|
So what's the logic with the non-McCain Republicans defending the CIA here? Is it just that the report was written by Democratic staffers so must be bad or are they speaking honestly as sociopaths? The admin at least has some inadequate motive of not wanting to look bad but they're still jackasses here.
|
#
?
Dec 9, 2014 22:42
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 30, 2024 04:03 |
|
|
Trabisnikof posted:Anyone have a good quote of McCain supporting waterboarding etc? I'm having trouble finding it. quote:When confronted today with the decision of whether to stick with his conscience or cave to the right wing, McCain chose to ditch his principles and instead vote to preserve waterboarding: McCain posted:"I said there should be additional techniques allowed to other agencies of government as long as they were not" torture. "I was on the record as saying that they could use additional techniques as long as they were not cruel, inhumane and degrading treatment," McCain said.
|
|
#
?
Dec 9, 2014 22:44
|
|
|
Shear Modulus posted:So what's the logic with the non-McCain Republicans defending the CIA here? Is it just that the report was written by Democratic staffers so must be bad or are they speaking honestly as sociopaths? They're thinly veiled fascists as is so what do you think?
|
|
#
?
Dec 9, 2014 22:44
|
|
|
Shear Modulus posted:So what's the logic with the non-McCain Republicans defending the CIA here? Is it just that the report was written by Democratic staffers so must be bad or are they speaking honestly as sociopaths? They think it's perfectly OK because we're at war with Islam. Also rules of war don't apply because gently caress you freedom that's why.
|
|
#
?
Dec 9, 2014 22:45
|
|
|
Joementum posted:It's a shame that Christopher Hitchens isn't still alive to try out each of those personally, like he did with waterboarding, and tell us whether he thinks they're torture or not. I won't know what to think about this whole thing until I can read about it in Vanity Fair.
|
|
#
?
Dec 9, 2014 22:46
|
|
|
Gonzo McFee posted:They're thinly veiled fascists as is so what do you think? That's not a veil, the air's just hazy from all the coal smoke.
|
|
#
?
Dec 9, 2014 22:47
|
|
|
BiggerBoat posted:They all got away with it. Or did you write that wrong? Besides Fuld more or less everyone got away okay. Some banks even made some big acquisitions during the crash. Shear Modulus posted:So what's the logic with the non-McCain Republicans defending the CIA here? Is it just that the report was written by Democratic staffers so must be bad or are they speaking honestly as sociopaths? OR People really still drinking the kool-aide and think that 'they hate us for our freedom' and should be tortured because they are not soldiers and nor protected by the Geneva Convention. e: I wonder how Arab publications translate 'We tortured some folks.' Enigma89 fucked around with this message at 23:09 on Dec 9, 2014 |
|
#
?
Dec 9, 2014 23:02
|
|
|
loquacius posted:*clip of McCain saying a thing* A comedy show is the only one on tv actually doing this.
|
|
#
?
Dec 9, 2014 23:12
|
|
|
I think I managed to improve Obama's torture speech. Throughout our history, the United States of America has done more than any other nation to stand up for freedom, democracy, and the inherent dignity and human rights of people around the world. The CIA used its enhanced interrogation techniques despite warnings from CIA medical personnel. Since the horrific attacks of 9/11, these public servants have worked tirelessly to devastate core al Qaeda, deliver justice to Osama bin Laden, disrupt terrorist operations and thwart terrorist attacks. CIA officers also threatened at least three detainees with harm to their families— to include threats to harm the children of a detainee, threats to sexually abuse the mother of a detainee, and a threat to "cut [a detainee's] mother's throat". Our intelligence professionals are patriots, and we are safer because of their heroic service and sacrifices. In the years after 9/11, with legitimate fears of further attacks and with the responsibility to prevent more catastrophic loss of life, the previous administration faced agonizing choices about how to pursue al Qaeda and prevent additional terrorist attacks against our country. Interrogation techniques such as slaps and "wallings" (slamming detainees against a wall) were used in combination, frequently concurrent with sleep deprivation and nudity. At the same time, some of the actions that were taken were contrary to our values. The use of the CIA's enhanced interrogation techniques was not an effective means of obtaining accurate information or gaining detainee cooperation. Today’s report by the Senate Select Committee on Intelligence details one element of our nation’s response to 9/11—the CIA’s detention and interrogation program, which I formally ended on one of my first days in office. Some of the plots that the CIA claimed to have "disrupted" as a result of the CIA's enhanced interrogation techniques were assessed by intelligence and law enforcement officials as being infeasible or ideas that were never operationalized. Moreover, these techniques did significant damage to America’s standing in the world and made it harder to pursue our interests with allies and partners. CIA officers (including personnel not trained in interrogation) could, at their discretion, strip a detainee naked, shackle him in the standing position for up to 72 hours, and douse the detainee repeatedly with cold water—without approval from CIA Headquarters. As Commander in Chief, I have no greater responsibility than the safety and security of the American people. [CIA Officer 1] ordered that Gul Rahman be shackled to the wall of his cell in a position that required the detainee to rest on the bare concrete floor. That is why I have consistently supported the declassification of today’s report. The next day, the guards found Gul Rahman's dead body. But one of the strengths that makes America exceptional is our willingness to openly confront our past, face our imperfections, make changes and do better. Later, during the course of al-Nashiri's debriefings, while he was blindfolded, [CIA Officer 2] placed a pistol near al-Nashiri's head and operated acordless drill near al-Nashiri's body. Today is also a reminder that upholding the values we profess doesn’t make us weaker, it makes us stronger and that the United States of America will remain the greatest force for freedom and human dignity that the world has ever known.
|
|
#
?
Dec 9, 2014 23:16
|
|
|
"We are concerned that this release could endanger the lives of Americans overseas, jeopardize U.S. relations with foreign partners, potentially incite violence, create political problems for our allies, and be used as a recruitment tool for our enemies," Republican Senators Marco Rubio and Jim Risch said in a statement on Monday. It's unfortunate that these people feel the need to claim this happened, but we wouldn't want to ruin the lives of a very promising young country over one little mistake. Superpower will be superpowers, after all, and it would just serve to embarrass a very prominent and well respected Western civilization. And really, we all know that Senate committees and accused terrorists lie about this kind of thing all the time, so I'm not even convinced that it happened.
|
|
#
?
Dec 9, 2014 23:16
|
|
|
berzerker posted:It's unfortunate that these people feel the need to claim this happened, but we wouldn't want to ruin the lives of a very promising young country over one little mistake. Superpower will be superpowers, after all, and it would just serve to embarrass a very prominent and well respected Western civilization. And really, we all know that Senate committees and accused terrorists lie about this kind of thing all the time, so I'm not even convinced that it happened. Perfect c/p to facebook, thanks
|
|
#
?
Dec 9, 2014 23:22
|
|
|
Radbot posted:Why not occupy Mexico? Seriously, why is it any less political tenable than occupying the Middle East? I mean, I get that Mexicans are slightly less scary than Arabs and that the narrative to contain cartel violence isn't as profitable, but it's also happening literally hundreds (not thousands) of miles away from our loving border. The fact that that doesn't register with anyone, even outside of the MSM, is straight up bizarre. At this point the US occupying Mexico would be seen as a clear step to uniting the United States of America and the United States of Mexico. This plays pretty badly among sizable amounts of both the USA population and the Mexican population. It's something that's going to be avoided unless it becomes absolutely necessary. And once it becomes necessary to do it, we probably would end up annexing it anyway because lets face it we already have all these economic ties going on and will have to institute a long term "temporary" governing authority.
|
|
#
?
Dec 9, 2014 23:27
|
|
|
Why would you want to own Mexico.
|
|
#
?
