Red Cross: US Torturing Prisoners at Guantanamo

[Eduardo X]

The Red Cross has completed a report outlining torture at Guantanamo Bay.

There is a new lawsuit in Germany accusing more than 6 people, including Rumsfeld and George Tennant, of War Crimes.
There are calls in Canada for Bush to be arrested as a suspected War Criminal, or at least to deny him access to the country. The lawsuit obviously failed, as Bush was in Canada, but there are many different things happening around the world that must be making Bush nervous. I remember in 1999 when Margret Thatcher refused to leave the country out of fear of arrest over war crimes. Could this be happening again?

[LawBeefaroni]

I know a Red Cross report makes it more official, but was there ever any doubt?

[Eduardo X]

I know a Red Cross report makes it more official, but was there ever any doubt?

Not at all.
But what's the world going to do? The US has announced to the world on multiple occasions that international laws don't apply to it, so will there simply be no justice?

[Poleaxe]

1. That story you posted actually made me laugh in certain places.

2. You should point out that this is not from the American Red Cross, but the independant organization based in Geneva.

3. I seriously doubt Bush is worried about being arrested for war crimes.

[malchior]

1. That story you posted actually made me laugh in certain places.

Nothing funnier than the possible torture of prisoners.

2. You should point out that this is not from the American Red Cross, but the independant organization based in Geneva.

OK. Does that mean they are "lefties" or some other nonsense.

3. I seriously doubt Bush is worried about being arrested for war crimes.

True enough. That's just silly.

[CSL]

2. You should point out that this is not from the American Red Cross, but the independant organization based in Geneva.

OK. Does that mean they are "lefties" or some other nonsense.

No, even worse they might be Europeans!

[geezer]

I know a Red Cross report makes it more official, but was there ever any doubt?

Not at all.
But what's the world going to do? The US has announced to the world on multiple occasions that international laws don't apply to it, so will there simply be no justice?

Sadly, it seems that way. Truly we have arrived at a bottom line that rests on the twin pillars of "might makes right" and "ends justify the means."

The only peole that truly could do anything decided that 3000 American lives were worth more than 50,000 arabic lives, and that it's ok to torture/imprison/dissappear a few foreigners because we are scared and angry.

Or they decided that it was more important to keep those nasty gays from getting married than holding anyone in authority accountable for abuse.

Or maybe 50-some percent of us can really be bought off with $300. Who the hell knows. There will be justice - history will be quite cruel to this time in America, (as it always is when addressing reactionary conservatism), but unless you believe in some sort of karmic or theological repercussions, it's doubtful that the current people in power will ever directly suffer. There will always be those supporters who claim that criticism of the current state of things in suspect or invalid because it comes from, say Geneva and consequently there will always be, at worst, a comfortable percentage of people ready to give assurances that no matter what extremes the Bushies go to it's justified because we don't want the next warning to be a mushroom cloud over New York. Or something.

[Eduardo X]

Well, to nit-pcik Geezer, I think a good 1/3 of the country didn't vote in the election. We have NO IDEA what they think!

[Poleaxe]

The Red Cross said publicly 13 months ago that the system of keeping detainees indefinitely without allowing them to know their fates was unacceptable and would lead to mental health problems.

Oh those poor terrorists!

The report said that such “apparent integration of access to medical care within the system of coercion” meant that inmates were not cooperating with doctors. Inmates learn from their interrogators that they have knowledge of their medical histories and the result is that the prisoners no longer trust the doctors.

This one made me laugh out loud. So prisoners have given up the right to privacy?

The people who worked at Camp Delta, the main prison facility, said that one regular procedure was making uncooperative prisoners strip to their underwear, having them sit in a chair while shackled hand and foot to a bolt in the floor, and forcing them to endure strobe lights and loud rock and rap music played through two close loudspeakers, while the air-conditioning was turned up to maximum levels.

This sounds like a Saturday night from my college days!

