Picture of the Day - "Progress" in Iraq / Update

[Florin]

I discussed recently with a Romanian lady supporting everything the actual administration is doing, including the official approval of torture during interrogations.

I said: 400,000 American men died in World War II to subdue two powers were torture was legalized and encouraged: Germany and Japan.
Considering how many German soldiers were killed by resistance movements and guerillas in terrorist acts, the Germans could also feel perfectly justified to interrogate with torture.
So we (i.e. the United States) were better than them, and justified to defeat them, and it was good that we defeated them.
If now, for whatever reasons, we (i.e. the United States) approve torture ourselves, for what 400,000 Americans died for in World War II?
(I repeated the argument with the Cold War, when Soviet Union and her allies used torture.)

Then the lady told me that because I live in the U.S. and I am an American citizen, I should support and approve the government in everything is doing.

I answered: What would be the difference with the days of the Romanian Communist Party, when we were asked to be: Uniti in cuget si simtiri, in jurul Conducatorului iubit. ("United with our thoughts and feelings, around the beloved Leader")

What do you think? I am ready to read other opinions.

[Indrid]

i believe you were both right.

[mabadesc]

I won't discuss the torture issue because I think it's too small of an issue in the larger scope of things, and also because I think it was an isolated incident. All CIA and military intelligence interrogation specialists I've heard on TV simply stated that physical torture is not an efficient and reliable way of obtaining information. They said they have their own psychological methods through which they can get much more info. from a prisoner, and I believe them. They were saying interrogation techniques make up a complex scientific method.

Now, with regards to your following quote:

QUOTE

Then the lady told me that because I live in the U.S. and I am an American citizen, I should support and approve the government in everything is doing.

I think the lady was full of Bull****. You don't have to support or approve anything you don't want.
That's precisely the point of being an American citizen: being able to have and publicly support any ideas you want, regardless of how mainstream or radical they are.
You can be a neo-nazi, a KKK member, or a Black-Supremacy member here and the police will protect you if hold a public demonstration.

I think that's great. I despise and strongly disagree with neo-nazis, the KKK, and Black supremacists, but I support their right to speak out and to make their beliefs known.

[mabadesc]

Chandernagore wrote:

QUOTE

Mmm I find it very hard to believe that *after* the war, from the bottom of his rathole, Saddam shipped out WMDs.

So now you disagree with the UN, on which you were basing all your arguments against war. When the UN inspectors previously reported that they couldn't find any WMD's, you were quick to believe them. Now that the same organization says otherwise, all of a sudden you find it "very hard" to believe them. Nice, that's a good way to show fairness and an open mind, Chandernagore. :roll:

QUOTE

On the other hand, that he destroyed ballistic missiles before the war is pretty well covered by the UN inspectors who watched the process back then.

Don't distort the truth, Chander.....I know it's convenient to do...
Re-read the article. The article is not talking about the missiles destroyed publicly during the UN inspectors' visits. It talks about WMD's and missiles being dismantled and shipped away from Irak shortly before the war and during the war. This means long after the UN inspectors had left Irak. And the only reason Saddam did this was because the US/UK troops were already heading towards Irak.

[Florin]

QUOTE

I won't discuss the torture issue because I think it's too small of an issue in the larger scope of things, and also because I think it was an isolated incident.  All CIA and military intelligence interrogation specialists I've heard on TV simply stated that physical torture is not an efficient and reliable way of obtaining information.  They said they have their own psychological methods through which they can get much more info. from a prisoner, and I believe them. .......

Yes, but you see, as the time is passing by, our American newspapers reveal more and more documents of the present administration which specified clearly, in written text, what can be used. It is clearly mentioned:
- using barking dogs right near the prisoner
- stripping of all clothing
- physical punishment, described on paper in various ways
- threatening with punishment against the rest of the family etc. etc. etc. etc.

You should now that some Iraqi tormented there (one saw his father tortured to death in front of him, he being also tortured) hired American lawyers to sue the American government. These American lawyers already proved annoying for the administration, because they are willing to research the matter beyond the limits self-imposed by the military investigation.

Did you see the recent inquiry of John Ashcroft by the Congressional commission? One Senator (or Congressman, doesn't matter) said to Ashcroft:
"Do you know why the United States signed all these international documents against torture of prisoners? To protect our own military forces, like my son who is enrolled right now."

Also, I am not so convinced by your assertion that I think it was an isolated incident. It was already proved that torture was used in many other prisons, and it followed a pattern suggesting coordination and supervision.
Also, about what Mr. Bush said that this does not represent America.
Well, I agree, but not quite completely...
Just look in the news with all these scandals of members of American football teams (most often high-school teams, but sometimes in the professional world) who for no reason are sodomized, beaten, physically hurt and humiliated by their teammates. Or all those "initiation ceremonies" of the colleges, where the younger students to be initiated undergo various humiliations, going as far as rape and sodomizing. What about so many rape complains of the women hired to serve the United States Armed Forces?
And you see what all these described above have in common? The attempt to cover up the facts, at least in beginning, and very often to punish the victims, not the aggressors!
So I think the root of the problem is in the educational system, of course. The teachers and the policemen deployed in schools should be given more power to punish bully behaviour, as it is known in the United States. It is interesting that in many schools the principal or whoever is in charge do not take any measure when parents of the victims complain about what happened to their kids or teenagers while attending schools.
If bully behaviour would be severely punished in primary, intermediate and high schools, and also in colleges, America would be better, and thus the world would be better.

