|
|
Post by goGopherBill on Apr 29, 2009 10:36:39 GMT -5
Jt
I don't care what the CONVENTION AGAINST TORTURE SAYS.
They don't have Americas best interest at heart nor do they realize who and what we are fighting.
McCain sucks on this issue...as well as many others.
What he endured is 2,000 times worst than Any TERRORIST facing American questioning has.
He is biased and rightfully so.
Terrorist do not have any rights .. PERIOD.
This is a war for survival ..not a isolated police action.
Another reason to elect conservatives..we know that terrorist are,why they are and what they want to do to us.
Liberals believe in peace and harmony..love and understanding.
GOOD LUCK.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Apr 29, 2009 11:10:51 GMT -5
Bill's arguments are always perfect examples for the *other* side of the argument.
But just a few points:
1) Please define "terrorist". Since being one means you have no rights, this seems like it could be important.
2) How is this a "war for survival"?
3) Please explain who terrorists are, why they are, and what they want to do to us.
Laws are laws, Bill. We don't get to pick and choose, especially when we are part of the government.
|
|
|
|
Post by JT on Apr 29, 2009 16:28:13 GMT -5
Jt I don't care what the CONVENTION AGAINST TORTURE SAYS. Well, we ratified it, and that pesky little constitution says that when we ratify a treaty, it binds us to what it says. Yes they do... PERIOD. But assuming you're right, who gets to define who a terrorist is? Remember, they have no rights, so once defined, they have no right to contest that definition. Could someone declare you to be a terrorist? Ah... so a terrorist is anyone that a conservative says is a terrorist. Pardon me, Bill, but that strikes me as even worse than the right-wing-extremist document that says gun-owners, veterans, etc etc are ripe for recruitment by RWE terrorist groups. |
|
|
|
Post by TheSantaBarbarian on Apr 29, 2009 20:04:11 GMT -5
You are actually trying to invoke logic in an argument with bill? LOL!
|
|
|
|
Post by Pirate VB Fan on Apr 29, 2009 21:53:21 GMT -5
The major problem with us torturing our prisoners is that we have now said it is ok for others to torture our soldiers when they have them prisoner.
|
|
|
|
Post by goGopherBill on Apr 29, 2009 22:50:56 GMT -5
Your arguments are so weak..
But to be fair n balanced..
Pirate..hate to burst your bubble.
American Soldiers have been tortured MORE since our foundation than any other country.
They, the OTHER GUYS ALREADY TORTURE ANYONE THEY CAPTURE..thus defining themselves as terrorist and barbarians unfit for civilized protection.
The Geneva convention defines what armed conflicts and rules are..not some trumped up political anti BUSH convention.
The rest is mumble jumbo quick speak n spin.
|
|
|
|
Post by Murina on Apr 30, 2009 1:59:10 GMT -5
The Geneva convention defines what armed conflicts and rules are..not some trumped up political anti BUSH convention. Amazing... The text of the treaty was written in 1984. The USA signed it in 1988 and ratified it in 1994. Those must have been some anti-Bush people with amazing foresight! Like it or not, the USA has been bound by law to enforce the CAT since 1994. Do you believe in the rule of law? (R)uffda!, I'm consistently amazed at your willingness to engage with this person! My hat is off to you (R)! My stomach can barely take reading his garbage. Scary that there are so many who have beliefs like him. |
|
|
|
Post by chipNdink on Apr 30, 2009 3:02:01 GMT -5
... American Soldiers have been tortured MORE since our foundation than any other country. They, the OTHER GUYS ALREADY TORTURE ANYONE THEY CAPTURE..thus defining themselves as terrorist and barbarians unfit for civilized protection. ... Is that going to be your excuse when you go to meet your Maker, and He asks, "Why did you torture people?" Your response is going to be, "Well, I tortured them LESS than they tortured us." |
|
|
|
Post by goGopherBill on Apr 30, 2009 8:06:08 GMT -5
Chipper..
I support enhanced interrogation..not torture.
My God is a Christan God...
Our enemies are of a MUSLIM FAITH..those who BETRAYED THEIR ..one of peace.FAITH
I'll take my chances.
1984 treaty? You gt to be kidding?
And what support do you have that it was broken?
DEMOCRATIC LIES?
and since you are so up on making sure we COMPLETELY FOLLOW EVRY WORD IN EVERY TREATY...
please make sure that NORTH KOREA,RUSSIA,CUBA,all of AFRICA ,CHINA ..and the so called peaceful middle east MUSLIMS FOLLOW EVERY TREATY THEY HAVE SIGNED TO THE T and dotted i.
again you are just the far left wing of the Democrats..blaming all our sins on AMERICA and REPUBLICANS.
Again your arguments are so weak and your attacks are PERSONAL.
SO AGAIN I show evidence that contradicts anything you have said.
SPIN away ..and blame BUSH.
|
|
|
|
Post by OverAndUnder on Apr 30, 2009 17:01:42 GMT -5
If we are using harmless techniques and not torturing, then we do not need the phrase "enhanced interrogation". If it's truly benign it should just be "interrogation". In politics, anytime someone starts using a new phrase to describe something, it nearly always betrays an attempt to squirm away from the honest truth. I guess saying "enhanced interrogation" is not torture all depends on what the meaning of "is" is?
|
|
|
|
Post by hammer on Apr 30, 2009 17:25:19 GMT -5
Olbermann reminds of the soldier George C. Scott slapped in the movie Patton:
|
|
