chevysoldier
-
Posts
15,487 -
Joined
-
Last visited
-
Days Won
29
Content Type
Profiles
Forums
Gallery
Store
Events
Posts posted by chevysoldier
-
-
Did you really just comment against my comment also using nothing but anecdotal evidence then saying "please provide resources" when you didn't?
Showing a url with foiled attacks is anecdotal evidence? What do you want me to get? FBI/CIA files for you? I just want to know how you know there weren't many terrorists in IRaq. JRMiii asked to see foiled attack from in the region, and that url had some.
-
You'll see I edited my post to reflect the information in the report.
Do you have evidence of these foiled attacks? Do you have evidence we would have continued to be attacked?
.
http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,335500,00.html
Some of those are CONUS, some OCONUS. And I'm sure there are more that have not been released do to sucurity reasons.
You're not getting rid of more and more terrorists so they won't come over here. You're killing 10 terrorists, and creating 50 more. Do you think the families of those killed are not going to hate the people responsible for killing their family members? That's where the war on terror is flawed. You can't effectively suppress fanatical beliefs with violence. It ends up breeding more hate. Do you really think, for the most part, people like seeing foreign troops on their own soil? How would you feel if the situation was reversed?Actually a lot of the people from there do like us. They are just scared to speak out. I saw them come up to us and thanks us for what we have done. When they voted for the first time, they had a higher % then we do for our presidential elections. They cared about the right to have a choice. But you don't hear of all the good becuase of bias media like CNN that won't report it.
This isn't necessarily true. They are killing and capturing those they are claim are terrorists or related to terrorists. Iraq had next to no terrorist ties before we went in there. Afghanistan and the Taliban didn't attack us either. Terrorists are hiding in and/or are from places like Pakistan and Saudi Arabia.This is definitely one of those cases where we've made as many enemies as friends. I hear more stories of they hate us than I do they love us from people coming back from there (Iraq or Afghanistan).
See above comment and please provide resources.
-
1) I still don't think you can compare Constitutional rights with a military bonus. You have the right to habeas corpus, you also have a right to a public defender if you can't afford one. You don't have a RIGHT to a military bonus. This is why one debt is unacceptable, one is debatable. I understand a trial will add debt, but that's the price you pay to have the Constitution, not a bonus check.
HE ISN'T AN AMERICAN CITIZEN. THE CONSTITUTION DOESN'T PROTECT HIM.
2) I understand we're not fighting Muslims, but once again... good luck fighting an ideology, this is why the War on Drugs has worked so well too. The simple fact that we do fight them, then torture them, and it's all leaked out just helps recruitment. That's how it works.
And what started this war? 9/11 attacks. So what do we do? Let them run amuck? Let them turn us into radical Muslims?? Do you think they care one bit about your life? They would shoot you dead on sight whether you presented a deadly threat or not. Would you do the same to him? I doubt it.
3) You said it yourself "Human error happens" - so until all humans are outside the process, it won't be error-free and thus we'll never be 100% safe... ever, no matter how much money we throw at the problem.
How much did Obama throw at the national debt trying to fix the problem? We didn't ask for this war, this war came to us and we reponded. See Dec 7th 1941.
4) Like I said before, I've never ragged on or dogged our troops. They're following orders. Sorry you didn't read any of the previous threads where I've mentioned it, but it's always been about the 'mangement' - so it's NOT the first time I've mentioned it overall, but yes - the first time I've mentioned it in this thread. My bad for assuming it was implied. I have friends that have served and I wouldn't dog their service.
Further - you keep mentioning Iraq. Iraq has little to do with terrorists... it was Afghanistan, so I don't see why you keep going to the 'Iraq tree' when it doesn't strengthen your argument.
Okay, Middle East. Most parts over there are terrorist training grounds. We can't put our army in every country. Have you noticed a shift of troops from Iraq to Afghanistan? Iraq is much more stabile now than it was. Afghanistan is a totally different beast because NATO is involved and the terrain is difficult.
Now I'm going to sleep in my nice, warm bed, with a roof over my head because of those fellow Americans that will stand at the ready all night long to keep our enemy at bay thousands of miles away. How is this fact so difficult for you to conceive?
-
-
I'm just going to bold my comments within your quote.
Let me break this down for you. Again... slowly, sentence by sentence.They don't deserve a bonus when it creates additional debt. Just like I don't deserve one when my company is losing money, and the Wall St. guys don't when they drive their companies into the ground.
But you don't know if you think he should be tried in NYC which will add to the debt.
That's debatable... you can fight a war over land, you can fight a war over resources, but you can't fight a war (and WIN) over ideological values. This is why the Jews, Muslim, and Christians still exist. This is why drugs still exist. This is why terrorism still exists - Ft. Hood?
We are not fighting a religion per se, we are fighting a radical, extremist religous group. We are not trying to wipe out Muslims. Muslims don't and haven't threatened our way of life as we know it now.
Where did I say that? I haven't taken a stance on that issue... I'm still weighing both arguments, it depends on whether I believe he's entitled to the rights afforded by the US Constitution - I haven't decided that yet.
Don't want to add to debt=may be okay with NYC trial.
Was Ft. Hood not a terrorist attack? So, something obviously went wrong there... especially in light that this guys motives were questioned long before this tragedy occurred.
Human error happens, can't stop everything. Terrorist attack? In the sense of creating panic and terror, yes. Extremist muslim attack? Don't know yet. Maybe? Well orchestrated? No so he probably acted alone which means it probably is not directly tied to the radical group.
No, it's not. I've said I've had qualms with the management long ago - you must've missed those threads. And, yes, I realize Obama is 'in charge' now, but 1) he inherited this cluster, and 2) who said I agree with everything he does? I support Obama as a MUCH better candidate than anything the GOP offered (McCain/Palin - really?
), but that is not an endorsement that I believe 100% in everything Obama does.But this is the first time, in this thread, where you have mentioned higher being the problem. He already tried to make up his mind about the war before he was even elected. He had no idea what the Generals on ground though. He know American mothers and father want their kids to come home. I want them to come home. But not at the price of having terrorist come here and all our deaths be for nothing. Like I said, it has been proven that us being overseas has had a direct impact on the number of terrorist activities on our land and decreased those. Getting the Iraqi people strong enough to vote, to turn the Iraqi National Guard into the Iraqi Army. To get them to stand up for themselve and decrease terrorists using their land as a home base for trying to kill us. I saw those things take place personally and can vouch for the validity of what we have done for them, for us.
-
You keep trying to paint this portrait that I'm somehow anti-soldier. And it's not true. I'm just as appreciative as everyone else. The troops just do what they're told without question - and do it well.
It's the 'management' I doubt. And if all you got from that video was 'a rock' then I don't really know any other way to explain it to you.
Okay, you don't think the soldiers deserve a bonus becuase they know about the pay beforehand. You don't think they keep the terrorists in check over there so we don't have to fight them here. You feel it's okay to add to the debt and afford him rights with a trial in NYC. You compare a rock keeping tigers away just because "I say it does that" to soldiers keeping terrorists away even though it has been proven to do so. And this is the first time you have said anything about management who, by the way in case you didn't realize, is Obama at the top of that. The guy you so believe in.
Left turn, left turn, left turn, left turn
-
-
Sorry that went over your heads. This may clear up my 'bearcrow mailbox' silliness.
Seriously?? You truly believe that the men and women over there have no bearing whatsoever on your way of life here? You have yet to comeback with anything of value to challenge my last few comments? Just a video of a rock, yeah thats intelligence right there.
-
When was the last time your house was attacked by a bear? Apparently your mailbox must be a magical 'bearcrow'
Thats it, cant come back with anything useful, make some silly stuff up.
-
-
You really think being over this is going to stop them from trying? Where there's a will, there's a way...
Umm, it is. When was the last time since 9/11 that something catastophic happened? They have been trying and have been failing, no thanks to your S&W, but to our military.
-
Once again for everyone - I'm all for supporting the military. I'd much rather see them spend more money HERE at home in the US on giving our soldiers more pay, educational benefits, etc... rather than wasting it powering tactical generators in Fallujah - where we don't need to be.
On the flip side, where are the all anti-Welfare, anti-social safety net people on this? Our soldiers know what they're signing up for before they sign on the dotted line, do they not? I don't go into Mickey D's and expect a $60,000 salary.
You really think being over this is going to stop them from trying? Where there's a will, there's a way...
No they don't join for the money, well some do because they can't find anything else, but the majority do it to defend your way of life. A thank you from time to time would be nice. And no, saying thanks to a vet on veterans day isn't the same. Why do so many people only say thanks on that day.
-
Considering that most enlisted get paid a minimum wage and eat dirt,
they pretty much do deserve a bonus for success.
Particularly in educational benefits. This country is built on industrial leadership developed from military service.
Oh but no, they aren't defending the people's right to sleep in a warm bed safely over here. They are way over there, miles and miles away. What could that possibly have to do with me over here??
-
I never said I'm fine spending money on him, I'm still unsure of the appropriate way to handle this guy.
But, you proved my point about Afghanistan and Iraq. WTF are my tax dollars doing over there? You're delusional if you think it's protecting us here. It's not - it's pissing people off.
And you wouldn't have those VBIED or RPGs if it wasn't for public tax dollar development.
You really believe that if we weren't over there, they would not still be trying to kill us here? They've been trying to hit us again here and yet we have been keeping them in check. And how has our tax dollars resulted in a terrorist stuffing explosive in a car and driving into a convoy?
-
I've never been pro-debt. And we're not talking importance, but it's quite the hyperbole to think they're standing guard at night for me.
No, Mr. Ruger and the Smith and Wesson Bros. do that for me.
I'm all for supporting our military, but Issue 1 was a 'bonus'... not an entitlement.
Yet you are fine spending money on him for a "fair" trial in NYC. Debt is debt.
What do you think they are doing right now in Iraq and Afghanistan? Standing guard. They aren't at your front door, but they keep the bad guys in check, over there. The terrorists can't regroup and fight us over here because they are in chaos over there. How would your Ruger and S&W hold up to a VBIED or an RPG?
-
-
All that means is that, when we execute them, our reasons and justifications will be plainly obvious to anyone interested in looking. Dead is still dead, it's just that one way makes us look just, the other makes us look suspicious.
What reasons and justifications? Suspicious of what? That he won't get a fair trial? He openly said he was responsible, the whole world knows this. So we need to reward him with US rights?
-
$1000 bonus != Capital Punishment
Besides, I bet his trials costs less than the $200M Ohio wants to borrow for Issue 1.
That's really the only point I wanted to address at this time... continue on.
So? Less than $200 million still adds to the debt right? Giving rights to a non-us citizen terrorist is more important than the people that stand guard at night for you?
-
HAHAHAHAHAHAEdit: My wife didn't find that as funny as I did.
-
I don't have to click play so I'm good.
Wish I could have put it on auto play
wtf is going on in hereNobody seems to really know, even Likwid is now going
did I start?Nah, I went environmentally friendly now. It's electric.
Sweet, Christmas ideas!!!
ah geeze, i'm confused again.This is OR.net, I mean c'mon.
-
hang the fucker. dont waste my money trying him in court,=. fucking call the firing squad
I agree with you here but using what you said.
You guys that didn't vote for Issue one to give money to veterans because we don't have money for that and will put us into more debt, but it's okay to waste money by trying him in a US court that will go on longer than a military tribunal?
Nascar?
-
In case you don't know this, they, as in the extremists of the muslim faith, hate our guts. They don't want to be your friend. Even the ones in country that we have befriended have turned on us or used our friendship, if you can call it that, against us. Maybe if you befriend a serial killer here in the US that may work, but in this theater it doesn't work. Let me repeat that, they hate your guts with a passion and will do anything they can to see you dead. Whats your next option to get useful information?I'm not an expert on the subject, but from what I've read from the people that are... the best way to extract information is to illustrate to them that we aren't the enemy, and basically 'befriend' them. Once they realize we aren't 'the bad guys' they'll open up. The downside: It takes time. But, it's better to get ACCURATE information than 10 leads on bad information to waste your resources chasing those. I.e. I'd rather spend 30 days on getting it right, than getting a wrong answer every 5 days.Think about it. Is it easier to get information from someone you hate, or someone you like?
