Please answer my question. Do you have any proof that Saddam armed the enemies of Israel?
That
was my answer. I consider Saddam’s offer of money to the families of Palestinian suicide bombers a form of inducement to violence.
Perhaps Saddams fixation of Israel was a case of penis envy. Israel does get away with actively oppressing it's own citizens and draws no sanctions for it. Where as Iraq got slapped with more sanctions after the Gulf War for trying to kill off the Kurds.
Red herring. We are not interested in Israel’s guilt, but in Saddam’s potential to act on his fixation.
I agree that Israel getting into a MAD situation would be bad. I don't want Israel to nuke someone over getting gassed. But is there any proof that Saddam had plans for this or any other attack on Israel? They diddn't even retaliate for Osirak.
At the time of Osirak, Saddam’s arsenal was in its infancy. He was also gearing for war with Iran.
Oh, so they're being punished, therefore referring to Chile (not comparing, you liar) is just ridiculous.
We're discussing their METHODS and COMPETENCE, moron.
LIAR. These are
your words:
“Funny, explain the difference between the military intelligence corps and Chile- because so far I ain't seeing one in Iraq.”
You insinuated that Chile’s military intelligence was just like America’s in Iraq. That’s a comparison, nitwit.
Riiiiggghhht. You're going to put forward that the Israelis didn't oversee their interrogations either now?
And obviously, they let it get too far? What you’re doing here is advocating a black-and-white fallacy by suggesting that all torture will inevitably kill victims.
And you seriously underestimate how such treatment will lionize these scumbags in the wider world, especially the Arab World. This is supposed to be a war about civilization and way of life and all that other bollocks.
The Arab world is already convinced we torture the prisoners we take. Do you honestly believe that they will assume we’re treating Osama according to the Geneva Conventions regardless of whether we actually put him in a five star hotel or a hole in the ground?
Spare me the standard propaganda line. Even if this wedding turns out to be nothing of the sort (currently the coalition showing photos it says were of the site and calling photos of 10 dead children simply a lie), they've repeatedly fucked up and killed many civilians, comparisons with other military's are irrelevant. And I've yet to see you come up with a cogent reason for why referring (not making comparisons, yet another pathetic lie from you) to what military interrogators did in Chile is just unconscionable.
“Propaganda line?” It’s true, you fucking retard. The United States goes to great lengths to reduce the possibility of civilian casualties during operations.
Furthermore, attempting to compare – and we’ve already established that that’s
exactly what you attempted to do, but nice backpedal anyway – Chile’s military intelligence arm, known for its often senseless and uncontrolled brutality, to that of the United States – where incidents like that at Abu Ghraib are cause for shakeups, prosecution, and reorganization – is simply misleading.
It doesn't matter. If you read the article, you'll see that military interrogators may have participated in this shit. And their oversight is *supposed* to have stopped these excesses.
But they obviously – by your own admission – gave roles to military police, who were apparently supposed to “prepare” the prisoners in question. That shouldn’t be happening.
And, frankly, given the much smaller scale the torturing of only high leadership in very specific circumstances (when they haven’t said anything else), the affair is going to be far easier to control.
et another dumbass strawman. Where did I say anything like that, fucknut? I'll repeat the question, moron: substantiate your reasoning that with every possible piece of information a terrorist throws out there, they'll instantly have the information on hand to determine it true or false.
What the fuck do you think happens if they get information that's of dubious quality out of torture? They'll just magically check it against their omnipotent Skynet to decide whether it's true? Did it occur to you that this dubious information can enter the damn RECORD, and further taint the intelligence, leading to embarassment down the line? Does any of this sound FAMILIAR?
And this is only possible if torture occurs? Spare me.
Every fucking piece of data that the U.S. military comes across in Iraq has to be catalogued and cross-checked. That’s why there’s such a fucking massive back-up.
Yet again you ignore the holes you punch in your own fucking argument. “Well, obviously, only torture will yield questionable data” is what your argument boils down to. Did you even stop to think that your criticism of my position is equally applicable to yours?
Oh we do, do we? Funny, haven't seen any substantiation of this.
Look above: we know it works, and we know that the American public wouldn’t be enraged by the revelation that Osama bin Laden had been subject to torture. Furthermore, the Arab world already expects that we torture prisoners – in part thanks to Abu Ghraib. Hence the public relations consequences have by and large already come to pass outside the U.S.
Assuming of course 100% effectiveness of information they have on hand to check up with, if they have any at all
So you’re telling me that as long as it’s by “uninvasive means,” we can act on any information that comes out of a mindfuck session at once? Moron. DO YOU NOT SEE THAT THE SAME PROBLEM OF FILTERING DATA APPLIES REGARDLESS OF WHETHER TORTURE IS USED?
Hey, dickhead, unlike you, my concern for the consequences doesn't stop at America's borders.
And there’s a falsehood if ever I saw one. The proper cost-benefit analysis takes into account global reverberations of various actions as a matter of course.
OHhhhhhhhh, so now it's "underhanded things once in awhile". Backpedal backpedal backpedal backpedal. Watch out for the cliff behind you, idiot.
It was always under-handed things once in a while. If you want to argue that doing bad things every minute of every day is a reasonable way to advance U.S. interests, you need to offer examples.
No, your idea for the best interests of your nation is doing whatever you please, as long as you get something out of it. In your own words.
No, you moron. As long as the results are fucking positive. And they aren’t positive – obviously – in every single version of your strawman yet.
Even if true (it is an allegation that Russian engineers, not Russia per se) big whoop. Iraq could never have built and tested any new missiles if UNMOVIC had been in place, and their existing pathetic SA-2 kitbases were being destroyed.
If Russian engineers were milling around Iraq as late as 2001, that rather puts a damper on your picture of effective sanctions, now doesn’t it?
Correction- did you know that the US military search teams that the ISG replaced checked every ammunition dump between Kuwait and Baghdad by their own admission, and that Kay said he searched 10 of 120 almost 6 months before he quit. Furthermore, the Coalition has rightly (unlike certain other idiots) held off from using it as proof as anything, treating it as a stray.
What were the circumstances of the pre-ISG search? And are all 120 of the depots in question certainly located between Kuwait and Baghdad, on the route taken by invading U.S. forces?
As for Kay, his argument conveniently neglects to place attention on the matter of whether Saddam was still hiding items from the 1998 inspections or before.
According to numerous ICRC and Amnesty International reports that have been forwarded to the US government as early as 10 months ago, this shit has been going on in Afghanistan and in US-controlled jails in Iraq for a long time, and internal US Army investigations whose results have become at least partially public have confirmed them. See also the link I posted earlier in this thread to an article written by a former US military interrogator. In light of that, how about you provide evidence that the torture is not a systematic policy? There is plenty of publicly available evidence that supports my position, so the burden of proof is on you.
First of all, an opinion piece form an unofficial source won’t cut it; I want outright news or government reports. If you say they’re out there, prove it.
Second, I’m not about to let you off the hook and prove a negative. It’s your responsibility to substantiate your positive assertion, not mine. If that’s too difficult for you, then I’ll accept your concession.
But hey, what the fuck do they know, right?
The report argues that torture is a “poor” tool. But we have already agreed on this. The question is whether it is a
useless tool – and the answer is clearly no, since it’s been used elsewhere with positive results.
Furthermore, the report cites moral and legal concerns as the key problems in the use of torture – and we already know that while the torture of men like Osama bin Laden will turn heads, it won’t initiate a massive public outcry.
