[Wheatfield]

So you are saying the past does not involve accountable atrocities? Maybe I can see that in a retrospect of several decades, but these offences are still dripping with fresh blood. I think the base of the Democratic party is not going to blame Obama for the "past", they are going to blame him for letting it slide by without consequence. I hear it often, and it is not a cry for retribution, it is a cry for justice. Is that out of fashion now too?
Regards

I'll tell you what concerns me about parading this out for the world to see.
Sure, justice needs to be done, but what justice?
Some private who was "just following orders" will take the fall, or some private who was a "rogue soldier" will get a court-martial, or a small group os soldiers will take the hit, but it will be limited to the people at the bottom.
The culture that motivated it will not change, the blame will stay at the bottom to protect the powerful, and a few lackeys will be ruined because they got caught.

These sorts of atrocities don't happen in a vacuum. A culture of at least tacit approval is required, and that culture is top down. We went after Saddam Hussein, ostensibly for murdering a few thousand Iraqi Kurds, and we put him to death for it.
I have very strong doubts that he was the one that opened the barrels of poison gas.

Ask yourself, if you open this can of worms will you follow it to the top? Will you go after GWB for ultimately being the one in charge of the people who committed the crimes?
Will you execute Cheney willingly for murder if it turns out some prisoners were tortured to death?
Or will you stop one layer up from the people at the bottom who act as the fall guys?
If you are going to go after "justice" you need to make the people in charge take responsibility for their people, just like you did with Hussein, or else the entire thing will ring hollow, will satisfy no one, and will change nothing.

[seacapt]

In the case of AP, this is one of the world's biggest produces of photojournalism. It is, realistically, a decision between the hurt caused to a family by a photo, and showing billions of people visually what is happening. It's sad for the family, but the son is already dead, and it's not because of a photographer. The photographer is doing us the service of risking their own life to show people the results of policies like those of Robert Gates.

Personally I think it's very weak to be at least partially responsible for sending soldiers overseas to be killed, then lash out at photographers for showing people the reality of war.

As soon as the Government starts controlling information that comes out of one of their most controversial policies - and the US Government already does to some extent - it's very, very dangerous territory for press freedom.

If officials are worried it's 'inflammetory' or 'would cause grief' - look at the reality, not the pictures. If these things didn't happen they wouldn't get photographed. I'm glad AP stayed strong and published the photo of the dying soldier. Be interesting to see how the ACLU goes in the torture photos case.

I've been trying since yesterday to ignore this thread and not let it bother me, but I can't.
First AP was wrong in publishing this picture without the permission of the subjects next of kin. AP and the photographers motives were not about doing the world "a service" . Their motives were sensationalism , money and fame. My feelings on this have nothing to do censorship , sanitation or restriction of freedom of the press but rather are based on respect. Had you ever lost a friend or relative in battle you might understand.
Secondly the mere fact that an organization like the ACLU is permitted to exist within the United States bares tremendous witness to the liberties and rights afforded to American citizens.
Finally this rhetoric about mistreatment of prisonners has gone on for too many years. The treatment of prisonners of war is supposed to be outlined in the Geneva Convention. I don't see how humilliation and intimidation have been equated to torture , atrocities and war crimes. Our own millitary receives simillar treatment as part of their training in order to know what to expect if they are captured . Nailing a mans scrotum to a wooden chair is torture , embarassing him is not. How exactly should prisonners be interogated? Should the interogator say OK little alledged terrorist guy if you promiss not to try to kill us anymore and tell us where your clubhouse is we'll give you a twinkie?
Get it straight folks US troops are risking their lives daily in the middle east mainly because a group of terrorists attacked and killed American citizens on American soil. How many of you remember exactly what you were doing when you first heard about 911?
I say to all my fellow Americans , it doesn' t matter if you love Bush or Obama . You may agree or disagree with our millitary presence in the middle east , that is your right but the fact is that our troops are in harms way . Those troops are doing their jobs and following their orders in an effort to protect us. They( the troops themselves and their famillies) deserve 100% of our support and respect.

HAVE A NICE DAY!

[Rupert]

Err, no. That's not what I said.

More like it's kind of lame for the previous administration to have been covering it up, so as to continue to do it, and then have the present one be blamed for not throwing the same stuff to the circus *now* when the point is to actually do things *differently* rather than defend the indefensible against the media's exploiting America's short attention span.

I said, I want to see transparency about what happens *now,* and in the case of what happened in the last administration, I said I want to see charges brought where applicable.

So I want those images used as *evidence,* not thrown out there for media fodder all of a sudden, as if they are something the present administration was responsible for, or is happening *now,* which is the message some are intended to get, however it undermines the process of actually *fixing the mess.*



I want to see *trials.*

So I misread it Ratlady! It happens, remember that. Not much chance we are going to see any trials, the guilty continue to take pot shots at Obama (mainly Dickie boy) without fear. They know they are safe from prosecution due to the gigantic mess they left that consumes all resources and leaves little time for prosecution of the guilty. No justice, no change. They are just waiting for their turn to come around again, where they can pick up where they left off....and they will. Why not? There were no consequences.....
Regards

[Rupert]

I'll tell you what concerns me about parading this out for the world to see.
Sure, justice needs to be done, but what justice?
Some private who was "just following orders" will take the fall, or some private who was a "rogue soldier" will get a court-martial, or a small group os soldiers will take the hit, but it will be limited to the people at the bottom.
The culture that motivated it will not change, the blame will stay at the bottom to protect the powerful, and a few lackeys will be ruined because they got caught.

These sorts of atrocities don't happen in a vacuum. A culture of at least tacit approval is required, and that culture is top down. We went after Saddam Hussein, ostensibly for murdering a few thousand Iraqi Kurds, and we put him to death for it.
I have very strong doubts that he was the one that opened the barrels of poison gas.

Ask yourself, if you open this can of worms will you follow it to the top? Will you go after GWB for ultimately being the one in charge of the people who committed the crimes?
Will you execute Cheney willingly for murder if it turns out some prisoners were tortured to death?
Or will you stop one layer up from the people at the bottom who act as the fall guys?
If you are going to go after "justice" you need to make the people in charge take responsibility for their people, just like you did with Hussein, or else the entire thing will ring hollow, will satisfy no one, and will change nothing.

You are right on the money. No one will ever go after the top criminals, it is against the grain in Washington, left or right. But....they have no problem with a corporal or private. So at least, some poor soldiers are better off for Obama's decision to "let it go". Many other countries go after the top guys, and often get them, but in America it is Taboo.
Regards

[Rupert]

I've been trying since yesterday to ignore this thread and not let it bother me, but I can't.
First AP was wrong in publishing this picture without the permission of the subjects next of kin. AP and the photographers motives were not about doing the world "a service" . Their motives were sensationalism , money and fame. My feelings on this have nothing to do censorship , sanitation or restriction of freedom of the press but rather are based on respect. Had you ever lost a friend or relative in battle you might understand.
Secondly the mere fact that an organization like the ACLU is permitted to exist within the United States bares tremendous witness to the liberties and rights afforded to American citizens.
Finally this rhetoric about mistreatment of prisonners has gone on for too many years. The treatment of prisonners of war is supposed to be outlined in the Geneva Convention. I don't see how humilliation and intimidation have been equated to torture , atrocities and war crimes. Our own millitary receives simillar treatment as part of their training in order to know what to expect if they are captured . Nailing a mans scrotum to a wooden chair is torture , embarassing him is not. How exactly should prisonners be interogated? Should the interogator say OK little alledged terrorist guy if you promiss not to try to kill us anymore and tell us where your clubhouse is we'll give you a twinkie?
Get it straight folks US troops are risking their lives daily in the middle east mainly because a group of terrorists attacked and killed American citizens on American soil. How many of you remember exactly what you were doing when you first heard about 911?
I say to all my fellow Americans , it doesn' t matter if you love Bush or Obama . You may agree or disagree with our millitary presence in the middle east , that is your right but the fact is that our troops are in harms way . Those troops are doing their jobs and following their orders in an effort to protect us. They( the troops themselves and their famillies) deserve 100% of our support and respect.

HAVE A NICE DAY!

I hear you and think most will agree that our servicemen and women are remarkable and deserve our respect. Still, it does not infer immunity from the rule of law, and that rule of law was broken many times during the Bush administration by a few Soldiers at the request of their superiors. Even in something as non serious as football or baseball, we have rules, and it matters little that "our team" is trying to give us a win by committing a foul, it is still a foul. Soldiers are sworn to protect the Constitution, and it supersedes any orders to the contrary. Choices are made, and consequences occur, good or bad.
Regards

[seacapt]

I hear you and think most will agree that our servicemen and women are remarkable and deserve our respect. Still, it does not infer immunity from the rule of law, and that rule of law was broken many times during the Bush administration by a few Soldiers at the request of their superiors. Even in something as non serious as football or baseball, we have rules, and it matters little that "our team" is trying to give us a win by committing a foul, it is still a foul. Soldiers are sworn to protect the Constitution, and it supersedes any orders to the contrary. Choices are made, and consequences occur, good or bad.
Regards

could you be a little more specific please?

