Cheney teaches ethics to West Pointers

[GrGr]

Title was trolling and would result in a thread lock.
I have removed the obvious troll to allow the thread to stay active.

Should such a blatant attempt occur again, the OP of such thread will have time off.

Anandtech Moderator

Cheney criticizes the Geneva Conventions in Military Academy commencement address Michael Roston
Published: Saturday May 26, 2007

Raw story
Vice President Dick Cheney criticized the notion of applying the Geneva Conventions to individuals captured in the course of the war on terrorism in a Saturday commencement address at the United States Military Academy in West Point, New York.

"Capture one of these killers, and he'll be quick to demand the protections of the Geneva Convention and the Constitution of the United States," the Vice President said in the Saturday morning speech. "Yet when they wage attacks or take captives, their delicate sensibilities seem to fall away."

Cheney delivered the remarks in the context of moral and ethical lessons that the graduating cadets at West Point had learned in the course of their study.

"You have lived by a code of honor, and internalized that code as West Point men and women always do," he said. "As Army officers on duty in the war on terror, you will now face enemies who oppose and despise everything you know to be right, every notion of upright conduct and character, and every belief you consider worth fighting for and living for."

Recently, West Point instructors have complained of the difficulty of persuading Army cadets to adhere to the principles of the Geneva Conventions in the war on terrorism. A February article in the New Yorker highlighted a dialog on the problem between West Point's dean and Joel Surnow, producer of the hit Fox television program '24.'

"This past November, U.S. Army Brigadier General Patrick Finnegan, the dean of the United States Military Academy at West Point, flew to Southern California to meet with the creative team behind '24,'" wrote Jane Mayer in the magazine. "Finnegan, who is a lawyer, has for a number of years taught a course on the laws of war to West Point seniors - cadets who would soon be commanders in the battlefields of Iraq and Afghanistan. He always tries, he said, to get his students to sort out not just what is legal but what is right. However, it had become increasingly hard to convince some cadets that America had to respect the rule of law and human rights, even when terrorists did not. One reason for the growing resistance, he suggested, was misperceptions spread by '24,' which was exceptionally popular with his students. As he told me, 'The kids see it, and say, ''If torture is wrong, what about '24?''"

The excerpt of Cheney's remarks is presented below, and can be accessed in full at the White House website.

#
The standards of this Academy only highlight the deepest and most fundamental difference between the United States and our sworn enemies. A month ago, the chairman of the Joint Chiefs, General Pace, spoke to this class about each officer's duty to follow a moral compass in all of his or her actions. In these four years you have learned the rules of warfare and professional military ethics. You've studied the tenets of morality. You've reflected on the seven Army values: of loyalty, duty, respect, selfless service, honor, integrity, and personal courage. You have lived by a code of honor, and internalized that code as West Point men and women always do.

As Army officers on duty in the war on terror, you will now face enemies who oppose and despise everything you know to be right, every notion of upright conduct and character, and every belief you consider worth fighting for and living for. Capture one of these killers, and he'll be quick to demand the protections of the Geneva Convention and the Constitution of the United States. Yet when they wage attacks or take captives, their delicate sensibilities seem to fall away. These are men who glorify murder and suicide. Their cruelty is not rebuked by human suffering, only fed by it. They have given themselves to an ideology that rejects tolerance, denies freedom of conscience, and demands that women be pushed to the margins of society. The terrorists are defined entirely by their hatreds, and they hate nothing more than the country you have volunteered to defend.

The terrorists know what they want and they will stop at nothing to get it. By force and intimidation, they seek to impose a dictatorship of fear, under which every man, woman, and child lives in total obedience to their ideology. Their ultimate goal is to establish a totalitarian empire, a caliphate, with Baghdad as its capital. They view the world as a battlefield and they yearn to hit us again. And now they have chosen to make Iraq the central front in their war against civilization.

Hm now who was it that chose Iraq as the central front again?

If I recall correctly Cheney and Scalia are good friends. But the reason I posted this article is because it gives a nice comment to Scalia's Bauer comments too. Some TV shows is programming Americans with doubtful values it seems.

 

[Sinsear]

Topic Title: War Criminal Cheney teaches ethics to West Pointers

Did I miss an indictment and conviction by a court somewhere?

