The reasons stated at the time were 1) Iraq was developing WMD 2) Iraq had links to 911.. which were both flat out lies.
The real reason behind the war is OIL.
you think it is about that only. maybe it is and i am just thinking that it is to small a reason. i really think the answer is not just abotu OIL but also (and i know i am going to be ripped for this) I think that 911 fucked Bush up and he saw himself as someone who had to save the US. then i think he had people liek Chaney and others who thought OIL.
People demand freedom of speech to make up for the freedom of thought which they avoid."
- Soren Aabye Kierkegaard (1813-1855)
If you haven't got anything nice to say about anybody, come sit next to me."
- Alice Roosevelt Longworth (1884-1980)
at most we have used waterboarding. something, people stand up and walk away from when its over.
something for the folks that have no clue what they are talking about...
Waterboarding is a torture technique that simulates drowning in a controlled environment. It consists of immobilizing an individual on his or her back, with the head inclined downward, and pouring water over the face[1] to force the inhalation of water into the lungs.[2] Waterboarding has been used to obtain information, coerce confessions, punish, and intimidate. In contrast to merely submerging the head, waterboarding elicits the gag reflex,[3] and can make the subject believe death is imminent. Waterboarding's use as a method of torture or means to support interrogation is based on its ability to cause extreme mental distress while possibly creating no lasting physical damage to the subject. The psychological effects on victims of waterboarding can last long after the procedure.[4] Although waterboarding in cases can leave no lasting physical damage, it carries the real risks of extreme pain, damage to the lungs, brain damage caused by oxygen deprivation, injuries as a result of struggling against restraints (including broken bones), and even death.
During World War II, Japanese troops, especially the Kempeitai, as well the Gestapo, the German secret police, used waterboarding as a method of torture. The German technique was called the German equivalent of "u-boat". During the Double Tenth Incident, waterboarding consisted of binding or holding down the victim on his back, placing a cloth over his mouth and nose, and pouring water onto the cloth. In this version, interrogation continued during the torture, with the interrogators beating the victim if he did not reply and the victim swallowing water if he opened his mouth to answer or breathe. When the victim could ingest no more water, the interrogators would beat or jump on his distended stomach. In 1947, the United States charged a Japanese officer, Yukio Asano, with war crimes for carrying out waterboarding on a U.S. civilian. Asano was sentenced to 15 years of hard labor
Numerous experts have described this technique as torture.Some nations have also criminally prosecuted individuals for performing waterboarding, including the United States.
Twenty-one years earlier, in 1947, the United States charged a Japanese officer, Yukio Asano, with war crimes for carrying out another form of waterboarding on a U.S. civilian. The subject was strapped on a stretcher that was tilted so that his feet were in the air and head near the floor, and small amounts of water were poured over his face, leaving him gasping for air until he agreed to talk.
"Asano was sentenced to 15 years of hard labor," Sen. Edward M. Kennedy (D-Mass.) told his colleagues last Thursday during the debate on military commissions legislation. "We punished people with 15 years of hard labor when waterboarding was used against Americans in World War II," he said.
you think it is about that only. maybe it is and i am just thinking that it is to small a reason. i really think the answer is not just abotu OIL but also (and i know i am going to be ripped for this) I think that 911 fucked Bush up and he saw himself as someone who had to save the US. then i think he had people liek Chaney and others who thought OIL.
Nah there is another reason. The US wants to establish itself in the middle east so when shit hits the fan in 10-20 years time they can fight World War III on non US soil.
...
Going into and occupying any country militarily is a quagmire. Was/is there one occupation was wasn't?
Especially when our culture, customs, religion and language are in completely different universes. We are NEVER going to change their culture... just as they can NEVER change ours. I don't know why this is so difficult to understand. We can change their leaders.. but was cannot change them. THEY will have to initiate and create the change... if they want it.
What we did was place the guns in the hands of the other side. Then we ask, "What happened?" Reality happened. We were too busy blowing our own horn to listen to what they might have been saying.
This is why I seriously question what's really going on right now. Cheney admitted it. He knew, all their advisor's knew, I mean shit...they all knew what they were getting into. They had endless meetings, ongoing discussions, intelligence reports, you name it, and a couple years on top to think about and consider it, and still they decided to sell it around fabrications, and then go and do it. Irresponsible is not the word.