Dec 9, 2014 23:29
|
|
|
Bums are dying hungry on the streets of the nation's greatest city and the CIA is spending their time force feeding terrorists through their butt holes. What a backwards world. This is all very upsetting and the more frustrating thing is that the average day joe doesn't give a poo poo. El Scotch posted:Why would you want to own Mexico. Enigma89 fucked around with this message at 23:33 on Dec 9, 2014 |
|
#
?
Dec 9, 2014 23:30
|
|
|
Mr Interweb posted:Actually, wasn't McCain like the only Republican who agreed with the Dems that torture was wrong? Try asking the Senate Republicans to raise their hands if they support torture.
|
|
#
?
Dec 9, 2014 23:30
|
|
|
El Scotch posted:Why would you want to own Mexico. Once you're engaging in a long term occupation of it as an enemy force, and it's right on your borders, well what else are you going to do?
|
|
#
?
Dec 9, 2014 23:31
|
|
|
El Scotch posted:Why would you want to own Mexico. Lots of oil, nice coastline, good drugs, cheap labor, a small and defensible southern border, what's not to like? Also it's step two toward NAU. And then the world.
|
|
#
?
Dec 9, 2014 23:35
|
|
|
annexation is per se illegal under international law, and the united states of god's america always ALWAYS respects international law and nothing could convince me otherwise. also this annexation talk is retarded no one is seriously considering that as a valid idea right?
|
|
#
?
Dec 9, 2014 23:35
|
|
|
Jagchosis posted:annexation is per se illegal under international law, and the united states of god's america always ALWAYS respects international law and nothing could convince me otherwise. I mean we have the Gestapo, we might as well go Full Lebensraum
|
|
#
?
Dec 9, 2014 23:37
|
|
|
Just in case you were worried that Obama hasn't been doing anything to bring those involved to justice, Obama HAS jailed someone connected to the CIA's torture program. (You'll never guess who!  )
|
|
#
?
Dec 9, 2014 23:48
|
|
|
Then we can annex Canada and introduce those poor victims of socialism of the glories of free market health care!
|
|
#
?
Dec 9, 2014 23:49
|
|
|
Chamale posted:Try asking the Senate Republicans to raise their hands if they support torture. 
|
|
#
?
Dec 9, 2014 23:54
|
|
|
Enigma89 posted:Besides Fuld more or less everyone got away okay. Some banks even made some big acquisitions during the crash. Right. I agree. Except you wrote this: Enigma89 posted:I knew that none of the big bank executives were going to get away with blowing up the economy and get shielded by DC. So I assume you meant to write "none of them would be held accountable" or "I knew they would all get away with it". From your tone, I gathered what you meant but the language confused me.
|
|
#
?
Dec 9, 2014 23:55
|
|
|
BiggerBoat posted:Right. I agree. Except you wrote this: Ah sorry. I was sort of shooting from the hip. I meant to say that most/all would get away with it.
|
|
#
?
Dec 9, 2014 23:56
|
|
|
Chamale posted:Try asking the Senate Republicans to raise their hands if they support torture. It'd probably win them votes if they did. Seriously. People I know that vote GOP and have a hard on for war are like "well, they cut off people's HEADS on TV!" which always baffles me because it seems to me that they wouldn't want U.S. policy steered and for the bar to be set by what the vermin, Muslim, enemy, anti-christian "sand n*****s" do, but that's how most of them seem to approach it whenever the subject comes up.
|
|
#
?
Dec 10, 2014 00:03
|
|
|
This is like prosecuting Marines who fought on Iwo Jima for owning Jap skull collections!
|
|
#
?
Dec 10, 2014 00:08
|
|
|
BiggerBoat posted:It'd probably win them votes if they did. McCain can't raise his arms above his head because he was badly injured by torture in Vietnam.
|
|
#
?
Dec 10, 2014 00:12
|
|
|
Nintendo Kid posted:At this point the US occupying Mexico would be seen as a clear step to uniting the United States of America and the United States of Mexico. This plays pretty badly among sizable amounts of both the USA population and the Mexican population. Fine, don't occupy then. Why isn't our military partnering with the Mexican military to rout these fools out? How the gently caress do we know exactly where these people operate, yet instead of drone bombing them, we drone bomb weddings in places three thousands miles away? Why does CNN care so deeply about the beheading of an Arab man who was probably a militant anyways, versus the burning/dissolving in acid of 43 children?
|
|
#
?
Dec 10, 2014 00:19
|
|
|
The only thing that's keeping my mind off how totally horrific the torture report is is that all the conservatives leaving comments are going in different directions; torture is okay because freedom, torture is wrong because Obama, this is just a distraction from the real issues like Gruber, etc. It's comforting to see them off-message before Hannity or whoever has a chance to hammer in the correct opinion  I assume it'll eventually end up being that Obama released the report to betray our brave CIA who were just protecting American lives though
|
|
#
?
Dec 10, 2014 00:19
|
|
|
BiggerBoat posted:It'd probably win them votes if they did. Seriously. People I know that vote GOP and have a hard on for war are like "well, they cut off people's HEADS on TV!" which always baffles me because it seems to me that they wouldn't want U.S. policy steered and for the bar to be set by what the vermin, Muslim, enemy, anti-christian "sand n*****s" do, but that's how most of them seem to approach it whenever the subject comes up. Pretty sure this is the normal response on both sides. The Democrats could have defunded Guantanamo and didn't do anything about it. Obama didn't close it. Soo I am not sure what you are trying to say here besides that people are willing to vote for two guilty parties. One party wants to do it and the other one doesn't really want to stop it. Trying to pin this all on the Republicans is just short sighted. Feinstein is right that history will judge us including the entire country that kept voting in the same people that were ordering/allowing these terrible things to happen. It's unconscionable. e: I am not sure what is worst. Letting torture happen because you see the detainees as subhumans or not trying to stop it because you are scared what Fox news is going to say about you. At least one is founded on some sort of principal, albeit hatred.  2x e: I am half kidding about that last paragraph so please don't hammer me. 
Enigma89 fucked around with this message at 00:27 on Dec 10, 2014 |
|
#
?
Dec 10, 2014 00:20
|
|
|
El Scotch posted:Why would you want to own Mexico.  In addition, Mexico's population is currently 119,713,203 so we'd probably get at least 10 new states, probably closer to 20, which means 20-40 new Senators and god knows how many new Representatives. Given that Mexico is hugely Hispanic, a large chunk of US-controlled Mexico would likely vote for Democrats, and good loving luck trying to gerrymander a bunch of Republican seats out of Mexico. Back in the 1840's during the whole Texas Rebellion/Mexican-American War there actually was a group called the All of Mexico movement pushing for (obviously) the US to take the entirety of Mexico. So if Manifest Desitny was awesome and the US had a "god-given right" to just take all the territory from the Atlantic to the Pacific, then why did we only take the Northern part of Mexico instead of all of Mexico? Let's ask Senator John C. Calhoun: John C. Calhoun posted:Senator John C. Calhoun of South Carolina, who had approved of the annexation of Texas, was opposed to the annexation of Mexico, as well as the "mission" aspect of manifest destiny, for racial reasons. He made these views clear in a speech to Congress on January 4, 1848: There's a small part of me that wonders what the US would look like if we had taken all of Mexico. The Republicans probably wouldn't have been able to go full white supremacist if there were an extra 40-50 million Hispanics voting against them, and Hispanics would be an insanely powerful voting block. San Antonio probably wouldn't be too different, so I could just start laughing at all the freaking out and panicking. fade5 fucked around with this message at 00:40 on Dec 10, 2014 |
|
#
?
Dec 10, 2014 00:28
|
|
|
Trabisnikof posted:Says every single-issue voter ever. I would rather carry around Ron Paul golden bitcoins in my pocket then read another report on how we were spending millions on torturing people. This is seriously hosed up and the fact that people are not pissed about that is severely depressing. Do people really think this poo poo is going to stop? Snowden came out and blew the whistle on everything and Obama & Company have not really stopped as far as I know. Why would they stop this? Hopefully I am wrong and maybe I am just pissed/jaded but as soon as people realize that no one is really that pissed about this, business will go back normal. What is the point of a free press if the free people don't give a poo poo? Enigma89 fucked around with this message at 00:37 on Dec 10, 2014 |
|
#
?