 

[JD50]

Originally posted by: Sinsear

Topic Title: War Criminal Cheney teaches ethics to West Pointers

Did I miss an indictment and conviction by a court somewhere?

No, innocent until proven guilty only applies to terrorists captured on the battlefield. Well, according to some of the moonbats here.

 

[Craig234]

I've long thought that soldiers (of any army) should be taught to use their own views on morality and to avoid just being tools that can be used for evil. I'd like to see more real ethics taught, not just indoctrination. To their credit, the US military does some teaching of that and has some freedom for the military to be exposed to 'free speech', as I understand.

Cheney is an evil bastard. His logic could as easily be applied to letting police sneak into the homes of criminals and kill them, because the criminals don't respect the same rules the police do. He also fails to note the issue that sometimes the US can have policies that are not just. Cheney is a fine minion for an empire, blind to its wrongs.

Did I miss an indictment and conviction by a court somewhere?

Criminals are criminals regardless of being convicted. Was Hitler ever convicted in a court?

 

[yankeesfan]

Originally posted by: Craig234
I've long thought that soldiers (of any army) should be taught to use their own views on morality and to avoid just being tools that can be used for evil. I'd like to see more real ethics taught, not just indoctrination. To their credit, the US military does some teaching of that and has some freedom for the military to be exposed to 'free speech', as I understand.

Cheney is an evil bastard. His logic could as easily be applied to letting police sneak into the homes of criminals and kill them, because the criminals don't respect the same rules the police do. He also fails to note the issue that sometimes the US can have policies that are not just. Cheney is a fine minion for an empire, blind to its wrongs.

Did I miss an indictment and conviction by a court somewhere?

Criminals are criminals regardless of being convicted. Was Hitler ever convicted in a court?

Yes, he was.

 

[dahunan]

Originally posted by: yankeesfan

Originally posted by: Craig234
I've long thought that soldiers (of any army) should be taught to use their own views on morality and to avoid just being tools that can be used for evil. I'd like to see more real ethics taught, not just indoctrination. To their credit, the US military does some teaching of that and has some freedom for the military to be exposed to 'free speech', as I understand.

Cheney is an evil bastard. His logic could as easily be applied to letting police sneak into the homes of criminals and kill them, because the criminals don't respect the same rules the police do. He also fails to note the issue that sometimes the US can have policies that are not just. Cheney is a fine minion for an empire, blind to its wrongs.

Did I miss an indictment and conviction by a court somewhere?

Criminals are criminals regardless of being convicted. Was Hitler ever convicted in a court?

Yes, he was.

Hopefully Humanity gets to convict Cheney someday too

 

[ProfJohn]

Nice trolling thread title we have here.

I seem to recall a thread calling Hillary a 'commie' being locked because of its title hmmmm

 

[palehorse]

trolling for idjits 101

 

[imported_Shivetya]

Originally posted by: Sinsear

Topic Title: War Criminal Cheney teaches ethics to West Pointers

Did I miss an indictment and conviction by a court somewhere?

Do you really think the OP lives in reality?

C'mon, these guys post the same crap day after day moreso to convince themselves their petty lives are not their fault. By branding those in power as bad it makes them feel less guilty for their failure

 

[Craig234]

Originally posted by: ProfJohn
Nice trolling thread title we have here.

I seem to recall a thread calling Hillary a 'commie' being locked because of its title hmmmm

Ideological response, equating the very arguable case that Cheney is a war criminal with the absurd name-calling that Hillary is a communist.

Tell you what - any thread calling Cheney a communist should be locked, too.

 

[ayabe]

Regardless of Cheney's 'guidance' I think our West Pointers know what's what, they receive a top notch education and I wouldn't doubt the curriculum being taught even for a second.

 

[Lemon law]

Craig234 asks---Criminals are criminals regardless of being convicted. Was Hitler ever convicted in a court?

As a matter of fact Hitler was convicted and jailed for his role in the Abortive Beer Hall Rebellion.

And Nelson Mandella was jailed for decades on largely trumped up terrorism charges.

And Ken Lay is as innocent as the new driven snow despite a conviction because he died while his conviction was on appeal.

The fact is that more than a prima facia case can now be made against Cheney on a variety of criminal charges does not speak well for the man. And in the fullness of time,
he and fellow members of this administration may end up charged and convicted in domestic or international courts for crimes against humanity type charges. Nor should we assume GWB will escape the attentions of future courts either.

 

[techs]

Yes, Cheney, who set a record for deferments, can't understand why soldiers would need the Geneva Convention.
Although actual soldiers like Colin Powell would.

 

[OutHouse]

Originally posted by: dahunan

Originally posted by: yankeesfan

Originally posted by: Craig234
I've long thought that soldiers (of any army) should be taught to use their own views on morality and to avoid just being tools that can be used for evil. I'd like to see more real ethics taught, not just indoctrination. To their credit, the US military does some teaching of that and has some freedom for the military to be exposed to 'free speech', as I understand.

Cheney is an evil bastard. His logic could as easily be applied to letting police sneak into the homes of criminals and kill them, because the criminals don't respect the same rules the police do. He also fails to note the issue that sometimes the US can have policies that are not just. Cheney is a fine minion for an empire, blind to its wrongs.

Did I miss an indictment and conviction by a court somewhere?

Criminals are criminals regardless of being convicted. Was Hitler ever convicted in a court?

Yes, he was.

Hopefully Humanity gets to convict Cheney someday too

and what would he be charged with?

 

[shadow9d9]

Originally posted by: JD50

Originally posted by: Sinsear

Topic Title: War Criminal Cheney teaches ethics to West Pointers

Did I miss an indictment and conviction by a court somewhere?

No, innocent until proven guilty only applies to terrorists captured on the battlefield. Well, according to some of the moonbats here.

Which terrorists get that treatment? The "terrorists" at our secret prisons stripped of rights?

 

[Starbuck1975]

All of the service academies maintain a curriculum of teaching future military leaders the importance of ethical conduct in times of war. Throughout history, you will be hard pressed to find any nation or empire that teaches its warrior class to respect a standard of conduct while engaged in the brutality of war.

Cadets and Midshipmen during their first year have to memorize and recite various military speeches and quotes that emphasize ethical conduct. All of the service academies strictly enforce an honor code, the likes of which you will not find on any other college campus.

Does this mean that every officer that emerges from the service academies is a pillar of ethical conduct...of course not...all of the service academies have had their share of cheating scandals, and examples of their graduates going on to disregard what they were taught when on the battlefield.

But Cheney's speech does simplify what is essentially the essence of our current conflict with Islamic extremism...how does a nation, or any army, maintain a sense of ethics on the battlefield when the enemy seemingly has no regard for any such notion? If your enemy decides to take off the gloves so to speak, can you still achieve victory by still appealing to a higher moral code?

If you look at the wars America has won, it did so by arguably NOT appealing to a moral code...the carpet bombing of German and Japanese cities during WW2, not to mention the atomic solution to force Japan's surrender, directly contradict any notions of morality in that those decisions specifically targeted civilians to achieve military strategic goals.

I can understand why cadets at West Point are starting to question the Geneva Convention...these are the young men and women who will lead our soldiers into combat in Iraq and Afghanistan, and they will do so with a desire to win...and in times of war, victory sometimes requires drastic measures.

I have always found the notion of ethics during times of war a bit silly...the very nature of war is brutal and inhumane, so how can you possibly introduce humanity into the equation? Is there truly a humane way to kill your enemy? Given that Total War has blurred the lines between combatants and civilians, it is not hard to understand why the death toll of wars are increasing...gone are the days when two armies meet honorably on the field of battle, removed from cities and civilians.

Oh, and the title of this thread is complete and utter trolling nonsense.

 

[ProfJohn]

Originally posted by: Craig234

Originally posted by: ProfJohn
Nice trolling thread title we have here.

I seem to recall a thread calling Hillary a 'commie' being locked because of its title hmmmm

Ideological response, equating the very arguable case that Cheney is a war criminal with the absurd name-calling that Hillary is a communist.

Tell you what - any thread calling Cheney a communist should be locked, too.

