Carter: America tortures

[dar512]

Please take note that UG has no answer for this:

Originally Posted by dar512

Give me a specific case where the mistreatment of these prisoners has had the direct result of drawing the conflict in Afghanistan or Iraq to a positive conclusion. Then I might agree that the word is 'stymie'. However I will never agree that torture of a human being is worth 'stymieing'.

or this:

Originally Posted by dar512

Ah. So we should torture the enemy so that we can protect our American freedom? Would that be the freedom to threaten to torture me? Or would that be my freedom of speech that you would like to curtail by threatening me?

What does that tell you?

[Urbane Guerrilla]

It would seem obvious that you could spin things like that so long as the fighting in Afghanistan is still going on. I call that intellectual dishonesty, dar512. I urge you to cease it and forever desist, that you may come into the practice of honesty, rather than sympathizing with more fascistic mullahs. Sure, the fighting's not over, and none of us knows when it might be, and shooting at foreigners is still almost more of an Afghan tribal sport than playing bushkazi. I don't expect peace, quietude, or rose gardens there anytime soon, precisely because of the Afghan penchant for shooting at anybody of a different language, a penchant practiced mutually by everybody.

We are struggling primarily against a non-national enemy who is driven by his bigotry, is he not? The way we can beat these people is by getting information, since we cannot put pressure upon their nation -- and clearly we are indeed getting information enough to take down their leadership on a semiregular basis, which tells me we're doing something right -- I've been involved in secretive national doings myself, whose triumphs are unheralded every bit as much as their failures get trumpeted. I reckon we are having our successes, quietly. I don't think we should be interrupting them.

Your second boxful is frankly frothy rhetorical stuff, unworthy of reply. Think better.

[Ibby]

Originally Posted by Urbane Guerrilla

I reckon we are having our successes, quietly.

Most of our successes are pretty quiet to those not having them, i suppose. The media isn't let to know about them a whole lot.
I'll bet they're not too quiet to those in the room with the uh, 'successes' though. They're probably more like

no...please...imtellingyouidontknow...whatareyoudoingwiththaaaaaaaaanostopnomakeitstopgurglegurglenoooimtellingyouiswearaaaaaagaspgaspgaspmakeitstopmakeitstoppleaseimbeggingyouuuuuu

...you dont want to know what the failures sound like.
mostly, they stop after that gurgle, gurgle part.

[tw]

Originally Posted by Urbane Guerrilla

I reckon we are having our successes, quietly. I don't think we should be interrupting them.

UG precedes that quote by claiming he was privy to secret successes. Then he *speculates* that torture results in useful information. For all his privy access, he really does not know? In the next sentence, he converts total speculation into a fact - then uses that 'fact' to justify torture.

Barak used this exact same logic to 'play the white boys'.

Urbane Guerrilla cannot answer and completely sidesteps two simple questions:

Originally Posted by dar512

Give me a specific case where the mistreatment of these prisoners has had the direct result of drawing the conflict in Afghanistan or Iraq to a positive conclusion. Then I might agree that the word is 'stymie'. However I will never agree that torture of a human being is worth 'stymieing'.

and

Originally Posted by dar512

Ah. So we should torture the enemy so that we can protect our American freedom? Would that be the freedom to threaten to torture me? Or would that be my freedom of speech that you would like to curtail by threatening me?

Urbane Guerrilla is asked these questions repeatedly. UG avoids answering these questions repeatedly by attacking the questioner.

Originally Posted by Urbane Guerrilla

It would seem obvious that you could spin things like that so long as the fighting in Afghanistan is still going on.

How ironic. UG's responses are typical of a conspiring terrorist trying to hide his complicity. Even Barak did not resort to deceit.

UG - dar512 asked you two simple questions. Why not answer him with honesty? Is honesty that difficult - especially when it might contradict a political agenda? Answer his questions without political accusations. His questions are simple. Why can Urbane Guerrilla not answer dar512’s questions? Why must UG attack the messenger?

[TheMercenary]

Originally Posted by dar512

[b]Please take note that UG has no answer for this:

What does that tell you?

It tells me they are doing a good job of keeping things secret that should be kept that way and you don't know if a positive or negative result has happened or not.

[tw]

Why does UG post multiple times every day ... and still cannot answer even one of dar512's two questions?