Carter: America tortures - Page 8

DanaC · 10-26-2007, 02:47 AM

Ibby you just sent a shiver down my spine.

Urbane Guerrilla · 10-28-2007, 09:57 PM

Neither of you, tw or dar, are being honest, and if you get attacked for your dishonesty, you really shouldn't be implying I'm anything other than right. Enjoy your pseudotriumph if you can but remember: it's all based on you lying to yourselves. You can't lie to me. You never could accept the best answer, and tw in particular cannot endure an American victory, and is covering this up very thinly with noise. You and I both know what an actively antipatriotic individual you are, and for it you are damned.

xoxoxoBruce · 10-28-2007, 10:01 PM

Would you like some music to go with that dance?

tw · 10-29-2007, 01:21 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Urbane Guerrilla

Neither of you, tw or dar, are being honest, and if you get attacked for your dishonesty, you really shouldn't be implying I'm anything other than right.

Please fill us with your honesty. Our loins ache for your honesty. Answer dar512's two simple questions.

Urbane Guerrilla · 10-28-2007, 10:05 PM

I've given a worthwhile answer. Those who say otherwise are merely talking stuff.

xoxoxoBruce · 10-28-2007, 10:10 PM

I can picture you with earplugs, saying nah-nah-nah-nah-nah-nah, while you type that. It made me giggle like a school girl.

Urbane Guerrilla · 10-28-2007, 10:51 PM

Dar's dishonesty consisted in the conceiving of his question: he might better have put it "Are we winning in Afghanistan and if so, when have we won?" That might have been a better question, and it wouldn't have been crafted to try and trip up someone, as dar's was -- not that he's very good at that when he's crossing swords with someone of my experience. If I'm going to answer a "have you stopped beating your wife" special, it will be an answer to something deeper than the surface of the question.

Tw has for a couple of years now been desperate to find anything at all he could give me grief about. Not on his best day. Not for the likes of him.

The opposition to this war against the newest fascists remains without any idea for actually winning it at all, let alone winning it better than the Bush Administration can. This prevents their point of view from having worth or integrity. You yourself, Bruce, have no idea how better to win this war, nor, I note, any principles on which to base an idea that your road has more virtue than mine. I did in effect ask you about that not long ago and got back complete silence. Either you have no principles on which to oppose me, or you're being reticent because you doubt they'd compare well to mine, or...? Just because you once told me you weren't at all on my side, is that any particular reason to run around trying to prove it at each and every opportunity? People who try that around me tend to talk themselves into corners...

The only right road against undemocracy is to win against it. There's nothing wrong with accomplishing this by a holistic strategy incorporating both war and peace -- but war is needed to answer the war they'd start to prevent, for whatever reason their warmongers think sufficient, their integration into the global economy and attendant culture, or mosaic of cultures.

xoxoxoBruce · 10-29-2007, 09:05 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Urbane Guerrilla

... he might better have put it "Are we winning in Afghanistan and if so, when have we won?"

No, Bush fucked that one up big time.

Kitsune · 10-30-2007, 03:55 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Urbane Guerrilla

The only right road against undemocracy is to win against it.

"Me fail English? That's unpossible!"

So, if the US once ruled waterboarding a war crime once upon time, is it now no longer considered that because we're the people administering it or is 1947 too "pre-9/11" to understand?

Urbane Guerrilla · 10-29-2007, 09:11 PM

You don't know the answer, dar doesn't know the answer, I don't know the answer (though I have understanding enough of these things to make a couple guesses), Sean Hannity doesn't know the answer. There's a whole crowd of us who don't have a definitive, fully knowledgeable answer.

And OPSEC is why. This whole fight is going to be won or lost on HUMINT. HUMINT can be a dirty business -- it's where the old cloak and dagger of espionage novels comes in. Of course, losing the war is even dirtier than that, isn't it? Or had you noticed? Most of the rest of information gathering is a day at the office, or something close to radio astronomy. These only become relevant if they are where the information is. With this foe, these are mostly where the information isn't.

There is one answer I do know: if we do it the way you want it done, success will not follow. There will be no "positive conclusion" if we do what you want. I'd rather not have it that way, understanding your motivations as clearly as I do.

Happy Monkey · 10-30-2007, 04:12 PM

More waterboarding history.

TheMercenary · 10-30-2007, 04:15 PM

Wonder if it would help make illegal's in the US go home?

lookout123 · 10-30-2007, 05:02 PM

no, but i bet if you put a bullet in the skull of 1/3 illegals caught coming across and let the word get out, they'd quit coming.

bluecuracao · 10-30-2007, 06:10 PM

Probably more than that get killed, maimed, or raped trying to get here as it is, so I bet you're wrong.

lookout123 · 10-30-2007, 06:33 PM

i think you exaggerate a bit, but let's pretend you are correct. you are saying that the illegals who make it this far only represent 2/3 of those that started the journey. ok. so if we take 1/3 that make it this far and put one in the back of the head that leaves only 43% of those that started the journey. Then you put an appropriate punishment in place for employers caught with illegal employees (such as the law recently passed in arizona). So now you have only a 43% chance of surviving your journey and will have a hard time finding a job once you arrive... my guess is you'd see a reduction in traffic.

10-28-2007, 09:57 PM	#2
Urbane Guerrilla Person who doesn't update the user title Join Date: Jul 2002 Location: Southern California Posts: 6,674	Neither of you, tw or dar, are being honest, and if you get attacked for your dishonesty, you really shouldn't be implying I'm anything other than right. Enjoy your pseudotriumph if you can but remember: it's all based on you lying to yourselves. You can't lie to me. You never could accept the best answer, and tw in particular cannot endure an American victory, and is covering this up very thinly with noise. You and I both know what an actively antipatriotic individual you are, and for it you are damned. __________________ Wanna stop school shootings? End Gun-Free Zones, of course.

