GITMO to close within a year, so I'm hearing.

Help Support The Pipe:

Greg Stone

Well-Known Member
Joined
Jun 6, 2007
Messages
588
I seem to remember that after the World Trade Center was bombed in 1993 the United States was able to track down and catch, prosecute, and jail the perps. Clinton didn't lock down this country and try to use fear to rule. It worked. Going on a witch hunt usually rakes in people who aren't really bad guys. Besides have we caught the person behind 9-11? Didn't think so.
Clinton was next to useless when it came to going after UBL. We had more than one opportunity to end him when Bill was in the White House but decided against it for fear of collateral damage offending one or another of our "allies".
 

FlyXJTnow

Well-Known Member
Joined
Feb 8, 2005
Messages
2,830
Clinton was next to useless when it came to going after UBL. We had more than one opportunity to end him when Bill was in the White House but decided against it for fear of collateral damage offending one or another of our "allies".
I guess it worked. Have you been paying attention to Karzai and the Afghans lately? They're completely pissed at all the casualties from collateral damage we've been doing lately.

I always liked using special forces to handle delicate situations. Kinda like Tora Bora a few years ago when the Ranger's had Bin Laden cornered and were denied from going any further to kill him.

If you ask me Bin Laden was Bush's Emanuel Goldstein.
 

Greg Stone

Well-Known Member
Joined
Jun 6, 2007
Messages
588
I guess it worked. Have you been paying attention to Karzai and the Afghans lately? They're completely pissed at all the casualties from collateral damage we've been doing lately.

I always liked using special forces to handle delicate situations. Kinda like Tora Bora a few years ago when the Ranger's had Bin Laden cornered and were denied from going any further to kill him.

If you ask me Bin Laden was Bush's Emanuel Goldstein.
I have in fact seen that the Afghans are pissed lately. Definitely a tough situation and I have concerns about what exactly the mission is over there and what the realistic end goal is.

There's a pretty good book out recently by a Delta Force officer that was in command of the operation to kill Bin Laden in Tora Bora. Interesting, easy reading.

I like the Emanuel Goldstein analogy :) Although I'm not sure I have enough faith in the competence of the Bush administration to come up with a plan like that. GWB probably thinks that George Orwell was one of his buddies on the Yale crew sqaud.
 

schlecht muttaficka

Well-Known Member
Joined
Apr 22, 2005
Messages
1,281
Yes...we use unconventional means. If a terrorist get some water splashed on his face and he gives up some info that saves American lives...would you accept and act on that information and would you sit on it because it was taken by unconventional means?

If you seriously think our government does not do things..on a regular basis..that is not in line with what the majority thinks is right, you are fooling yourself. You enjoy the benefits of some of these operations but question those who prosecute them.

I wish someone had the sack to answer this question honestly.....

If you knew someone had information that would decide whether someone in your immediate family lived or died...what would you do? What means would you use to get that information? Would you simply ask the nicely and then move on? Think hard about it....

My apologies for not wordng my post correctly. I failed to articulate my point when I edited it with additional content. Please, read it again, especially the last part. I'm not debating, nor trying to negate your post.


Clinton was next to useless when it came to going after UBL. We had more than one opportunity to end him when Bill was in the White House but decided against it for fear of collateral damage offending one or another of our "allies".
It never ceases to amaze me how many people DON'T know this, or simply choose to dismiss it when praising Clinton. I can't keep a straight face whenever I see that interview of him on the infamous FOX interview where he says he "tried harder than anybody else to kill Bin Laden".

As you said, Bush and his administration had their share of failures, but how bad would they be had it not been for his predecessor's?
 
Last edited:

FlyXJTnow

Well-Known Member
Joined
Feb 8, 2005
Messages
2,830
I have in fact seen that the Afghans are pissed lately. Definitely a tough situation and I have concerns about what exactly the mission is over there and what the realistic end goal is.

There's a pretty good book out recently by a Delta Force officer that was in command of the operation to kill Bin Laden in Tora Bora. Interesting, easy reading.

