The RetrieverTraining.Net Forums The Retriever Academy
Total Retriever Training with Mike Lardy
Hawkeye Media Gunners Up Tritronics Gun Dog Broker
Page 5 of 14 FirstFirst ... 34567 ... LastLast
Results 41 to 50 of 135

Thread: Waterboarding, Why is it torture?

  1. #41
    Senior Member Clay Rogers's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Location
    Leggett, NC
    Posts
    372

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Roger Perry View Post
    By that line of thinking Bush did not start the wars in Afghanistan or Iraq because "other people planned and implemented the attacks."

    Winner, Winner chicken dinner!!!!!!!!!! By God, Simple Jack, you finally figured it out. He didn't start the wars, the terrorists that attacked us did. Wouldn't you agree?
    RIP SGT. David Blake Williams KIA 22 Mar 2008 Iraq


    Every day should be Veteran's day.


    "They say War is Hell, but I have to disagree. War is easy. It's the living afterwards thats hell." Author Unknown

  2. #42
    Senior Member Ken Bora's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2004
    Location
    Burlington, Vermont
    Posts
    11,077

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by stumpholehunter View Post
    By God, Simple Jack, you finally figured it out.
    it is kind of funny that arguing with us brought him around to the truth.




    .
    "So what is big is not always the Trout nor the Deer but the chance, the being there. And what is full is not necessarily the creel nor the freezer, but the memory." ~ Aldo Leopold

    "The Greatest Obstacle to Discovery is not Ignorance -- It is the Illusion of Knowledge" ~ Daniel Boorstin

  3. #43
    Senior Member Clay Rogers's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Location
    Leggett, NC
    Posts
    372
    RIP SGT. David Blake Williams KIA 22 Mar 2008 Iraq


    Every day should be Veteran's day.


    "They say War is Hell, but I have to disagree. War is easy. It's the living afterwards thats hell." Author Unknown

  4. #44
    Banned
    Join Date
    Nov 2003
    Location
    Port St. Lucie, Fl
    Posts
    3,611

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by stumpholehunter View Post
    Winner, Winner chicken dinner!!!!!!!!!! By God, Simple Jack, you finally figured it out. He didn't start the wars, the terrorists that attacked us did. Wouldn't you agree?
    The terrorists flew planes into the world trade center. There was a possibility even that could have been stopped if the Bush administration had heeded the warnings they got months before 9/11/2001.

    As far as iraq, when did they attack us. I found an article that even the conservatives felt it was a mistake to go to war with Iraq.

    Conservatives Against a War with Iraqby Rep. John J. Duncan
    March 6, 2003


    Most people do not realize how many conservatives are against going to war in Iraq.

    A strong majority of nationally-syndicated conservative columnists have come out against this war. Just three of many examples I could give include the following:

    Charley Reese, a staunch conservative, who was selected a couple of years ago as the favorite columnist of C-Span viewers, wrote that a U.S. attack on Iraq: "is a prescription for the decline and fall of the American empire. Overextension urged on by a bunch of rabid intellectuals who wouldn't know one end of a gun from another has doomed many an empire. Just let the United States try to occupy the Middle East, which will be the practical result of a war against Iraq, and Americans will be bled dry by the costs in both blood and treasure."

    Paul Craig Roberts, who was one of the highest-ranking Treasury Department officials under President Reagan and now a nationally-syndicated conservative columnist, wrote: "an invasion of Iraq is likely the most thoughtless action in modern history."

    James Webb, a hero in Vietnam and President Reagan's Secretary of the Navy, wrote: "The issue before us is not whether the United States should end the regime of Saddam Hussein, but whether we as a nation are prepared to occupy territory in the Middle East for the next 30 to 50 years."

    It is a traditional conservative position to be against huge deficit spending.

    The Congressional Budget Office estimated that a very short war followed by a five-year occupation of Iraq would cost the U.S. $272 billion, this on top of an estimated $350 billion deficit for the coming fiscal year.

    It is a traditional conservative position to be against the U.S. being the policeman of the world. That is exactly what we will be doing if we go to war in Iraq.

    It is a traditional conservative position to be against world government, because conservatives believe that government is less wasteful and arrogant when it is small and closer to the people.