Calling Hillary a commie has as much truth to it as calling Cheney a war criminal.
"It takes as a village"
"We are going to take things away from you on behalf of the common good."
"We must stop thinking of the individual and start thinking about what is best for society. "

 

[JD50]

Originally posted by: shadow9d9

Originally posted by: JD50

Originally posted by: Sinsear

Topic Title: War Criminal Cheney teaches ethics to West Pointers

Did I miss an indictment and conviction by a court somewhere?

No, innocent until proven guilty only applies to terrorists captured on the battlefield. Well, according to some of the moonbats here.

Which terrorists get that treatment? The "terrorists" at our secret prisons stripped of rights?

Case in point, thank you very much sir.

 

[azazyel]

Originally posted by: ProfJohn

Originally posted by: Craig234

Originally posted by: ProfJohn
Nice trolling thread title we have here.

I seem to recall a thread calling Hillary a 'commie' being locked because of its title hmmmm

Ideological response, equating the very arguable case that Cheney is a war criminal with the absurd name-calling that Hillary is a communist.

Tell you what - any thread calling Cheney a communist should be locked, too.

Calling Hillary a commie has as much truth to it as calling Cheney a war criminal.
"It takes as a village"
"We are going to take things away from you on behalf of the common good."
"We must stop thinking of the individual and start thinking about what is best for society. "

Actually I would say the currect administration is far more 'Red' than Clinton.

George W. Bush is not, of course, a closet Marxist. But many of his closest advisors, especially the neoconservatives, do have post-Trotskyite backgrounds. The original Marxist plan was for the socialist revolution to engulf the whole planet, and this plan was embraced by Marx, Engels, Lenin, and Trotsky. It famously came up against the buffers of Stalin?s alternative proposal to build socialism in one country first. In exile, Trotsky kept the idea of world revolution going by setting up the Fourth International in 1938. Within two years, Irving Kristol?the man who was later to be the founding father of the neoconservative movement that so dominates the Bush administration?joined it. Irving Kristol never renounced or condemned his Trotskyite past: in 1983, he wrote that he was still proud of it. Likewise, in 1996, Michael Ledeen of the American Enterprise Institute?one of the leading ideologues of the war on terror?coined the phrase ?global democratic revolution? in the subtitle of a book in which he attacked Bill Clinton for being a ?counter-revolutionary.? The book?s title, Freedom Betrayed, is an obvious allusion to Trotsky?s own 1938 account of his break with Stalin, The Revolution Betrayed.

Indeed, when President George H.W. Bush enthusiastically proclaimed the New World Order in his speech to Congress on Sept. 11, 1990 he was in fact using a phrase that had re-entered the political lexicon in the late 1980s purely thanks to Soviet leaders. Bush senior was eagerly heralding the imminent enforcement of international law?specifically, a United Nations Security Council resolution?by military might. ?We?re now in sight of a United Nations that performs as envisioned by its founders,? he said. But this was exactly what the USSR wanted, as it struggled to disentangle itself from its Stalinist heritage. On Dec. 7, 1988, Mikhail Gorbachev?who once said he was going back to Marx and Lenin after the excesses of Stalinism in the same way as modern Catholics were going back to Jesus and the Bible after Richelieu and Mazarin?used the phrase ?new world order? when he called for an end to the division of the world economy into different blocs, on the grounds that there was in reality only one world economy, and for the United Nations to assume a central role in world peacekeeping.



http://www.amconmag.com/2006/2006_01_16/article.html

 

[Jaskalas]

Senators Clinton and Kerry should be war criminals too, along with the majority of Congress. Clinton herself voted against an amendment to the war authorization that would have required further diplomatic measures.

Then we have this:

?Mark my words, he will develop weapons of mass destruction,? President Clinton had said at the time. ?He will deploy them, and he will use them.?

War criminal who lied to the country?

 

[fskimospy]

Originally posted by: yankeesfan

Criminals are criminals regardless of being convicted. Was Hitler ever convicted in a court?

Yes, he was.[/quote]

Uhmm, no he wasn't. Not unless you are talking about the German court that tried and convicted him for his attempted coup in 1923, and somehow I don't think that's what everyone's so mad at him about... haha.

That's like saying Stalin was brought to justice because his car got a parking ticket outside the Soviet embassy.

 

[MonkeyK]

Originally posted by: Jaskalas
Senators Clinton and Kerry should be war criminals too, along with the majority of Congress. Clinton herself voted against an amendment to the war authorization that would have required further diplomatic measures.

Then we have this:

?Mark my words, he will develop weapons of mass destruction,? President Clinton had said at the time. ?He will deploy them, and he will use them.?

War criminal who lied to the country?

That is why, on the unanimous recommendation of my national security team -- including the vice president, the secretary of defense, the chairman of the joint chiefs of staff, the secretary of state and the national security adviser -- I have ordered a strong, sustained series of air strikes against Iraq.
They are designed to degrade Saddam's capacity to develop and deliver weapons of mass destruction, and to degrade his ability to threaten his neighbors.
At the same time, we are delivering a powerful message to Saddam. If you act recklessly, you will pay a heavy price. We acted today because, in the judgment of my military advisers, a swift response would provide the most surprise and the least opportunity for Saddam to prepare.

First, we must be prepared to use force again if Saddam takes threatening actions, such as trying to reconstitute his weapons of mass destruction or their delivery systems, threatening his neighbors, challenging allied aircraft over Iraq or moving against his own Kurdish citizens.

Mission accomplished. Time to reassess the treat. After targeted bombing, it is foolish to think that nothing outside of intent has changed.

 

[Craig234]

Originally posted by: ProfJohn

Calling Hillary a commie has as much truth to it as calling Cheney a war criminal.
"It takes as a village"
"We are going to take things away from you on behalf of the common good."
"We must stop thinking of the individual and start thinking about what is best for society. "

Wrong.

None of those make Hillary a communist any more than communist nations' dabbling in other approaches makes them non-communist.

Consider these:

"We are going to take things away from you on behalf of the common good."

Since when is that universally wrong?

She's not saying that no one can have any private property and it all goes to the common good; rather, she's being honest with voters about the fact that there's no free lunch.

You are the real radical in opposing this view - the founding fathers put in the constitution the power to tax (taking some things away on behalf of the common good), the power of eminent domain (taking some things away on behalf of the common good), every serious and nearly all the not serious presidential candidates in history have supported some taxation, which means agreeing with her that they would take things away on behalf of the common good.

So, you support a 0% tax rate, no other taxes, and no eminent domain? I'll go let the military base know I want the land back, no more of this 'taking for the common good'.

That's a crazy statement you made.

"We must stop thinking of the individual and start thinking about what is best for society.

What was the context? Gun control?

Here's Bill Clinton:

"We can't be so fixated on our desire to preserve the rights of ordinary (citizens)."

He was speaking of gun control. Why don't you quote him? Maybe it's because you realize you can't win any argument with sane people trying to tell them Bill Clinton is a communist, so you don't post the similar quote from him, strictly for debate points despite the intellectual dishonesty - to try and avoid the poor argument for being exposed?

I'm very much in favor of individual rights - and I recognize the need for some limits, as do all sane people I know of.

Of course, we won't see you posting the far more incriminating quotes from your side - such as Bush on his suggestion a site parodying him should be shut down:

There ought to be limits to freedom.
- George Bush

As usual, you throw the topic off, dodging the issue of Cheney's wrongdoing, which you say not one factual word about, as you wildly throw out nonsense about democrats.

 

[Lemon law]

On a scale of 1 to 10 on being an international war criminal---at best Clinton and Kerry might be a 2 or a 3---as for GWB&Cheney---they are at least an 8 and maybe an 9.9 just on the sheer scale of their monstrosities. But at least the Cheney fans are not accusing Carter of being an international war criminal.

And if we are going to grade Presidents on international skullduggery, how do Reagan and Nixon
rate.?---well ahead of Clinton and Kerry I would guess.

 

[zinfamous]

Originally posted by: Craig234

Originally posted by: ProfJohn
Nice trolling thread title we have here.

I seem to recall a thread calling Hillary a 'commie' being locked because of its title hmmmm

Ideological response, equating the very arguable case that Cheney is a war criminal with the absurd name-calling that Hillary is a communist.

Tell you what - any thread calling Cheney a communist should be locked, too.

what about those calling him a fascist?
He's certainly not a communist...fascists hate communists