It's extremely intentional and calculated. It wasn't a mistake, as well Haliburton is somewhat of a huge conflict of interest, regardless of who was "directing" the company at the time. Plame was outed. That should be reason right there. Libby was directed by someone, and he made reference to it, and it came right from the top.
Not good. That's some serious corruption right there. That's just the tip of the tip of the iceberg in this saga.
Somebody cashed their chips in and went to town.
Progress is not made by everyone joining some new fad,
and reveling in it's loyalty. It's made by forming coalitions
over specific principles, goals, and policies.
I think you already know the answer to that. The point I'm trying to make is there was no Saudi Arabia scenario in Iraq under Saddam. As I said before he used to kill religious folk as a hobby. I have friends that came from schools/universities in Iraq before the war. Both male and female.
it carries the real risks of extreme pain, damage to the lungs, brain damage caused by oxygen deprivation, injuries as a result of struggling against restraints (including broken bones), and even death.
extreme pain? ok pain doesnt last forever. probably a few hours at most. brain damage? sure its possible. but happen every time? no. (self inflicted) broken bones from struggling? wow ok, another stretch that doesn't happen every time.
hey napoleon, do you get off being an asshole....lets continue shall we....
why am I not surprised you didnt bold this????
extreme pain? ok pain doesnt last forever. probably a few hours at most. brain damage? sure its possible. but happen every time? no. (self inflicted) broken bones from struggling? wow ok, another stretch that doesn't happen every time.
what else you got?
Lets see.. say hypothetically a very close family member of yours was accused of knowing information about a dirty bomb.. taken away and tortured using this technique.. kept telling them he/she knew nothing.. but it continued.. until they realised "oops he/she might actually be telling the truth".. how will you feel? its alright.. it only happened once, twice, three times.. water under the bridge.. no wait straight in ur face not under the bridge
Some people think that if torture leaves no visible marks then nothing really happened, and it's acceptable.
The real damage that occurs with torturing a person is not the physical portion. as that portion heals for the most part. It's the emotional damage that is the worst part of the process, and that takes many, many years to heal (if it ever really does).
Arguing torturing on physical technicalities is quite rediculous. It's the act itself.
It's like arguing rape is not as bad if the rapist uses KY jelly.
Progress is not made by everyone joining some new fad,
and reveling in it's loyalty. It's made by forming coalitions
over specific principles, goals, and policies.
first how many times can a person be beheaded? i am guessing twice (just joking)
let say that Iraq has free elections and choose who they want as a leader(s) let's say that they work with the palestians to end the war with isreal. let's say that women have the chance to go to school. let's say that poverty is reduced.
now who knows this might not happen (it seems like that now because we are so intrench in this war it hard to see any good) the questions was never when this happens but if it happens.
And pigs might grow wings and fly and if a dog had a square ass he'd shit bricks, and if that retard on the Bills didn't miss that field goal, they'd have been Super Bowl champions.
one foot in the door
the other foot in the gutter
sweet smell that they adore
I think I'd rather smother
-The Replacements-
Lets see.. say hypothetically a very close family member of yours was accused of knowing information about a dirty bomb.. taken away and tortured using this technique.. kept telling them he/she knew nothing.. but it continued.. until they realised "oops he/she might actually be telling the truth".. how will you feel? its alright.. it only happened once, twice, three times.. water under the bridge.. no wait straight in ur face not under the bridge
do you think this is done to random people? if my family member had information regrading a dirty bomb, then yes. i'm all for it.
Some people think that if torture leaves no visible marks then nothing really happened, and it's acceptable.
The real damage that occurs with torturing a person is not the physical portion. as that portion heals for the most part. It's the emotional damage that is the worst part of the process, and that takes many, many years to heal (if it ever really does).
Arguing torturing on physical technicalities is quite rediculous. It's the act itself.
It's like arguing rape is not as bad if the rapist uses KY jelly.
if the war on iraq leads to great middle east would Bush be seen as a head of the time. no "yes or no" answer please.
No!
It won't be anything near the wet dream Bush and co. or any other conqueror from the last hundred and fifty years that has wished, dreamt, saliitated or killed for. The middle east (countries) have lasted longer then Yugoslavia did, but that may be more for the ruthless dictators that have been running the show. And the hand on the throat to surpress any kind of uprising.
