Bush to veto intel bill with interrogation restrictions
posted at 9:10 am on March 8, 2008 by Ed Morrissey
Share on Facebook | printer-friendly
President Bush will veto the recently passed intelligence authorization bill over restrictions on CIA interrogation techniques. He will explain the veto in his weekly radio address, claiming that it takes vital tools away from counterterrorism agents during a conflict when such tools are most needed. The conflict sets up a showdown with Congress, in the presidential election, and with a media apparently determined to misreport it:
President Bush today will veto legislation meant to ban the CIA from using waterboarding and other harsh interrogation tactics and will argue that the agency needs to use tougher methods than the U.S. military to wrest information from terrorism suspects, administration officials said. …
Although long expected, Bush’s formal move to veto the bill reignites the Washington debate over the proper limits of the U.S. interrogation policies and whether the CIA has engaged in torture by subjecting prisoners to severe tactics, including waterboarding, a type of simulated drowning.
The issue also has potential ramifications for GOP presidential nominee John McCain (R-Ariz.), a longtime critic of coercive interrogation tactics who nonetheless backed the Bush administration in opposing the CIA waterboarding ban. The Democratic presidential candidates, Sens. Hillary Rodham Clinton (N.Y.) and Barack Obama (Ill.), both support the ban, though neither was present for last month’s Senate vote for the bill that Bush is to veto.
The legislation would have limited the CIA to using 19 less-aggressive tactics outlined in a U.S. Army field manual on interrogations. Besides ruling out waterboarding, that restriction would effectively ban temperature extremes, extended forced standing and other harsh methods that the CIA used on al-Qaeda prisoners after the Sept. 11, 2001, attacks.
John McCain absolutely did not support waterboarding, and the Post misrepresents the issue entirely. John McCain supports the veto not because he supports waterboarding, but because McCain believes it already to be illegal. He has made this plain ever since this bill came to the floor for its vote. His bill in 2006 already made the practice illegal, at least in his opinion, and the portion of this bill that addresses that is superfluous.
More than that, McCain sees it as dangerously limiting to the CIA, for two reasons. First, the Army field manual applies to a different set of circumstances than the CIA faces, primarily because the Army faces a different enemy in the field and has a much different mission than the CIA. The AFM appropriately limits the actions of its interrogators, but it isn’t the ur-text of what constitutes and doesn’t constitute torture. Just because a method doesn’t make it into the AFM doesn’t mean that it’s torture under international convention.
Secondly — and this can’t be said strongly enough — it is wildly inappropriate to publish the limits of interrogatory technique for the CIA. That should be left to the imagination of our enemie, again for two reasons. One, the publication allows our enemies to prepare themselves for the limit of the techniques published, making successful interrogation much more difficult to achieve. Second, having the limits remain unknown allows fear of what might happen to make less-intensive techniques more effective.
McCain opposed the bill for these reasons, not because he supposedly reversed himself on waterboarding. The problems with this legislation don’t involve techniques as much as it involves strategic stupidity.
You must be logged in to post a comment.
Blowback
Note from Hot Air management: This section is for comments from Hot Air's community of registered readers. Please don't assume that Hot Air management agrees with or otherwise endorses any particular comment just because we let it stand. A reminder: Anyone who fails to comply with our terms of use may lose their posting privilege.
Trackbacks/Pings
Trackback URL
Comments
Comment pages: « Previous 1 2 3 4 Next »
Salamantis,
I know what you mean, but I’m just not convinced –these are Democrats we’re talking about– that they won’t change their story once they get into the W.H. They always promise everything, even the ding dang kitchen sink. I don’t trust them anymore than you do, which is a good reason not to listen to them during their primary process. However, with Clinton, I am almost certain she will pull to the middle once she secures her position, by whatever means necessary I might add, as party nominee. The middle entails not pulling out of Iraq.
With that said, I just am not sure they’ll pull out or not. Perhaps you are correct to take them at their word when they say that they will pull out of Iraq.
By the way, I would like to thank you for explaining the whole waterboarding process. I had an idea of what it was but never really a full picture. I am more convinced now that I have a clearer understanding of the actual technique that it is neither torture or something that should be stopped when its application results in actionable intelligence.
Weebork on March 8, 2008 at 4:11 PM
I don’t think we’ve faced any conventional military land threats across the U.S. borders for about 150 years.
If you are talking about Al Queda terrorist operations across our borders then the Northern border would be as crucial as the Southern one.
If you are talking about economic threats, McCain hasn’t made a case that he’s an expert in that area. He’s reading Greenspan’s book though.
dedalus on March 8, 2008 at 4:23 PM
But, that’s why they’ve caught Chechen Rebels coming through Mexico huh?
DfDeportation on March 8, 2008 at 4:24 PM
25 of them…
DfDeportation on March 8, 2008 at 4:27 PM
But….that’s okay….I guess…
DfDeportation on March 8, 2008 at 4:27 PM
That picture looks vaguely like things I see at hair salons.
