Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 … 20

 

2006-06-18 06:24:09
lowing
Banned
+1,662|6805|USA

nikki_lighthouse wrote:

lowing wrote:

Oh I forgot, humiliation is torture now.

War prisoners do not get trials
Tiny point of order here. The people in Guantanamo Bay are NOT prisoners of war - if they were the USA would be in breach of the Geneva Convention to which it has long been signed up to.

Under the wording of the Geneva Convention the USA has declared the detainees not to be prisoners of war - that is a distinction the USA has repeatedly, aggressively and publically made and so it is unacceptable for people to use the term "prisoners of war" to justify their arguments as you have here. It's nothing personal against you lowing, I have just seen it in a number of places and it really ticks me off. They are NOT prisoners of war, YOU have declared them not to be so please don't use that term to justify whatever you may or may not be doing to them.

As a case in point - to whoever thinks the war is over... well, if that is the case are you going to repatriate all those "POWS" now? No, thought not. Because they are not POWS they are terrorists and as such are being held outside the normal, internationally recognised jurisdictions. Which, under the circumstances is understandable! Just please be prepared to admit it! Rant over
I am well aware of our countries stand regarding these people. They were captured during battles, the reason we are not declaring them POW's is because POW's deserve a certain amount of respect even though they are your enemy.  I said it before, they are being treated a far cry better than our soldiers have been treated as well as the civilians that fall into their hands. Please do NOT expect any tears for them from me. There really is nothing you can tell me that is going to make me give a shit about the filth held in Gitmo. The longer they are held, the safer we all are. Any word on how many have been let go only to be caught or killed in battle again??

I wonder if your lack of response to my torture segment is due in part that you agree these people have not been tortured in any real sense.

Last edited by lowing (2006-06-18 06:25:45)

2006-06-18 06:27:33
Bubbalo
The Lizzard
+541|6715
Actually, according to UN definitions, several common practices are torture.
2006-06-18 06:32:59
lowing
Banned
+1,662|6805|USA

Bubbalo wrote:

I didn't say it was stable, did I.  But there is a sovereign government, which means no matter how war-like the situation is, it is not a war.
Your logic is flawed..........We are now fighting this war along side the new Iraqi govt. Allied to the US.

I guess WW2 wasn't a war since we fought as allies with sovereign govts.....

You are digging pretty deep to try and come up sound logic for this one..Ya might wanna let it go.

Again I ask, do you have an article or something that can better support your reasoning for declaring war over, or are you just pulling shit out of your ass?


Bubbalo wrote:

Actually, according to UN definitions, several common practices are torture.
Ya mean the UN recognizes underwear being put on someones head as torture? Show me, I gotta read this.

Last edited by lowing (2006-06-18 06:34:40)

2006-06-18 06:55:17
delta4bravo*nl*
Dutch Delight
+68|6906
He is a lying son of a bitch, hell yes he should have been  impeached long time ago.
and better today than tomorrow.
2006-06-18 07:19:26
UON
Junglist Massive
+223|6807

lowing wrote:

Bubbalo wrote:

Actually, according to UN definitions, several common practices are torture.
Ya mean the UN recognizes underwear being put on someones head as torture? Show me, I gotta read this.
Article 5.

      No one shall be subjected to torture or to cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment.

Or don't you consider it degrading? We could do a little test, a bit like you suggested when you asked me to pick between being directed to pray north or having my head cut off.  So here's a hypothetical test to determine whether underwear on the head falls into the 'degrading treatment' category:

Why don't I tie you up and put the dirtiest skidmarked underwear from HorseManBearPig's laundry basket over your face, and you can tell me if you think it's degrading or not?
2006-06-18 07:20:09
Bubbalo
The Lizzard
+541|6715

lowing wrote:

Your logic is flawed..........We are now fighting this war along side the new Iraqi govt. Allied to the US.

I guess WW2 wasn't a war since we fought as allies with sovereign govts.....

You are digging pretty deep to try and come up sound logic for this one..Ya might wanna let it go.

Again I ask, do you have an article or something that can better support your reasoning for declaring war over, or are you just pulling shit out of your ass?
No, I'm not.  First, those held in Guantanamo Bay were captured as part of the war with Saddam's Iraq.  Any captured as part of a war with America's Iraq (don't read into this, I'm just using this to differentiate) ought be held in Iraq and tried for relevant crimes.  War requires a declaration of war.  There is noone for America to declare war on.


lowing wrote:

Ya mean the UN recognizes underwear being put on someones head as torture? Show me, I gotta read this.
Oh, you're good.  I say that some of what is done is considered torture, so you instantly pick one, which clearly proves me wrong.

P.S. Try sleep deprivation.
2006-06-18 07:34:51
lowing
Banned
+1,662|6805|USA

UnOriginalNuttah wrote:

lowing wrote:

Bubbalo wrote:

Actually, according to UN definitions, several common practices are torture.
Ya mean the UN recognizes underwear being put on someones head as torture? Show me, I gotta read this.
Article 5.

      No one shall be subjected to torture or to cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment.

Or don't you consider it degrading? We could do a little test, a bit like you suggested when you asked me to pick between being directed to pray north or having my head cut off.  So here's a hypothetical test to determine whether underwear on the head falls into the 'degrading treatment' category:

Why don't I tie you up and put the dirtiest skidmarked underwear from HorseManBearPig's laundry basket over your face, and you can tell me if you think it's degrading or not?
I am pretty sure it would be, and I don't give a shit. I have asked this of you before so and I will ask this of you again. Where is are your anti-terrorists posts that condemn these people for the torture and murder of innocent civilians? Where is your concern for those that risk their lives in battle for your country? If you really want me to give a damn about torture or murder, I will spend my time sympathizing for MY countrymen and women. there are plenty of people like you to worry about the protection of those that would see us come to harm.

You expect the US to fight a war with rules against an enemy that has no rules, no conscience, no morality no value on life. I am glad we have taken the gloves off. you are also forgetting to make an argument that the killing of Al Zaraqwi could be looked at as an assassination, which is against our policy. With your logic it must have been wrong to blow the fucker up. How evil we must be. Again, as you both grow up and have to live on your own, you will change the way you look at the world around you, just like all the other hippies did in the 60's and 70's. Funny it took them growing up and maturing to come around. Go figure.

Also, thanks for the - karma  I haven't heard from you in awhile and I was beginning to think ya didn't care. lol
2006-06-18 07:36:08
messfeeder
Member
+31|6682|Gotham
Hahaha!!! AHAHAHAH!!!! Sorry. I think it's funny that hurting someone's feelings or making them uncomfortable is "torture."
2006-06-18 07:37:58
lowing
Banned
+1,662|6805|USA

Bubbalo wrote:

lowing wrote:

Your logic is flawed..........We are now fighting this war along side the new Iraqi govt. Allied to the US.

I guess WW2 wasn't a war since we fought as allies with sovereign govts.....

You are digging pretty deep to try and come up sound logic for this one..Ya might wanna let it go.

Again I ask, do you have an article or something that can better support your reasoning for declaring war over, or are you just pulling shit out of your ass?
No, I'm not.  First, those held in Guantanamo Bay were captured as part of the war with Saddam's Iraq.  Any captured as part of a war with America's Iraq (don't read into this, I'm just using this to differentiate) ought be held in Iraq and tried for relevant crimes.  War requires a declaration of war.  There is noone for America to declare war on.


lowing wrote:

Ya mean the UN recognizes underwear being put on someones head as torture? Show me, I gotta read this.
Oh, you're good.  I say that some of what is done is considered torture, so you instantly pick one, which clearly proves me wrong.

P.S. Try sleep deprivation.
Why don't you try having your fuckin' head sawed off, sport??
2006-06-18 07:59:17
TheFlipTop
Member
+28|6678

lowing wrote:

TheFlipTop wrote:

His actions proving he cannot eat a Pretzel without helpful third party help. Oh if he had only been left to cope with that pretzel on his own..............
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
Well I guess this proves my point.
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
Likewise!
2006-06-18 07:59:34
UON
Junglist Massive
+223|6807

lowing wrote:

You expect the US to fight a war with rules against an enemy that has no rules, no conscience, no morality no value on life.
Some people might use those terms to describe the US, particularly the covert operations and coups.

lowing wrote:

Again, as you both grow up and have to live on your own, you will change the way you look at the world around you, just like all the other hippies did in the 60's and 70's.
Why would I need to live on my own?  I'm married and have kids on the way, and apart from anything that statement has no grounding in reality.  You choose to throw names around and call me a hippy when you have no real argument, as usual.  Let me know your private email address if you want me to return the abuse, because I am making an effort not to sink to your level and to respect the rules of the forum.

lowing wrote:

Where is are your anti-terrorists posts that condemn these people for the torture and murder of innocent civilians?
In my posts which condemn all such behaviour.  If you had any kind of comprehension ability you might notice.  If you are going to infer things from things I haven't said (how fucking stupid is that) then why not infer something from the fact that I haven't said "Murder all Americans"?  Shall I start holding you to things you haven't said?  This could be a fun game if you want to continue it.

lowing wrote:

Where is your concern for those that risk their lives in battle for your country?
Basically where my concerns lie for the soldiers who fight for my country is none of your fucking business because that is not the topic under discussion, and even if it were it is up to me whether to engage in discussion on the subject.  But since you bang on about it all the time: I have many friends in the military and even some in the police, and obviously don't want anyone to come to harm whether I know them or not, so shut the fuck up please, and stop with your bullshit judgements based on the fact that I haven't posted my inside legs measurements and autobiography on the forum.  In fact, I'm sure I've mentioned that before.
2006-06-18 08:05:21
Bubbalo
The Lizzard
+541|6715

lowing wrote:

Why don't you try having your fuckin' head sawed off, sport??
Oooook........so because sawing someone's head off is bad, everything else must be good?

lowing wrote:

I have asked this of you before so and I will ask this of you again. Where is are your anti-terrorists posts that condemn these people for the torture and murder of innocent civilians? Where is your concern for those that risk their lives in battle for your country?
Show me the posts approving of their actions, and I'll show you posts of mine condemning them shortly thereafter.

lowing wrote:

If you really want me to give a damn about torture or murder, I will spend my time sympathizing for MY countrymen and women.
Because you can only care about one side?  It's that sort of with us or against us mentality that will lead to war time and time again.

lowing wrote:

there are plenty of people like you to worry about the protection of those that would see us come to harm.
And the concern is that if we must sacrifice that which we so often preach as important in order to win, what's the point?

lowing wrote:

You expect the US to fight a war with rules against an enemy that has no rules, no conscience, no morality no value on life.
I expect the US to practice what it preaches.  If it really wants to torture people, it can stop harping on about how brilliant it is.

lowing wrote:

I am glad we have taken the gloves off. you are also forgetting to make an argument that the killing of Al Zaraqwi could be looked at as an assassination, which is against our policy.
It was an assassination.  You specifically targetted an individual and killed him.  Assassination has never been against US policy, they've used it many times before.

lowing wrote:

With your logic it must have been wrong to blow the fucker up. How evil we must be.
How does "torturing is wrong" equate to "killing someone in order to prevent them murdering someone else is wrong".  Again with the black and white, lowing.

lowing wrote:

Again, as you both grow up and have to live on your own, you will change the way you look at the world around you, just like all the other hippies did in the 60's and 70's. Funny it took them growing up and maturing to come around. Go figure.
Really, because I do not know a single person who approves of Guantamo Bay, including grandparents who have been around alot longer than you.  I feel I must repeat from another thread:

Bubbalo wrote:

You know what?  Fuck you.  You know nothing about my life, you know nothing about me, you know nothing about what I have experienced.  The difference between you and me has nothing to do with experience, it has to do with morals.  You consider it morally acceptable to screw over hundreds of people for your benefit, and not spare a thought.  I don't.  I know that it has nothing to do with experience, because my father, and my mother, and my grandparents, and my siblings, and many of others whom I know who are older than me, and many of them older than you, feel the same.  It's about a core choice.  You choose to fuck everyone over, to not give a damn about what consequences your actions might have, to view those who make attacks on your country and your people as less than human.  I don't.  I choose to look at them as people's sons and daughters, and husbands and wives, and brothers and sisters.  And I choose to ask why.  And if it's really is a bad thing to want to help those who would attack me because I recognise that their plight is genuine, then I go to hell in the knowledge that at least I tried, and no matter what anyone says about how effective I was, they cannot call me heartless.  They cannot say I was ignorant.  And they cannot say that I lacked character.  From the sounds of it, the same cannot be said of you.  And that makes me sad too.  To think that there are humans who would rather kill others, and opress others, so as not to sacrifice their own comfort, and then blind themselves to the world.  And yet, for all that I think you are immoral, I would never call you less than human.  And that, right there, is the difference between you and me.  I would rather sacrifice my comfort, and if need be my life, for the right of innocent people I will never know to be free.  If running Guantanamo Bay in a legal manner means I'll be killed tommorrow, fine.  I'll die with no regrets.

Last edited by Bubbalo (2006-06-18 08:06:33)

2006-06-18 08:13:27
BN
smells like wee wee
+159|6922
oohh, I am not the only one to think this

http://today.reuters.com/news/ArticleNe … HAIDER.xml
2006-06-18 08:14:53
lowing
Banned
+1,662|6805|USA

UnOriginalNuttah wrote:

lowing wrote:

You expect the US to fight a war with rules against an enemy that has no rules, no conscience, no morality no value on life.
Some people might use those terms to describe the US, particularly the covert operations and coups.

lowing wrote:

Again, as you both grow up and have to live on your own, you will change the way you look at the world around you, just like all the other hippies did in the 60's and 70's.
Why would I need to live on my own?  I'm married and have kids on the way, and apart from anything that statement has no grounding in reality.  You choose to throw names around and call me a hippy when you have no real argument, as usual.  Let me know your private email address if you want me to return the abuse, because I am making an effort not to sink to your level and to respect the rules of the forum.

lowing wrote:

Where is are your anti-terrorists posts that condemn these people for the torture and murder of innocent civilians?
In my posts which condemn all such behaviour.  If you had any kind of comprehension ability you might notice.  If you are going to infer things from things I haven't said (how fucking stupid is that) then why not infer something from the fact that I haven't said "Murder all Americans"?  Shall I start holding you to things you haven't said?  This could be a fun game if you want to continue it.

lowing wrote:

Where is your concern for those that risk their lives in battle for your country?
Basically where my concerns lie for the soldiers who fight for my country is none of your fucking business because that is not the topic under discussion, and even if it were it is up to me whether to engage in discussion on the subject.  But since you bang on about it all the time: I have many friends in the military and even some in the police, and obviously don't want anyone to come to harm whether I know them or not, so shut the fuck up please, and stop with your bullshit judgements based on the fact that I haven't posted my inside legs measurements and autobiography on the forum.  In fact, I'm sure I've mentioned that before.
Your defensive posture speaks volumes with regard to your loyalties,along your lack of a real response other than, "none of your fucking business" and "shut the fuck up"....LOL quite pathetic. ]

Are you willing to protect your baby as a new father, or does your pafacism prevent that?

As far as the hippy thing goes, I got you and Marconious mixed up, but I am sure you could understand how easy that would be.
2006-06-18 08:17:55
kr@cker
Bringin' Sexy Back!
+581|6703|Southeastern USA

BN wrote:

oohh, I am not the only one to think this

http://today.reuters.com/news/ArticleNe … HAIDER.xml
What? A personal friend of Quaddafi and Hussein sympathizer doesn't like something about the US? you're kidding
2006-06-18 08:19:57
lowing
Banned
+1,662|6805|USA

Bubbalo wrote:

lowing wrote:

Why don't you try having your fuckin' head sawed off, sport??
Oooook........so because sawing someone's head off is bad, everything else must be good?



lowing wrote:

If you really want me to give a damn about torture or murder, I will spend my time sympathizing for MY countrymen and women.
Because you can only care about one side?  It's that sort of with us or against us mentality that will lead to war time and time again.

lowing wrote:

there are plenty of people like you to worry about the protection of those that would see us come to harm.
And the concern is that if we must sacrifice that which we so often preach as important in order to win, what's the point?

lowing wrote:

You expect the US to fight a war with rules against an enemy that has no rules, no conscience, no morality no value on life.
I expect the US to practice what it preaches.  If it really wants to torture people, it can stop harping on about how brilliant it is.

lowing wrote:

I am glad we have taken the gloves off. you are also forgetting to make an argument that the killing of Al Zaraqwi could be looked at as an assassination, which is against our policy.
It was an assassination.  You specifically targetted an individual and killed him.  Assassination has never been against US policy, they've used it many times before.

lowing wrote:

With your logic it must have been wrong to blow the fucker up. How evil we must be.
How does "torturing is wrong" equate to "killing someone in order to prevent them murdering someone else is wrong".  Again with the black and white, lowing.

lowing wrote:

Again, as you both grow up and have to live on your own, you will change the way you look at the world around you, just like all the other hippies did in the 60's and 70's. Funny it took them growing up and maturing to come around. Go figure.
Really, because I do not know a single person who approves of Guantamo Bay, including grandparents who have been around alot longer than you.  I feel I must repeat from another thread:

Bubbalo wrote:

You know what?  Fuck you.  You know nothing about my life, you know nothing about me, you know nothing about what I have experienced.  The difference between you and me has nothing to do with experience, it has to do with morals.  You consider it morally acceptable to screw over hundreds of people for your benefit, and not spare a thought.  I don't.  I know that it has nothing to do with experience, because my father, and my mother, and my grandparents, and my siblings, and many of others whom I know who are older than me, and many of them older than you, feel the same.  It's about a core choice.  You choose to fuck everyone over, to not give a damn about what consequences your actions might have, to view those who make attacks on your country and your people as less than human.  I don't.  I choose to look at them as people's sons and daughters, and husbands and wives, and brothers and sisters.  And I choose to ask why.  And if it's really is a bad thing to want to help those who would attack me because I recognise that their plight is genuine, then I go to hell in the knowledge that at least I tried, and no matter what anyone says about how effective I was, they cannot call me heartless.  They cannot say I was ignorant.  And they cannot say that I lacked character.  From the sounds of it, the same cannot be said of you.  And that makes me sad too.  To think that there are humans who would rather kill others, and opress others, so as not to sacrifice their own comfort, and then blind themselves to the world.  And yet, for all that I think you are immoral, I would never call you less than human.  And that, right there, is the difference between you and me.  I would rather sacrifice my comfort, and if need be my life, for the right of innocent people I will never know to be free.  If running Guantanamo Bay in a legal manner means I'll be killed tommorrow, fine.  I'll die with no regrets.
How sad, all that effort and you said absolutely nothing worth responding to

Last edited by lowing (2006-06-18 08:20:28)

2006-06-18 08:21:27
Bubbalo
The Lizzard
+541|6715

lowing wrote:

How sad, all that effort and you said absolutely nothing worth responding to
So then it's all correct?
2006-06-18 08:24:43
BN
smells like wee wee
+159|6922

kr@cker wrote:

BN wrote:

oohh, I am not the only one to think this

http://today.reuters.com/news/ArticleNe … HAIDER.xml
What? A personal friend of Quaddafi and Hussein sympathizer doesn't like something about the US? you're kidding
maybe he just read this, who knows...

http://www.whatreallyhappened.com/lieofthecentury.html
2006-06-18 08:26:20
lowing
Banned
+1,662|6805|USA

Bubbalo wrote:

lowing wrote:

How sad, all that effort and you said absolutely nothing worth responding to
So then it's all correct?
You know better than that, I just find it hard to debate rationally with the irrational.
2006-06-18 08:26:30
splixx
ChupaCABRA
+53|6893|Omaha, Nebraska

BN wrote:

oohh, I am not the only one to think this

http://today.reuters.com/news/ArticleNe … HAIDER.xml
No your not.
2006-06-18 08:27:35
lowing
Banned
+1,662|6805|USA

splixx wrote:

BN wrote:

oohh, I am not the only one to think this

http://today.reuters.com/news/ArticleNe … HAIDER.xml
No your not.
Yeah and the nazis should know their war criminals.
2006-06-18 08:29:21
Bubbalo
The Lizzard
+541|6715

lowing wrote:

Yeah and the nazis should know their war criminals.
They're, and how do you you figure he's a Nazi?
2006-06-18 08:32:03
UON
Junglist Massive
+223|6807

lowing wrote:

Your defensive posture speaks volumes with regard to your loyalties,along your lack of a real response other than, "none of your fucking business" and "shut the fuck up"....LOL quite pathetic. ]

Are you willing to protect your baby as a new father, or does your pafacism prevent that?

As far as the hippy thing goes, I got you and Marconious mixed up, but I am sure you could understand how easy that would be.
Again, being a personal question there is no need to answer that question to take part in the debate.  But I'll indulge you one last time:  It seems like something I've said gave you the impression that I wouldn't batter an intruder into unconciousness if they broke into my house.  That is not true.  You also seem under the impression that I am against all forms of violence in all circumstances.  That is not true, I simply don't believe violence the best solution to a problem, and should not be used it is the last and only resort and is permitted by the relevant law, be it international (in the case of wars) or national (in the case of self-defence).

My defensive posture might be because my personal life is none of your fucking business and not relevant to the discussion.
2006-06-18 08:32:50
lowing
Banned
+1,662|6805|USA

Bubbalo wrote:

lowing wrote:

Yeah and the Nazis should know their war criminals.
They're, and how do you you figure he's a Nazi?
It is called sarcasm. Just making a statement as to the absurdity of calling Bush a war criminal. It is absurd to call them Nazis.  Get over it.
2006-06-18 08:39:01
lowing
Banned
+1,662|6805|USA

UnOriginalNuttah wrote:

lowing wrote:

Your defensive posture speaks volumes with regard to your loyalties,along your lack of a real response other than, "none of your fucking business" and "shut the fuck up"....LOL quite pathetic. ]

Are you willing to protect your baby as a new father, or does your pacifism prevent that?

As far as the hippie thing goes, I got you and Marconious mixed up, but I am sure you could understand how easy that would be.
Again, being a personal question there is no need to answer that question to take part in the debate.  But I'll indulge you one last time:  It seems like something I've said gave you the impression that I wouldn't batter an intruder into unconciousness if they broke into my house.  That is not true.  You also seem under the impression that I am against all forms of violence in all circumstances.  That is not true, I simply don't believe violence the best solution to a problem, and should not be used it is the last and only resort and is permitted by the relevant law, be it international (in the case of wars) or national (in the case of self-defence).

My defensive posture might be because my personal life is none of your fucking business and not relevant to the discussion.
I never said 1 thing about your personal life. You deemed questions regarding your lack of readable concern over the endeavors that yours and my countrymen are undertaking, and clear readable concern over the treatment of our enemies as a personal nature. That is a new guideline for describing personal. What does that tell me?

 

Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 … 20

Board footer

Privacy Policy - © 2024 Jeff Minard