[Florin]

The following link is not quite in the subject suggested by the title of the topic:

http://compuserve.fool.com/news/mft/2004/m...nce=y&bounce2=y

But anyway, you may find in interesting. And moreover, I think this is happening in every single country of the world, not only in the United States.

[Florin]

Jay Leno made a cool joke in his show (The Tonight Show, with Jay Leno, at 11:30 PM eastern time, weekdays, Channel 4 - NBC).

He reminded that John Ashcroft, in front of the Senatorial Commission, said that he will not justify or unveil what his department is doing with the prisoners until the War Against Terror will be over.
And Jay Leno added: Well, there were also other guys who said they do not need to justify to anybody, until the war will be over. Those who were accused in the Trial of Nurenberg. :laugh: 8) :loool:

[Indrid]

ha! good one.....but Ashcroft is one of those guys who won`t let totalitarian tendencies get in his way of doing things...no sir, my way is the right way

[Chandernagore]

QUOTE

So now you disagree with the UN, on which you were basing all your arguments against war.  When the UN inspectors previously reported that they couldn't find any WMD's, you were quick to believe them.  Now that the same organization says otherwise, all of a sudden you find it \"very hard\" to believe them.  Nice, that's a good way to show fairness and an open mind, Chandernagore.    :roll:

The information available to you and me are significantly different.

QUOTE

On the other hand, that he destroyed ballistic missiles before the war is pretty well covered by the UN inspectors who watched the process back then.

QUOTE

Don't distort the truth, Chander.....I know it's convenient to do...

I disorted nothing. My sentence was correct.

QUOTE

Re-read the article.  The article is not talking about the missiles destroyed publicly during the UN inspectors' visits.  It talks about WMD's and missiles being dismantled and shipped away from Irak shortly before the war and during the war.

The World Tribune has replaced the UN spokesman to represent UN ?

QUOTE

This means long after the UN inspectors had left Irak.  And the only reason Saddam did this was because the US/UK troops were already heading towards Irak.

Now, what sense would this make ? A dictator already at war secretly shipping out his weapons to help with his own downfall...

Mabadesc are you not by chance attempting to justify an illegal invasion one year after it has taken place ? Need I remind you that back then this administration claimed to have concrete proof (Powell was explicit at the UN). Proofs, not conjectures, not suppositions, of huge stockpiles of WMD and a well advanced nuclear program.

Following the Tribune, we have an administration where every senior member has deliberately lied repeatedly in public to start a war trying to explain one year after the facts how their huge concrete proofs so easily evaporated under their scrutinizing eyes.

Naive.

[Chandernagore]

Retired Officials Say Bush Must Go

The Bushites jeopardized the entire international order the US has built up since WWII for the sole purpose of making an example out of a 3rd rate dictator from a 4th rate impoverished nation who was basically no threat to the USA. So the next regime change is one that the neocons certainly didn't envision, ha ha... for nothing less than Bush ousting will patch up the cracks in American diplomacy and international standing forged by the merry band currently in power :

A group of 26 former senior diplomats and military officials, several appointed to key positions by Republican Presidents Ronald Reagan and George H.W. Bush, plans to issue a joint statement this week arguing that President George W. Bush has damaged America's national security and should be defeated in November.

http://story.news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=stor...lssaybushmustgo

[mabadesc]

QUOTE

The World Tribune has replaced the UN spokesman to represent UN ?

No, definitely not. But the fact that you completely dismiss the article says a lot about your ability to keep an open mind on this subject. You have already tried, sentenced, and executed the US administration, and no past, present, or future evidence to the contrary will change your mind.

Oh, well....you're entitled to feel however you want....

[Chandernagore]

QUOTE

But the fact that you completely dismiss the article says a lot about your ability to keep an open mind on this subject.

Oh Mabadesc, pliiiiiz stop automatically assuming that those who disagree with your views are intellectually dishonest. If you cannot bring rational arguments to support your point of view, libel won't make up for it :roll:

QUOTE

You have already tried, sentenced, and executed the US administration, and no past, present, or future evidence to the contrary will change your mind.

It took me some time, about 3 months. But yes I have. I judged this bunch of serial liars on their deeds... and on their lies. So has the rest of the world. As for "evidence" to the contrary we know very well what kind of evidence this administration has provided in the past :laugh:

[dragos]

:offtopic:

Chandernagore... in the avatar... is that you? :loool: :rollroll:

[Chandernagore]

QUOTE

Chandernagore... in the avatar... is that you?  :loool:   :rollroll:

Of course Am I not lovely ?

[Chandernagore]

Hey what's happening here ? 6 hours (at least) that Junior was not dragged into the mud where he belongs. Quick, a Bushism :

…The war on terror, you can't distinguish between al Qaeda and Saddam when you talk about the war on terror. And so it's a comparison that is -- I can't make because I can't distinguish between the two… - George W. Bush, President

A president who can't make a difference between archenemies. Makes you feel like you are in control :rollroll: