Enemy in the White House: OBAMA WILL RELEASE PICS OF US SOLDIERS "ABUSING" TERRORISTS

[leftsock]

sometimes they make mistakes

People are still responsible for their actions.

 

[Annie Oakley]

People are or should be responsible for their mistakes but when those mistakes are made in unusual circumstances we need to be perhaps a bit more forgiving. My belief is that the government only wants to release these to fuel the fire and go after people in the previous administration. We as a country don't need that especially when it would seem that it might be an attempt to distract people from other things that are going on.

 

[BloodEclipse]

That's fair, but at the same time it's no reason to be afraid of the truth. America is supposed to be an open society, and secrecy merely fuels the imagination. Anything that can be explained should be explained. If the audience is unable to understand the explanation due to their own biases, that is a fault of the audience, not of the truth.

It does not do the military any good to pretend that they are the "adults" and their countrymen are "children" who must be protected from the bogeyman. You do not encourage critical thinking by preventing its onset; you encourage it by forcing people to grapple with realities that may not be present in their everyday lives. The attitude that all this must be kept secret lest the "children" get the wrong idea does more damage to the way the military is perceived than the truth will ever do.

Most of this "ABUSE" was just techniques to help with interrogations. You can see a picture and think "wow something is wrong here", when in reality what we are doing is in the best interest of our soldiers and of our country. If you cannot stomach what it takes to save our citizens from further harm, then step aside and let those with the courage and the will do so. Also it would be helpful if those who are weak would SHUT the Hell up!

 

[Fletch]

I guess my biggest concern is that so many of our fellow citizens do react like children and will eat whatever the government decides to feed them regarding what they want the "truth" to be. When people are open to other opinions and educate themselves to try to seek out the truth it is fine. Just seems like there are a lot of people who don't do that.

That's fair too. But I have a firm belief in the power of reason. So must we all, otherwise no one would ever attempt to raise children. There is a place for discussion of the horrors of war, and we are not doing ourselves any favors by avoiding that discussion. It may mean that we seek other solutions, and I don't see anything wrong with that. It may also mean that we decide the way we're prosecuting a war is just fine and dandy given the circumstances, and that's honestly fine with me too. But as a putatively free and open society, we owe it to ourselves to at least have the discussion with all the available facts at our disposal.

 

[leftsock]

There sure seem to be several "shut the hell up" comments. I guess people who don't agree with others' positions wholeheartedly and without reservation shouldn't voice alternate ideas?

Perhaps we could all have a drink together and do without the bullying?

 

[Fletch]

If you cannot stomach what it takes to save our citizens from further harm, then step aside and let those with the courage and the will do so.

Ah, but therein lies the problem... if I'm not given the chance to see the evidence for myself, I have no idea whether or not I can stomach it. So you've essentially made the argument in favor of releasing the photos.

Also it would be helpful if those who are weak would SHUT the Hell up!

I'm looking at the First Amendment in another window, and I don't see any place where it says "except for the weak". I've always been taught that one of the strengths of our society is that everyone has a voice and is free to use it. Were you sick that day?

 

[INRanger]

I will be the first to admit I've done some very bad things always to bad people and never for my own gratification. I have slightly more than three years combat experience as a soldier and another eighteen months(so far) as a private military contractor. I've been in a lot of shall we say "ambiguous" situations. I have a very strong sense of morality and have always followed it. I am responsible for my actions but not to you. I am the one who carries the weight of my experience we do not share this burden. I assure you if that bubble that you live in ever bursts you will thank whatever it is you worship that people like me exist.

 

[Fletch]

I will be the first to admit I've done some very bad things always to bad people and never for my own gratification. I have slightly more than three years combat experience as a soldier and another eighteen months(so far) as a private military contractor. I've been in a lot of shall we say "ambiguous" situations. I have a very strong sense of morality and have always followed it. I am responsible for my actions but not to you. I am the one who carries the weight of my experience we do not share this burden. I assure you if that bubble that you live in ever bursts you will thank whatever it is you worship that people like me exist.

And I certainly have no desire to denigrate the service you've given. I just wonder why you're working so hard to protect the so-called "bubble" if you honestly believe it is holding back some gratitude that you are owed.

 

[INRanger]

I don't want your gratitude you sanctimonious knuckle head. I just want you to stay in the lane you chose. You can keep your bubble I just wish you would sound proof it.

 

[dburkhead]

That's fair, but at the same time it's no reason to be afraid of the truth. America is supposed to be an open society, and secrecy merely fuels the imagination. Anything that can be explained should be explained. If the audience is unable to understand the explanation due to their own biases, that is a fault of the audience, not of the truth.

It does not do the military any good to pretend that they are the "adults" and their countrymen are "children" who must be protected from the bogeyman. You do not encourage critical thinking by preventing its onset; you encourage it by forcing people to grapple with realities that may not be present in their everyday lives. The attitude that all this must be kept secret lest the "children" get the wrong idea does more damage to the way the military is perceived than the truth will ever do.

But we're not getting the truth. We're getting Pravda--the current Administration's spin on whatever truth there is.

Frankly, I would not trust any pictures from the current Administration. After all, the media, in their haste to crucify Bush, still used photos from the temporary quarters at Gitmo that haven't been used since 6 months into the Afghanistan war (let alone the Iraq war).

As usual, they're trying to convict in the Court of Public Opinion in lieu of any actual pursuit of justice. This isn't an investigation, it's a witch hunt.

Here's some truth for you:

Both Peolosi and Reid were in the decision loop on using things like waterboarding for interrogation. They've had 2 years with a majority in both the House and the Senate. Why is it only now that the Democrats are "investigating" this? In another forum the "local leftist" argued that they didn't bring it up earlier because of "political expediency" but if that's the case, how do we know that it's not "political expediency" rather than any pursuit of "justice" that's driving things now?

 

[Fletch]

But we're not getting the truth. We're getting Pravda--the current Administration's spin on whatever truth there is.

Frankly, I would not trust any pictures from the current Administration. After all, the media, in their haste to crucify Bush, still used photos from the temporary quarters at Gitmo that haven't been used since 6 months into the Afghanistan war (let alone the Iraq war).

As usual, they're trying to convict in the Court of Public Opinion in lieu of any actual pursuit of justice. This isn't an investigation, it's a witch hunt.

Here's some truth for you:

Both Peolosi and Reid were in the decision loop on using things like waterboarding for interrogation. They've had 2 years with a majority in both the House and the Senate. Why is it only now that the Democrats are "investigating" this? In another forum the "local leftist" argued that they didn't bring it up earlier because of "political expediency" but if that's the case, how do we know that it's not "political expediency" rather than any pursuit of "justice" that's driving things now?

I have no quarrel with anything you've said. At the same time, like I said earlier, I believe reason will prevail. Sure, there'll probably be some initial public furor, but most people will go back to watching American Idol and forget about the whole thing. Those who are truly interested will do the digging and find out the truth. And the easier the truth is to get at, the better off we all are. That way, when some ninnyhammer starts up with the yakkity yak about our soldiers, a la post-Vietnam, the truly informed can shut them down. I don't see why this is so hard to understand.

 

[Fletch]

I don't want your gratitude you sanctimonious knuckle head. I just want you to stay in the lane you chose. You can keep your bubble I just wish you would sound proof it.

So now you're opposed to the idea of civilian control of the military?

 

[Annie Oakley]

David, what you said is what I was going to try to say but wouldn't have done it as well. I don't think we can trust our government to give us the truth about much of anything.

As for what INRanger said about doing bad things to bad people. My brother is a VN Vet. He is someone that I admire and respect. I consider him to be a very good person. There were some things that were done while he was in the service that have stayed with him because he had to react in a way that was contrary to what he would normally do. Should he have been punished for those things? I don't think so because he has had to live with them and make peace with the part of himself that questions those decisions to this day.

There is a big difference in doing something with evil intenet and doing something because there is not another option.

 

[Fletch]

There is a big difference in doing something with evil intenet and doing something because there is not another option.

No doubt about it. Lifeboat ethics are called lifeboat ethics specifically because most of us don't spend our lives in a lifeboat.

 

[dburkhead]

I have no quarrel with anything you've said. At the same time, like I said earlier, I believe reason will prevail. Sure, there'll probably be some initial public furor, but most people will go back to watching American Idol and forget about the whole thing. Those who are truly interested will do the digging and find out the truth. And the easier the truth is to get at, the better off we all are. That way, when some ninnyhammer starts up with the yakkity yak about our soldiers, a la post-Vietnam, the truly informed can shut them down. I don't see why this is so hard to understand.

Your belief is touching but has no necessary connection with reality. Consider that folk are still talking about the "terrible conditions at Gitmo" that haven't existed for literally years. Those "terrible conditions" were due to temporary facilities necessitated by us going into the war in Afghanistan without a whole lot of advance warning. However, new clean comfortable facilities were promptly constructed but you wouldn't know it to hear from the news. Whenever they have some report on Gitmo the pictures? Always from those temporary facilities.

You really expect me to believe that the concerted propaganda campaign of the last eight years will suddenly stop because the people it's directed at are no longer in power but are instead on trial?

Pull the other one, it's got bells on.

 

[Annie Oakley]

"Lifeboat ethics" is a good way of putting it I think.

 

[dburkhead]

So now you're opposed to the idea of civilian control of the military?

Are you the President, Secretary of Defense, or Secretary of Army/Navy/Air Force? If not then "civilian control of the military" is not relevant for you.

"Civilian control of the military" means that the military chain of command ends with civilians, not that every ignoramus with an opinion (not calling you an ignoramus, BTW, just so we're clear on that) is qualified to judge what the military does or how it does it.

 

[INRanger]

So now you're opposed to the idea of civilian control of the military?

No I rather like the idea, Ive seen what happens when the military is in charge of civilians. We answer to a civilian authority POTUS and congress who in turn answer to you. That does not mean the military answers to you. You are entitled to broad overview of what we do, that is your ball to play with. The things that are being released now are not in your purview. Its a criminal failure of our commander in chief.

 

[Fletch]

Of course the military does not answer directly to me, but if I am to engage in my duty as a citizen to keep a watchful eye on my government, keeping an eye on the military is necessarily included in that. I don't believe there is any reason to think that the military, broadly speaking, has anything to be ashamed of with regard to the past 7 or 8 years. I do believe the various administrators of the military do, and I have taken them to task for those things.

That said, I still see no reason why I shouldn't be apprised of the situations I'm putatively asking soldiers to be part of or not. I do not have a voice in whether soldier Smith does such and such. I do have a voice in whether he should be where he is to begin with.

The war of pictures-as-propaganda has been fought by both sides, and I see no reason to stop it. My largely military family has been sharing all sorts of photos from Iraq and Afghanistan, that present a different picture of the conflict than the media. I think that's great. We don't need fewer images of what goes on, we need more. We need a clearer image of what the stakes are, what the costs are, what the benefits are. I don't see how anything in our society is aided by covering things up.

 

[Annie Oakley]

Maybe if the media were more likely to show some of the very positive images that I have seen from my nephew all of this would be easier. As we stand today, the media is just another arm of the government for the most part. If 40 pictures are released and 30 of them are positive I have to wonder if the media will only show us the 10.

That and the fact that the current administration still wants to "spank" the former one tells me that we will only see the worst that they have to show. If we could be assured that we were really getting the truth I might get on board with you. I don't believe that the powers that be are interested in the truth. Wish I could feel differently about our government but I don't.