AbaddonsReign on March 8, 2008 at 4:33 PM
It’s also possible for a terrorist to buy a plane ticket and arrive in one of our international airports. Many of the 9/11 terrorists did, with valid visas even.
dedalus on March 8, 2008 at 4:36 PM
Don’t worry Little lord Obama will make the world love us again. As long as the rest of the world receives cash and acknowledgement of their existence they are happy. Waterboarding will stop and the chocolate rivers will flow again and gumdrop rainbows will fill the sky in Iraq after we leave. Remember folk “they” only hate us for or foreign policy nothing else.
Peace to ALL from the moral HIGH ground……….
TroubledMonkey on March 8, 2008 at 4:38 PM
They can fly in with their BULGARIAN PASSPORTS…sold to them by……….Mexicans…lovely….
DfDeportation on March 8, 2008 at 4:43 PM
What do these questions have to do with any discussion in this thread? Did someone advocate that Squid be beaten/tortured/jailed due to the nature of his opinion? Try learning what an ‘attack’ is and ‘rights’ are.
baldilocks on March 8, 2008 at 4:54 PM
I’m thinking that “Squid” gambled that most conservatives would not know who Amy Goodman is. Yeah, Squid, some of us listen to Pacifica Radio; that’s part of what turned me into a conservative.
baldilocks on March 8, 2008 at 5:01 PM
Well, I gotta go. The weather’s nice here in SOCAL. We’re gonna waterboard each other just for fun today…what a rush…
DfDeportation on March 8, 2008 at 5:11 PM
No gamble at all, I guessed that, hence the disclaimer before it in my original post.
Have fun!
Squid Shark on March 8, 2008 at 5:42 PM
Rod, you are wrong on so many counts. Let me set you straight in your assumptions about me.
certainly not in the armed forces: I have been in the Armed Forces for 9 years now.
does not know anyone in the armed forces
quite the oposite, most of my friends are in the armoed forces (for good reason) and 2 have died in Iraq one in Afganistan.
has never even spoken to anyone in the armed forces See above
is not married for five years I have been married.
has no children Your right there…
in fact, probably still a virgin see above
is an only child raised in an upper middle-class home located in the suburbs of San Francisco by ultra liberal parents thereby causing him to explore the right perspective which led him here
Quite the oposite, oldest of two, from a working class home in southwest Florida, both my parents are conservatives, my father is a police officer my mother is a Paramedic.
takes the “right” view now and then just to drive his mom nuts My mom is not very versed on politics now therefore she does not care.
Knows nothing about waterboarding or torture except what he’s heard his mother ranting about and what he has seen Jack Bauer do I will not comment on this because it is ridiculous, but I know plenty about interrogation methods.
Voted for the first time in his life in the primaries for Obomo This is so G-D damn stupid I dont even know what to say, I voted for the first time in the 2000 primaries if you must know, that was for McCain. Was one of the 500+ for Bush in FL in the General.
has an Obomo sticker on his Prius I drive a Ford Focus, and I have no sticker on it (screws up resale)
has never suffered any hardships in his life Ive suffered a bit, Ive had to work to get myself to where I am, I didnt take a dime for college from my parents and I have worked hard to make a good career in the military.
either still lives at home or with a like-minded boy/man roommate of his age A nice three bedroom house in Jacksonville with my wife and two dogs.
masturbates every night and/or morning This is disgusting and the fact that you even think about my self love habits says a bunch about you.
works at Best Buy – (he left not to enjoy the sun but to go to work) Ironically I did go to best buy with another couple to help them pick out a TV. I have never worked there however, sorry. Quarter point there I suppose.
Watches the SciFi channel, Mythbusters, Spike and that Game channel I do watch Sci Fi and Mythbusters, good shows and my wife likes them. I dont even this I get Spike and don’t know what the Game Channel is.
Half a point.
Inflates his low self-esteem by posting contradictory or inflammatory comments into threads then telling his man/boy roommate and workmates at Best Buy that he made fools of all who responded to his posts
I dont have terrible low self esteem, I do feel strongly on this issue though, I am not trying to make fools of anyone.
Apology accepted.
You feel the need to call me a naive young man, however i never made a personal attack on anyone in here but you seem to want to issue an entire ad hominem POST about me including allusions to my virginity and my self-stimulation habits, I dont know what you call that, but I call it: sad.
I dont have a quarrel with you brother. Take a deep breath.
Squid Shark on March 8, 2008 at 6:08 PM
I and many other veterans have a real problem with the notion that people who want to grab a gun a fight or engage in terrorist activities should somehow be given the same rights as a uniformed combatant who plays by the rules.
The Geneva conventions are based on a series of rights and responsibilites. To qualify, there are things you have to do. It is not a carte blanche insurance card.
The simple fact of the matter is that folks like KSM DO NOT qualify for the protections provided by the Geneva Convention and as such those rights should not be extended. Period.
The primary motivation for extending the protections provided by the Conventions is to encourage a normalized form of combat, the reduction of non combatant deaths and the protection of combatants once they are out of the fight. In this regard, it provides a not so subtle form of coercsion so as to say, “If you want these protections, you have to comport yourself within these standardized rules of conduct.”
Why the Hell do some of these people want to extend the benefits to people who don’t want to play by the rules. Do you think you’re going to win them over with kindness??
It should be noted that only a small fraction of detainees were waterboarded. They tended to be well known assets of an established value.
