user ballots
Login
Register
Add One
FAQ/Contact
Popular Ballots
Recent Popular
Recent Votes
Best
Worst
Yes or No
Choices
What If
Prediction
Advice
Would You
Crime
Recommend
Quiz
TV & Movie
Music & Radio
Political
Science
Sports
Relationship
Techonology
Culture
Philosophy
Religion
Ethics
History
Food & Health
Fashion & Beauty
Crime
FanBase
Discussion
Bug Report
|
COMMENTS:
I really don't care the press made it out to be soooo bad & the fact is these guys were there for being criminals & would be killers , the idea that that would compare to cutting off someones head ? no way & I know the libs will defend the prisoners but again anyone who thinks it through knows , while stupid , it wasn't even on a par with the things some of these guys have done to their fellow countrymen (& women)
I am speechless.
Who said cutting off people's heads is justified? I am not 'defending the prisoners' but I certainly don't defend the bad behavior of those soldiers either. My father and father-in-law, both career military men, were sickened and ashamed by those photos.
Sheesh. Are you agreeing with Rush Limbaugh, that those poor guys were just letting off a little steam?
by mojo on Wed Jan 12, 05 10:06am
[+]
I think what evergirl is saying is what the insurgents do is ten times worse, I don't think she's necessarily justifying it.
by aya on Wed Jan 12, 05 10:22am
[+]
Nobody listens to Rush Limbaugh, anyway. But CNN said that a lot of the guys were tortured into making false confessions.
by aya on Wed Jan 12, 05 10:26am
[+]
It's hard to know where to start. The prisoners at Abu Ghraib are not convicted terrorists. Many prisoners have not been charged with any crimes, and are often picked up at random, without cause. Not to say that some there have not committed crimes, maybe as minor as possessing guns, or not respecting curfew. But to make the assumption that all the prisoners at Abu Ghraib are convicted felons, having committed murder and acts of terrorism is a definite fallacy. And then to say, because they are there in the prison they deserve to be tortured and humiliated, because the torture and humiliation is nothing compared to the crimes THEY committed makes absolutely no sense. You don't know, nor do the prison guards know they committed any crimes, or what crimes they committed, if they did. This is not a defense of terrorists and murderers - the ones who are committed unspeakable acts of cruelty and cowardice. But yes I will defend the prisoners because they are just that, prisoners - not proven terrorists or murderers or criminals.
by brar on Wed Jan 12, 05 10:33am
[+]
exactly.
by mojo on Wed Jan 12, 05 10:35am
[+]
Sometimes, though, I just get pissed when I see what the Insurgents are doing, and I think, I don't care if they get tourted, lookit what they're doing.
by aya on Wed Jan 12, 05 10:35am
[+]
I hope the Abu Ghraib henchmen are sentenced to imprisionement in a facility where they are visited daily in their cells by several "large" negro men.
Some of the people imprisioned in Abu Ghraib were there because they violated the night curfew and many because they were denounced by neighbors.
Also, in the section where most of the 'abuses' were committed only prisioners of common crime were kept.
Mojo , no I wasn't saying you would or did compare the two , but you know there are those out here who will, the "Bush is a nazi" crowd , my statement was based on what I would expect the libs to say based on their other statements out here , but not aimed at you Mojo
& Aya , your right about what I was saying it's 10 times worse
Are you really believing that these men women & children,thatds right CHILDREN were criminals??Honey you are way off yor rocker.That,my dear is Stupid.
Mojo , this is indeed of "why did you push billy? "Because he pushed me first." am I right?
Everygirl,just because someone wrongs you doesnt make it ok for you to do the unspeakable to them.It makes you just as dispicable as they are,certainly not better or even justified.
I haven't heard anything about children being involved & if they were I'm sure the press would make a big deal out of it , there may have been kids staying there for one reason or another but not like these male prisoners were & keep in mind some of the people at this same prison were the ones who got the little girl with all the facial tumors & her dad to America so she could be operated on while the docs there were saying to take her home & let her die. also I said to begin with it was stupid on the soldiers part regardless of the verdict that comes down on the prisoners later, just like you have really stupid guards in some of our jails here
& Qui Qui no it doesn't make them the same , that was my point I knew there would be people saying that but it is totally different from beheading innocent people
I gotta get me to game in the US and me some naked Cheerleaders!
All we got over here is muck savage women and boney arsed bog men waving flags made out of plastic bags and shouting abuse at the hoors. "Hit em hard he's no relation" and "low and hard like a terriers erection" are common.
On the question at hand I find the statement laughable.
by B_P on Wed Jan 12, 05 10:59am
[+]
Does anyone remember the soldier that was decapitated and then praded and dragged around ???
