So Truly Proud of America, It Is Also Stupid That We Gave Our Enemies This Ammunition

Elyzabeth

Elyzabeth

Member
Location
Bristol, England
TO BE USED AGAINST US,

AND USED AGAINST US IT WILL BE..

ALL OF THE TERRORISTS HAVE HIT PUBLIC RELATIONS PAYDIRT WITH THIS ONE !!! !


It was given on a silver platter.. here you are , we did these things wrong now..
you have permission to tell the world how terrible we are.

NOBLE AS IT WAS TO DISCLOSE ALL OF THIS HIGHLY NEGATIVE INFORMATION ABOUT

OURSELVES...IT GAVE OUR ENEMIES, REAL AMMUNITION
 

My guess would be the release of our records on US alleged cruelty and fighting the attackers such as those that destroyed so much property and lives in New York City, Washington DC, field in Pennsylvania, where so much property was destroy and thousands killed. That is not some big dark secret and it has been on this forum for some time now. All that information release was hasty and unnecessary at this early date. Lots of US and other countries efforts are likely badly hurt. Time will tell.

Elizabeth, you are so true with your post. Thank you.
 

And, I respectfully disagree. The U.S. is better than a country that tortures just because we can. The U.S. is better than the Third World countries where jihadists kill over a hundred school kids. The U.S. is better than countries where jihadists behead in the name of religion. The World knew what went on in Gitmo. Waterboarding has been in the news for years. Torture permitted and encouraged by the past Administration was no secret. Yet, we seemed to think we could close our eyes and just forget it happened.

It was past time for us to "come clean". It was past time to keep trying to sweep our autrocities under the rug. So far, it is undocumented where the torture of those at Gitmo saved even one American life. So... was the torture really to obtain information? Or, was it punishment... retaliation?

Had the Committee Report been held past when the new Congress is sworn in, it would never have seen the light of day. Once the Report was complete, either release it or continue trying to hide what was done.

Our son is Army, currently with a Special Forces Group. Will this report mean anything worse would happen should he end up in enemy hands? Not with this enemy that does not abide by Geneva Convention regulations. Not with this enemy that beheads aid workers. Not with this enemy that slaughters school children. These radical jihadists are already wanting to kill every American they see.

As much as many don't want to accept, we have evolved into a global economy... a global society. We send aid workers and military to assist with Ebola. We work hard to assist other countries with famine, disease, dictatorial regimes. We are NOT the "policeman" of the World. But, we are looked at as the sane... the good... the decent of the World. To give the intimation that we approve of torture, just for the sake of hearing someone scream and seeing someone's bowels empty by hiding the truth makes us less than what we should be.

The Report is out. It's over. From here on, there is nothing that can be done or said that will take it back. I, for one, will applaud that someone stood up, opened the report for all to see, in hopes that we do not repeat this in the future. Too many will continue to harp that releasing the Report will cause torture and death of American citizens. Have those people not been witness to the jihad by terrorist groups ongoing since before 9-11?? Agonizing over this Report is nothing but partisan politics. Yes... America is better than this.
 
Prior to this unreviewed and unwanted release the 'tortures' had been approved by the courts of those days. So nothing was wrong as we had those operations under the eyes of the government and the laws. Today we have some different motivations and we should just let history have a bit of relaxing to do. By those standards of the day, there was nothing being done wrong, certain revelations were made, even though some deny such, and there is no reason other than political to continue now to say it was all wrong. And for that one that did release the one sided, unapproved release, I hope the voters will solve that problem next election time.

And now today we have another government announcement that should give plenty to talk about with out incorrectly rehashing what is now history, can't and won't change a thing comments.
 
BobF said:
Prior to this unreviewed and unwanted release the 'tortures' had been approved by the courts of those days. So nothing was wrong as we had those operations under the eyes of the government and the laws. Today we have some different motivations and we should just let history have a bit of relaxing to do. By those standards of the day, there was nothing being done wrong, certain revelations were made, even though some deny such, and there is no reason other than political to continue now to say it was all wrong. And for that one that did release the one sided, unapproved release, I hope the voters will solve that problem next election time.

And now today we have another government announcement that should give plenty to talk about with out incorrectly rehashing what is now history, can't and won't change a thing comments.
Click to expand...

Which "courts" approved the Gitmo waterboarding, rectal feeding, electric drills to the head, etc?? I've not seen where any "court" approved of this. The Administration, at that time, ran it by Alberto Gonzales... the political appointment to AG. Even then, it sounds as if there wasn't a lot of information forwarded to him that fully described the actions being taken against prisoners. Our... the U.S. courts have no jurisdiction over the Geneva Convention, anyway. So, even if you can find where a "court" approved... that does not mean the requirements of the GC were held to.
"Unreviewed"??? A Congressional Committee worked a long while procuring data which went into the report. That Committee released the report they generated. So... who else should have reviewed the report?? "W"?? Cheney?? Gonzales??
 
Why bring the Geneva convention to this discussion? I don't think we have any 'war' to resolve at this time. Usually the US does try to meet the Geneva Convention to avoid discussions, but in this case I wonder if it was even a legal thing necessary.

If we go back into the original records we could find the 'Torture Memos' that were around at the beginning of this period. They were around until Obama took them away when he became President. I have only found general comments so far, no idea where more detailed information is. But it did exist prior to Obama. So for the last 6 years we have not had legal permission to do as we had just after those folks destroyed many structures and killed thousands of innocent people in the US.

For me, we did just fine at the time. We were badly hurt and fighting back as best we could. We should always do that in cases like we had at that time and still do in certain foreign countries today. I do admire those with pure hearts and motivations. But when those nastiest decide to attack the US again, it is time to put all the niceness away and become a fighter for freedom in any way possible. Those enemies are not offering kindness or fairness, just obedience or death, something we need to make sure never happens to the US.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Torture_Memos

For the Torture manuals, see U.S. Army and CIA interrogation manuals

The Torture Memos is a term originally applying to a set of legal memoranda drafted by John Yoo as Deputy Assistant Attorney General of the United States and signed in August 2002 by Assistant Attorney General Jay S. Bybee, head of the Office of Legal Counsel of the United States Department of Justice. They advised the Central Intelligence Agency, the United States Department of Defense, and the president on the use of enhanced interrogation techniques: mental and physical torment and coercion such as prolonged sleep deprivation, binding in stress positions, and waterboarding, and stated that such acts, widely regarded as torture, might be legally permissible under an expansive interpretation of presidential authority during the "War on Terror".
 
While I am extremely proud of the United States for owning up to what we did wrong..re : torture..
if we saved one innocent American life, it was worth it..

However our enemies will use this information against us and get enormous coverage from it.

NOT SO GOOD FOR OUR WONDERFUL COUNTRY TO BE SO TRANSPARENT !!!

and so honest !!!
 
BobF said:
Why bring the Geneva convention to this discussion? I don't think we have any 'war' to resolve at this time. Usually the US does try to meet the Geneva Convention to avoid discussions, but in this case I wonder if it was even a legal thing necessary.

If we go back into the original records we could find the 'Torture Memos' that were around at the beginning of this period. They were around until Obama took them away when he became President. I have only found general comments so far, no idea where more detailed information is. But it did exist prior to Obama. So for the last 6 years we have not had legal permission to do as we had just after those folks destroyed many structures and killed thousands of innocent people in the US.

For me, we did just fine at the time. We were badly hurt and fighting back as best we could. We should always do that in cases like we had at that time and still do in certain foreign countries today. I do admire those with pure hearts and motivations. But when those nastiest decide to attack the US again, it is time to put all the niceness away and become a fighter for freedom in any way possible. Those enemies are not offering kindness or fairness, just obedience or death, something we need to make sure never happens to the US.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Torture_Memos

For the Torture manuals, see U.S. Army and CIA interrogation manuals

The Torture Memos is a term originally applying to a set of legal memoranda drafted by John Yoo as Deputy Assistant Attorney General of the United States and signed in August 2002 by Assistant Attorney General Jay S. Bybee, head of the Office of Legal Counsel of the United States Department of Justice. They advised the Central Intelligence Agency, the United States Department of Defense, and the president on the use of enhanced interrogation techniques: mental and physical torment and coercion such as prolonged sleep deprivation, binding in stress positions, and waterboarding, and stated that such acts, widely regarded as torture, might be legally permissible under an expansive interpretation of presidential authority during the "War on Terror".
Click to expand...



Why go back to the Geneva Convention??? Right, documents that you sign onto can be ignored at will! Great, try that with a loan or a mortgage or any other legal document YOU sign. Why should governments not be on the hook for their signature?

'Usually the the US does try to meet the Geneva Convention'.....Usually isn't good enough when it comes to torturing people or your signature on a legal document.

So 3,000 Americans compared to 1.5 million Iraqi civilians.......weighing in the balance, whose life is more important.......still trying to figure it out........seems to me they are all lives that were important to those who lived them!

So easy to justify doing inhumane things.
 

You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top