Dec 10, 2014 00:30
|
|
|
Though, a lot of the opposition to annexing all of Mexico came from free soilers who viewed it as potentially more slave territory, the same reason why the Gadsden Purchase was only southern Arizona and New Mexico instead of potentially Chihuahua and Baja.
|
|
#
?
Dec 10, 2014 00:31
|
|
|
Jerry Manderbilt posted:Though, a lot of the opposition to annexing all of Mexico came from free soilers who viewed it as potentially more slave territory, the same reason why the Gadsden Purchase was only southern Arizona and New Mexico instead of potentially Chihuahua and Baja. Not gona lie, having Baja could of been pretty sweet. loving South 
|
|
#
?
Dec 10, 2014 00:32
|
|
|
fade5 posted:The US would instantly become a Majority-Minority nation, and the Republican freakout would be glorious to behold. If the U.S. had taken Mexico, Hispanics as we understand the group today would not exist.
|
|
#
?
Dec 10, 2014 00:36
|
|
|
fade5 posted:The US would instantly become a Majority-Minority nation, and the Republican freakout would be glorious to behold. South Carolina.
|
|
#
?
Dec 10, 2014 00:36
|
|
|
Radbot posted:Fine, don't occupy then. Why isn't our military partnering with the Mexican military to rout these fools out? How the gently caress do we know exactly where these people operate, yet instead of drone bombing them, we drone bomb weddings in places three thousands miles away? Why does CNN care so deeply about the beheading of an Arab man who was probably a militant anyways, versus the burning/dissolving in acid of 43 children? 1) Mexico and us aren't on that chummy of terms to send soldiers in on a long term basis but DEA is actively involved in mexico. 2) It is very debateable how much we know where certain leaders are at any time and then it is a matter of who are you referring to? Plenty of people are dead who were in leadership roles over the past five years. Its a much shorter list of who is still alive/not in jail by now. 3) CNN doesn't cover Mexico Mexico is a failed state but the consensus right now seems to be (between US and Mexican officials) that as long as the violence stays on the right side of the border the US will let Mexico deal with (or gently caress up) things until the US needs to get involved. Edit: Enigma89 posted:Not gona lie, having Baja could of been pretty sweet. loving South Yes, a shame we didn't take more of another country. You are the worst stereotype. Opposition to taking all of Mexico was pretty complicated but if US went in you could bet there'd be a lot less native Americans in Mexico right now. Berke Negri fucked around with this message at 00:50 on Dec 10, 2014 |
|
#
?
Dec 10, 2014 00:38
|
|
|
Chamale posted:I think I managed to improve Obama's torture speech. Torture is definitely not a joke, and I have no intention of making light of it. And it can be a tough and emotional thing for nations to go through, speaking from personal experience. And I know that it's often much harder on the torturer than on the victim. However, I also know that it doesn't necessarily turn you into a sad, depressed sack of tears for the rest of your life. People can move past it, and heal.
|
|
#
?
Dec 10, 2014 00:47
|
|
|
Berke Negri posted:Mexico is a failed state but the consensus right now seems to be (between US and Mexican officials) that as long as the violence stays on the right side of the border the US will let Mexico deal with (or gently caress up) things until the US needs to get involved. That consensus also includes cartel leaders. The cartels are very aware that the US has the power to damage their business severely if it so chooses, so they work hard to keep their members in line and ensure no violence affects Americans across the border.
|
|
#
?
Dec 10, 2014 00:48
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 30, 2024 04:03 |
|
|
fade5 posted:In addition, Mexico's population is currently 119,713,203 so we'd probably get at least 10 new states, probably closer to 20, 31 states
|
|
#
?
Dec 10, 2014 00:49
|
|