Opponents seem to think that all interogation consists of nothing but linebacker-sized thugs beating helpless souls to a pulp.
I don’t favor torture, but there are a multitude of stress-inducing activities that have been proven to be effective and they should be employed when deemed required.
The left seems to want to hamstring the process by only allowing a very mild form of interogation that is consistant with the Army Field Manual. Why would we not want to do whatever it takes to break a guy like KSM? He was a known commodity before his capture and we fully understood the length and breadth of his value as an intelligence resource.
Some on the left clearly believe that the country has more to fear from our own government’s actions than the actions of islamic radicals. Toward that end, they have sought to limit our ability to track and monitor our enemies or to effectively question them once in our control.
I appreciate and respect John McCain’s point of view but I think he is dead wrong on waterboarding.
moxie_neanderthal on March 8, 2008 at 6:10 PM
Et tu Brute…
The other part of that definition clearly state the guish of body or mind
I will play with you all night if you would like but I do have a life outside of this board, I agree my argument have been weak on this board and you criticism is good, I will take it to heart, it is an issue I feel passionately about. I am still fleshing out my real arguments on it. However, operational security is a restriction, as I would assume you know.
I was not trying to gain sympathy with my statement, I was trying to empathize with the other poster. Sorry it was misunderstood.
Squid Shark on March 8, 2008 at 6:15 PM
Thanks terrye, you came over from CQ right?
Squid Shark on March 8, 2008 at 6:21 PM
I wont lie, the ad hominem screed earlier was a bit much.
Squid Shark on March 8, 2008 at 6:23 PM
John McCain and other (like me) are not advocating that terrorists qualify for these rights. But this is a new kind of war and requires different rules. What about those held in GTMO without trial who are mere suspects in terrorist incidents? Ones taken from other countries not in the war zone?
The laws need to be clarified and that is what we are doing now.
Squid Shark on March 8, 2008 at 6:26 PM
Squid Shark: Just a quick question. Your blog appears to be based out of Jacksonville and you indicate you’re in the military. In addition, with a name like squid shark, I’m assuming you’re navy and I’d assume you’re associated with NAS or Mayport.
For several friends of yours to be KIA in Iraq/Afghanistan would mean they were more likely to have been naval medics assigned to Marine units.
One last point, I noted with interest in your post here on HotAir (I’m paraphrasing) that you must take care re: political speech as you are in the military. This is a curious statement given the overtly political blog you appear to run….
Did I get this all about right or am I missing something???
moxie_neanderthal on March 8, 2008 at 6:31 PM
Squid Shark: You cannot hope to impose criminal law standards in a combat zone, for obvious reasons.
As you no doubt know, detainees at GITMO fall underneath military justice and will have their day in court before military tribunals. In fact, their is presidence for illegal enemy combatants to be detained in ways not consistent with American court systems.
Are we to understand that you wish to extend the same rights and privileges provided by US criminal law to to non US enemy combatants?
moxie_neanderthal on March 8, 2008 at 6:38 PM
You got it all, it is a pretty fine line. I dont discuss classified information, confidential techniques. I do not actively work for one campaign. I do not criticize the performance of the national command authority. And note that my blog has no mention of my service in the military.
Its a tough line, you have to do what you can.
Also, plenty of sailors and officers serve outside of the Marine units (its called Individual Aaugmentation), most in my commissioning groups were Marines, as well as several high school friends who enlisted.
If anyone actually read my blog it would still likely not matter.
Squid Shark on March 8, 2008 at 6:43 PM
Squid Shark, although I do not question your patriotism, I don’t want your finger on “the button”.
OldEnglish on March 8, 2008 at 6:44 PM
Indeed, I agree, and I hope that they ALL will be charged soon.
Squid Shark on March 8, 2008 at 6:45 PM
fair enough, no buttons in my vicinity anymore, I am at a different place in my career.
Squid Shark on March 8, 2008 at 6:46 PM
You mean the plots created by the corrupt Neo-Conservative Bush Administration? You mean those?
Like I said, quit drinking the kool-aid.
WayWard Fundamentalist Christian on March 8, 2008 at 7:03 PM
And that is why your arguments here failed to gain traction from the start. You let passion do the talking on a subject that you neither fully comprehend nor bothered to learn the definitions of.
Even now, after your flawed arguments have been exposed, you fail to grasp the meaning of your own words. You completely discounted the fact that the accepted definition of torture does also include a lasting physical effect, despite your earlier proclamation that it didn’t:
Instead, you emphasize the lasting mental effect in the definition, which was never in doubt nor in contest. Bringing up points that were never in contention is not the way to revive your argument.
The excuse of the military gag-order is just that, an excuse. If you truly believe in adhering to the military code, then you shouldn’t even be here in the first place. Otherwise, such an excuse allows you the liberty to come here and let passions speak your mind and never have to explain yourself when your unorganized arguments quickly fall under scrutiny (as they have already).
That is the classic liberal mindset and betrays your true purpose here. No, your methods did not go misunderstood, to the contrary, they were quite apparent. Claiming disinterest or indifference now on a subject you previously stated you were “passionate” about paints you as fickle and disingenuous.
Such qualities serve only to undermine what little credibility remains of your presence here.