10-28-2007, 10:05 PM	#5
Urbane Guerrilla Person who doesn't update the user title Join Date: Jul 2002 Location: Southern California Posts: 6,674	I've given a worthwhile answer. Those who say otherwise are merely talking stuff. __________________ Wanna stop school shootings? End Gun-Free Zones, of course.

10-28-2007, 10:51 PM	#7
Urbane Guerrilla Person who doesn't update the user title Join Date: Jul 2002 Location: Southern California Posts: 6,674	Dar's dishonesty consisted in the conceiving of his question: he might better have put it "Are we winning in Afghanistan and if so, when have we won?" That might have been a better question, and it wouldn't have been crafted to try and trip up someone, as dar's was -- not that he's very good at that when he's crossing swords with someone of my experience. If I'm going to answer a "have you stopped beating your wife" special, it will be an answer to something deeper than the surface of the question. Tw has for a couple of years now been desperate to find anything at all he could give me grief about. Not on his best day. Not for the likes of him. The opposition to this war against the newest fascists remains without any idea for actually winning it at all, let alone winning it better than the Bush Administration can. This prevents their point of view from having worth or integrity. You yourself, Bruce, have no idea how better to win this war, nor, I note, any principles on which to base an idea that your road has more virtue than mine. I did in effect ask you about that not long ago and got back complete silence. Either you have no principles on which to oppose me, or you're being reticent because you doubt they'd compare well to mine, or...? Just because you once told me you weren't at all on my side, is that any particular reason to run around trying to prove it at each and every opportunity? People who try that around me tend to talk themselves into corners... The only right road against undemocracy is to win against it. There's nothing wrong with accomplishing this by a holistic strategy incorporating both war and peace -- but war is needed to answer the war they'd start to prevent, for whatever reason their warmongers think sufficient, their integration into the global economy and attendant culture, or mosaic of cultures. __________________ Wanna stop school shootings? End Gun-Free Zones, of course. Last edited by Urbane Guerrilla; 10-28-2007 at 10:59 PM.

10-29-2007, 09:11 PM	#10
Urbane Guerrilla Person who doesn't update the user title Join Date: Jul 2002 Location: Southern California Posts: 6,674	You don't know the answer, dar doesn't know the answer, I don't know the answer (though I have understanding enough of these things to make a couple guesses), Sean Hannity doesn't know the answer. There's a whole crowd of us who don't have a definitive, fully knowledgeable answer. And OPSEC is why. This whole fight is going to be won or lost on HUMINT. HUMINT can be a dirty business -- it's where the old cloak and dagger of espionage novels comes in. Of course, losing the war is even dirtier than that, isn't it? Or had you noticed? Most of the rest of information gathering is a day at the office, or something close to radio astronomy. These only become relevant if they are where the information is. With this foe, these are mostly where the information isn't. There is one answer I do know: if we do it the way you want it done, success will not follow. There will be no "positive conclusion" if we do what you want. I'd rather not have it that way, understanding your motivations as clearly as I do. __________________ Wanna stop school shootings? End Gun-Free Zones, of course.

10-30-2007, 04:12 PM	#11
Happy Monkey I think this line's mostly filler. Join Date: Jan 2003 Location: DC Posts: 13,575	More waterboarding history. __________________ _________________ \|...............\| We live in the nick of times. \| Len 17, Wid 3 \| \|_______________\| [pics]

10-26-2007, 02:47 AM	#1
DanaC We have to go back, Kate! Join Date: Apr 2004 Location: Yorkshire Posts: 25,964	Ibby you just sent a shiver down my spine.

10-28-2007, 10:01 PM	#3
xoxoxoBruce The future is unwritten Join Date: Oct 2002 Posts: 71,105	Would you like some music to go with that dance?

10-28-2007, 10:10 PM	#6
xoxoxoBruce The future is unwritten Join Date: Oct 2002 Posts: 71,105	I can picture you with earplugs, saying nah-nah-nah-nah-nah-nah, while you type that. It made me giggle like a school girl.

10-30-2007, 04:15 PM	#12
TheMercenary “Hypocrisy: prejudice with a halo” Join Date: Mar 2007 Location: Savannah, Georgia Posts: 21,393	Wonder if it would help make illegal's in the US go home? __________________ Anyone but the this most fuked up President in History in 2012!

10-30-2007, 05:02 PM	#13
lookout123 changed his status to single Join Date: Apr 2004 Location: Right behind you. No, the other side. Posts: 10,308	no, but i bet if you put a bullet in the skull of 1/3 illegals caught coming across and let the word get out, they'd quit coming. __________________ Getting knocked down is no sin, it's not getting back up that's the sin

10-30-2007, 06:10 PM	#14
bluecuracao in a mood, not cupcake Join Date: Jun 2005 Location: Philadelphia Posts: 3,034	Probably more than that get killed, maimed, or raped trying to get here as it is, so I bet you're wrong.

10-30-2007, 06:33 PM	#15
lookout123 changed his status to single Join Date: Apr 2004 Location: Right behind you. No, the other side. Posts: 10,308	i think you exaggerate a bit, but let's pretend you are correct. you are saying that the illegals who make it this far only represent 2/3 of those that started the journey. ok. so if we take 1/3 that make it this far and put one in the back of the head that leaves only 43% of those that started the journey. Then you put an appropriate punishment in place for employers caught with illegal employees (such as the law recently passed in arizona). So now you have only a 43% chance of surviving your journey and will have a hard time finding a job once you arrive... my guess is you'd see a reduction in traffic. __________________ Getting knocked down is no sin, it's not getting back up that's the sin

Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests)