Poll

6 votes (30%)
2 votes (10%)
No votes (0%)
12 votes (60%)
No votes (0%)
No votes (0%)

20 members have voted

Wavy70
Wavy70
Joined: Nov 3, 2009
  • Threads: 15
  • Posts: 907
March 13th, 2011 at 12:32:20 AM permalink
Quote: Keyser

Democrats are full of warm fuzzy ideas like closing Gitmo, but they are very short on experience, logic and accountability.



Republicans are short on results.
I have a bewitched egg that I use to play VP with and I have net over 900k with it.
AZDuffman
AZDuffman
Joined: Nov 2, 2009
  • Threads: 219
  • Posts: 11216
March 13th, 2011 at 6:59:50 AM permalink
Quote: Wavy70

Republicans are short on results.



Based on what? Getting rid of Saddam; reinvigorating the entire economy in the early 1980s; getting us out of the Vietnam mess LBJ started; destroying the USSR without firing a shot; ending the Korean shooting war; saving Kuwait when it was invaded; the interstate highway system; are you meaning things like that?

OTOH, dems passed Obamacare and would not even mention it in their 2010 campaigns except to mention they were AGAINST it.
Tolerance is the virtue of believing in nothing
AZDuffman
AZDuffman
Joined: Nov 2, 2009
  • Threads: 219
  • Posts: 11216
March 13th, 2011 at 7:03:16 AM permalink
Quote: Wavy70

I think the important part is not what was said after but how the intelligence about this was used before. I wonder if Obama would ignore the warnings like Bush did.

I also wonder if Obama would have had dinner with the Saudi Crown Prince, whose family sponsored the attack 2 days after and enjoy a cigar on the balcony while the Pentagon burned in the background?

Should Roosevelt have invited the Japanese Ambassador for snacks after 12/7?



Ignore WHAT warnings? And your analogy is faulty, the 9-11 attacks were sponsored by Bin Ladden, not the Saudi Family. Saudi Arabia had expelled UBL from the country years before.

I wonder if Bush would have turned down the chance to have Osama arrestred and sent to the USA like CLINTON did?


As to your remark about Bush and his honorable military service you should get your news from an outlet other than CBS and MSNBC.
Tolerance is the virtue of believing in nothing
SFB
SFB
Joined: Dec 20, 2010
  • Threads: 2
  • Posts: 203
March 13th, 2011 at 10:33:37 AM permalink
P90:

There is much that we agree on, in this. You have some considered opinions as well. You can understand some of the nuances that are going on.

I can start from the point of view that if these are POW’s, and subject to the GC, then since there is still shooting going on, at least with the non-governmental organizations that many of these detainee’s represent, that we should NOT be worrying about any of this. They are POWS, and are currently being held well within the quoted sections of Article 21 and 22.

So trials? Who needs trials? They are POWS. So they are stuck until there is some sort of peace treaty with these organizations.

But wait, SOME may not be of that ilk. And because we are a country of laws, we try to peel those out of the POW classification and put them into some other classification. And when you do that, it DOES get more complicated.

I understand better why you referenced the UCMJ in your earlier arguments. My readings of the UCMJ in the earlier 80’s did not include those passages on Military Tribunal procedures. The readings were more in making sure I didn’t get in too much trouble for drinking. ;)

But I understand if they exist in the UCMJ, and how they could be used as a framework to try the individual detainees. The purpose of these articles, in the original writing, was to insure that your average soldier or sailor was NOT charged in a courtroom for the actions out on the battlefield. So that when your unit was overrun, the victor, didn’t hold a kangaroo court, convict you of various crimes, then throw you in a real jail, with real criminals, or executed you on the spot. The intent was to prosecute, those who directed unlawful actions under the GC, such as indiscriminant killing of civilians, mistreatment of prisoners, and other true war crimes. The generals can get a trial, but the average soldier was “just following orders”, and not charged.

We are going to have to separate on this point:
Quote: P90

first of all, there are still a lot who only ever were civilians


As I pointed out earlier, there were A LOT more detainees in the system 5-6 years ago. Many of those, after the earlier, much decried “administrative reviews” were released, or returned to their countries to face charges by those countries, and their (whatever type they have) judical systems.

What we do have left, is considered the worst of the bunch. And if they were originally POWS, and still POWs, then they are stuck at GITMO till the shooting stops. If they are MORE Then POWS, those that were in charge, then I say, lets get going with whatever tribunal will get them cleared out of the system. And no matter what, as the Obama Administration has come to discover, you are NOT going to be able to try them in Manhattan. Or East Podunk for that matter. The “regular” court system is closed off, for good reason, because they are not being charged with normal crimes, they are being charged with war crimes.

There are not that many left. And I am sure they all profess that they were “just a cab driver” in whatever country they may have been plucked from. Contrary to popular belief, the “Bad Guys” do not always just admit to the horrible things they do. They deny, deny, deny. I have reason to believe that those that are still left, that there is probably pretty good evidence that these guys are worse than just a cabdriver. There IS a reason these guys are still left there.

I agree that the torture of these individuals, no matter how the perpetrators like to crouch their actions, was not, and can not be condoned if you truly believe in the principles that this country was founded under. The right to trial? Well, its getting to that place that has been difficult. As we have been discussing.

And one of the changes that this administration has pursued on the battlefield, with the use of drones, is the Judge, Jury and Executioner roles. Instead of trying to capture someone, and making the whole, “what do we do next with them?’ problem, they just get blown up.

That is a change.

SFB
Wavy70
Wavy70
Joined: Nov 3, 2009
  • Threads: 15
  • Posts: 907
March 13th, 2011 at 11:03:55 AM permalink
Quote: AZDuffman

Based on what? Getting rid of Saddam; reinvigorating the entire economy in the early 1980s; getting us out of the Vietnam mess LBJ started; destroying the USSR without firing a shot; ending the Korean shooting war; saving Kuwait when it was invaded; the interstate highway system; are you meaning things like that?

OTOH, dems passed Obamacare and would not even mention it in their 2010 campaigns except to mention they were AGAINST it.



AZ I know history is not you speciality but you must have noticed some issues with your "facts"
Saddam was not gotten rid of by the GOP and Bush. It was a multi national force. The sad part is through the 1980's the Republican administration armed Saddam. Do you remember when Saddam gave Rumsfeld a solid gold sword as a token of affection for the millions in arms he received from the Reagan administration?

Reinvigorated the economy of the early 80's? I think oyu mean bloated the government and skyrocketed the government overhead. Let me guess Reagan made the economy so great George H only needed one term?

Destroying the USSR? No that was Gorbachev. The fact that the USSR was on the brink of starvation when Reagan got into office must not have had anything to do wiht them collapsing? The soviet Union would have failed even if Regan never was prez.

The shooting in Korea is over? Tell that to the guys on the ship N Korea sank last year. No one can take any credit for that aside from the S Korean People.

Kuwait? Yes the GOP is great at sponsoring dictatorships and putting dictators back in power.

The interstate highway system altho named for Eisenhower who was quite influential but the origins started in 1939 when FDR gave Thomas MacDonald (Public Roads Head) a Map of the USA wiht 8 superhighway corridors marked crossing the country.

AZ all these things are easily found on line. Do a bit of research first.
I have a bewitched egg that I use to play VP with and I have net over 900k with it.
Calder
Calder
Joined: Mar 26, 2010
  • Threads: 5
  • Posts: 451
March 13th, 2011 at 12:06:27 PM permalink
Of course we armed Iraq in the 80s. Remember the Iran - Iraq War? If you'd preferred the U.S. sit that out, fine, but the historical context is important.

If you don't think the Reagan tax cuts sparked an economic boom, you're simply arguing for the sake of partisanship. If you voted for Obama, don't bother bringing up government overhead.

Quote: Wavy70

The fact that the USSR was on the brink of starvation when Reagan got into office


Really?

I think almost everyone would agree that the "shooting war" (AZ's words) in Korea ended. And kudos to the South Korean Army for the Inchon landing.

Kuwait? Well, the U.S. did a pretty good job of getting it back to the Kuwaitis. Would you have watched that one go by, too?
AZDuffman
AZDuffman
Joined: Nov 2, 2009
  • Threads: 219
  • Posts: 11216
March 13th, 2011 at 12:07:23 PM permalink
Quote: Wavy70

AZ I know history is not you speciality but you must have noticed some issues with your "facts"
Saddam was not gotten rid of by the GOP and Bush. It was a multi national force. The sad part is through the 1980's the Republican administration armed Saddam. Do you remember when Saddam gave Rumsfeld a solid gold sword as a token of affection for the millions in arms he received from the Reagan administration?

Reinvigorated the economy of the early 80's? I think oyu mean bloated the government and skyrocketed the government overhead. Let me guess Reagan made the economy so great George H only needed one term?

Destroying the USSR? No that was Gorbachev. The fact that the USSR was on the brink of starvation when Reagan got into office must not have had anything to do wiht them collapsing? The soviet Union would have failed even if Regan never was prez.