The most striking of the accusations, which have come mainly from a group of detainees released to their native Britain, has been that the military used prostitutes who made coarse comments and come-ons to taunt some prisoners who are Muslims.

My god, they are taunting those poor men!

[malchior]

@Poleaxe,

No offense but are you really this callous in real life because what you posted above is borderline despicable.

Quote:
The Red Cross said publicly 13 months ago that the system of keeping detainees indefinitely without allowing them to know their fates was unacceptable and would lead to mental health problems.


Oh those poor terrorists!

Are they all PROVEN to be terrorists? Before they give up every last human right do they at least have a right to trial, hearing, anything at all?

Quote:
The people who worked at Camp Delta, the main prison facility, said that one regular procedure was making uncooperative prisoners strip to their underwear, having them sit in a chair while shackled hand and foot to a bolt in the floor, and forcing them to endure strobe lights and loud rock and rap music played through two close loudspeakers, while the air-conditioning was turned up to maximum levels.

This sounds like a Saturday night from my college days!

Good comparison. Cause on Sunday morning these guys have a Sunday more to look forward to this while you were shaking off the hangover.

My god, they are taunting those poor men!

I agree that this was one of the weaker accusations, but aren't we supposed to be BETTER than this kind of nonsense?

[YellowKing]

Some of the crap they define as "torture" is utterly laughable. Loud rap music?

Those guys would just as soon slit out throats in front of a video camera if the tables were turned. Sorry, I have no sympathy for these prisoners. They're being treated better now than they were living free in their own country.

I'll tell you one thing - the downfall of this country is going to be namsy-pamsy groups like the ACLU and Red Cross nitpicking every damn thing we do while turning a blind eye to the atrocities perpetrated by the terrorists themselves. I'm so tired of these far leftist groups undermining every US policy in the name of human rights for people who have NO CONCEPT OF THE VALUE OF HUMAN LIFE.

These so-called human rights groups like the International Red Cross are, in my mind, nothing more than anti-US propaganda tools used by Europeans and other members of the international community to undermine the foreign policy and national security of the United States.

[malchior]

What's going to be our downfall? People nitpicking how we TORTURE people(and I agree some of it is nitpicking) or turning a blind eye to how we achieve our goals.

As a Democracy we NEED people out there screaming when something terrible is happening. It is one of the fundamental duties of a citizen of a free nation. I agree we should capture our enemies and try our best to extract information we need to protect our citizens. But stooping to torture is just not the way to do it.

I'm so tired of these far leftist groups undermining every US policy in the name of human rights for people who have NO CONCEPT OF THE VALUE OF HUMAN LIFE.

And we educate their culture by mirroring their expectations? That's crazy. That creates a bigger problem long term.

These so-called human rights groups like the International Red Cross are, in my mind, nothing more than anti-US propaganda tools used by Europeans and other members of the international community to undermine the foreign policy and national security of the United States.

You've entered tinfoil hat land here. This is the same International Red Cross that treated our soldiers in times of war, that warned the world of human rights abuses time and time again. Now all of a sudden they are some tool of the European anti-American agenda?

[noxiousdog]

First, I think the outrage shows a remarkable naivite about what really goes on in the world (see: Dufour, Ivory Coast, UNSCOM). And, no, we aren't above it if you think our unemployment rate is too high.

However:

I'll tell you one thing - the downfall of this country is going to be namsy-pamsy groups like the ACLU and Red Cross nitpicking every damn thing we do while turning a blind eye to the atrocities perpetrated by the terrorists themselves. I'm so tired of these far leftist groups undermining every US policy in the name of human rights for people who have NO CONCEPT OF THE VALUE OF HUMAN LIFE.

I think it's been pretty well proven that a significant portion of detainees aren't terrorists.