[Parallax]

seacapt, here's the problem. You are arguing your case to a bunch of libs that think it is perfectly OK to take rights away from American citizens; the right to say a prayer whenever and wherever you want, the right to decide wow you spend the money that you earn (e.g. whether to buy health insurance or not), the right to own a gun if you choose, the right of free speech (e.g. SCOTUS upheld that someone not associated with a candidate's campaign can not buy air time within 90 days of an election), etc., etc., etc. However, DON'T YOU DARE step on the rights of some scumbag terrorist hump that is trying to kill all of us simply because we exist!

---

Last edited by Parallax; 11-17-2009 at 11:26 AM.

[Rupert]

could you be a little more specific please?

Try reading it again, and if necessary, I will get out the Crayons.
Regards!

[seacapt]

that rule of law was broken many times during the Bush administration by a few Soldiers at the request of their superiors.
Regards

Try reading it again, and if necessary, I will get out the Crayons.
Regards!

I did read it again and once again I'll ask , Could you be a little more specific please ?
As far as the crayons I don't need them I allready know how to color. I can even draw stick diagrams with arrows to indicate motion to show you where to store your crayons when they're not being used.

[Rupert]

Wow! You are good with Crayons....now when you learn to read you will be a formidable force! Well, at least in your own mind.
Regards

[dave sz]

I hear you and think most will agree that our servicemen and women are remarkable and deserve our respect.

really????

[Rupert]

really????

So you don't?

[Ratmagiclady]

So I misread it Ratlady! It happens, remember that. Not much chance we are going to see any trials, the guilty continue to take pot shots at Obama (mainly Dickie boy) without fear. They know they are safe from prosecution due to the gigantic mess they left that consumes all resources and leaves little time for prosecution of the guilty. No justice, no change. They are just waiting for their turn to come around again, where they can pick up where they left off....and they will. Why not? There were no consequences.....
Regards

Yeah. That's pretty much the scenario. This was *set up* in such a way as to put any other administration in the position of either having to sacrifice *fixing* the foreign policy issues, or, let them get away with it for the now. When Bush said, 'Let History be the judge,' he was basically saying, 'Nobody gets to be the judge now. Cause we say so. Do it in another administration.'

It's basically another aspect of the 'scorched earth' policies of the Rummy/Rove/Cheney/Bush thing: undoing the mess, never mind prosecuting, would have a huge human (and political) cost if it were made soundbite-simple, as in this case I'd like.

Ain't pretty, but I wasn't expecting pretty.

Sometimes *justice* is best served cold, too. When we can all stand in a world where we *know* we're better than that stuff, and actually can live there, *then* say "OK, you guys. You hurt a lot of people back there, not to mention nearly totalled our national honor."

Do it now, they'll just paint it as partisan and it won't help. This is by design. From when they got to place all the chess pieces.

I want it a) Stopped. And b) Done right, when we're all on the same page about prosecutions.

[Wheatfield]

I

Finally this rhetoric about mistreatment of prisonners has gone on for too many years. The treatment of prisonners of war is supposed to be outlined in the Geneva Convention.
<and there was much snippage>
I say to all my fellow Americans , it doesn' t matter if you love Bush or Obama . You may agree or disagree with our millitary presence in the middle east , that is your right but the fact is that our troops are in harms way . Those troops are doing their jobs and following their orders in an effort to protect us. They( the troops themselves and their famillies) deserve 100% of our support and respect.

HAVE A NICE DAY!

If those troops are acting outside of the Geneva Convention (BTW, when did the Geneva convention start allowing prison camps for political prisoners to be kept without charges?), then they are not doing their jobs, deserve no ones respect, and are doing more harm than good.
If the orders they are following put them outside the Geneva Convention, then both the soldiers and their masters deserve no respect.
As soon as the US started using waterboarding as an interrogation technique, it told the world that they would no longer obey Geneva convention. Your own government took the Geneva Convention off the table, so to try to hide behind it now isn't really going to fly very far.