he have a subscription to "Guns and Ammo"? What sort of Television channels does he watch? Does he have any relatives or associates from foreign countries? Has he ever visited a foreign country? Which ones? For what purpose?
Does he fly? Should he be put on a 'no fly' list, considering what a threat to public order and safety he seems to be?
Does he, in fact, have an interest in violent video games? Games that involve killing other people?
I think you will all agree, these are only reasonable things to wonder about the Dr, considering that this is a post-9/11 world we live in.
Dr Lecter please do not be alarmed by any federal agents that show up at your house. They are doing God's will, protecting god fearing Americans from possible terrorist activity.
Dr. Lecter threatened me with bodily harm.
That, my friends, is against the law.
Now, I am a deeply conservative person, a stand up republican, which means that I believe in Law and Order. Not as activist judges would have it, but as it is written in black and white.
Now, threatening someone with bodily harm is clearly illegal.
In fact, it is the act of a potential terrorist.
I really think we should be investigating this 'Dr Lecter' person. What are his associations? Does he belong to any extremist groups? Does he visit extremist websites? How about his library record? Does he check out books about guns or revolution? Does he have a subscription to "Guns and Ammo"? What sort of Television channels does he watch? Does he have any relatives or associates from foreign countries? Has he ever visited a foreign country? Which ones? For what purpose?
Does he fly? Should he be put on a 'no fly' list, considering what a threat to public order and safety he seems to be?
Does he, in fact, have an interest in violent video games? Games that involve killing other people?
I think you will all agree, these are only reasonable things to wonder about the Dr, considering that this is a post-9/11 world we live in.
Dr Lecter please do not be alarmed by any federal agents that show up at your house. They are doing God's will, protecting god fearing Americans from possible terrorist activity.