The fact that Bush won't let Iraqi oil be state run is a good example of the leagacy he will leave there.
do you think this is done to random people? if my family member had information regrading a dirty bomb, then yes. i'm all for it.
It might not be done to random people but it has been done to people who had no knowledge or links to bombs or terrorism. Thus, my question stands.. A TRUSTED FAMILY MEMBER OF YOURS WHO YOU KNOW WILL NEVER HAVE ANY LINKS TO THIS SHIT YET HE IS ACCUSED AND TORTURED THEN TOLD "SORRY".. does that make it ok because it only happened a few times?
Some people think that if torture leaves no visible marks then nothing really happened, and it's acceptable.
The real damage that occurs with torturing a person is not the physical portion. as that portion heals for the most part. It's the emotional damage that is the worst part of the process, and that takes many, many years to heal (if it ever really does).
Arguing torturing on physical technicalities is quite rediculous. It's the act itself.
It's like arguing rape is not as bad if the rapist uses KY jelly.
you think this is all for fun? the mind fuck of waterboarding is/was used to get information to help prevent another 9/11 or even a dirty bomb. should they have a tickle fight?
rapist rape for a variety of reasons, none of which are used to get information to help potential save millions of innocent people.
It might not be done to random people but it has been done to people who had no knowledge or links to bombs or terrorism. Thus, my question stands.. A TRUSTED FAMILY MEMBER OF YOURS WHO YOU KNOW WILL NEVER HAVE ANY LINKS TO THIS SHIT YET HE IS ACCUSED AND TORTURED THEN TOLD "SORRY".. does that make it ok because it only happened a few times?
people do not end up on a waterboarding table for no reason. even if that person checks out innocent, there is a reason he/she ended up on that table in the first place.
you think this is all for fun? the mind fuck of waterboarding is/was used to get information to help prevent another 9/11 or even a dirty bomb. should they have a tickle fight?
rapist rape for a variety of reasons, none of which are used to get information to help potential save millions of innocent people.
What if that technique doesn't work? Do you go harder?
Do you really expect angry soldiers to stop at that technique if they wont say anything?
"oh we can drown him but if he doesnt speak then its ok dont touch him anymore"
you think this is all for fun? the mind fuck of waterboarding is/was used to get information to help prevent another 9/11 or even a dirty bomb. should they have a tickle fight?
rapist rape for a variety of reasons, none of which are used to get information to help potential save millions of innocent people.
the problem with the logic of using torture to prevent another attack is that the information received during torture is for the most part unreliable. Time and time again experts have come forwards with the same message that information gained under conditions if torture is mostly unreliable because the suspect will tell you what ever you want to hear in order for the torture the stop. So by employing techniques like waterboarding we are not gaining an advantage, like the Bush administration would lead us to think. It is probably doing the opposit by providing misinformation that may detract our sources from following other, maybe more credible, leads.
"When one gets in bed with government, one must expect the diseases it spreads." - Ron Paul
people do not end up on a waterboarding table for no reason. even if that person checks out innocent, there is a reason he/she ended up on that table in the first place.
Yes and it has been shown previously the reason was wrong.
you think this is all for fun? the mind fuck of waterboarding is/was used to get information to help prevent another 9/11 or even a dirty bomb. should they have a tickle fight?
rapist rape for a variety of reasons, none of which are used to get information to help potential save millions of innocent people.
Well it surely isn't going to stop it from happening. All it will do is make a new new breed of tortured and resentful Islamic lunatics.
That is unless one thinks the Iraq war is a success, and all of Islam can be converted.
Progress is not made by everyone joining some new fad,
and reveling in it's loyalty. It's made by forming coalitions
over specific principles, goals, and policies.
What if that technique doesn't work? Do you go harder?
no, I would never accept direct physical harm like cutting off hands or something. I'm no expert, I would hope there are other, non violent, techniques that work.
people do not end up on a waterboarding table for no reason. even if that person checks out innocent, there is a reason he/she ended up on that table in the first place.
thats one of the more naive and uninformed things i may have ever read here
see post above and i will thoroughly run laps around your ass in this debate my friend. pick an issue, any issue listed above. and if you rewally want to get owned please pick torture
this should be easy
this is the lamest, most bragging post i've seen anyone make, not counting myself.
the problem with the logic of using torture to prevent another attack is that the information received during torture is for the most part unreliable. Time and time again experts have come forwards with the same message that information gained under conditions if torture is mostly unreliable because the suspect will tell you what ever you want to hear in order for the torture the stop. So by employing techniques like waterboarding we are not gaining an advantage, like the Bush administration would lead us to think. It is probably doing the opposit by providing misinformation that may detract our sources from following other, maybe more credible, leads.