Et tu Brute on March 8, 2008 at 7:09 PM
I note that on your blog you attmept to equate Timothy McVeigh with Islamic-based terrorism as a way of implying that the right-wing has its own terrorism problem.
Laughable comparison.
moxie_neanderthal on March 8, 2008 at 7:20 PM
It does. Too bad you’ve got your head too far up the Republican party’s behind to see it.
WayWard Fundamentalist Christian on March 8, 2008 at 7:22 PM
I read about half of this talkback before I had to stop in disgust. Squid Shark, good for you! In case you haven’t realized it yet, the vast majority of the people who post on this site are not conservatives. They are Machiavellian-Hobbesian-consequentialist-morons. What, idiots, you think William F. Buckley, Jr. was in favor of waterboarding? Huh? He wasn’t even in favor of the Iraq War. How about Russell Kirk? You think he supported waterboarding? No, you people are a bunch of lying torture apologists. On one hand you try and claim it’s not “torture” and yet on the other hand that “we must do what ever is necessary to defeat the enemy.” OK, so call a spade a spade and admit that you are OK with torture. Ann Coulter, the patron saint of Conservatives with Low IQs at least does this. She calls waterboarding “torture.”
Anyways, Squid, not all of us are OK with simulated drowning and nuking women and children. These people are, and I’m ashamed that they are in what used to be a conservative party.
WillBarrett on March 8, 2008 at 7:24 PM
Let me be clear here. I ain’t saying 9/11 was GWB’s doing. Not at all, That was Bill Jeff’s Failure.
But some of these so-called terror plots, that were foiled, like “Fort Dix”, and the other one, where the guys rammed the airport and set the propane tanks on fire. Something smells fishy about them.
As does several others that I’m aware of.
WayWard Fundamentalist Christian on March 8, 2008 at 7:25 PM
Amen. Well Put!
Ask yourself, Would Ronald Reagan approve of torture?
I think not.
WayWard Fundamentalist Christian on March 8, 2008 at 7:27 PM
Obviously you feel unbound by facts or logic so I’ll leave you with your tin hat and merely suggest you apply another layer of foil as the gamma rays appear to be getting through.
moxie_neanderthal on March 8, 2008 at 7:27 PM
The moral case for waterboarding goes like this:
A. It is frightful, not “torture.” There are no drills in bodies, heads hacked off (slowly), burns, etc. Merely temporary fear, like say the mock Executions given to our Embassy people by the Iranians.
B. It can save many, many lives if used properly and in the right context. By abjuring it we are willing to countenance mass casualty attacks WORSE than 9/11 that require strategic nuclear responses to prevent more of them. An example would be anthrax or other bio attacks in crowded subways or sports arenas killing tens of thousands to hundreds of thousands. Or several nukes killing millions.
In that case only a strategic nuclear response wiping out about half the population of a suspect nation would do to forestall future attacks.
The error in logic that moralists assume is that NOT WATERBOARDING does NOT HAVE COSTS AND WILL NOT COST LIVES.
Funny, I put the lives of Americans over the comfort of terrorists. But that’s just me and my values.
whiskey_199 on March 8, 2008 at 7:37 PM
Geez, Ed, can we get any more nuanced, here?
McCain opposes waterboarding — he’s already broadcast that to the world. He’s a US Presidential candidate who opposes waterboarding. That’s clear.
And now, well, he opposes this bill because
he’s running for presidentwaterboarding is already illegal? Because it broadcasts to the world that the CIA won’t waterboard? That’s as clear as mud, and on this one, I can’t fault the intellectually/politically challenged media.Nichevo on March 8, 2008 at 7:44 PM
*yawn* Let me guess. You also don’t hate America like those other guys.
freevillage on March 8, 2008 at 7:53 PM
I don’t have a quarrel with you brother. Take a deep breath.
Squid Shark on March 8, 2008 at 6:08 PM
I would say I was wrong on all accounts. And yes, maybe it was sad – however, in hindsight, it was also certainly arrogant, and self-indulgent.
I was wrong in my assumptions and wrong to post such tripe. As a Vietnam-era vet who suffered through the condemnation of the public, I have always strived to do everything in my power to ensure that our servicemen never again suffer the indignities I did from an ungrateful nation. By mindlessly ridiculing you in my post, I have failed in that too.
While I do not agree with your position on water-boarding, I hold you in the highest regard for your service to our nation.
Again, my apologies. Glad to see you took it all in stride.
Rod on March 8, 2008 at 8:23 PM
If memory serves me right a middle eastern man was seen with McViegh before the bombing.
Johan Klaus on March 8, 2008 at 8:33 PM
I can’t let Squid off the hook. His line of crap endangers men like my USMC son. He does a little political dance out here and then claims it isn’t and that he can’t defend himself because of operational security
JonRoss on March 8, 2008 at 8:43 PM
Nope sorry, that is precisely what you and McCain are doing and, YES I question your patriotism. You may be well-intentioned but you are are working against the nation’s well-being. I spit on you for your treason!
You want to codify a “terrorist bill of rights” which essentially makes all terrorists into civil litigants. Our enemy doesn’t ascribe to such things as the Geneva Convention, Code of Conduct, or civil law. Yet you would make it so that a suspected terrorist caught with a bomb in one hand and a burning match in the other be Mirandized by the Army before they open fire. You flat out are a traitor.
highhopes on March 8, 2008 at 9:03 PM
It is interesting at a time of war when the enemy
will use every means possible to attack the United
States of America and her interests abroad,as well
as her allies.