    It is a traditional conservative position to be critical of, skeptical about, even opposed to the very wasteful, corrupt United Nations, yet the primary justification for this war, what we hear over and over again, is that Iraq has violated 16 U.N. resolutions.

    Well, other nations have violated U.N. resolutions, yet we have not threatened war against them.

    It is a traditional conservative position to believe it is unfair to U.S. taxpayers and our military to put almost the entire burden of enforcing U.N. resolutions on the U.S., yet that is exactly what will happen in a war against Iraq.

    In fact, it is already happening, because even if Hussein backs down now it will cost us billions of dollars in war preparations and moving so many of our troops, planes, ships, and equipment to the Middle East.

    It is a traditional conservative position to be against huge foreign aid, which has been almost a complete failure for many years now.

    Talk about huge foreign aid Turkey is demanding $26 to $32 billion according to most reports. Israel wants $12 to $15 billion additional aid. Egypt, Jordan, Saudi Arabia want additional aid in unspecified amounts.

    Almost every country that is supporting the U.S. in this war effort wants something in return. The cost of all these requests have not been added in to most of the war cost calculations.

    All this to fight a bad man who has a total military budget of about $1.4 billion, less than 3/10 of one percent of ours.

    The White House said Hussein has less than 40% of the weaponry and manpower that he had at the time of the first Gulf War. One analyst estimated only about 20%.

    His troops surrendered then to camera crews or even in one case to an empty tank. Hussein has been weakened further by years of bombing and economic sanctions and embargos.

    He is an evil man, but he is no threat to us, and if this war comes about, it will probably be one of the shortest and certainly one of the most lopsided wars in history.

    Our own CIA put out a report just a few days before our War Resolution vote saying that Hussein was so weak economically and militarily he was really not capable of attacking anyone unless forced into it. He really controls very little outside the city of Baghdad.

    The Washington Post, two days ago, had a column by Al Kamen which said: "The war in Iraq, likely in the next few weeks, is not expected to last long, given the overwhelming U.S. firepower to be arrayed against the Iraqis. But the trickier job may be in the aftermath, when Washington plans to install an administrator, or viceroy, who would direct postwar reconstruction of the place."

    Fortune magazine said: "Iraq We win. What then?" "A military victory could turn into a strategic defeat. . . . A prolonged, expensive, American-led occupation . . . could turn U.S. troops into sitting ducks for Islamic terrorists. . . . All of that could have immediate and negative consequences for the global economy."

    Not only have most conservative columnists come out strongly against this war, but also at least four conservative magazines and two conservative think tanks.

    One conservative Republican member of the other Body (Sen. Hagel) said last week that the "rush to war in Iraq could backfire" and asked: "We are wrecking coalitions, relationships and alliances so we can get a two-week start on going to war alone?"

    The Atlantic Monthly magazine said we would spend so much money in Iraq we might as well make it the 51st state. I believe most conservatives would rather that money be spent here instead of 7,000 miles away.

    It is a traditional conservative position to be in favor of a strong national defense, not one that turns our soldiers into international social workers, and to believe in a noninterventionist foreign policy rather than in globalism or internationalism.

    We should be friends with all nations, but we will weaken our own nation, maybe irreversibly unless we follow the more humble foreign policy the President advocated in his campaign.

    Finally, it is very much against every conservative tradition to support preemptive war.

    Another member of the other Body, the Senator from West Virginia, Senator Byrd, not a conservative but certainly one with great knowledge of and respect for history and tradition said recently:

    "This is no simple attempt to defang a villain. No. This coming battle, if it materializes, represents a turning point in U.S. foreign policy and possibly a turning point in the recent history of the world. This nation is about to embark upon the first test of the revolutionary doctrine applied in an extraordinary way at an unfortunate time. The doctrine of preemption the idea that the United States or any other nation can legitimately attack a nation that is not imminently threatening but may be threatening in the future is a radical new twist on the traditional idea of self-defense."

    The columnist William Raspberry, again not a conservative but one who sometimes takes conservative positions, wrote this week these words: "Why so fast. Because Hussein will stall the same way he's been stalling for a dozen years. A dozen years, by the way, during which he has attacked no one, gassed no one, launched terror attacks on no one. Tell me its because of American pressure that he has stayed his hand, and I say great. Isn't that better than a U.S.-launched war guaranteed to engender massive slaughter and spread terrorism?"