I like the Emanuel Goldstein analogy :) Although I'm not sure I have enough faith in the competence of the Bush administration to come up with a plan like that. GWB probably thinks that George Orwell was one of his buddies on the Yale crew sqaud.
That's true, probably giving Bush too much credit.
 

Whirlpool

Well-Known Member
Joined
Oct 15, 2006
Messages
1,840
Replies in bold:

Let's move on from the "splashing water in someone's face" example. If it were that minor and inconsequential why would it be considered an interrogation technique?

Interrogation comes in many forms. Some are pretty mild..while others can lead to death. Nothing we have done, from what I know, as even approached that. In my opinion, it is minor...but that is my opinion. Like I have said before, one mans torture is nothing to another man.

As to what one would do if a terrorist had information.............
The fact of the matter is that the 911 attacks were successful not because our government was unable to aggressively interrogate or wiretap without a warrant or monitor my library habits. Those attacks were successful because we were lazy and stupid.

There is no fact of the matter. There are a million reasons why it happened. It had nothing to do with us being lazy or stupid. These people want to kill us and will find a way to do it. It is that simple. We did lose humint under a previous president, which makes it debatable whether we would have had intel as to the attacks.


If you feel safer now that the government does those things and others then I'm happy for you. Although I suspect your feeling of safety is a mirage because we're just as lazy and stupid as we were 8 years ago.

I feel a little safer because of our intelligence community (until Obama put Panetta in charge of the CIA...dumb move) And we are NOT lazy or stupid. You do not respect the talents and motivation of those who want to kill us. They are good at what they do and we need to respect that...we did not before and we paid for it. I doubt we will make the same mistake again. One of the advances has been in getting information from these terrorist. That is a simple fact.

Thank you for your service just the same. I mean that.

Anytime!
 

Whirlpool

Well-Known Member
Joined
Oct 15, 2006
Messages
1,840
Kill Bin Laden is the book by Dalton Fury (not his real name...if it were, the dude could walk up to a chick and say "My name is Dalton Fury" and her pants would hit the floor.

It is a great read.
 

FlyXJTnow

Well-Known Member
Joined
Feb 8, 2005
Messages
2,830
Kill Bin Laden is the book by Dalton Fury (not his real name...if it were, the dude could walk up to a chick and say "My name is Dalton Fury" and her pants would hit the floor.

It is a great read.
I agree. I saw an interview with him and read an excerpt. Its on my reading list.
 

PhantomHawk

Well-Known Member
Joined
Jan 5, 2007
Messages
6,695
I can't keep a straight face whenever I see that interview of him on the infamous FOX interview where he says he "tried harder than anybody else to kill Bin Laden".
I feel the same way about the bumper sticker that says "No one DIED when CLINTON lied." Every time I see that one I think about the day he ordered a missile strike on a pharmaceutical factory claiming it was a site for the development of bio-weapons. People died, and they were only making medicine there. Not to mention how many people died after we destroyed the only pharmaceutical plant in the Sudan. But it did get Bill out of the headlines for a while. And since 3 days prior he was arguing the definition of the word "is", I am sure it was a welcome break. Granted, that's a far cry from starting a war of aggression, but it still irks me how spiteful people are with their partisanship. That is true on BOTH sides of the fence. Personally, I have no problem whatsoever with a President that gets blown in the Oval Office, but I also want him to kill the bad guy. I am comfortable with leadership that does the unpleasant things necessary to protect our way of life, and lies to the public for it's own good. Because the public, in general, is ignorant and stupid. Thank God we don't live in a pure democracy. We live in a representative democracy. If everybody who happened to be born on US soil got to vote on every single issue we had, we'd fall apart in a week.
 
Last edited:

lap

Well-Known Member
Joined
Jul 16, 2005
Messages
13,248
You're getting into the situation of moral relevance. How can you do that and be conservative? Isn't torture, torture? So now we have to break things down into lesser degrees of torture? Bush already tried to do that with his administrations definitions.
Waterboarding is not torture in my book. And nothing that has been reported we have done to these prisoners pales in comparison to what Nazis, Imperial Japan, or Alqaida has done. There is no moral equivalent to what we have done to what they have done.

Electrical cables connected to your son's testicles don't maim or physically harm. I'm sure it would hurt like the dickens and would make him say whatever it took to make it stop though.

Let's not kid ourselves here. Waterboarding is not "spraying water in someone's face". It is a technique meant to make someone believe that they are drowning, which we'd all agree would be a terrible way to go. I'm sure that it's very unpleasant otherwise why would one want to confess to something to make it stop?

And don't get me started on the Patriot Act. The government has no business looking into what books I take out at the library. Nor do they have any business listening to my international phone calls for that matter.

We as Americans believe that we are better. That we have a better country and a better society. The Patriot Act and torturing terrorist suspects don't do anything to further our "more perfect union". They harm it. The whole idea of a "War On Terror" is ridiculous. Just as the "War On Drugs is ridiculous and has been a complete failure. For crying out loud Afghanistan is exporting more heroin now than when the Taliban were in power. How's that for irony?

Don't get me wrong. UBL ought to die by American hands as should his buddies. But we ought not to screw up our country in the process.
If my son was Khalid Sheik Mohamud, I would NOT mind them using waterboarding, sleep deprivation, loud music, cold temperatures, growling dogs, nudity, underwear on the head on him what so ever!

Lets not kid ourselves, we are not talking about things that cause physical harm to these people like electrically shoking theirl balls would. We are talking about harsh interrogation techniques in which the person has all his parts the way they were before. The fact that they are unpleasent is precisely why we should use them! Or I guess we can go back to putting them in 27B from LAX-EWR or ask them what their definittion of torture is, right?

And actually, the government does have the right to look at what books you checked out. As long as the provision of the Patriot Act are followed, that is. And if you are not a suspected terrorits then they cannot look at what books you've checked out. As for international calls, if its outside the borders of the US, your communications are not protected under the first amendement.

Just wait, Obama will not roll back any of the programs that Bush started. If he was, he would have already done it just as he has with Gitmo.

I seem to remember that after the World Trade Center was bombed in 1993 the United States was able to track down and catch, prosecute, and jail the perps. Clinton didn't lock down this country and try to use fear to rule. It worked. Going on a witch hunt usually rakes in people who aren't really bad guys. Besides have we caught the person behind 9-11? Didn't think so.
Actually, treating the WTC bombing as a crime is what led OBL think that we are just a paper tiger. We go after the low level guys just to make the media think that we caught the people who did it but we don't even try to go after the real culprits. Now we pay for that mistake. Clinton could've cought the person behind 9/11 but he was too worried about what people would think instead. It didn't work.

Let's move on from the "splashing water in someone's face" example. If it were that minor and inconsequential why would it be considered an interrogation technique?

As to what one would do if a terrorist had information.............
The fact of the matter is that the 911 attacks were successful not because our government was unable to aggressively interrogate or wiretap without a warrant or monitor my library habits. Those attacks were successful because we were lazy and stupid.

If you feel safer now that the government does those things and others then I'm happy for you. Although I suspect your feeling of safety is a mirage because we're just as lazy and stupid as we were 8 years ago.

Thank you for your service just the same. I mean that.
We may have been lazy or stupid back then. But now that we have all these programs to help gather intelligence, you cannot say the same. We are not lazy or stupid about it anymore (if we were then). But don't forget that the enemy is not dumb. They adapt as well and so must we or otherwise fall victim to the same fate.
 