Yet the Liberal Party wants to,and continues to try
and hamstring the US Military,continues to roadblock
the Intellegience,and restrict President Bush on torture
techniques,why the Liberals view the rights as more
important than that of the safety of an American citizen’s!
The Liberal Party also wants to bring the troops home from
Irag,and some would like to pull troops from Rammstein
Germany,the DMZ in South Korea,Japan,Diega Garcia,and bring
the home.
I’m no Military expert,but I do know that the War on Terror
has many fronts,an ever expanding,constantly changeing
battlefield,why for the life of me,would Liberals want to
pull the troops back and turn America into a fortress.
Hillary if elected will pull the troops,we have seen the Clintons foriegn policy,aka-”Black Hawk Down”,much the
same way as the peanut farmer “Carter” did in Iran as
the helicopters crashed in the desert,killing American’s.
So what grand wisdom will Barrack Obama bring to national
secruity,especially in a time of WAR,when Obama was against
the Liberation of Irag!
canopfor on March 8, 2008 at 9:07 PM
That is why he shouldn’t even be here.
He can’t have it both ways. The military, contrary to his apparent belief, is not a democracy. He fails to understand that his opinion on waterboarding has no relevance while in the service of the country.
His commander in chief has vetoed the bill to ban waterboarding. End of discussion for Squid.
Et tu Brute on March 8, 2008 at 9:07 PM
Waterboarding is turning someone upside down and pouring water on their face, preventing the water from flowing into the breathing passages by way of cloth.
People who think this is torture, I’d prefer if you define waterboarding at least once every 2 comments. Because then we’d get a lot of , “No, torture, such as turning someone upside and pouring water on their face, is wrong!”
I mean, sure, that’s different than Inquisition Torture. Or Al-Qaeda torture. Or Nazi torture. Or any definition of torture ever used before the history of time. But since it really is so horrible, you should be reminding people, of the terror, the horror, the absolutely gut-wrenching fact that people are getting turned upside-down.
And having WATER. POURED. ON. THEIR. FACE.
My god. It chills the blood just to think about it.
apollyonbob on March 8, 2008 at 9:08 PM
Who cares if a F****** Muslim terrorist is being manipulated physically and mentally for the purpose of saving American lives???
Will someone with a sane common sense explain it to me?
As stupid as I am, I can’t understand why it is not possible to do the impossible to save innocent lives.
No, I don’t want your explanations.
I think I know the answer.
It is called: IDIOCY.
People lost their mind and common sense.
Indy Conservative on March 8, 2008 at 9:20 PM
I want no such thing, I take you spit in stride, this Jew is a better Christian than you apparently *turning the other cheek* :)
Squid Shark on March 8, 2008 at 9:29 PM
Concur.
Squid Shark on March 8, 2008 at 9:30 PM
Looks like a cure for hiccups.
fryclint on March 8, 2008 at 9:35 PM
But they’re the most harrowing hiccups you can imagine!
apollyonbob on March 8, 2008 at 9:37 PM
Rod. I don’t agree with Squid Shark, but I find your whole effort absurd for many reasons. People believe all sorts of thing for all sorts of reasons. I do believe that Squid Shark is more of leftist than he is purports to be, but people are often not as self-aware as they fantasize themselves being.
Still, your comments about him being virgin are just silly. His sexuality could be anywhere. Amd anyway, what truly disguisted me about your discussion of his sexuality is this: if he is a virgin young man doesn’t it follow that he masturbates daily. It’s simply objectively evil to condemn virgin young men for masturbation. Do you also torture puppies for fun? What kind of disguisting POS are you?
thuja on March 8, 2008 at 9:44 PM
Indy has captured it in one perfect word. IDIOCY. Bush did the correct thing to veto the bill. We will see which shameful souls vote for the override attempt. I am done with this one.
JonRoss on March 8, 2008 at 9:52 PM
What I don’t understand is Congress insisting that all of this is made public. I don’t have any problem with waterboarding terrorists, other than the fact it chips away at the higher moral ground the U.S. has in the world. I won’t suppose to speak for McCain, but he had been tortured by the enemy and his feelings on anything that can be construed at torture is understandable. But there’s a bigger reason not to push the envelope on interrogation techniques too far, or even the appearance of going to far. That is the line will be pushed back, by others and ourselves.
We need boundries. McCain has set a good one as far as interrogation is concerned. There are other ways, such as turning the CIA loose and allowing them to deal with the characters they need to in order to find out the information we seek.
We treat out captives humanely, it’s one of our laws of war. It’s a good law. It’s one of those things that separate us from the scum of the earth.
Hog Wild on March 8, 2008 at 10:34 PM
WillBarrett on March 8, 2008 at 7:24PM
You don’t agree with me. You aren’t a conservative. And Kirk and Locke and Hayek would agree! (See, I can name drop too.)