I wish we both had solid proof, but we dont. i'm not pro torture. but I do want every means possible used to prevent another 9/11 or worse.
I wish we both had solid proof, but we dont. i'm not pro torture. but I do want every means possible used to prevent another 9/11 or worse.
No we don't have irrefutable proof but there have been so many experts who have consistantly said the samething, that information gained from toruture is usually unreliable. Are they 100% correct? Probably not but they probably do know what they are talking about so I tend to agree with them.
Even if the information we did receive was reliable how low do we have to sink in the name of security. I understand wanted to prevent an attack that may result in thousands of deaths and injuries but at what cost. Where do we draw the line, waterboarding, electrocution, pulling out fingernails, beatings. At some point the line between our government operatives and the people we are fighting against begins to be blurred. Do we really want to cross over to the other side for securities sake.
"When one gets in bed with government, one must expect the diseases it spreads." - Ron Paul
people do not end up on a waterboarding table for no reason. even if that person checks out innocent, there is a reason he/she ended up on that table in the first place.
that is dead wrong. false accusations and convictions are made all the time, ESPECIALLY when there is mass public hysteria and paranoia. see the joe mccarthy communist hunt and the salem witch trials. people panic and turn on their neighbors out of fear or whatever else. there is no way everyone in american prisons as enemy combatants right now is guilty. in fact, i know personally people who have been in those prisons and investigated those people and they say overwhelmingly the people being held have done nothing at all remotely related to terrorism.
I think with every new step into the minds of darkness the US loses a bit more of it's international reputation, and more people become wary of true intentions. Validated or not.
Stoop to the terrorist level (perceived or not) and you might as well be the terrorist.
It's a quick ride down, but along way up on that slippery slope.
Progress is not made by everyone joining some new fad,
and reveling in it's loyalty. It's made by forming coalitions
over specific principles, goals, and policies.
No we don't have irrefutable proof but there have been so many experts who have consistantly said the samething, that information gained from toruture is usually unreliable. Are they 100% correct? Probably not but they probably do know what they are talking about so I tend to agree with them.
where are these experts? and how many attacks have been prevented? we dont have these answers.
Even if the information we did receive was reliable how low do we have to sink in the name of security. I understand wanted to prevent an attack that may result in thousands of deaths and injuries but at what cost. Where do we draw the line, waterboarding, electrocution, pulling out fingernails, beatings. At some point the line between our government operatives and the people we are fighting against begins to be blurred. Do we really want to cross over to the other side for securities sake.
Comments
you think it is about that only. maybe it is and i am just thinking that it is to small a reason. i really think the answer is not just abotu OIL but also (and i know i am going to be ripped for this) I think that 911 fucked Bush up and he saw himself as someone who had to save the US. then i think he had people liek Chaney and others who thought OIL.
- Soren Aabye Kierkegaard (1813-1855)
If you haven't got anything nice to say about anybody, come sit next to me."
- Alice Roosevelt Longworth (1884-1980)
something for the folks that have no clue what they are talking about...
Waterboarding is a torture technique that simulates drowning in a controlled environment. It consists of immobilizing an individual on his or her back, with the head inclined downward, and pouring water over the face[1] to force the inhalation of water into the lungs.[2] Waterboarding has been used to obtain information, coerce confessions, punish, and intimidate. In contrast to merely submerging the head, waterboarding elicits the gag reflex,[3] and can make the subject believe death is imminent. Waterboarding's use as a method of torture or means to support interrogation is based on its ability to cause extreme mental distress while possibly creating no lasting physical damage to the subject. The psychological effects on victims of waterboarding can last long after the procedure.[4] Although waterboarding in cases can leave no lasting physical damage, it carries the real risks of extreme pain, damage to the lungs, brain damage caused by oxygen deprivation, injuries as a result of struggling against restraints (including broken bones), and even death.
