Bush's Shrinking Safety Zone

[Happy Monkey]

Originally Posted by George Bush

That's the problem here in America. They wonder whether or not there is a gratitude level that's significant enough in Iraq.

That's the problem, all right. We look at those Iraqis, and think they just aren't grateful enough! Maybe if we kill off a few more, they'll bump up that gratitude level to a sufficiently significant level.

[piercehawkeye45]

We think we are helping them out but don't understand what they are going through. Typical.

[tw]

Originally Posted by piercehawkeye45

We think we are helping them out but don't understand what they are going through.

We think the president tells a truth. 85% of all problems are directly traceable to top management. Iraqi are victims of American ideologs.

[Urbane Guerrilla]

Ibbie, the America-haters want you to confuse what are in effect enemy prisoners of war -- foreign citizens, mind you -- with American citizens. One never charges POWs -- consider the roaring international success North Vietnam achieved trying to call our fliers "blackest criminals!" -- one simply holds them, which is another point the antis want you confused about. Indeed your entire list shows how thoroughly they've taken Ibram in: to get us to lose the fight, they fly a banner woven of red tape alleging that we are obligated to extend citizen rights unto noncitizens. That there is no such obligation doesn't shut these liars up for a minute.

I have no idea where you're getting this "Christianity-state-religion" thing, as this isn't happening, and if you know anything about Christianity as decent people practice it, I'll be pretty surprised. Frothy leftwing websites will insist it is happening, but I know better than to credit that lot. Nazi websites insist they're just plain great folks too, you know.

[Ibby]

Originally Posted by Urbane Guerrilla

...and if you know anything about Christianity as decent people practice it....

Originally Posted by Urbane Guerrilla

Nazi websites insist they're just plain great folks too, you know.

You know, UG, if we were at WAR then calling them POWs and treating them as such would be a great thing to do.

We aren't at war. The war on terror is no more a war than the war on drugs. We don't go around rounding up Columbian coca famers and holding them indefinitely without charge, and torturing them, because that would be illegal and immoral. Charging the prisoners as terrorists or murderers, putting them on a trial by jury, and LEGALLY imprisoning them is completely acceptable. Holding them without charge, suspending Habeus Corpus, and torturing them, is not. It is a breach of EVERYONE's freedom when the government is given free reign to do this kind of thing. You may trust the government with your life - I don't. When the government is allowed to capture and torture as they please, it won't be long before they do it to their own citizens, too. All they have to do is mumble something about a terrorist threat, and they can do as they please. If the government decides the ACLU is a 'subversive terrorist threat' because they disagree with their pro-freedom views, they can just lock the whole lot of them up and throw away the key.

ANYBODY that calls themself 'pro-human' should oppose that. Giving the government more and more power can only lead to a repeat of the thirties and forties.

[Undertoad]

The Not War is preferable to Actual War, which is one of the alternatives, and would become the position of most of the public if another large-scale attack is pulled off inside the US.

It is a breach of EVERYONE's freedom when the government is given free reign to do this kind of thing.

Believing in slippery slope arguments as if they were logical and inevitable was what drove me into the Libertarian Party. Noticing that the world doesn't actually work that way is what pulled me out of it.

It is in fact not a breach of everyone's freedom when the government is given free reign to do this kind of thing.

For starters, although they restrict particular people's freedom, the police aren't the people who restrict freedom. They are the ones who maintain the conditions in which freedom can exist. And strangely, it's still mostly true even if the cops suck (although not if they are corrupt).

But more importantly, I can't for the life of me think of one actual freedom that I personally have lost if some gentleman overseas is water-boarded. I am still free to say what I want, assemble with others, shoot off a big ol cannon at the local range, kiss mah woman (or man!) in the public square, sell my computing services to the highest bidder, and heavens, I may even engage in dancing, if I so desire.

Also, "free reign" is actually worse than slippery slope: it's inventing the conditions that make your argument. The government doesn't have "free reign" to do anything, as there are huge checks and balances everywhere. Some of these checks are enumerated in the Constitution, but there are many more that you don't usually notice. Some that are extremely powerful yet you never even realize they are there.

And in the end, our government answers to a higher power: the voters. A big sector of the American government has just been de-elected and replaced.

[Undertoad]

Oh, and when you say giving the government more and more power is bad, do consider at least for a moment that the forces it is supposed to be fighting (in the GWoT) are religious fascists -- looking to set up the biggest, baddest, most torture-friendly and freedom-unfriendly governments on the planet.

[Happy Monkey]

Originally Posted by Undertoad

Oh, and when you say giving the government more and more power is bad, do consider at least for a moment that the forces it is supposed to be fighting (in the GWoT) are religious fascists -- looking to set up the biggest, baddest, most torture-friendly and freedom-unfriendly governments on the planet.

And, try as they might, they would never be able to do that to us. But they can make us do it for them, it seems. "What we're doing isn't so bad - look! They're chopping off heads!"

All they have to do is keep ahead of us on the brutality scale, and we'll happily follow them.

[Urbane Guerrilla]

Welp, keeping "ahead of us on the brutality scale" does mean they really suck bad enough that they should be defeated, defunded, destroyed and made pariahs of all men, and left talking to themselves in isolation cells and cardboard boxes in rainy alleys. Those that are still in shape to talk at all.

Be happy to defeat them, and don't agonize about how we have to be tough to win. It's bloody useless, and it will make you personally die a dog's death if they are ever lucky enough and powerful enough to catch you, HM.

[Urbane Guerrilla]

Ibram, if you cannot learn from me, as evinced by every word you wrote in the first two paragraphs of post #455, then you are in effect extremely stupid. Which does not actually match your true intellectual powers. However, there is no one so very stupid as one determined beyond any bounds of sense to stay stupid just out of some childish dislike. Be very ashamed of yourself.

@ whom it may concern: free rein -- loosened control, not rulership at no charge.

[Ibby]

Then please, oh wise and powerful UG, explain to me how we plan to wage a war on an idea, an ideology, a feeling?

[Happy Monkey]

Originally Posted by Urbane Guerrilla

Welp, keeping "ahead of us on the brutality scale" does mean they really suck bad enough that they should be defeated, defunded, destroyed and made pariahs of all men, and left talking to themselves in isolation cells and cardboard boxes in rainy alleys. Those that are still in shape to talk at all.

And then, after we've happily followed them, we would deserve the same.

[yesman065]

Originally Posted by Ibram

Then please, oh wise and powerful UG, explain to me how we plan to wage a war on an idea, an ideology, a feeling?

We shouldn't! We should just pack up all our shit and go home and wait in blissful ignorance until they kick the door in and stick a bomb up our asses. Then we can call the "more benevolent nations" to help us out. Oh nevermind, it'll be too late by then. Hell, lets just all convert now.

[Griff]

Originally Posted by yesman065

Hell, lets just all convert now.

I doubt Chuck Hagel is converting, but here he is pandering to us surrender monkeys.

The fact is that we agreed on and signed the Geneva Convention... we are not complying.
Right now, we are just as much the bad guys as they are. In Iraq, we are just the bad guys. We started it and are continuing it, regardless of the few good PR things we do.
If we were invaded and occupied the way they are there would be an insurgency, I would be part of it and we would be doing what they are.
By international law, what they are doing is legal and should be. (I am not including the foreigners in Iraq just there to kill Americans, separate issue)

I support our troops, BTW, those who sent them there are international criminals and mass-murderers.