It was a page one story in the New York Times, but the fact that the military relied on a memo describing how to elicit false confessions through torture became the basis of torture training at Gitmo somehow fell off the radar screen.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
You forgot The Mark Foley Manual On Missing And Exploited Children.
ReplyDeleteHmmm sounds like he is willing to keep as many troops there as he needs to.
ReplyDelete"He said that when he talked earlier about refining his policy after talking with commanders in Iraq, he was referring not to his 16-month timeline, but to how many troops may need to remain in Iraq to train the local army and police and what troop presence might be needed "`to be sure al-Qaida doesn't re-establish a foothold there."
"I will bring our troops out at a pace of one two brigades a month" which would mean the United States would be totally out of Iraq in 16 months. "That is what I intend to do as president of the United States."
But later in the session, he said it is possible the 16-month timeline could slip if the pace of withdrawal needs to be slowed some months to ensure troop safety. "I have always said ... I would always reserve the right to do what's best," Obama said."
If you lack imagination and creativity, there's always prior research. It's always much more reliable if includes empirical studies.
ReplyDeleteWhat, you didn't think Bush et al were trying to get reliable intel from torture, did you? This helps prove that the real purpose behind detaining and torturing these people is so that Bush dredge up an "imminent threat" based on forced confessions from prisoners under torture. He can then use the "threat" whenever, say, his poll numbers are down or he is facing reelection, like in 2004. I assume I'm not the only one who noticed how the Orange Alerts stopped once 2005 rolled around.
ReplyDeleteAlso fitting for the last panel would be the German Reich's manual on Counter Insurgency.
ReplyDelete"Step One: Shoot hostages.If this fails to quell dissent, and sabotage, more reprisals against civillians are necessary."
Of course, this was already used a few years back in the infamous SS-cartoons...
"don't worry, Hans. History will vindicate us."
Like all liberals, Rall is soft on terror. Ob(s)ama will be even softer, which is why we can't allow him to take power.
ReplyDeleteWhat's the matter Rall? No cartoon on how Tony Snow is in hell turning "crispy brown". Liberal hate knows no bounds.
nope. I don't buy it.
ReplyDeleteThere is absolutely no way we are this stupid.
You guys can keep hating America, with your aluminum foil hats. I'm gonna go eat a hot dog at the park.
Well, to be fair, I would've preferred a little prior research over the creativity displayed during the 2001 invasion of Afghanistan.
ReplyDeleteThe problem with the discourse on torture in this country is that it's absurdly limited to the "yeah, but what if torturing one person could save one million lives" scenario. For most civilized people, there are sufficiently convincing moral reasons to oppose torture. But the question that the media consistently refuses to ask (Does it even work?) leads to an answer which undermines just about any pro-torture argument.
ReplyDeleteLike arguments in favor of any of Bush's policies, the pro-torture argument derives whatever plausible merit it may have from highly dubious assumptions which, with a little digging, are easily disproved. Unfortunately, we have a media too cowardly to connect that dots, even when they report the facts, and a public too lazy to figure it out when it isn't spoon fed to them.
Hot dogs.....president Bush.....HOT DOGS.....president Bush.....Hot DOGS....president Bush....HOT DAWGS...president Bush.....
ReplyDeleteHot dogs.....president Bush.....HOT DOGS.....president Bush.....Hot DOGS....president Bush....HOT DAWGS...president Bush.....
ReplyDeletemessage received
moving on target 1
stand by
Swift boars, heros, pows....give it a rest. So you were 12 when Saigon fell that makes you what? Eight years old in 1971.
ReplyDeleteThere is no doubt that most American Wars have not been terribly successful in the long run. Our adventures in Cuba, the Phillipines, and yes, Viet Nam cover a long history of overoptimistic foreign adventures. Unfortunately, we had a couple of at least semi-successes that seem to inspire a deathless foolishness in the minds of administrations and the electorate.
Your article made one important point. The end of the Viet Nam War brought stability to Viet Nam, and I might add if you were old enough to remember 1968, it brought a bit of stability to the U.S. as well. The end of the war increased stability and economic particpiation also seem to be mitigating human rights abuses. Not perfect but better.
It is interesting that the country where no peace treaty has been signed, Korea, remains isolated and a source of continuing stability. We have examples on both sides.
So how about we quit ragging on the old soldiers and just let them fade away. Do keep making the real point that in every way you can measure, benefits to humanity have increased where war has decreased.