Further small victories
-
Oakman wrote:
I am surprised by the high-minded motives ascribed by you and Oily to people who are obviously politically motivated. Nixon was savaged in part for his arrogant stupidity and in part because he was a Republican. Clinton was savaged in part for his arrogant stupidity and in part because he was a Democrat. In neither case was the law of paramount importance to those attempting to bring down the presidency.
One takes for granted a large measure of partisan motivation. Nixon resigned when he decided that he had lost enough support among Republicans to lose his impeachment trial. Of course, even when people care about a principle, they don't entirely disregard the politics. It is easier to attack a wounded politician on a matter of principle than to attack one at the height of his popularity.
Oakman wrote:
Granted the irony - does that make what happened in the 50's or the mid 70's any less reprehensible?
If the mid 70s is a reference to Nixon, I don't think it was reprehensible. If it was a reference to the Church committee, then I don't know enough about it to offer a confident opinin.
Oakman wrote:
Is the irony worth more than a rueful smile before we move on to talk of serious issues?
I think the unreliability of evidence gained through torture is always worth emphasising.
Oakman wrote:
By the way. I am not defending anyone who committed or authorised torture. Just as Stan oftime says that I must either agree with him or admit I am a commie, you seem to be telling me that because I do not think this is an issue worth too much agonizing over, I am as one with Torquemada. My world is just not that black and white.
I think it is very important. There are certain principles that evolved over the last 1,000 odd years of civilisation and I take any reversals of this progress extremely seriously. The idea that torture could become viewed as a mainstream policy in the US or any other Western country, endorsed by most members of one major political party and about half the general public, is something that would be hard to believe a decade ago. Opposition to torture has been a defining feature of Western and civilised values for my entire life. I am realistic enough to know that a certain amount of rough treatment has gone on in the shadows at the hands of
John Carson wrote:
One takes for granted a large measure of partisan motivation.
90%? More?
John Carson wrote:
Opposition to torture has been a defining feature of Western and civilised values for my entire life.
You must be very disappointed by the real world. Your large neighbor to the north conducts torture daily. North Vietnam did it. So did North Korea, and NAZI Germany and Japan. But you did say, "western." I am relatively sure that most western powers (not just Germany) have - as you suggest - used torture when they thought it would bring results. It is my understand that the French use it now, though I have only oral reports to rely on.
Jon Smith & Wesson: The original point and click interface Both democrats and republicans are playing for the same team and it's not us. - Chris Austin
-
Stan Shannon wrote:
The reason it took so long for an entire naval task force to deal with one little boat with four pirates is because the entire episode was being micromanaged by Obama's legal advisors.
It took as long as it took because the Seals did it right. Making up things about meetings you weren't there to see and about which there has been no credible reporting, to make a point hurts your case.
Jon Smith & Wesson: The original point and click interface Both democrats and republicans are playing for the same team and it's not us. - Chris Austin
Oakman wrote:
Making up things about meetings you weren't there to see and about which there has been no credible reporting, to make a point hurts your case.
Yeah, I know. But I rely exclusively upon any rumor and inuendo that might be used to hamstring the Obama administration. I mean, hell, it worked for the democrats against Bush. http://wnd.com/index.php?fa=PAGE.view&pageId=95451[^]
Chaining ourselves to the moral high ground does not make us good guys. Aside from making us easy targets, it merely makes us idiotic prisoners of our own self loathing.
-
John Carson wrote:
In the 1970s, Nixon was forced from office and some people went to jail because there were enough people in Congress (including some Republicans) who cared enough about the law to make it happen.
I am surprised by the high-minded motives ascribed by you and Oily to people who are obviously politically motivated. Nixon was savaged in part for his arrogant stupidity and in part because he was a Republican. Clinton was savaged in part for his arrogant stupidity and in part because he was a Democrat. In neither case was the law of paramount importance to those attempting to bring down the presidency.
John Carson wrote:
It is supremely ironic that those complaining about "witchhunts" do so in opposing prosecution of those who promoted torture.
Granted the irony - does that make what happened in the 50's or the mid 70's any less reprehensible? Is the irony worth more than a rueful smile before we move on to talk of serious issues? By the way. I am not defending anyone who committed or authorised torture. Just as Stan oftime says that I must either agree with him or admit I am a commie, you seem to be telling me that because I do not think this is an issue worth too much agonizing over, I am as one with Torquemada. My world is just not that black and white.
John Carson wrote:
Torture, you see, provides very unreliable evidence.
So does the hearsay that is being repeated by the left and the right.
Jon Smith & Wesson: The original point and click interface Both democrats and republicans are playing for the same team and it's not us. - Chris Austin
Oakman wrote:
I am surprised by the high-minded motives ascribed by you and Oily
I have, of course, never addressed the motives of all those people who want investigations. I'm not interested in their motives. If Stan want to support investigations because he believes that it will destroy liberalism in the US, it doesn't matter to me that he does the right thing for the wrong reason. The merits of an idea stand independant of the transient motives of those that support the idea. Also, it is a pointless exercise. Neither you nor I can possibly know the motives of the millions of people who support investigations.
-
:thumbsup::thumbsup: gotta hand it to you, one of the best comments to date.
Mike - typical white guy. The USA does have universal healthcare, but you have to pay for it. D'oh. Thomas Mann - "Tolerance becomes a crime when applied to evil." The NYT - my leftist brochure. Calling an illegal alien an “undocumented immigrant” is like calling a drug dealer an “unlicensed pharmacist”. God doesn't believe in atheists, therefore they don't exist.
Figured you'd be telling us how in your neighborhood, the hookers giving blow jobs made Jaws (James Bond's, not Bruce) look tame. :laugh:
"Republicans are the party that says government doesn't work and then they get elected and prove it." -- P.J. O'Rourke
I'm a proud denizen of the Real Soapbox[^]
ACCEPT NO SUBSTITUTES!!! -
Oakman wrote:
Making up things about meetings you weren't there to see and about which there has been no credible reporting, to make a point hurts your case.
Yeah, I know. But I rely exclusively upon any rumor and inuendo that might be used to hamstring the Obama administration. I mean, hell, it worked for the democrats against Bush. http://wnd.com/index.php?fa=PAGE.view&pageId=95451[^]
Chaining ourselves to the moral high ground does not make us good guys. Aside from making us easy targets, it merely makes us idiotic prisoners of our own self loathing.
Stan Shannon wrote:
I mean, hell, it worked for the democrats against Bush
Not really. All it did was hurt your feelings
Jon Smith & Wesson: The original point and click interface Both democrats and republicans are playing for the same team and it's not us. - Chris Austin
-
Oakman wrote:
I am surprised by the high-minded motives ascribed by you and Oily
I have, of course, never addressed the motives of all those people who want investigations. I'm not interested in their motives. If Stan want to support investigations because he believes that it will destroy liberalism in the US, it doesn't matter to me that he does the right thing for the wrong reason. The merits of an idea stand independant of the transient motives of those that support the idea. Also, it is a pointless exercise. Neither you nor I can possibly know the motives of the millions of people who support investigations.
oilFactotum wrote:
Neither you nor I can possibly know the motives of the millions of people who support investigations.
Sorry. The way you went on and on about the rule of law and the way you have pretty much told Stan that because he disagrees with you, he does not support the rule of law, I got the impression that you could read people like a book, or at least think you do.
Jon Smith & Wesson: The original point and click interface Both democrats and republicans are playing for the same team and it's not us. - Chris Austin
-
oilFactotum wrote:
Neither you nor I can possibly know the motives of the millions of people who support investigations.
Sorry. The way you went on and on about the rule of law and the way you have pretty much told Stan that because he disagrees with you, he does not support the rule of law, I got the impression that you could read people like a book, or at least think you do.
Jon Smith & Wesson: The original point and click interface Both democrats and republicans are playing for the same team and it's not us. - Chris Austin
Oakman wrote:
The way you went on and on about the rule of law
I have indeed. Don't see how that translates to motives.
Oakman wrote:
you have pretty much told Stan that because he disagrees with you, he does not support the rule of law,
Wrong again. I said he does not support the rule of law because he pretty much said so [^]
-
John Carson wrote:
One takes for granted a large measure of partisan motivation.
90%? More?
John Carson wrote:
Opposition to torture has been a defining feature of Western and civilised values for my entire life.
You must be very disappointed by the real world. Your large neighbor to the north conducts torture daily. North Vietnam did it. So did North Korea, and NAZI Germany and Japan. But you did say, "western." I am relatively sure that most western powers (not just Germany) have - as you suggest - used torture when they thought it would bring results. It is my understand that the French use it now, though I have only oral reports to rely on.
Jon Smith & Wesson: The original point and click interface Both democrats and republicans are playing for the same team and it's not us. - Chris Austin
Oakman wrote:
You must be very disappointed by the real world.
Yes I am, though the passing of the years has promoted a greater acceptance than when I was younger.
Oakman wrote:
You must be very disappointed by the real world. Your large neighbor to the north conducts torture daily. North Vietnam did it. So did North Korea, and NAZI Germany and Japan. But you did say, "western."
Yeah. I also said "for my entire life". Nazi Germany and Imperial Japan were before I was born.
Oakman wrote:
It is my understand that the French use it now, though I have only oral reports to rely on.
That may be true, though it is, as I said, "in the shadows".
John Carson
-
Oakman wrote:
The way you went on and on about the rule of law
I have indeed. Don't see how that translates to motives.
Oakman wrote:
you have pretty much told Stan that because he disagrees with you, he does not support the rule of law,
Wrong again. I said he does not support the rule of law because he pretty much said so [^]
oilFactotum wrote:
Don't see how that translates to motives.
You really don't, do you. :sigh: Well, 'tis not my job to explain the world to you.
Jon Smith & Wesson: The original point and click interface Both democrats and republicans are playing for the same team and it's not us. - Chris Austin
-
Oakman wrote:
You must be very disappointed by the real world.
Yes I am, though the passing of the years has promoted a greater acceptance than when I was younger.
Oakman wrote:
You must be very disappointed by the real world. Your large neighbor to the north conducts torture daily. North Vietnam did it. So did North Korea, and NAZI Germany and Japan. But you did say, "western."
Yeah. I also said "for my entire life". Nazi Germany and Imperial Japan were before I was born.
Oakman wrote:
It is my understand that the French use it now, though I have only oral reports to rely on.
That may be true, though it is, as I said, "in the shadows".
John Carson
John Carson wrote:
Nazi Germany and Imperial Japan were before I was born
damn kid. :mad:
John Carson wrote:
That may be true, though it is, as I said, "in the shadows".
Which is pretty much where Obama could have left it.
Jon Smith & Wesson: The original point and click interface Both democrats and republicans are playing for the same team and it's not us. - Chris Austin
-
John Carson wrote:
Nazi Germany and Imperial Japan were before I was born
damn kid. :mad:
John Carson wrote:
That may be true, though it is, as I said, "in the shadows".
Which is pretty much where Obama could have left it.
Jon Smith & Wesson: The original point and click interface Both democrats and republicans are playing for the same team and it's not us. - Chris Austin
Oakman wrote:
Which is pretty much where Obama could have left it.
I think it was out of the shadows long before he was elected. In fact, given the widespread nature and the extent of the official sanctioning of the interrogation techniques, I think it was out of the shadows when it was first conceived.
John Carson
-
oilFactotum wrote:
Don't see how that translates to motives.
You really don't, do you. :sigh: Well, 'tis not my job to explain the world to you.
Jon Smith & Wesson: The original point and click interface Both democrats and republicans are playing for the same team and it's not us. - Chris Austin
Sorry bud, but you're nonsense is not wisdom.
-
Oakman wrote:
Which is pretty much where Obama could have left it.
I think it was out of the shadows long before he was elected. In fact, given the widespread nature and the extent of the official sanctioning of the interrogation techniques, I think it was out of the shadows when it was first conceived.
John Carson
John Carson wrote:
I think it was out of the shadows long before he was elected
Not according to Nancy Pelosi, et al. It appears that most of the Senators and Representatives first learned of it a few weeks ago. They are all pinning their hopes on plausible denialability - which Obama has taken away from them. (Including Nancy. If you believe the Speaker of the House/Chairman of the Intelligence Committee didn't know what was going on, I have a bridge you might like to buy.)
Jon Smith & Wesson: The original point and click interface Both democrats and republicans are playing for the same team and it's not us. - Chris Austin
-
Sorry bud, but you're nonsense is not wisdom.
oilFactotum wrote:
Sorry bud, but you're nonsense is not wisdom.
On the other hand, my spelling of "your" is education. I'm done - find someone else to troll. Maybe Stan will play some more.
Jon Smith & Wesson: The original point and click interface Both democrats and republicans are playing for the same team and it's not us. - Chris Austin