schlecht muttaficka

Well-Known Member
Joined
Apr 22, 2005
Messages
1,281
I feel the same way about the bumper sticker that says "No one DIED when CLINTON lied." Every time I see that one I think about the day he ordered a missile strike on a pharmaceutical factory claiming it was a site for the development of bio-weapons. People died, and they were only making medicine there. Not to mention how many people died after we destroyed the only pharmaceutical plant in the Sudan. But it did get Bill out of the headlines for a while. And since 3 days prior he was arguing the definition of the word "is", I am sure it was a welcome break. Granted, that's a far cry from starting a war of aggression, but it still irks me how spiteful people are with their partisanship. That is true on BOTH sides of the fence. Personally, I have no problem whatsoever with a President that gets blown in the Oval Office, but I also want him to kill the bad guy. I am comfortable with leadership that does the unpleasant things necessary to protect our way of life, and lies to the public for it's own good. Because the public, in general, is ignorant and stupid. Thank God we don't live in a pure democracy. We live in a representative democracy. If everybody who happened to be born on US soil got to vote on every single issue we had, we'd fall apart in a week.
All excellent points sir. It's safe to say that our viewpoint is pretty much identical, except for one little detail which I'll get to after this. But while we're on it, why don't we throw in the bombing of the Chinese embassy in Belgrade. People want the intelligence failures of the Bush administration to be taken to the highest level of accountability, why should anybody else be held to a lower standard? If I remember correctly, even non intelligence entities like tourism book publishers KNEW the EXACT location of the Embassy.

If everybody who happened to be born on US soil got to vote on every single issue we had, we'd fall apart in a week.
I wouldn't even give it that long.
 

Greg Stone

Well-Known Member
Joined
Jun 6, 2007
Messages
588
And actually, the government does have the right to look at what books you checked out. As long as the provision of the Patriot Act are followed, that is.

I guess I wasn't clear. I understand that the Patriot Act gives the government the right. My point is that it's wrong

And if you are not a suspected terrorits then they cannot look at what books you've checked out.

A suspected terrorist. That is the key phrase. What exactly is a suspected terrorist? Does KSM fit the profile? How about Stephen Hatfill? Are you aware that you, I, your pal preludespeeder, and the rest of the taxpayers recently gave this guy several million dollars after the government ruined his life because they suspected him of being a terrorist? The idea that it's ok for the government to do unsavory things to people suspected of being terrorists is a very dangerous thing. A true patriot would loath that.
We're still lazy and stupid.
 

Whirlpool

Well-Known Member
Joined
Oct 15, 2006
Messages
1,840
We're still lazy and stupid.
Nope...just the people that are not willing to do what it takes to keep these a'holes at bay are lazy and stupid...and cowards.

There are some great people doing some great work and have done a wonderful job of keeping this country safe for 8 years.
 

Greg Stone

Well-Known Member
Joined
Jun 6, 2007
Messages
588
Nope...just the people that are not willing to do what it takes to keep these a'holes at bay are lazy and stupid...and cowards.

There are some great people doing some great work and have done a wonderful job of keeping this country safe for 8 years.
I'm talking mainly about policy makers. Not those who carry out policy

It's obviously very complicated but as Americans we are responsible for the lazy and stupid people that we put into office, irrespective of party affiliation. What does that say about us? Maybe that the alarm went off but we're much happier to just continue hitting the snooze button. You could translate that analogy into many of our problems, from terrorism to the economy and more.
 
Last edited:

lap

Well-Known Member
Joined
Jul 16, 2005
Messages
13,248
We're still lazy and stupid.
The Patriot Act is not wrong. It helps us in the war on terror.

I understand that even people innocent people have been convicted of a crime in a court of law with rules from our constitution. Are you going to throw out the best jurisprudence system out the window because its not perfect?

We are talking about things that at the worst make you FEEL as though you are drowning, not actually drowning them. We are subjecting people to sleep deprivation, NOT putting them permanently to sleep, loud noise/music, NOT cutting of their ears, cold/hot temparatures, NOT burning/freezing them, nudity, NOT sodomizing them, woman's underwear on their heads, NOT beheadings.

We have not been lazy since 9/11. The government has spent billions of dollars, man hours, blood, sweat, and tears trying to keep us safe. Just because we don't see things overtly doesn't mean there is laziness going on. And those policy makers are certainly not stupid. We may disagree with them but for the most part, and in general, they are not stupid.
 

FlyXJTnow

Well-Known Member
Joined
Feb 8, 2005
Messages
2,830
I sleep better at night knowing that Bush has kept up safe SINCE 9-11. 9-11 was a gimme.
 

Latest posts

Top