The shooting in Korea is over? Tell that to the guys on the ship N Korea sank last year. No one can take any credit for that aside from the S Korean People.

Kuwait? Yes the GOP is great at sponsoring dictatorships and putting dictators back in power.

The interstate highway system altho named for Eisenhower who was quite influential but the origins started in 1939 when FDR gave Thomas MacDonald (Public Roads Head) a Map of the USA wiht 8 superhighway corridors marked crossing the country.

AZ all these things are easily found on line. Do a bit of research first.



I think you are the one who needs remedial history class.

Multi-national force? Without the USA it would not have been possible. Without W driving it then it would not have happened. And maybe you can explain then why liberals like yourself spent 2003-2008 saying things like "Bush acted unilaterally," or "it is not a coalition," or anything along that line.

Did we arm Saddam in the 1980s? Yup, because he was fighting Iran who was a bigger threat at the time. In a similar manner we armed the USSR in WWII since they were fighting Hitler and Germany, a bigger threat at the time--do you remember that from history class? Nations do not have permanant allies, only permanant interests.

Yes, the shooting war in Korea is over, ended in the 1950s. South Korea was completely unable to defend herself when the north invaded. If you read a history book you will read about the whole thing in the chapters after WWII (where you will find how we armed the USSR.)

Gorbachev did n ot destroy the USSR. More real history for you. In 1979, just 2 years before Reagan took office, the USSR had invaded Afghanistan and seemed unstoppable. Liberals wanted us to return to detante. Reagan defied them all and announced SDI. SDI scared the hell out of Gorbachev, he knew the USSR could not keep up. Had Reagan taken the advice of the left and made nice the USSR would have lasted longer. Imaging how much of a threat they would be today with the high price of oil. It is doubtful Desert Shield/Storm would have been approved by the UN if they had veto power at the UN.

Dictator in Kuwait? Sorry, they have an Emir, or in other words a form of kingdom. They have had a parliment at various times. Is Kuwait as good as a democracy? Nope, but better than Iraq who attacked 4 of their neighbors (Iran, Kuwait, Israel, and Saudi Arabia) without provocation.

And your remark on giving credit for the Interstate Highway System made me laugh. Instead, maybe we should give credit to the caveman who invented the wheel since without that we would have no need for highways?

Wavy, these things are easily found online and in history books. Do a bit of research first.
Tolerance is the virtue of believing in nothing
Wavy70
Wavy70
Joined: Nov 3, 2009
  • Threads: 15
  • Posts: 907
March 13th, 2011 at 11:33:26 PM permalink
I understand that you believe what you heard is correct but as I said a little research might help you.

I know you think that every good thing that has happened in the USA is due to the GOP and all the woe's of America come from the Democrats. Quite an idealistic world view. White Cowboy Hats/Black Cowboy Hat.

One good debate would be if the GOP got their way in the 1930's and kept FDR from rearming the country after Hoover left the military to rot where in the USA would the line be separating German America from Japanese America? After all the GOP of the 1930's was the Isolationist party. Let Europe fight Europe's War was the party line.
But without the New Deal there was a good chance the USA would have collapsed before WWII.

Yes we did help arm the USSR and it was a great help to them as Stalin said in Yalta that Lend/Lease was one of the most remarkable and vital achievements of the Anti Hitler alliance. But by your reasoning since the USA had the largest contingent in the Gulf Wars the victory should solely go to the USA I would imagine you give the Soviet Union credit for winning WWII since they had the largest force, suffered losses that are staggering in comparison to the USA's and the USSR liberated Berlin.
Hitler learned as did Napoleon that invading Russia is not as easy as it seems.

But on to the collapse of the Soviet Union. First off you know that it happened a few years after Reagan left office. But on to SDI. I doubt it "Scared the Hell" out of Gorbachev mainly since he was not the Premier and would not be for a few years. Within a few months of SDI being announced the American Physics community pointed out that we are no where near being able to shoot a missile traveling at 15,000/mph out of the sky and it would be at least a decade of research to see if would even be possible. Tests done in the 90's with a target that has a known speed and trajectory (Chicken Nailed to a Board Test) still were failures.

To claim the collapse of the USSR to Regan is quite a real stretch of the imagination. The fall was based solely on economics. The USSR since Stalin was nothing but a military industrial complex. Almost all of the nations industry was for arms. By the late 70's early 80's the people were without basic food let along any luxury goods. The USSR had only 1 export aside from arms and that was oil. Oil was able to support the communist regime and nation until OPEC vastly ramped up the production of oil and sent the price very low. So you had a nation wiht no industry aside from weapons with a huge overhead. The currency was virtually worthless. So the reality was oil could not save them not as you seem to think. It was once Gorbachev made it known that the Soviets will not be helping the satellite countries quash rebellion they all fell like dominoes. You may remember footage of the Czech border loaded wiht East Germans fleeing?

How you interpret the USSR invasion of Afghanistan as being a seemingly "Unstoppable" move is rather puzzling. From the beginning of the invasion it caused a huge rift in the nation since the people were starving and losses in Afghanistan were quite large. The invasion was a move of a desperate regime to try and get the perceived oil and gas field of Afghanistan. Additionally wars between Russia and Afghanistan go back to the Czars.

Yes we did arm Iraq in the 80's and we can thank the UK and BP for the Iranian Revolution. Once again you may want to research more than the first paragraph. After WWII since the Shah of Iran was Nazi friendly he was deposed by the UK and USSR. An elected government was set up and in 1951 Dr Mohammad Mossedaq was elected Prime Minister. Dr Mossedaq was very popular and nationalized the petroleum industry. He oddly thought that since it is Iran's oil they should split the profits from them 50/50 with AIOC. UK PM Churchill imposed an embargo on Iranian oil. In 1963 President Dwight David Eisenhower authorized Operation Ajax to depose the elected government of Iran and reinstall the ProNazi Reza regime. After Shah Reza Pahlavi was installed by the USA he ruled Iran till 1979 as an autocrat who while industrializing the nation employed his secret police to oppress any opposition or descent by means of torture and death. Once the Shah was installed as leader the bulk of the oil money was again going to the US and UK with the US giving the Shahs regime financial support. Once agan the Iranian people were disenfranchised and being robbed of their nations resources. So a revolution was inevitable. Once the Shah was deposed the US and UK lost billions in oil money. In come Iraq.

Iraq until the end of WWI had been part of the Ottoman Empire. After the War Iraq was one of Britain's spoils and installed the Hashemite king Faisal as Monarch despite the fact he was from Syria and was exiled by France which received Syria from the WWI treaty. After the independence of Iraq following WWII the Hashemite kingdom as many autocrats do slipped in to oppression of all dissent and speech. Once again a revolution was inevitable. After a few party changes the Baa'th party come to rule and Saddam in 1979. Saddam correctly plays his cards and the West gives him whatever he needs to fight Iran. Sadly these same weapons are used against the Kurds and other minority groups in Iraq. So the Iran Iraq war goes on till till 1988 and ends in a stalemate. During this time in addition to the money the USA was giving Iraq the Kuwait's were loaning them money to fight Iran since Kuwait did not want to fight themselves. So in 1988 Iraq had been fighting a war that all of it's Saudi Peninsula neighbors wanted them to fight but once the war ended Iraq was in debt to all of them. Far from a defense of the Baa'th party but I also know not to corner a rabid dog. So after loaning Iraq US$65 Billion when Iraq asked Kuwait to forgive some of the debt they refused and then increased oil production by 40% sending the price of oil plummeting. Oil is Iraq's main export. To add to the problem the true boarder between Iraq and Kuwait had never been set in the Ottoman treaty. This time Saddam bet wrong and thought that no one would care if he took over Kuwait. If Kuwait's main export was oranges a mid level state department spokesman would have read a strong repudiation and everyone would have gone home.

As to the Highway system Detroit more than anyone is the reason it exists. But it started in 1921 after the government realized it was in bad shape transporting supplies during WWI. Gen John Pershing presented a map to congress in 1922 of vital roads in the country. Many WPA projects were building the highway system. True the bulk of the system was completed during the Eisenhower administration but to give sole credit to him is rather simplistic. The US Auto industry had been pushing for better road systems since the 1920's.

BTW you are misinformed about the Saudi Royal family. Here are a few names Google them I think it will give you some practice on research.
Prince Turki Al-Faisal Al-Saud, Prince Salman Bin-Abdulaziz Al-Saud, Prince Naif Bin-Abdulaziz Al-Saud, Prince Mohamed Al-Faisal Al-Saud, Prince Sultan Bin-Abdulaziz Al-Saud.

In an ideal world everything would have a one sentence answer like you enjoy but with history the next roll is affected by the last.
Slavery was not the cause of the Civil War and Reagan saying "Tear Down this Wall" did not end the USSR.
I have a bewitched egg that I use to play VP with and I have net over 900k with it.

  • Jump to: