Pentagon blocks release of more Abu Ghraib material

Whatever.

I would much rather be compared to MacBeth than you. He may engage in creative writing (none of us truly knows how much of that is real), but if so he is very creative. In addition, he has well thought out positions and expresses them clearly and logically in a very reasonable tone.

You seem to be capable only of degrading liberals at every turn, ranting illogically about topics you know nothing about, and running away from challenges while declaring yourself to be the winner.

According to people I trust far more than you and your brother, everything I said here is true. I may be relying on mistaken information, but if I am, that does not qualify as a lie at all, particularly if you apply the same definition of "lie" to me that you apply to your lord and master, GWB. Of course, I don't expect that at all since you have proven time and again that you simply do not have the ability to analyze information.

 

FB, apologies for straying off topic, but when a proven liar like andymoon starts lying about who I am, I have no choice but to defend myself against his slander.

My points in this thread stand. The 'torture' at Abu Ghraib was a matter best left to be handled internally, not sold to a tabloid. As a result, the US suffered on many fronts in the PR war. Now Americans who put in time at Abu Ghraib and Gitmo can not come back and tell people about their service, because a large group of people (predominantly, if not exclusively liberal) will chastise them because of the actions of a few. International support for the war was eroded, morale damaged, and extra resources were needed to investigate. Was the same liberal/anti-war reaction there for when Nick Berg's head was sawed off? No. Telling.... Are journalists actively seeking to acquire footage of Americans being tortured by insurgents or al Queda? No. Telling...

I still don't understand how any liberal can think that a terrorist can kill an American because of an 'illegal war' and because of 'American imperialism" and the like. A terrorist can kill an American soldier, but an American soldier can not put panties on the head of a terrorist. Just makes no sense at all.

 

here you have it folks - trader texx hates "liberals" more than rapists and murderers.

 

The lady doth protest too much, methinks.

Your "points" have been blunted again and again. This points yet once more to your inability to analyze information.

It had been "handled internally" for quite some time and no changes were made until the actions of these morons was brought into the public's eye. Since then, it seems that we have not had any more of these incidents which shows that the publicity had the net positive effect of ending the degrading "interrogation" tactics, rapes, and murders inside Iraqi prisons.

Yes, as a result of the actions of a few particularly sick individuals, we suffered on many fronts in the PR war. It was the actions of these soldiers which caused this suffering, not the actions of the responsible soldier and journalists who broke the story, which caused these effects.

OK, so the most important part of this is that the soldiers who served at Abu Ghirab won't be able to tell people about their service? Once again your priorities are severely skewed.

This started happening long before Abu Ghirab once the world saw that GWB lied to the world regarding Iraq's WMDs. (If you are going to call me a liar then the same would apply to GWBs handling of the WMD issue)

Again, much of this is due to factors other than Abu Ghirab and would include lack of WMD finds, extended tours of duty, stop-loss orders, and improper planning.

When investigating the possibility of American troops torturing, raping, and killing Iraqi prisoners, I would argue that we should devote whatever resources are necessary to rooting out said activity as quickly as possible. The pictures that were published definitively increased the attention paid to these matters and helped to stop those abuses much more quickly than would have been the case if it had been "handled internally."

What is telling is the fact that you do not acknowledge the reaction from the "liberals" you decry. Everyone, liberal, conservative, moderate, or apolitical was outraged at the beheading and it is truly telling that you would accuse "liberals" of not having a negative reaction to said atrocities.

Yes, what it tells us is that everyone knows how inhuman these monsters are. Everyone with a brain is able to see that they are the worst examples of human beings on the planet and everyone expects them to engage in this kind of behavior. What do you expect, headlines screaming "Terrorists Engage in Terroristic Behavior!" That isn't "news," it is common knowledge.

Nobody expects American soldiers to engage in this kind of behavior and as such it is news when we get pictures depicting said behavior. It is news when we learn that Americans tortured, raped, and killed people, some of whom were later proven to be absolutely unconnected to Al Qaeda or the insurgency. Since journalists are responsible for bringing us news and not common knowledge, you would expect them to pursue Abu Ghirab over stories of Al Qaeda torturing people.

I still don't understand how you can lie like this about liberals. My father is the biggest liberal I have ever known (his favorite writer is Molly Ivans) and he has never once made excuses for terrorist killings. The war was indeed illegal, but that does not excuse terrorism and nobody, not even the "liberals" you loathe so much, has made any excuses for them that I have heard.

I can't say I'm too concerned about putting panties on anyone's head, but I am very concerned about American soldiers torturing, raping and killing Iraqi innocents, actions that have been proven true and not disputed.