VolMagic on March 8, 2008 at 10:35 PM
WayWard Fundamentalist Christian on March 8, 2008 at 7:25 PM
Yeah, and you get Aids from wearing condoms. Did you know that the Lochness Monster has benn killed by global warming? Darth Cheyne couldn’t get him with buckshot, so he instructed Halliburton to pump CO2 into the air until it died. Then he ate it.
VolMagic on March 8, 2008 at 10:43 PM
I don’t need or want to know what intelligence professionals do in order to secure my safety and freedom. Americans are guided by conscience and adamantly try to do the right thing. As such any gross miscarriages of morality and justice come to light and are dealt with. I do not recall any historical note regarding a huge public uproar about the lack of Japanese POW’s during the island hopping campaign.
dmann on March 8, 2008 at 10:51 PM
Um, have you traveled outside of the country in the past 20 years or so?
The “scum of the earth” could care less about how “moral” the U.S. is.
Our enemies (and there are many) only bring up morality when it is to their advantage to shame and embarrass us. Otherwise, morality takes the back seat.
I caution you to avoid making the mistake of believing that our actions (or inactions) will influence our perception on the world stage.
Our enemies hate and despise our freedoms and prosperity because their systems are broken and dysfunctional way beyond any of our biggest flaws.
It’s one of the reasons we have so many people coming (illegally) to this country and so few, who may be discontent with our government or lifestyle (Sean Penn, Alec Baldwin?), fleeing this country by the tens of thousands in order to find a better existence.
The U.S. is still a damn good place to be and will continue to be for a long time. They know it and we know it.
And that’s how it is.
Et tu Brute on March 8, 2008 at 10:56 PM
Waterboarding was used in the inquisition, by the Nazis and the Khmer Rouge.
Squid Shark on March 8, 2008 at 11:18 PM
Rod apologized and I heartily accept his apology. I am no leftist though.
Squid Shark on March 8, 2008 at 11:19 PM
That is most certainly not true, we have the right to express ourselves there are limits to the level of criticism and endorsement which may be exercised.
Squid Shark on March 8, 2008 at 11:22 PM
Amen
Squid Shark on March 8, 2008 at 11:22 PM
Better shoot me now :) I want nothing even close to what you could describe but you keep trying to demonize me with hyperbole.
Squid Shark on March 8, 2008 at 11:26 PM
What would President McCain have done?
The same thing as President Obama or Clinton.
Valiant on March 8, 2008 at 11:40 PM
Wrong again.
Self-expression is not a right in service of the country. In fact, self-expression and individualism are counter to everything that the military services teaches us at the most basic level.
That right is afforded to the citizens of the country you have pledged to serve. When you are discharged from the national obligations and oath you swore to uphold, support and defend, and no longer accept a paycheck furnished by the American taxpayers, you can run your mouth as you see fit.
Until that happens, you follow the orders of your appointed superiors.
Et tu Brute on March 8, 2008 at 11:46 PM
It is said that prevention is better than cure. The only problem is that, as far as a terrorist act is concerned, there is no cure. Dead is dead.
OldEnglish on March 8, 2008 at 11:51 PM
According to Article 88, Parker v Levy (I believe this is the primary case) and Service Regs, one may exercise free speech rights so long as I do not reveal classified information, endorse a political candidate as a servicemember implying a Service endorsement. I can not use contemptuous words about the national command authority or disobey lawful orders.
Im trying to find you some good references for this material.
Squid Shark on March 9, 2008 at 12:03 AM
http://carlisle-www.army.mil/usawc/Parameters/07autumn/kiel.htm
This link covers most of the details. Mostly in the lens of the Watada and Levy cases.
Squid Shark on March 9, 2008 at 12:07 AM
You’re digging for nothing. Your opinion still means nothing.
That you are trying so hard to prove that your opinion, in your present capacity, means something shows that you lack the maturity or intelligence to understand your own situation.
You don’t have to convince me or the commander in chief. Your opinion will still mean nothing.
This country is a nation of laws. Laws that are crafted by the citizens you are currently serving. They don’t care what you think of the law, they just want to know that you will support and enforce it as you pledged you would.
And the law today is that waterboarding is a lawful means of interrogation. As it will be tomorrow.
Et tu Brute on March 9, 2008 at 12:25 AM
And I will, it is a lawful order.
If it gnaws at me too much I will do the right thing.
Resign, not disobey.
Squid Shark on March 9, 2008 at 12:29 AM
I know I am younger than you Brute (I would assume by the tone you take with me in your posts), but your condescension is palpable…
I was trying to correct you on your incorrect assessment of my free speech rights and you avoid my correction and belittle me.
Squid Shark on March 9, 2008 at 12:31 AM
And that will be a decision that you will be responsible for.
And that is precisely what this whole sad little drama has been about from the beginning.
A lone sailor struggling with his passionate emotions on the implications of waterboarding terrorists who are bent on the destruction of this country and our way of life.
That this issue is causing a rift in you is beyond belief. You needlessly subjected the rest of us to your own shameful private turmoil in an effort to assuage those emotions, or perhaps find others to blame for your clouded judgment and loyalties.
Forget it, Squid. It didn’t work.
But I do have a suggestion that may relieve your suffering. Request a discharge and unburden yourself from this load. Then disappear into a dark corner of self-loathing.
Et tu Brute on March 9, 2008 at 12:43 AM
I think you have misread my situation, I did not start this argument, I mistakenly brought my service in as a crutch I agree but this “sad little drama” began with me as a conservative person, saying that this is not about liberals and conservatives, it is about morals. In my “worthless” opinion.
I dont need to find others to blame, all I can do is vote and donate, and I have.
Squid Shark on March 9, 2008 at 12:47 AM
BTW, to show I really have nothing against you, I do want to say I appreciate your tips, you have helped me to refine my debate style.
BZ :)
Squid Shark on March 9, 2008 at 12:48 AM
I come from a military family. We have over 75 years of active service between my father, 3 brothers, myself, and my son. I feel too much classified information is being leaked to the general public. The terrorist that are at Gitmo are there for a reason and I feel that they would kill us without blinking an eye. Truthfully, if one of these terrorist had information that would have harmed my son while he was in Iraq or would harm my grandchildren, I would pour the damn water myself. The general public has no idea what kind of war we are fighting here. I suggest you ask a soldier who has been to Iraq on how these terrorist treat thier own people. Ask how they hollowed out an infant, filled it with explosives and made the mother carry her dead baby to kill our soldiers at a check point. This actually happened people. As a mother and grandmother, I want my loved ones safe.
ChrisIansNana on March 9, 2008 at 1:50 AM
This has been a good debate, even though it has been flawed by the resort to ad hominems (in which I did not engage). On balance, I would have to say that those who are in favor of preventing needless civilian deaths, by employing waterboarding necessary to extract the intel from genocidal terrorists that is necessary to save those innocent lives, have carried the day.
And obviously, in my view, quite ethically and justifiably so.
Salamantis on March 9, 2008 at 2:25 AM
So were inspirational speeches. This is one more poor argument.
Waterboarding can be used as a method of extaction of information, or as a method of visiting discomfort. It clearly works in either case. The Congress twice has had the opportunity to classify waterboarding as torture and has twice declined.
Now please, Squid, stop trolling for visitors to your site.
Given your positions and your choice of “news” people, I certainly won’t go there.
drjohn on March 9, 2008 at 6:25 AM
Perhaps you missed my latest post where I apologized for my vile post for which I am now embarrassed and ashamed of. If you did read my apology and still felt the need to express your disgust, so be it. I deserve it.
Regards
Rod on March 9, 2008 at 6:34 AM
As I have previously mentioned, only a leftist cites Amy Goodman as a credible news source. As soon as I saw “democracy now” as a reference, you were no longer worth listenting to. This discussion was over and I believe you to be a troll.
drjohn on March 9, 2008 at 6:36 AM
Squid Shark on March 9, 2008 at 7:52 AM
Stick around Squid. Left or right doesn’t matter (now tell me that isn’t gonna get me some rocks my way). Thank God we all don’t agree on everything. This site would be mighty boring.
Limerick on March 9, 2008 at 7:59 AM
The short list of nations who used waterboarding openly is rather dubious company to keep. In my opinion.
Once again I AM SORRY FOR CITING AMY GOODMAN!!!!!!! This is why I put a disclaimer up….
Here a non Amy Goodman citation…
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/10/04/AR2006100402005.html
Squid Shark on March 9, 2008 at 7:59 AM
Limerick…
I miss CQ.
Squid Shark on March 9, 2008 at 8:00 AM
I would agree, this round :)
Have a good Sunday…
Squid Shark on March 9, 2008 at 8:01 AM
Eh….This community needed new people. Glad you all came aboard. We have em all (like most sites), screaming right, screaming left, and people like me who just scream.
Limerick on March 9, 2008 at 8:03 AM
I appreciate it Limerick.
Have a good rest of the weekend.
Squid Shark on March 9, 2008 at 8:18 AM
Those guys are pouring the water on the guy’s forehead. The punks can’t even protest right.
SoulGlo on March 9, 2008 at 8:39 AM
Yeah, that is pretty much the point in most of our debates here.
Lawrence on March 9, 2008 at 9:25 AM
??????
Squid Shark on March 9, 2008 at 9:26 AM
Uh, apparently not.
Boy, that was a quick weekend, huh?
So what is it, Squid? On the one hand you claim you have far better things to do than spend time on this board uh, “playing”.
But then you do a complete 180 and spend hours reading and responding to posts here, in direct conflict of your previous declarations.
Then you go on to make this statement:
Duly noted. But what you say and what you do are two different things. As stated previously, you can’t have it both ways.
There are proper ways to have discourse. One of them is not that you get to blurt out whatever emotional comment comes first to mind in a crowded room, and then when you get taken to task for it with logical counter-arguments, make the claim that you have better things to do than spend time debating your position.
That shows that you wilt under pressure when you face opposition. Which also proves that my original critique was spot on. You don’t know whether you’re coming or going. Your actions and words are weaving like a drunken sailor.
You like the advice I’ve given? Well here’s some more, free of charge.
Get your priorities in order. Spend a little less time worrying about whether the lasting mental effect of waterboarding on jihadi terrorists has moral implications, and spend a lot more time wondering how you can help your fellow brothers and sisters in arms give Johnny Jihad and his pals a severe case of death.
