AP: Gitmo Soldier Details Sexual Tactics

[arsbanned]

Originally posted by: TastesLikeChicken

Originally posted by: Bowfinger

Originally posted by: TastesLikeChicken
How dare they treat people who would gladly kill us like this? Why it's just terrible.

So you're OK with Muslims treating Americans this way, since we would gladly kill them? (Never mind that I'm ignoring your presumption of guilt and your stereotyping that all of the detainees are the same.)

I guess we should just cut their heads off instead? Surely that's much better than having female breasts rubbed on your back and comments made about your woodie. :roll:

Perhaps, to a Muslim, being treated this way is like having your head cut off. I'm not passing judgement on that, it may simply be a possibility.

 

[DragonMasterAlex]

Originally posted by: loki8481
just because the Supreme Court didn't declare is legally wrong doesn't mean that it's not morally wrong 🙁

True, but something can be MORALLY wrong without being ILLEGAL. Take smoking or drinking as examples and go from there.

Jason

 

[3chordcharlie]

Originally posted by: DragonMasterAlex
PS: Yeah, I know I have no sensitivity to cultures that believe suicide bombing civilians in cafe's is an OK way to deal with people and problems. You know what else? I LIKE it that way.

You also seem to miss the fact that the culture itself doesn't approve of suicide bombing in civilian cafes (or at least not anymore than you approve of neutron-bombing the region where one terrorist *might* be hiding*...).

More importantly you seem to miss the fact that blowing up hundreds or thousands of people - even if every last one of them is a 'terrorist' - can't and won't fix the cultural relations problem at the root of the current conflict.

 

[Infohawk]

Originally posted by: DragonMasterAlex
I'm gonna say yes, fvck 'em. If we can get *anyone* who is known to be close to bin Laden, I say all rules are off.

You sound like a real fan of the rule of law...

 

[DragonMasterAlex]

Originally posted by: TastesLikeChicken

Wow! Just...WOW.

Not only do you dictate the intent of my own comments to me by pulling something out of your a55 about racism, it seems I can't even take the time to take my wife out to dinner without you building some further ridiculous strawman about silence and consent.

Now please, define exactly what the fvck you're talking about.

You *might* be wasting your time here 🙂

Jason

 

[Gaard]

Originally posted by: DragonMasterAlex

Originally posted by: Gaard


Question to TLC : "So you're OK with Muslims treating Americans this way, since we would gladly kill them?"
Non-answer by TLC: "I guess we should just cut their heads off instead?"

I'm gonna say yes, fvck 'em.

I just want to clarify....you may have read the quote wrong. The question is in bold. Is that the question you're answering 'yes' to Jason?

 

[Infohawk]

Originally posted by: DragonMasterAlex
You *might* be wasting your time here 🙂

Jason

For an interesting perspective on wasting time and Tasteslikechicken, I recommend you look at kogase's last post. Very lucid.

 

[DragonMasterAlex]

Originally posted by: TastesLikeChicken

Originally posted by: Infohawk
I think bowfinger said "possibly racist." I think the repugnant element comes from tasteslikecheck "stereotyping that all of the detainees are the same."
Tasteslikechicken was assuming that all the detainees like to cut people's heads off. It's arguably racist to imply that all arabs in a US jail are into cutting people's heads off. Like saying all black people in jail are there for smoking crack or something along those lines.

Really? Is that it?

Here's what I initially said:

I guess we should just cut their heads off instead? Surely that's much better than having female breasts rubbed on your back and comments made about your woodie.

Now how, exactly, does that imply or translate to " imply that all arabs in a US jail are into cutting people's heads off."

I'm all ears. Please explain. And I can't wait to see how silly this gyration will be.

Well you have to stretch it...roll it between your fingers....pass it from hand to hand...roll it some more...then try to flick at some unsuspecting passerby.

In short, if you treat it like a booger you can reach the conclusions asserted by those above. Don't be so surprised, this forum is *littered* with that kind of "Logic".

Jason

 

[Infohawk]

Originally posted by: Ozoned
Maybe Infohawk will tackle this one also, like she did the other ones....

Sure, I'll give it a shot. Tasteslikechicken doesn't have an answer because any answer would be inconsistent. In other words, if he gave an answer it would require him to admit that he has a double-standard for people he identifies with and "the other."

(It's "he" btw).

 

[preslove]

Originally posted by: TastesLikeChicken

Originally posted by: conjur

Originally posted by: TastesLikeChicken

Originally posted by: conjur

Originally posted by: TastesLikeChicken
How dare they treat people who would gladly kill us like this? Why it's just terrible.

http://news.ft.com/cms/s/31867872-6fe0-11d9-850d-00000e2511c8.html

Four British men who were freed from US detention at Guantanamo Bay on Tuesday have been released without charge after being questioned by anti-terrorist police, UK police said.

Feroz Abbasi, Moazzam Begg, Richard Belmar and Martin Mubanga were initially detained by US troops in Afghanistan before being moved to Guantanamo Bay, where they were held for almost three years.

And you have proof it was one of these blokes who, after being captured as foreign nationals on a battlefield, were treated in such a hideous manner?