    Throughout these remarks, I have said not one word critical of the President or any of his advisors or anyone on the other side of this issue.

    I especially have not and will not criticize the fine men and women in our Nation's armed forces. They are simply following orders and attempting to serve this country in an honorable way.

    Conservatives are generally not the types who participate in street demonstrations, especially ones led by people who say mean-spirited things about our President. But I do sincerely believe the true conservative position, the traditional conservative position is against this war.

    Looks like much of what "the conservatives predicted came true and this was before the war in Iraq started.

  5. #45
    Senior Member gman0046's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2009
    Location
    Panama City Beach, FL
    Posts
    995

    Default

    Count me in on the contribution for Perry's one way ticket out of our great country. Anything else I say about Perry might be considered UNCIVIL. It's nice to see I'm not the only one sick and tired of his anti American rhetoric. I originally thought Pakistan would be a good place for him to go but on second thought Kenya would probably be more appropriate.

    I'm still trying to figure out why an adult would post "The Magic Gopher" on the RTF web site. My 7 year old Grandson and his friends were playing with that about a year ago. What's next, Sponge Bob? Sad.
    Last edited by gman0046; 05-09-2011 at 08:48 PM.

  6. #46
    Senior Member huntinman's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2009
    Location
    Tennessee
    Posts
    6,227

    Default

    You guys are wasting perfectly good brain cells. Ignore button regards...
    Bill Davis

  7. #47
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    May 2004
    Location
    Green Mountain, Co
    Posts
    2,300

    Default

    The US is a signatory to the Geneva Convention. Which makes torture a war crime. Ignoring that takes us to the moral low ground. What good is our word, the US signature on a treaty? Worthless?
    To those that say," yeah, I'm good with that." Well, then you are equally good with our servicemen being tortured.
    The info that led to the couriers came from many different sources. In regards to KSM. He was asked about the courier which he vaguely replied he knew him but the courier was not important. By his deception, it alerted the interrogators the courier was indeed important.
    What its prominence suggest, and what all science confirms is that the dog is a creature of the nose- A. Horowitz.

  8. #48
    Senior Member Ken Bora's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2004
    Location
    Burlington, Vermont
    Posts
    11,077

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Losthwy View Post
    .... What good is our word, the US signature on a treaty? Worthless?......

    .um, any Native American rtf members wanna take a stab at this one 'fore I ruin it on ya?
    anyone?
     
     
     
     
    .
    "So what is big is not always the Trout nor the Deer but the chance, the being there. And what is full is not necessarily the creel nor the freezer, but the memory." ~ Aldo Leopold

    "The Greatest Obstacle to Discovery is not Ignorance -- It is the Illusion of Knowledge" ~ Daniel Boorstin

  9. #49
    Senior Member luvmylabs23139's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2005
    Location
    North Carolina
    Posts
    3,620

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Losthwy View Post
    The US is a signatory to the Geneva Convention. Which makes torture a war crime. Ignoring that takes us to the moral low ground. What good is our word, the US signature on a treaty? Worthless?
    To those that say," yeah, I'm good with that." Well, then you are equally good with our servicemen being tortured.
    The info that led to the couriers came from many different sources. In regards to KSM. He was asked about the courier which he vaguely replied he knew him but the courier was not important. By his deception, it alerted the interrogators the courier was indeed important.
    One would first have to consider waterboarding torture for any of that to matter.
    Waterboarding is hardly torture!
    Hihope Hiland Heathen of Perth CD, RE, CGC, TDI

  10. #50
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    May 2004
    Location
    Green Mountain, Co
    Posts
    2,300

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Ken Bora View Post
    .um, any Native American rtf members wanna take a stab at this one 'fore I ruin it on ya?
    anyone?
    That matter of record is equally appalling. Not all of our history we can be proud of. Though hopefully we have learn from it. The internment of American citizens of Japanese ancestry is another example of how expediency leads us to down the low road.

    LUV
    If water boarding isn't torture, getting your fingernails pulled out is a manicure.
    What its prominence suggest, and what all science confirms is that the dog is a creature of the nose- A. Horowitz.

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •