McCain needs to call off his "pitbull" and show some class

  • Trouble logging in? Send us a message with your username and/or email address for help.
New posts
Bob

Bob

SoWal Insider
Nov 16, 2004
10,366
1,391
O'Wal
waterboarding is torture?.....it depends upon what your definition of "is" is. how about a little 'Nam waterboarding.
 
Rita

Rita

margarita brocolia
Dec 1, 2004
5,207
1,634
Dune Allen Beach
This is maddening!.:bang:

I hope this comes back to bite them!

The McCain camp's robocalls:

The call begins: "Hello. I'm calling for John McCain and the RNC," before telling recipients that they "need to know that Barack Obama has worked closely with domestic terrorist, Bill Ayers, whose organization bombed the U.S. Capitol, the Pentagon, a judge's home, and killed Americans."

More remarkable than the message (coming after a presidential debate in which John McCain said he didn't care about a "washed up terrorist") is the reach of the campaign itself. The Huffington Post received dozens of emails from voters who had either received the call or gotten a voice mail with a recording. Reports came from Ohio, Colorado, New Mexico, Wisconsin, Pennsylvania, Virginia, Missouri, North Carolina, Florida, Texas, West Virginia, Maine, New Hampshire, Indiana, Delaware, Illinois, Georgia and even Canada.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2008/10/16/massive-rnc-robocall-may_n_135348.html



.
 
Teresa

Teresa

SoWal Guide
Staff member
Nov 15, 2004
30,893
9,500
South Walton, FL
sowal.com
Rita said:
This is maddening!.:bang:

I hope this comes back to bite them!

The McCain camp's robocalls:

The call begins: "Hello. I'm calling for John McCain and the RNC," before telling recipients that they "need to know that Barack Obama has worked closely with domestic terrorist, Bill Ayers, whose organization bombed the U.S. Capitol, the Pentagon, a judge's home, and killed Americans."

More remarkable than the message (coming after a presidential debate in which John McCain said he didn't care about a "washed up terrorist") is the reach of the campaign itself. The Huffington Post received dozens of emails from voters who had either received the call or gotten a voice mail with a recording. Reports came from Ohio, Colorado, New Mexico, Wisconsin, Pennsylvania, Virginia, Missouri, North Carolina, Florida, Texas, West Virginia, Maine, New Hampshire, Indiana, Delaware, Illinois, Georgia and even Canada.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2008/10/16/massive-rnc-robocall-may_n_135348.html



.
Click to expand...
:yikes: extremely desperate measures.
 
Chickpea

Chickpea

Beach Fanatic
Dec 15, 2005
1,151
366
30-A Corridor
Andy A. said:
Where to begin? This is only my opinion and feelings and I am sure many will disagree with me and others will agree. But you seemed sincere in asking the questions and I shall try to respond with the same sincerity. I am only displeased with the Bush Administration's treatment of prisoners at Gitmo in that they have definitely been held too long without some kind of trial or outright release. The UCMJ, I believe, though I may be wrong, covers the desposition of prisoners of war. It is not within the jurisdiction of our civilian court system to try, sentence or release prisoners taken in combat or similar situations, IMO.

With regard to the "confirmed torture". I am not angry about it because I think it was an isolated incident in one prison in Iraq. I do not see "water boarding" as torture, per se. Our troops are trained to know what is like and I feel fortunate that during my escape and evasion training I was never "captured" and subjected to it. I understand that some of us were given an example of what it is like. I personally know of no one who was forced to undergo such a demonstration. Let me say this. If the lives of my troops were in danger and I felt sure the individual I was questioning had answers to save them, I would be hard pressed to not use any method available to me to assure their safety and well being. And yes, I know John McCain believes "water boarding" to be torture.

There is no "moral highground" when you are involved in a combat situation and someone is shooting at you. You are only intent on survival and what you have to do to maintain it and protect your comrades. No, I don't think our troops will be put in anymore danger upon being captured than they already are. You have only to look at the experiences of those captives held at the Hanoi Hilton to know that we really can't make it much worse than that on those held captive.

There is no such thing as a "friendly war". There is also no one who hates war anymore than one who as experienced it regardless of what some may tell you. Combat situations also shape your thoughts, attitudes and responses to things that may not come along until years later. Poppy says he will give up no rights nor will I. We perceive "rights" in a different light, however, as I certainly saw the need for censorship during WWII. I won't argue that there may not be some erosion of "rights" in today's United States. But I think it is questionable that such erosion, if there actually is such, is permanent.

In closing, you are correct in your statment regarding politicizing your questions. These are not party issues. I believe that too often we are blinded by those implying "human rights" have been violated, when, in fact, they are only interested in promoting their own agenda, often to the detriment of our military personnel. As I said in the beginning, this is only one individual's opinion and feelings, born of my individual combat experiences and I am sure there are those who will disagree and that is what make this country great.
Click to expand...

Andy,
Thank you for having taken the time to thoughtfully answer my questions yesterday - I appreciate the time you took to outline your point of view as I was genuinely curious. You have an experience I do not have and therefore some may say my arguments are purely academic BUT I have a couple of follow up questions that hopefully you can answer:

I understand that it is not within the jurisdiction of our civilian courts to try sentence POW's but what has happened at Gitmo is an embarrassment to the US military.

With respect to waterboarding - you do not believe this is torture? OK - you are entitled to your opinion but this means I assume you would be OK with another country using these tactics on american troops if they were captured by enemy forces to extract information they deemed critical? Is it not a good thing that the Geneva Conventions lays out some definitions that hopefully all countries can follow so that there is zero tolerance for individuals' selective interpretation? And if in the scenario you outline in which you would resort to some extreme measures to save the lives of your troop if you were convinced it woudl save them - would you be willing to give that same freedom to your enemies? Or is this a measure that only Americans have a right to do?

I cannot imagine what it is like to be in combat - I can only imagine that every core of your body is on survival mode - and I cannot fault that. However, with all due respect I do believe that one can and should have the moral highground - and as far as I am concerned, the rest of the world certainly conceded that the US had this prior to Iraq.

Unfortunately, conceding that there has been erosion of rights in this war, even if they are temporary, will have given many the excuse they need to erode the rights of their POW's for God knows how long in the future and the US will have lost its moral authority to condemn these acts - and those perpetuating the violence will be able to squarely point the finger at the US and say, "Well, they used these methods during their wars....

I know and understand very well there is no such thing as a friendly war- my family has been displaced twice because of war - I have seen the uggliness of it, the desperation of it and have seen the scars that remain long after the conflicts are so called resolved. I deplore with every ounce of my being what Bush and Cheney and Rumsfeld allowed in this war - granted it is exacerbated by the fact that I fundamentally believe the US should never have invaded them, but nevertheless, it has been tragic for me to see how world opinion of the US has been so badly eroded, in part because of these tactics we used whilst we still preach to other countries the virtues of human rights.

Completely agree that this issue is beyond politicizing. Anyways - thanks for having answered.
 
P

poppy

Banned
Sep 10, 2008
2,854
928
Miramar Beach
There is no "moral highground" when you are involved in a combat situation and someone is shooting at you. You are only intent on survival and what you have to do to maintain it and protect your comrades. No, I don't think our troops will be put in anymore danger upon being captured than they already are. You have only to look at the experiences of those captives held at the Hanoi Hilton to know that we really can't make it much worse than that on those held captive.
Click to expand...

Andy A. " moral highground" in battle" is a separate issue. It is the treatment of those that are captured that concerns me. We should be more humane because that is who we are as Americans, at least we used to be. John McCain himself will tell you bad interrogation methods reap bad information and I will take his word for that, he went thru hell the rest of us can't even imagine.

Wolf Blitzer was interviewing a White House official ,I don't remember which one, and asked about torture. This gentleman said "we don't torture in this country". I was screaming at the screen because Wolf didn't follow up with "how about in other countries?". Rendition does not make torture any more palatable or right.

I'm no expert in this field but I believe you will get more from people with kindness. Now don't read into this bringing tea and cookies and a foot rub. I'm speaking of showing them who we are as Americans, use approved interrogation methods, set an example of what could be the future for their country and the lives of their loved ones by our actions. They have seen enough cruelty in their lives.
 
Last edited:
hnooe

hnooe

Beach Fanatic
Jul 21, 2007
3,022
640
Sarah Palin: "Just who is this mysterious guy, Barack Obama?

Colin Powell: "He is a decent, strong, intelligent, family man who is ready to be Commander in Chief of the United States of America."

Sarah Palin: "Oh, garsh, dear me, nevermind!" Where's my moose, I am skedaddle!":lol:
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
New posts


Sign Up for SoWal Newsletter









Share this page

Share this page



                               
Top Bottom