The same methods police use everyday. If that doesn't work, then you can use drugs as a LAST resort, something like sodium pentothal in conjunction with the earlier methods. Using drugs that are well-tested and have no major side effects isn't torturous, and since they are plainly not US citizens and enemy combatants being interrogated by the military in a war setting, that should satisfy Geneva as well.So torture is wrong but using drugs to influence a person against their will isn't wrong? Wouldn't that fall under something like mental abuse? What about these side effects?
"
Adverse reactions include respiratory depression, myocardial depression, cardiac arrhythmias, prolonged somnolence and recovery, sneezing, coughing, bronchospasm, laryngospasm and shivering. Anaphylactic and anaphylactoid reactions to Pentothal (Thiopental Sodium for Injection, USP) have been reported. Symptoms, e.g., urticaria, bronchospasm, vasodilation and edema should be managed by conventional means.
Rarely, immune hemolytic anemia with renal failure and radial nerve palsy have been reported."
So hijacking someone's mind is okay?
The main reason there is a debate on this topic at all is that we don't really have a firm precedent for how to handle this kind of situation: this guy's not a US citizen, not a member of a foreign government or military. Technically, he's a foreign civilian, but obviously he doesn't fall into the same category as, say, a German tourist who gets into a fistfight while here.Since none of our laws/ policies have a clear, constitutionally-valid, objectively established category for 'Terrorist Dirtbag, Prosecution of', we're setting precedent as we go. What kind of category we slot this guy into will have a long-term effect on every other similar (and possibly not-so-similar) case in the future. Therefore, it is necessary to think both near-term and long-term, and to carefully weigh the implications and possible consequences of our actions.
The military tribunal system has been used for different reasons in differing circumstances throughout our history, but has always been primarily a mechanism for dealing with members of opposing militaries. FDR, for example, used military tribunals to handle some Nazi prisoners.
Using it in this context, to prosecute a foreign civilian (no matter how vile that person is, in this case) sets a precedent: Effectively, it's us saying, "In situations we deem to be fitting, we can take a person from some other country and subject them to an expedited, secretive (often) trial whose rules and practices are not nearly so clear-cut and transparent as those of a traditional court system."
We would go (justifiably) ape-shit if another country did the same thing to one of our citizens. It shouldn't be surprising that even our staunch allies are creeped-out and generally uncomfortable with us trying to handle things that way. It'd be far too easy to stretch it and apply it to currently un-thought-of situations.
The civilian court system, on the other hand, has as its primary virtues a clear set of rules, a transparency (necessary for international legitimacy) that is essentially unparalleled, and (despite all its flaws) a relatively well-acknowledged fairness. It could certainly do with plenty of improvement, but it's currently one of the better things out there. I'm well aware that this guy is not an American citizen, but the truth is that handling the case in this way makes the (probable) conviction much more legitimate to all reasonable eyes because it lacks the fuzziness or secrecy of the tribunal system.
Given that, no matter what we do, we'll be adapting one of these two systems to a task for which it was not designed, I believe our long-term ends are better served by this option over the tribunal system. Neither is perfect, but sometimes policy is trying to pick the crappy option most likely to produce a good outcome.
He is not a US citizen. He is a member of a organized militant group, our enemy. Sure he does not wear a certain uniform and is not really backed by a certain state or nation but he is an enemy of foreign nationality in a group that has set out to to kill us at any cost. That doesn't fall under a military tribunal?
Handling this case this way sets a precident that no matter what sort of crime another country or militant group commits against us, he will be REWARDED with the rights of a US citizen.
-
Yeah.
If I hear someone play that stupid fucking "Party in the USA" song one more time, I'm gonna shank them in the nutsack!
You mean this song?
-
How many times does it need to be posted on why torture doesn't work?
So then what would YOU recommend to get sensitive information from a terrorist.
Khalid Sheikh Mohammed
in Dumpster
Posted
September 2002, Lackawanna Six: American citizens of Yemeni origin convicted of supporting Al Qaeda after attending jihadist camp in Pakistan. Five of six were from Lackawanna, N.Y.
• June 2005, Father and son Umer Hayat and Hamid Hayat: Son convicted of attending terrorist training camp in Pakistan; father convicted of customs violation.
And sorry. I didn't realize it was the same site.