During World War II, Japanese troops, especially the Kempeitai, as well the Gestapo, the German secret police, used waterboarding as a method of torture. The German technique was called the German equivalent of "u-boat". During the Double Tenth Incident, waterboarding consisted of binding or holding down the victim on his back, placing a cloth over his mouth and nose, and pouring water onto the cloth. In this version, interrogation continued during the torture, with the interrogators beating the victim if he did not reply and the victim swallowing water if he opened his mouth to answer or breathe. When the victim could ingest no more water, the interrogators would beat or jump on his distended stomach. In 1947, the United States charged a Japanese officer, Yukio Asano, with war crimes for carrying out waterboarding on a U.S. civilian. Asano was sentenced to 15 years of hard labor
Numerous experts have described this technique as torture.Some nations have also criminally prosecuted individuals for performing waterboarding, including the United States.
Twenty-one years earlier, in 1947, the United States charged a Japanese officer, Yukio Asano, with war crimes for carrying out another form of waterboarding on a U.S. civilian. The subject was strapped on a stretcher that was tilted so that his feet were in the air and head near the floor, and small amounts of water were poured over his face, leaving him gasping for air until he agreed to talk.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Water_boarding#_note-WashPostWaterboarding_100406
"Asano was sentenced to 15 years of hard labor," Sen. Edward M. Kennedy (D-Mass.) told his colleagues last Thursday during the debate on military commissions legislation. "We punished people with 15 years of hard labor when waterboarding was used against Americans in World War II," he said.
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/10/04/AR2006100402005.html
Nah there is another reason. The US wants to establish itself in the middle east so when shit hits the fan in 10-20 years time they can fight World War III on non US soil.
that were placed on Iraq When?
- Soren Aabye Kierkegaard (1813-1855)
If you haven't got anything nice to say about anybody, come sit next to me."
- Alice Roosevelt Longworth (1884-1980)
This is why I seriously question what's really going on right now. Cheney admitted it. He knew, all their advisor's knew, I mean shit...they all knew what they were getting into. They had endless meetings, ongoing discussions, intelligence reports, you name it, and a couple years on top to think about and consider it, and still they decided to sell it around fabrications, and then go and do it. Irresponsible is not the word.
It's extremely intentional and calculated. It wasn't a mistake, as well Haliburton is somewhat of a huge conflict of interest, regardless of who was "directing" the company at the time. Plame was outed. That should be reason right there. Libby was directed by someone, and he made reference to it, and it came right from the top.
Not good. That's some serious corruption right there. That's just the tip of the tip of the iceberg in this saga.
Somebody cashed their chips in and went to town.
and reveling in it's loyalty. It's made by forming coalitions
over specific principles, goals, and policies.
http://i36.tinypic.com/66j31x.jpg
(\__/)
( o.O)
(")_(")
I think you already know the answer to that. The point I'm trying to make is there was no Saudi Arabia scenario in Iraq under Saddam. As I said before he used to kill religious folk as a hobby. I have friends that came from schools/universities in Iraq before the war. Both male and female.
why am I not surprised you didnt bold this????
extreme pain? ok pain doesnt last forever. probably a few hours at most. brain damage? sure its possible. but happen every time? no. (self inflicted) broken bones from struggling? wow ok, another stretch that doesn't happen every time.
what else you got?
Lets see.. say hypothetically a very close family member of yours was accused of knowing information about a dirty bomb.. taken away and tortured using this technique.. kept telling them he/she knew nothing.. but it continued.. until they realised "oops he/she might actually be telling the truth".. how will you feel? its alright.. it only happened once, twice, three times.. water under the bridge.. no wait straight in ur face not under the bridge
The real damage that occurs with torturing a person is not the physical portion. as that portion heals for the most part. It's the emotional damage that is the worst part of the process, and that takes many, many years to heal (if it ever really does).
Arguing torturing on physical technicalities is quite rediculous. It's the act itself.
It's like arguing rape is not as bad if the rapist uses KY jelly.
and reveling in it's loyalty. It's made by forming coalitions
over specific principles, goals, and policies.
http://i36.tinypic.com/66j31x.jpg
(\__/)
( o.O)
(")_(")
And pigs might grow wings and fly and if a dog had a square ass he'd shit bricks, and if that retard on the Bills didn't miss that field goal, they'd have been Super Bowl champions.
the other foot in the gutter
sweet smell that they adore
I think I'd rather smother
-The Replacements-
do you think this is done to random people? if my family member had information regrading a dirty bomb, then yes. i'm all for it.
It's ok.. theres no sugar.
(Do you guys get that ad in the US)
No!
It won't be anything near the wet dream Bush and co. or any other conqueror from the last hundred and fifty years that has wished, dreamt, saliitated or killed for. The middle east (countries) have lasted longer then Yugoslavia did, but that may be more for the ruthless dictators that have been running the show. And the hand on the throat to surpress any kind of uprising.
The fact that Bush won't let Iraqi oil be state run is a good example of the leagacy he will leave there.
It might not be done to random people but it has been done to people who had no knowledge or links to bombs or terrorism. Thus, my question stands.. A TRUSTED FAMILY MEMBER OF YOURS WHO YOU KNOW WILL NEVER HAVE ANY LINKS TO THIS SHIT YET HE IS ACCUSED AND TORTURED THEN TOLD "SORRY".. does that make it ok because it only happened a few times?
you think this is all for fun? the mind fuck of waterboarding is/was used to get information to help prevent another 9/11 or even a dirty bomb. should they have a tickle fight?
rapist rape for a variety of reasons, none of which are used to get information to help potential save millions of innocent people.
people do not end up on a waterboarding table for no reason. even if that person checks out innocent, there is a reason he/she ended up on that table in the first place.
What if that technique doesn't work? Do you go harder?
Do you really expect angry soldiers to stop at that technique if they wont say anything?
"oh we can drown him but if he doesnt speak then its ok dont touch him anymore"
the problem with the logic of using torture to prevent another attack is that the information received during torture is for the most part unreliable. Time and time again experts have come forwards with the same message that information gained under conditions if torture is mostly unreliable because the suspect will tell you what ever you want to hear in order for the torture the stop. So by employing techniques like waterboarding we are not gaining an advantage, like the Bush administration would lead us to think. It is probably doing the opposit by providing misinformation that may detract our sources from following other, maybe more credible, leads.
Yes and it has been shown previously the reason was wrong.
Does that make it ok?
Well it surely isn't going to stop it from happening. All it will do is make a new new breed of tortured and resentful Islamic lunatics.
That is unless one thinks the Iraq war is a success, and all of Islam can be converted.
and reveling in it's loyalty. It's made by forming coalitions
over specific principles, goals, and policies.
http://i36.tinypic.com/66j31x.jpg
(\__/)
( o.O)
(")_(")
yes
thats one of the more naive and uninformed things i may have ever read here
this is the lamest, most bragging post i've seen anyone make, not counting myself.
I wish we both had solid proof, but we dont. i'm not pro torture. but I do want every means possible used to prevent another 9/11 or worse.
again with your debating skills. how am I wrong?
No we don't have irrefutable proof but there have been so many experts who have consistantly said the samething, that information gained from toruture is usually unreliable. Are they 100% correct? Probably not but they probably do know what they are talking about so I tend to agree with them.
Even if the information we did receive was reliable how low do we have to sink in the name of security. I understand wanted to prevent an attack that may result in thousands of deaths and injuries but at what cost. Where do we draw the line, waterboarding, electrocution, pulling out fingernails, beatings. At some point the line between our government operatives and the people we are fighting against begins to be blurred. Do we really want to cross over to the other side for securities sake.
that is dead wrong. false accusations and convictions are made all the time, ESPECIALLY when there is mass public hysteria and paranoia. see the joe mccarthy communist hunt and the salem witch trials. people panic and turn on their neighbors out of fear or whatever else. there is no way everyone in american prisons as enemy combatants right now is guilty. in fact, i know personally people who have been in those prisons and investigated those people and they say overwhelmingly the people being held have done nothing at all remotely related to terrorism.
There is no need to insult someone simply because you don't share their views.
Stoop to the terrorist level (perceived or not) and you might as well be the terrorist.
It's a quick ride down, but along way up on that slippery slope.
and reveling in it's loyalty. It's made by forming coalitions
over specific principles, goals, and policies.
http://i36.tinypic.com/66j31x.jpg
(\__/)
( o.O)
(")_(")
grey area, no question about it.