Do you ever, in this forum or any other, recall or comment on any incidents where some person or organization opposed to the United States is the perpetrator? And do you also so persistently post on the subject, for days on end? If possible, could you please link a thread or two? Or is your special attention unable to focus on any but purported and/or actual misdeeds by Americans? REPENT!
You almost got it. https://www.bigsoccer.com/forum/showpost.php?p=4368577&postcount=300 I apparently am suspiciously too interested on the incident involving the dead italian secret service agent. Forgive this sarcastic intrusion in a serious thread. What can I say about the topic? It all started with power ppl producing crap that someway justified the use of torture IMHO. That is where thoughtful ppl should tackle (or should have). Add to this that The habit does not make the monk (Translation: "Clothes do not make the man". l'abito non fa il monaco), ie there are soldiers (whatever nationality) whos best place to live would be a jail. Add to this that a man is often corrupted by having the life or death power above other men. Add to this that, as anyone knows, war is hell (A lot of ppl should remember about it when buffoons start talking about inexistent WMDs though).
Who reads the NY times or the LA times? Oh yes the unemployed they have good help wanted ads in them. I hope you get a job soon.
I've never seen a post of yours before, but I think I can figure out why you already have a red nipple.
While I am disheartened at any abuses made by US troops, I am hopeful that when they are uncovered that those who are guilty are held accountable. I hope that came out right. On the flip side, it would be nice to see even harsher condemnation towards those on the opposite side of this war who behead and kill their captives. I do not condone any torture, but what has occured by US troops pales in comparison to what the terrorists have done.
I wonder if we the people, might just hold the US military to a higher standard than say, oh, the hired muscle of Columbian drug lords. I mean what the hell. Even if they torture and kill, maybe we shouldn't? Just a thought.
Plenty. Check any one started by Karl Kellar or InTheNet. Unfortunatley, the "organization opposed to the United States" is usually the Democratic Party. It seems like a particularly weak counter-argument. I mean the point of this thread was "Our Armed Forces may be doing horrible things in our name". Your response is "Oh you guys are always complaining about America!" Not exactly a strong logical standpoint (although in the context of Grunt's post, it did make more sense). Think of it this way, the U.S. government is like our child. You can be one of two kinds of parent: One that is focused on what your child does, and tries to teach it to do the right thing, or one of those parents that ignore what YOUR child is doing, and only complains about other parents and their children's behavior. Which child do you think you'll be able to affect more?
x the number of times I've seen this on this board... Why do you compare US troops and US standards of law to terrorists at all? We're not as bad as the terrorists...therefore what??? I simply don't understand this. Is it to argue "Well, it could be worse?" Why does this framing of things always return to not only these boards, but the national discourse as well? I don't compare US troop behaviour to terror-mongering because I don't expect there to be a reasonable comparison. But so many people do it here on BS.com that maybe I ought to start seeing terror-mongers and the troops on the same level...would that place our leadership and terror leadership on the same level of comparison as well then? Help me with understanding this response ("terrorists are worse!") to the acts of the claimed "best democracy on earth." I NEED to understand why this comparison is offered (nearly every time on these boards) at all. Either we are at, and of, a better standard of conduct (as a result of the embrace of a Better Idea), or we are not. If our standard can only be understood as relative to the standard of the worst practicioners (terr-mongers), what does that say about our claims to lead globally in a world of dense relationships where people want lawful resolutions to issues in a just way? EDIT: I like your avatar of Dick Cheney, very realistic.
Mel I see you can read, but comprehension is sort of a problem for you isn't it? My comparison is asking that harsher condemnation of those terrorists in Iraq who are beheading people be given. I stated that I did not CONDONE ANY torture. I also stated that the US is policing itself in this matter. I do hold the US to a higher standard, but do not let US actions overshadow what are far more heninous crimes being committed.
??? It's open season on these terrorists. We have soldiers who go out in Iraq everyday with their only priority being to shoot terrorists. What kind of harsher condemnation were you looking for?
This is you: I do not condone any torture, but what has occured by US troops pales in comparison to what the terrorists have done. And I'm telling you that the post-conjunction portion of that sentence is unnecessary, period. THIS would have been the correct sentence. I do not condone any torture. Your "but" is common around these parts, and the thinking that offers it discredited.
Point conceded. I do not condone ANY torture. I will now make a declaritive statement, what the US has done pales in comparison to what those barbarians have done. Better?
No. "What the those barbarians have done pales in comparsion to the Holocaust." Does this actually tell us anything meaningful? No. Like I said, comparative analysis (or declarative statements reflecting such) are only useful to those who find such comparisons informative. They can only be informative if the standard for such is found within it, and not outside, independent and unmalleable, like the Constitution and concomitant treaties to which we are signatory. But that's just me; I'm crazy and off the wall like that; you'll have to forgive me.
I gotcha, no problem. We both agree that there is no reason for any torture to be conducted by US troops. My contention is that I look at this situation and I see such outrage over allegations of US abuse, that it seems to me that it overshadows even more henious crimes being committed. I think it is fair to say that the US gives better treatment to its prisoners then they would get. But again that has nothing to do with the behavior of the US troops.