Yes we remember.
Do you remember the wedding party that got blown to bits?
Do you remember the hospital in Fallujah that got blown to bits?
by B_P on Wed Jan 12, 05 11:28am
[+]
B_P, this is a war zone, unfortunately, things happen, does not make them right, but it happens.
everygirl: The people were prisoners ... that doesn't make them guilty. In fact, most turned out not to be guilty at all ... they were just swept up.
So your attempts to compare atrocities are ... specious ... at best.
And as for humiliation being like cheerleading ...
Gimme a B!
Gimme an R!
Gimme an E!
Gimme an A!
Gimme a K ...!
They don't act in a civil manner, we should reciprocate.
I'd like to see some naked lawyer pyramids.
Does the world hate us enough now?
"B_P, this is a war zone, unfortunately, things happen, does not make them right, but it happens.
by Bafkoof on Jan 12, 2005"
This is straight after telling us about parading a body around?!? This is a war zone bafkoof! these things happen!
dick head!
thc this isnt reciprocation! They are doing this to say go away! Which means you were there first ergo it is not reciprocation. you can justify it as much as you like but I just wont accept it and nor will the majority of people! I know you want to believe that youve been wronged but seriously from anywhere but america thats not how we see it! dont you think weve had loses too? but all we want is it too finish its a no win situation. Question thc. Do you really think You can win? Honestly? no bullshit just a straight answer! I`ve lived through terrorism and in the end we had to admit defeat and even though its not ideal we had to accept compromise! How many have to die before it becomes apparent that this is a lose lose situation for all sides?
saddam is out of "power" that's a win right there mobs
thc2883: I will say this again, slowly ... "every ... person ... detained ... is ... not ... guilty." The they you so blithely refer to is an intersecting set of the set of people we imprison, thus we cannot base our behaviour on "theirs", even if we sought recipricocity.
everygirl: If that "win" comes at teh cost of our principles and humanity, it is far too costly.
Lawyers really should be ignored most of the time. Remember the twinky defense? They'll say anything to get their client off, so who cares about their opinion?
A more relevent opinion would be that of the american people, who are overwhelmingly against torture. Or the actions of the military and government, which have decided to punish these people rather than laugh about it and let them go.
Although it is interesting that the people who use this single action to condemn all americans revile the notion that the constant stream of beheadings reflects badly on the arab world. Can't have it both ways without being a hypocrite.
your wrong cathexis - first we didn't lose our integrity because of these stupid acts , also I really think you are far too left to see the greatness in the capture of saddam
This is just so depressing! Look Beheadings in the arab world are not a new thing its how they deal with criminals. Pilling up naked men and making them do disgusting things is immoral and certainly not how prisoners of war should be treated! It doesnt matter how much you repeat to yourself everygirl that you havent lost your integrity when to the rest of the world you have! These werent `stupid acts` they were premeditated and vile and set a new precedent in human misery. Noone cares about saddam or that you have him its old news! Doesn`t it matter to you everygirl that the US put him there in the first place? Cant you see that by justifying it your actually condoning it? I`m sick of this shit! really really sick of it! this isnt about right or wrong anymore its become about point scoring and its absolutely soul destroying!
Ha! Making them strip naked is immoral because it's disgusting. Beheadings are not immoral because they've been doing it for a while.
Hello? Logic? Where are you?
In addition,no one has mentioned the raping of all genders & ages in this place.You cannot justify that everygirl,but you are too blinded to the right to see it
If they make you hate & kill they have already won.
so you would have blown kisses at saddam? I'm telling you Bush , like it or not , will go down in the history of Iraq as a hero that helped(along with the honest members of our troops) to free the people , also we weren't talking about raping anyone the ballot was about the pictures , nothing else orginally remember? and again tit for tat doesn't make you right if you don't live over there under this freak saddam how is it you think you can scream oh we shouldn't have pulled him out? I think it's out of the realm of understanding if you refuse to put youself in the place of the victims under saddam & mobs if it makes you angry maybe it's because you know you can't say pulling saddam out was a mistake , oh no Bush did a good thing after all , not that I expect you to admit it. Again the pyramids were stupid & wrong (of course) but they don't compare to the beheadings
herzog: Agreed ... neither case should be generalized. Both are wrong. Which is more wrong ...? Obviously the answer should be: "who cares", wouldn't you agree?
Neither behaviour should be defended, IMO.
everygirl: You're right ... we lost our integrity far earlier than this episode ... this just adds to the debasement.
And if you are insinuating that deposing Hussein was worth the sacrifice of our sense of honour, principles, and humanity, then I suggest you have no conception of what it means to be a Patriot and would be best served heisting your backside to a Civics 101 class to get re-aquainted with Founding principles.
The whole point of having principles is that they hold you to a higher standard ... even when it is inconvenient.
Plus ... are you really going to sit there and tell me that piling naked prisoners into pyramids was key to toppling Saddam? If so ... do go on ... I have to hear this rationalization!
eg: Or, if you examine your stance, is this really just a knee-jerk partisan need to defend that which has already happened ... no matter what the situation?
Cath: if abu gharib did harm our integrity, in your opinion, then it must follow that you believe it reflects poorly on ALL americans, not merely the ones responsible. Otherwise it would merely harm the integrity of those involved.
Now, would you say all the worlds muslims have lost integrity because of 911? Or is it only americans who are worthy or generalizations?
I didnt say beheading wasn`t immoral herzog it just doesnt reflect on the arab world the way you suggest it does! and everygirl you may as well BE herzog in your ability to lose the point of the ballot and then criticise someone else for the very thing you did in your first statement. You started talking about liberals and the prisoners being criminals! These are prisoners of war and like it or not there were children in there and they were raped by american servicemen and their own accounts suggest the orders came from on high! As for saddam I completely disagree I dont think it was any of our business to be there. Besides it wasnt a mission of mercy it was to remove weapons of mass destruction that simply werent there! Why everygirl did america not stop the genocide in rwanda where over a million died? why is that everygirl? If you can answer that then I will accept every point youve made!
"Now, would you say all the worlds muslims have lost integrity because of 911? Or is it only americans who are worthy or generalizations?
by herzog on Jan 12, 2005"
9/11 reflected badly on al qaeda! Not on all muslims. thats like saying that abu ghraib reflected badly on all christians!
Al qaeda are a terrorist network the american army works for your government and the public perception of non americans is how could this happen without people knowing! Most people outside of america are familiar with terrorism english people didnt hold the irish population accountable for the actions of the ira! But that doesnt stop most irish people hating the english! You have the same situation in iraq but as you have no real experience with terrorism you are making the same mistakes. I`ll tell you how this will end. America will have to pull out eventually! The fighting still wont stop and will continue until they either get a damn good settlement or they regain their sovreignty (dodgy spelling) either way bush will not be a hero and americans will be hated whatever side they were on! I personnaly disagreed with the british army going into ireland but it wouldnt stop an ira `terrorist` from killing me or hating me!
herzog: Here's the fallacy in your logic: The Abu Ghraib incident was perpetrated by members of the US military ... an official arm of the US Government. It is likely that this was not an islated incident of "a few bad apples," but rather a systemic problem of ethics that ranges into the very structure of the organization.
Contrast this with the terrorists/ Muslim situation ... the US military is an official arm of the US government. The terrorist organizations, despite their protestations to the contrary, are not official arms of the Muslim faith.
Hence, while I daresay a large number of Muslims may be embarrassed by association, there is no formal relationship.
I'm sure that there are a few hundred thousand potheads who are wondering what this guy was smoking before he said that, and whether they can get it to grow successfully in their back yards.
mobsie and Cathexis- brilliant points, both of you.
everygirl, small acts of kindness and minor victories (Saddam's capture, in light of the continued activities of the various al Qaeda cells) is nothing in the face of the greater atrocities that have gone on at Abu Ghraib.
For fcuks sake EVERYGIRL. Besides the mind-blowing infantile nature of that comment, tell me where you read the files on each of these abused prisoners so I can confirm that they were "criminals and would be killers"
Have you any clue of the ramifications of this "stupid" behaviour. The humiliation of these prisoners in what is a sexually repressed country by any standards causes so much hatred among the wider community that it gives young Iraqis the impression that the only way to defend their country is to fight the occupation.
by OJD on Thu Jan 13, 05 12:28pm
[+]
Remember the Chewbacca defense?
'Here's the fallacy in your logic: The Abu Ghraib incident was perpetrated by members of the US military ... an official arm of the US Government. It is likely that this was not an islated incident of "a few bad apples," but rather a systemic problem of ethics that ranges into the very structure of the organization.'
Right, so the fact that we have rules against such things, are currently punishing those people involved, and have had a massive outcry from the american public *against* such things, all that is irrelevent?
The muslim organizations recieve very official funding from muslim nations, recieve no punishment in muslim nations, and recieve little if any condemnation from the muslim people. Now, who represents whom better?
The south gets blamed for their tacit support for the klan for many years, despite the fact that they were never an official branch of the government. Why? Because many people supported them, and few openly opposed them, because they created laws, or ignored them to benefit the klan, because the klan claimed to represent the south and few people disputed this, at the time. So if it's fair to condemn the south for the actions of the klan, why is it not fair to condemn arabs for the actions of al-qaeda? The parallels are remarkable. Only difference is liberals have no trouble coming out against the south, but wouldn't dare say anything against the 'arab street'.
I am very surprised that, as of today (1/14/05) there are six people who voted that "they were just having a bit of fun."
by mojo on Fri Jan 14, 05 8:21am
[+]
1: The fact that it is being addressed is revelent and helps shore up our credibility and integrity.
2. The fact that it is being pinned on some low-level scapegoats does not speak well.
3. The fact that there is an outcry among Americans does speaks well for us.
1. If a real link can be proven between muslim nations and perpetrators of atrocities, then thos enations will have the same reflection.
Note the clever sleight-of-hand you used: You have now substituted Nation for Religion.
Better ... but weaselly in that you make this out to be the same argument, rather than a new tangent. You should work on the Bush Cabinet ... you're good.
As for the general fairness argument ... herzog, don't make me call you Weasel Boy, again.
1. It doesn't (or shouldn't) matter what anyone else does, as far as whether our behaviour is acceptable or not.
Didn't your mother ever scold you with "If all of your friends jumped off a bridge, would you?"
Your problem is in linking the two events ... one has nothing to do with the other, yet I continually see folks on the Right try to pair them, in an effort to position their transgression as "Not so bad."
IT IS BAD! Stop trying to make excuses and have the integrity to work to get our own house in order.
In a DIFFERENT discussion, we can talk about the opposition's atrocities and I can wholeheartedly agree with you (unless you're trying to link it with another group, in which case I'll have to look at the facts).
But boy ... stop trying to defend/mitigate the indefensible.
A lawyer said that? Well I never.
I never once said this was kosher. I have no problem with people denouncing the actions of those soldiers, I agree in fact.
What I do have a problem with is A) the excessive attention this has recieved in the media compared to the atrocities the other side has committed, equal air time here please? And B) the hypocrisy of those who'll use this to denounce all americans, but would never do the same thing, under similiar circumstances, to the other side.
And you say we're simply trying to pin it on some underlings in some vast coverup. What if it really is just the fault of a handful of underlings and there is no coverup?
Excessive attention, hmm.
As opposed to - for example - the Clinton blowjob?
by mojo on Fri Jan 14, 05 3:54pm
[+]
YEAH MOJO!
And the left doesn't condone the type of abhorrent actions the right does.
As for the media attention ... I have a hard time feeling sympathy. So many times the New GOP has used this to try and create distractions. They are not sorry for what they've done ... they merely seek to escape criticism.
Come talk to me when that side is innocent.
Besides ... we already know that side is wrong! Again ... I have to say that I view this as a stark attempt to escape repercussions. Make sure your own ethical side is clean ... then everything take scare of itself.
The world expects a "terrorist" to be a barbarian. They do not (or didn't) expect a US representative to be.
The media is not biased, the media just wants money. Dan Rather is slightly biased in his reporting, (ratherbiased.com) and that's the exception. The media just wants the ratings. Certain networks lean a certain way but that's their right. There is an equal amount just about in OPINIONATED talk shows of liberal and conservative.
moving on..
"Mojo , this is indeed of "why did you push billy? "Because he pushed me first." am I right?
Everygirl,just because someone wrongs you doesnt make it ok for you to do the unspeakable to them.It makes you just as dispicable as they are,certainly not better or even justified."
No, the perpose of the humiliation wasn't to get them back for their horrific acts. It was to get them to talk and confess info for the CIA. They were told to roughen up the soldiers, and this troop happened to take it far and enjoy it. Because remember, these are not just prisoners, these are beheaders, prisoners of war. If Americans were POW of them it wouldn't be orgies and pyramids, it'd be slicing off heads. Think about it.
mojo
Improper actions in the past don't justify improper actions now. What happened to Clinton was wrong, so is what is happening to these soldiers.
thc - Just responding to the 'excessive attention' remark, not justifying anything. What's good for the goose is good for the gander, right?
by mojo on Sat Jan 15, 05 9:08am
[+]
Yeah, I should've known your intention.
Dani: Think about this ... you assume each of the humilated people was actually guilty and needed to be forced to talk.
What peopel ignore time and again is that 95% of the people there were later deemed to be innocent and released. They were worked over without reason.
We (the US) are supposed to hold ourselves to a higher standard than so-called terrorists. Not just be able to act out of expediency.
|
|