 

Andy, you have the patience of Job.

Excellent last post.

 

T_J, some line has to be drawn. In retaliation to taunting by enemy prisoners with simulating 9/11 plane crash, actions such as beating, kicking, and punching unruling ones are understandable, though still wrong. But when you start to sodomize boys and rape women, enemies or not, you might as well nuke the hell of them all.

 

He and his twin are trying to bait me as they did Azadre. It is difficult for me to take their insults seriously seeing them as the spoiled, whiny punks that they have proven themselves to be. I am sure they think that if they pile on me enough that I will loose a tirade the likes of which got Azadre booted, but I delight far too much in delivering accurate insults that do not cross the line to profanity. They got more than they could handle when they engaged in a war of words with this Gemini.

Thanks.

 

I am glad you've been taking the high road, andy, good for you. The last thing we need in BBS is insulting a fellow poster. Making a little fun should never escalate into nasty personal attacks - vicious cycles would often ensue.

 

Bush Ignored US Military's Opposition To Torture
by Michael in New York - 7/28/2005 03:20:00 AM
http://americablog.blogspot.com/2005/07/bush-ignored-us-militarys-opposition.html

Chickenhawks love to think they're John Wayne tough by saying only wimps oppose torturing prisoners. Well now we know that the US military's own lawyers vehemently opposed the armchair warriors of the White House who wanted to overthrow nearly 100 years of US precedent by ignoring the Geneva Convention and flout international law and everything we hold decent as Americans by torturing prisoners. Yep, our own military made clear that torture is stupid and wrong and it endangers our troops. But does Bush ever listen to his own generals? Of course not.

Yep, Rear Admirals, Brig. Generals and Major Generals all spoke out strongly and consistently against torturing prisoners. Indeed, the entire military spoke with one voice out of concern for damaging our country's core values and for the safety of our men and women who might be captured.

But Bush and Cheney couldn't be bothered to listen to men who had risked their lives defending this country when those two had better things to do. They don't give a damn about the troops. If they did, those men and women would be properly equipped. If they did, Bush and Cheney would listen to their generals and not ignore expert advice about what was best for the safety of our soldiers.

So there's a question for Scotty after beating him up on Rove -- why did Bush ignore the advice of every single branch of the military? Why wasn't Bush worried about the safety of our troops? Does he often ignore the unanimous opinion of his top military leaders?

My only complaint? That no general or major military official has had the bravery to come forward and resign out of disgust with Bush's disregard for the Geneva Convention, the safety of our troops, his incompetence in securing the peace, his refusal to put the boots on the ground needed to get the job done and his lies that dragged the military into an unnecessary war.

 

I have no problem with travelling the low road when it is necessary. If they deserve insults, they will get them from me. I just don't have to resort to profanity to deliver a well deserved, accurate, and timely insult.

As an aside, I find it truly amusing to be called a "liberal" by these idiots. I am currently trying to talk my stepfather into running for Congress. He is as Republican as they come, but would be a da#n sight better legislator than the vast majority of the a$$clowns currently on The Hill (Democrats and Republicans both fit into this category). I am trying to talk him into it mostly because he shares my conservative beliefs in fiscal restraint and small government and does not automatically think that a position is the right one simply because it was mentioned by GWB or Faux News.

If I can talk him into it, he will give DeLay a run for his money in the GOP primary in '06 (maybe) or '08 (more likely).

 

That was a great find. It looks like opposing torture is just one more way to support your troops.

 

What am I? Chopped liver?!?!?!



Excellent post moe!

 

My bad, I am frazzeled here. I probably agree with 99% of things you post here, and appreciate the information everytime.

 

just funnin' ya blade! It's all good!

 

Thanks. This tells me all I needed to know - that you're a liar. I asked you to name your 3 people, you didn't do it. You're a liar. but I already knew that.

 

In fact I have never attended a cf.net event. Another lie.

 

Let's take a look at how andymoon "took the high road" in this thread.

1) Came into the thread by attempting to attack another poster by revealing personal information about another poster -- something which Jeff is vehemently opposed to.
2) Blatantly lied about that personal information
3) Went off into his typical multi-post hate-inspired tirade of cursing, name-calling and slander
4) Proclaims that he took the high road by not insulting anyone.


What a lying sack.

 

So why were you one of the many who piled on in ridiculing MacBeth when he tried to do the exact same thing?

Also, are you guys really twins? Identical?

 

Sometimes, I wonder if I'm a moderator or a third grade teacher.