Waterboarding

#1
GASOUTHERNVOL

GASOUTHERNVOL

Ever drink Bailey's from a shoe?
Joined
Oct 9, 2006
Messages
32,039
Likes
569
#1
Ok so Obama has "left the door open" to go after the CIA agents that "tortured" terrorists to get information. If I am not mistaken these methods (waterboarding, sleep deprivation, forced nudity) have been used to retrieve information to prevent attacks on the United States. Why does Obama think these individuals have rights? So if we start passively questioning these terrorists, make sure that they have plenty of coffee and doughnuts and dont forget we cannot have them uncomfortable in the slightest, does that mean the terrorists are going to start passively decapitating innocent people? If waterboarding keeps me and my family safe, where do I turn the faucet?
 
#2
#2
Son, we live in a world that has walls. And those walls have to be guarded by men with guns. Who's gonna do it? You? You, Lt. Weinberg? I have a greater responsibility than you can possibly fathom. You weep for Santiago and you curse the Marines. You have that luxury. You have the luxury of not knowing what I know: that Santiago's death, while tragic, probably saved lives. And my existence, while grotesque and incomprehensible to you, saves lives...You don't want the truth. Because deep down, in places you don't talk about at parties, you want me on that wall. You need me on that wall.
We use words like honor, code, loyalty...we use these words as the backbone to a life spent defending something. You use 'em as a punchline. I have neither the time nor the inclination to explain myself to a man who rises and sleeps under the blanket of the very freedom I provide, then questions the manner in which I provide it! I'd rather you just said thank you and went on your way. Otherwise, I suggest you pick up a weapon and stand a post. Either way, I don't give a damn what you think you're entitled to!
 
#3
#3
GASOUTHERNVOL said:
Ok so Obama has "left the door open" to go after the CIA agents that "tortured" terrorists to get information. If I am not mistaken these methods (waterboarding, sleep deprivation, forced nudity) have been used to retrieve information to prevent attacks on the United States. Why does Obama think these individuals have rights? So if we start passively questioning these terrorists, make sure that they have plenty of coffee and doughnuts and dont forget we cannot have them uncomfortable in the slightest, does that mean the terrorists are going to start passively decapitating innocent people? If waterboarding keeps me and my family safe, where do I turn the faucet?
Click to expand...

oh yeah, hussein thinks America is the problem and that we caused the attacks due us being greedy. Hussein hates the foundations that this country was built on. that's why he apologizes for America being a greedy country. he doesn't care to see how great this nation is.

i think a part of him see these terrorist being just in their anger toward Americans.
 
#4
#4
joevol320 said:
oh yeah, hussein thinks America is the problem and that we caused the attacks due us being greedy. Hussein hates the foundations that this country was built on. that's why he apologizes for America being a greedy country. he doesn't care to see how great this nation is.

i think a part of him see these terrorist being just in their anger toward Americans.
Click to expand...

thats another thing that pisses me off, the United States bows to no one,,,
 
#7
#7
Vol Mania 21 said:
go to this page and read the comments. there are a couple of military guys supporting waterboarding and other torture tactics, and then you have this guy named Daniel who has the "if we are friends, we have no enemies" motto going for him.

Wednesday, 22 April, 2009 | Crossfit Huntsville
Click to expand...

yah we will see how that works when his "friends" have a knife to his throat slowly cutting his head off....


i would be down for some old school spanish inquisition methods...
 
#9
#9
Vol Mania 21 said:
i'd be ruthless personally, i'd give the green light to torture by any means necessary
Click to expand...

amen

that terrorist:
1)isnt an American
2)was going to attempt to kill as many Americans as possible
3)knows information that can prevent future attacks

"kill em all, let God sort em out"
 
#10
#10
let me do it, the budget would be cheap. just give me some blunt objects, stable electric current, some railroad spikes and a hammer
 
#11
#11
Well then, just to be safe, we should drop off a nuclear bomb in the Middle East. We got to do whatever it takes to defeat those terrorists!
 
#13
#13
Volunteer_Kirby said:
Well then, just to be safe, we should drop off a nuclear bomb in the Middle East. We got to do whatever it takes to defeat those terrorists!
Click to expand...

yes because nuking a region is the same as making a terrorist stand around naked without any sleep, or have to deal with some water treatment.... :good!:
 
#15
#15
Considering that our typical MO in recent war fare is:

Day 1-5: Drop bombs
Day 6-7: Round up the quitters
Day 8-9: Clean up some of our mess
Day 10-infinity: Drop off food, supplies, rebuild government, establish peace keeping sanctions, help with caring for citizens who may or may not of harboured insurgents, establish police force, offer medical assistance, ect ect.....

Seriously, we drop bombs, and then drop of food from the same damn aircraft. You think the Germans did that? Did the Japs? How bout the Russians? Or maybe the Iraq kooks? Im sure the Vietcong had goooood intentions.

I say this, we treat our enemies far better after the fact than any other nation in the history of the Planet. If they are being tortured after capture, or they are being treated harshly during interrogation, so freaking be it. We no longer need to play big brother to other countries of the world. You jack with us, we spend a week ensuring that the only thing left is an orange glow that stretches from every boarder of your country that can be seen from space.
 
#17
#17
Volunteer_Kirby said:
Ah, right. Pardon me for not taking the comments in this seriously.


GASOUTHERNVOL,

Get that sarcasm meter fixed, asap!
Click to expand...

So how should these individuals be treated, in your undoubtedly knowledgeable opinion?

Do you think they should be subject to American Civil Liberties and the Geneva Conventions?
 
#18
#18
The ONLY reservation I have is oversight. It's the slippery slope thing. At what point are we, you know, "sufficiently confident" you know something to take the gloves off? Do we KNOW somebody knows something or do we THINK he knows something?

Make no mistake, if something goes down and we actually catch one the guys that's plenty good enough for me. Information about his comrades needs to be forthcoming and I don't really care how it's obtained. Do we round up everybody that happens to have, say, ever worked with the guy and start waterboarding? One has to be very careful when handing the government the OK to do things. There is a strong tendency to start getting indiscrimanent.
 
#19
#19
TXVOL07 said:
Considering that our typical MO in recent war fare is:

Day 1-5: Drop bombs
Day 6-7: Round up the quitters
Day 8-9: Clean up some of our mess
Day 10-infinity: Drop off food, supplies, rebuild government, establish peace keeping sanctions, help with caring for citizens who may or may not of harboured insurgents, establish police force, offer medical assistance, ect ect.....

Seriously, we drop bombs, and then drop of food from the same damn aircraft. You think the Germans did that? Did the Japs? How bout the Russians? Or maybe the Iraq kooks? Im sure the Vietcong had goooood intentions.

I say this, we treat our enemies far better after the fact than any other nation in the history of the Planet. If they are being tortured after capture, or they are being treated harshly during interrogation, so freaking be it. We no longer need to play big brother to other countries of the world. You jack with us, we spend a week ensuring that the only thing left is an orange glow that stretches from every boarder of your country that can be seen from space.
Click to expand...



couldnt have said it better myself..
When problems happen, we are called to fix things, then they critisize how we do it. Then we get a president that is apologizing for everything, Do you see George Washington bowing to anyone? Andrew Jackson? Lincoln? Regean? Roosevelt? Eisenhower? Teddy Roosevelt?

Now I hope he is praying, not for the fallen officer, but for our children and grandchildren...
 

Attachments

  • the_prayer_at_valley_forge.jpg
    the_prayer_at_valley_forge.jpg
    42.1 KB · Views: 74
#21
#21
DC Vol said:
So how should these individuals be treated, in your undoubtedly knowledgeable opinion?
Click to expand...

Heh, DC Vol. Undoubtedly knowledgeable? You're much too kind. :redface:

All I ask is that we take the suspected terrorists out of the "black sites" and give them the work on U.S. soil. The military can do as they please, as long as it is on U.S. soil and within the limits of the law.
 
#22
#22
Government being, among other purposes, instituted to protect the consciences of men from oppression, it certainly is the duty of Rulers, not only to abstain from it themselves, but according to their stations, to prevent it in others.
-- George Washington
 
#23
#23
Volunteer_Kirby said:
Heh, DC Vol. Undoubtedly knowledgeable? You're much too kind. :redface:

All I ask is that we take the suspected terrorists out of the "black sites" and give them the work on U.S. soil. The military can do as they please, as long as it is on U.S. soil and within the limits of the law.
Click to expand...

The problem I have with that is these insurgents/terrorists aren't combatants that should be covered under International/US law.


Why should they be granted luxuries? They're not conscript soldiers or even volunteer soldiers "doing their duty". They're muslim fundamentalists or outright psychopaths that flocked to Iraq to be in a lawless environment. That's their choice. They chose to use civilian casualties as a religious statement or to successfully de-rail public support.

By their actions they should absolutely not be subject to the Geneva Conventions or American Civil Liberties.
 
#24
#24
dc vol said:
the problem i have with that is these insurgents/terrorists aren't combatants that should be covered under international/us law.


Why should they be granted luxuries? They're not conscript soldiers or even volunteer soldiers "doing their duty". They're muslim fundamentalists or outright psychopaths that flocked to iraq to be in a lawless environment. That's their choice. They chose to use civilian casualties as a religious statement or to successfully de-rail public support.

by their actions they should absolutely not be subject to the geneva conventions or american civil liberties.
Click to expand...

amen brother!!!
 
#25
#25
DC Vol said:
The problem I have with that is these insurgents/terrorists aren't combatants that should be covered under International/US law.


Why should they be granted luxuries? They're not conscript soldiers or even volunteer soldiers "doing their duty". They're muslim fundamentalists or outright psychopaths that flocked to Iraq to be in a lawless environment. That's their choice. They chose to use civilian casualties as a religious statement or to successfully de-rail public support.

By their actions they should absolutely not be subject to the Geneva Conventions or American Civil Liberties.
Click to expand...

Luckily that is not for you to decide.

If we detain them, then they become our responsibility. It's as simple as that. Now, there is a reason for why we take a lot of these suspected terrorists to black sites or to prisons on foreign soil. The reason is that many of the interrogation techniques are illegal on U.S. soil, so therefore a select few military officials choose to bypass U.S. law by performing the interrogation process on black sites or on foreign soil. Now I assume they do this solely for the sake of bypassing U.S. law, but I cannot know for sure. I really see no reason for it, unless they were purposely side-stepping U.S. law. Why else would they take suspected terrorists to those sites? I can tell you they don't do it because it's closer or because they want to save fuel. You look at that Samoli pirate who was flown to the U.S. just the other day - he is, by definition, a terrorist, but look at how he was treated. I don't see any outcry or disgust from the populace for sending him to U.S. to undergo a trial by jury, do you?
 
New posts
You must log in or register to reply here.

VN Store



Back
Top