No, and you don't have proof it wasn't. Therefore, your ridiculous generalization is moot.

Not really. The US had every right to hold those men without charges. If it WAS one of them, tough sh!t. Stay away from fighting in Afghanistan for the Taliban next time and they won't be subjected to such humiliation as having a woman rub her breast on their backs.

THOSE PEOPLE WERE CONSCRIPTED AT GUNPOINT YOU FVCKING BIGOT!

 

[TastesLikeChicken]

Originally posted by: 3chordcharlie
I think it's possible to take cultural sensitivity too far in cases like this; however, deliberate humiliation is definitely not a case of 'taking sensitivity too far'.

I've said it before, and nothing has changed - you can't fight a war of any sort, claiming the moral high ground, when you engage in disgusting tactics, and dehumanize your enemy. It automatically costs you any claim to moral superiority.

The ends don't justify the means if they destroy the very ends in question.

There is no moral high ground in war, so stop with that ridiculous red herring.

These people are not in Gitmo because they were innocent little Muslims minding their own business. They are jihadists and extremists who would gut you and yours on the spot if they had the chance. Some of them already probably killed at least one of your fellow countrymen on the field of battle and others who have been released because they supposedly were no threat hav been recaptured trying to kill coalition soldiers in Afghanistan. And here you are defending them, feeling sorry for them and their whacky fundie ideas, because they were humiliated, while their ideological brethren in Iraq are cutting the heads off of people?

Cry me a massive river.

The zeal in here of some to overlook the obvious for the mere pleasure of inpugning the US admin makes me sick. What a bunch of partisan troglodytes frequent this place.

What was the sig someone had in here about your ideology controlling you. Well ain't it the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth?

 

[Gaard]

Originally posted by: Infohawk

Originally posted by: DragonMasterAlex
You *might* be wasting your time here 🙂

Jason

For an interesting perspective on wasting time and Tasteslikechicken, I recommend you look at kogase's last post. Very lucid.

Damn, I completely missed that post. Thanks for bringing it to my attention. I give it a :thumbsup:

 

[Ozoned]

Originally posted by: Infohawk

Originally posted by: Ozoned
Maybe Infohawk will tackle this one also, like she did the other ones....

Sure, I'll give it a shot. Tasteslikechicken doesn't have an answer because any answer would be inconsistent. In other words, if he gave an answer it would require him to admit that he has a double-standard for people he identifies with and "the other."

(It's "he" btw).

😱 Sorry. Way to much assuming going on around here. Don't you agree?

 

[Infohawk]

Originally posted by: Ozoned
😱 Sorry. Way to much assuming going on around here. Don't you agree?

Yes, but it is limited to certain posters.

 

[TastesLikeChicken]

Originally posted by: preslove

Originally posted by: TastesLikeChicken

Originally posted by: conjur

Originally posted by: TastesLikeChicken

Originally posted by: conjur

Originally posted by: TastesLikeChicken
How dare they treat people who would gladly kill us like this? Why it's just terrible.

http://news.ft.com/cms/s/31867872-6fe0-11d9-850d-00000e2511c8.html

Four British men who were freed from US detention at Guantanamo Bay on Tuesday have been released without charge after being questioned by anti-terrorist police, UK police said.

Feroz Abbasi, Moazzam Begg, Richard Belmar and Martin Mubanga were initially detained by US troops in Afghanistan before being moved to Guantanamo Bay, where they were held for almost three years.

And you have proof it was one of these blokes who, after being captured as foreign nationals on a battlefield, were treated in such a hideous manner?

No, and you don't have proof it wasn't. Therefore, your ridiculous generalization is moot.

Not really. The US had every right to hold those men without charges. If it WAS one of them, tough sh!t. Stay away from fighting in Afghanistan for the Taliban next time and they won't be subjected to such humiliation as having a woman rub her breast on their backs.

THOSE PEOPLE WERE CONSCRIPTED AT GUNPOINT YOU FVCKING BIGOT!

Oh jeez. You must be kidding. :roll:

There were people from Britian, Australia, and other countries captured in Afghanistan. Are you saying the Taliban conscripted those people at gunpoint in their own countries and forced them to fight?

Get a clue.

 

[TastesLikeChicken]

Originally posted by: Ozoned

Originally posted by: Infohawk

Originally posted by: Ozoned
Maybe Infohawk will tackle this one also, like she did the other ones....

Sure, I'll give it a shot. Tasteslikechicken doesn't have an answer because any answer would be inconsistent. In other words, if he gave an answer it would require him to admit that he has a double-standard for people he identifies with and "the other."

(It's "he" btw).

😱 Sorry. Way to much assuming going on around here. Don't you agree?

I would agree, particularly since I already answered the question. But don't let Disinfosquak know that. Allow him to wallow in his ignorance some more. I'm enjoying it immensely. :laugh:

 

[DragonMasterAlex]

Originally posted by: 3chordcharlie
I think it's possible to take cultural sensitivity too far in cases like this; however, deliberate humiliation is definitely not a case of 'taking sensitivity too far'.

I've said it before, and nothing has changed - you can't fight a war of any sort, claiming the moral high ground, when you engage in disgusting tactics, and dehumanize your enemy. It automatically costs you any claim to moral superiority.

The ends don't justify the means if they destroy the very ends in question.

I completely agree with you, it's just that, well...I don't care if we have the perceived "Moral high ground" or not, so long as we do whatever it takes to WIN. Do I realize there are higher moral issues here? Of course I do, I'm not stupid, I'm well versed in the topic, it's simply that I refuse the idea that we should allow ourselves to be killed and our soldiers put in harm's way because we want to be the "nice" warriors. It's nonsense: war is hell, everyone knows it, now get out there and fight as if your life depended on it and your mama would be tortured, raped and murdered if you don't win.

Jason

 

[DragonMasterAlex]

Originally posted by: Gaard

Originally posted by: DragonMasterAlex

Originally posted by: Gaard


Question to TLC : "So you're OK with Muslims treating Americans this way, since we would gladly kill them?"
Non-answer by TLC: "I guess we should just cut their heads off instead?"

I'm gonna say yes, fvck 'em.

I just want to clarify....you may have read the quote wrong. The question is in bold. Is that the question you're answering 'yes' to Jason?

Your question is misleading, though. Of COURSE I am not OK with them treating Americans that way, but the fact is that neither I nor you nor any other American has ANY choice in how they treat other people. Hell, these people don't treat WOMEN decently in THEIR OWN culture, the extremist elements don't even allow that people should be free to ELECT those who run their countries!

So NO, I'm not OK with it, but I'll admit the obvious truth no one seems to be saying here: They already do it anyway, they did it before we went to war with them, they aren't going to stop anytime soon. I see no reason to show them ANY quarter when they clearly don't even have enough CIVILIZATION in their heads to not bomb non-military persons who are just out trying to live their day-to-day lives.

Jason

 

[Infohawk]

Originally posted by: DragonMasterAlex
So NO, I'm not OK with it, but I'll admit the obvious truth no one seems to be saying here: They already do it anyway, they did it before we went to war with them, they aren't going to stop anytime soon. I see no reason to show them ANY quarter when they clearly don't even have enough CIVILIZATION in their heads to not bomb non-military persons who are just out trying to live their day-to-day lives.

Jason

In other words, two wrongs makes the second wrong not that big of a deal. Deep stuff.

 

[DragonMasterAlex]

Originally posted by: Infohawk

Originally posted by: Ozoned
Maybe Infohawk will tackle this one also, like she did the other ones....

Sure, I'll give it a shot. Tasteslikechicken doesn't have an answer because any answer would be inconsistent. In other words, if he gave an answer it would require him to admit that he has a double-standard for people he identifies with and "the other."

Possibly, but to be fair about it...who doesn't?

Jason

 

[DragonMasterAlex]

Originally posted by: preslove
THOSE PEOPLE WERE CONSCRIPTED AT GUNPOINT YOU FVCKING BIGOT!

Given the culture they come from that wouldn't surprise me to learn, but do you have some evidence to back this up? It's not that I doubt your premise, I just would like to read something official to this effect, and I'm too busy/lazy to look it up for myself tonight 🙂

Jason

 

[Infohawk]

Originally posted by: DragonMasterAlex
Possibly, but to be fair about it...who doesn't?

Jason

I don't.

 

[DragonMasterAlex]

Originally posted by: Infohawk

Originally posted by: Ozoned
😱 Sorry. Way to much assuming going on around here. Don't you agree?

Yes, but it is limited to certain posters.

Well, on the topic of this war, I don't think anyone on any side is innocent of making assumptions. We've all done it, and if we're to claim any semblance(sic?) of integrity, we really ought to have the honesty to admit it. We aren't "insiders" to the war, the president, the congress or anything else, so by definition we MUST assume certain things in order to proceed at all.

Jason

 

[DragonMasterAlex]

Originally posted by: Infohawk

Originally posted by: DragonMasterAlex
So NO, I'm not OK with it, but I'll admit the obvious truth no one seems to be saying here: They already do it anyway, they did it before we went to war with them, they aren't going to stop anytime soon. I see no reason to show them ANY quarter when they clearly don't even have enough CIVILIZATION in their heads to not bomb non-military persons who are just out trying to live their day-to-day lives.

Jason

In other words, two wrongs makes the second wrong not that big of a deal. Deep stuff.

Funny, but I didn't say that, did I? All such wrongs are wrongs, but the fact is that this is a WAR. War sucks, people do highly questionable acts in pursuit of their ideals, be they right or wrong. In the end the consequences will be bourne on the conscience of those who commit such acts, and there is no condemnation you or I can offer up that will carry more weight than the judgment that those people pronounce upon themselves in their most private, personal moments.

Jason

 

[DragonMasterAlex]

Originally posted by: Infohawk

Originally posted by: DragonMasterAlex
Possibly, but to be fair about it...who doesn't?

Jason

I don't.

Ah yes, you are pure as the driven snow, consistent in all ideas and all fronts at all times. WOW, who knew that a moral "Superman" typed and breathed on the same forum as we lowly maggots crawling on the soles of your shoes.

And here I thought that you were at *least* honest, if misguided.

Jason