The American people want to know that their servicemen and women aren’t suffering from moral dilemmas when this country is at war. They want to know that their soldiers and sailors and airmen and Marines are looking for the enemy, engaging him and getting so far up his nose that he can feel their boots on his chin.
Not sitting around in the rear with the gear whining about the morality of waterboarding.
You want passion? You want to feel passionate about something? Toughen up and quit cooling your heels spending sunny weekends lounging around hitting the political blogs. Instead, do something to help your fellow sailors and Marines kick the snot out of your nations enemies. If you can’t do it, step aside so somebody else can get at them. You’re just getting in the way.
Et tu Brute on March 9, 2008 at 10:22 AM
The level of coolness (in every meaning of the word) that Squid Shark demonstrates here is astounding.
Oh, yeah and this
is the winner of the thread.
freevillage on March 9, 2008 at 10:22 AM
NO WATERBOARDER IS ILLEGAL!
STAY HOME ‘08
DfDeportation on March 9, 2008 at 10:35 AM
This is my weekend off, right now I am on shore rotation, sitting around waiting for the next IA to send me over (likely to Afganistan). I dont need to explain my service to you. Everyone gets their time out of theatre, this is mine, I will enjoy one of the few weekends i have had off in the last few years however I please without your input, thanks.
I dont suffer moral dilemas in the engaging the enemy. I personally oppose waterboarding, but it is lawful and I will follow orders pertaining to it and give orders pertaining to it. That is my job and I am pretty good at it.
Once again, we all have our time out of theatre, this is mine.
I do it damn near every day, mostly my job is Force Protection at home these days though. Any day I could get sent right back out to the operational side.
Have a nice Sunday.
Squid Shark on March 9, 2008 at 10:54 AM
It was funny, but he did apoligize for that, its all good.
Squid Shark on March 9, 2008 at 10:55 AM
I didnt say that, my wife wanted to go to the store and then take a walk on the beach. Aa shameless dodge you say? Yes but ohhh it was very nice.
Squid Shark on March 9, 2008 at 11:05 AM
Wasn’t a conflicted Navy guy who changed his name just convicted of passing restricted info about ship movements to the jihadis? Creates a bit of uneasiness among the civilian population.
a capella on March 9, 2008 at 11:35 AM
Again, not relevant.
Learn to construct a solid argument first before you open your mouth on something you feel passionate about.
As you have learned the hard way, you have spent hours trying to explain yourself. You can still be passionate about an issue, but articulating yourself with more reason and logic, and less emotion, can have far better results. You should also understand that given your situation, your conviction here is worthless and indefensible to start.
In other words; a huge waste of your time. Seems like a poor way to spend what little time you have “out of theater”. You should have stuck to your original claim that you had better things to do.
That’s a bit of your own advice that you should have listened to.
Et tu Brute on March 9, 2008 at 11:41 AM
Yes, Et tu Brute, I have traveled outside the U.S. border several times in the last 20 years. Twice for the purpose of executing a war on behalf of the United States as a Marine.
I fully understand your point that no matter what the U.S. does won’t affect the opinions of those that hate us. We are fighting a vicious and evil enemy that has no standards when it comes to fighting a war. And they are losing, they are losing because they are having to resort to using the mentally diminished to set off bombs by remote control. They are losing because young Iraqi’s are getting fed up with the extremist Islamic point of view, they want to live and they are straying away from the mosques more and more. Al Queda’s brutal tactics are working against them now and I suspect will only cause them to be further alienated from those who used to support them. We saw it in Afghanistan and we are seeing it in Iraq.
My opinion on torture is not really my own, it was taught to me during my time as a Marine. I was told that I was not to torture captured enemy. I was told to use the five “S” when it came to captured enemy:
1. Search, for weapons.
2. Segregate, leaders from followers.
3. Silence, don’t allow them to talk.
4. SAFEGUARD, don’t harm them needlessly and give them first aid if they need it.
5. Speed, get them to appropriate POW authority.
The reason I was told why the U.S. doesn’t torture, a enemy will be less inclined to surrender and more inclined to fight to the death if he know’s he is going to be tortured.
The higher moral ground is the right place to be regardless if it’s respected or not by our enemy’s.
Hog Wild on March 9, 2008 at 11:50 AM
I appreciate the advice but I wonder: If waterboarding is a moral issue, how mush “reason” is required. I rarely see “locical” argument for, say, pro-life positions. It is a common-sense moral issue. Yet those of us who see it that way seem completely flustered when others dont “get it”. I think I am seeing things the same way about the waterboarding argument.
I dont see this as a waste of my time. My wife works hard all week (attorney) and when she is asleep, it is my time to post on the internet and type on my blog. And I did have better things to do I suppose, spending some time with her.
I spent alot more time trying to defend my own character rather than my argument on here.
I still do agree with the first part of your post…
I have learned alot about constructing a message board argument.
Squid Shark on March 9, 2008 at 11:57 AM
BZ Hog Wild, the basic military regulations have worked pretty well for years.
Squid Shark on March 9, 2008 at 11:59 AM
Yep, ships movements are the most inadvertently passed pieces of confidential info.
Squid Shark on March 9, 2008 at 12:00 PM
Comment pages: « Previous 1 2 3 4 Next »