[dbt1949]

The "torturing " of prisoners has being going on by every country ever invented since the beginning of time.We were doing the same thing and worse in VietNam.Doesn't make it right nor does it make it fair but it is a fact of life that's not going to change.
Assuming all the outcry of torturing of prisoners of the US has any effect they'll just learn to hide the prisoners better from the media.It'll still be happening.
Revenge is a hard obsticle to overcome.(buddies getting killed,9-11,etc)

[The Meal]

Stuff like this makes me question my desire to be associated with America. Pulling this kind of stuff on people who've not been through a fair trial? That's the kind of thing I want my country to go to war over if it's happening overseas.

~Neal

[Poleaxe]

Stuff like this makes me question my desire to be associated with America. Pulling this kind of stuff on people who've not been through a fair trial? That's the kind of thing I want my country to go to war over if it's happening overseas.

~Neal

Which country do you wish to be associated with?

[The Meal]

Stuff like this makes me question my desire to be associated with America. Pulling this kind of stuff on people who've not been through a fair trial? That's the kind of thing I want my country to go to war over if it's happening overseas.

~Neal

Which country do you wish to be associated with?

One that doesn't embarass me with "do as we say, not as we do" behavior.

To turn your probing question around, are you proud of how US is acting in Gitmo?

~Neal

[DD]

Some of the crap they define as "torture" is utterly laughable. Loud rap music?

Those guys would just as soon slit out throats in front of a video camera if the tables were turned. Sorry, I have no sympathy for these prisoners. They're being treated better now than they were living free in their own country.

I'll tell you one thing - the downfall of this country is going to be namsy-pamsy groups like the ACLU and Red Cross nitpicking every damn thing we do while turning a blind eye to the atrocities perpetrated by the terrorists themselves. I'm so tired of these far leftist groups undermining every US policy in the name of human rights for people who have NO CONCEPT OF THE VALUE OF HUMAN LIFE.

These so-called human rights groups like the International Red Cross are, in my mind, nothing more than anti-US propaganda tools used by Europeans and other members of the international community to undermine the foreign policy and national security of the United States.

Well said.

[noxiousdog]

Stuff like this makes me question my desire to be associated with America. Pulling this kind of stuff on people who've not been through a fair trial? That's the kind of thing I want my country to go to war over if it's happening overseas.

~Neal

Which country do you wish to be associated with?

One that doesn't embarass me with "do as we say, not as we do" behavior.

To turn your probing question around, are you proud of how US is acting in Gitmo?

~Neal

It's not about proud, it's about reality. In order to find a country that 1) can control it's own destiny and 2) doesn't engage in underhanded and/or immoral behavior would require leaving this planet for sure.

[The Meal]

In order to find a country that 1) can control it's own destiny and 2) doesn't engage in underhanded and/or immoral behavior would require leaving this planet for sure.

I agree. Does that mean as a member of the populace of a republic that I shouldn't point out when my government is behaving hypocritically? Should I behave like I appreciate it? Should I decry those who're pointing out that the Emporer is nekkid as leading us to the downfall of this country?

~Neal

[Dogstar]

I cringe at reading Poleaxe's and YellowKing's comments.

Yes, this sort of thing goes on the world over. Does that make it right? No. Do I think some of what they're describing is the same as sticking bamboo shoots under people's fingernails? No. Do I think that just because something is labeled as psychological torture somehow makes it better than physical torture? No.

What I'm appalled by is that we're supposed to be better than this. How do we win back world opinion, or even the opinion of the Arab World, when we have the International Red Cross calling us on what we're doing in Guantanamo, especially after Abu Gharaib? (I'd like to point out that this doesn't include the numerous undisclosed locations around the globe where we take prisoners for interrogation so that the methods used aren't remotely subjected to public scrutiny of any sort.) What happened to winning the hearts and minds of people?

As noxiousdog pointed out, it's not like the prisoners are all terrorists. It's not like each and every one of them is out to "slit our throats," as someone upthread said. There may be some, yes, but not all. That's why we're having hearings to determine each individual's status, role, etc.

Revenge isn't justification for doing such. Any type of violation that happens due to that sort of motivation should be punishable by law.

Last but not least, could someone explain to me how the U.S. can be involved in accusing, securing, and prosecuting people for war crimes, but our people are exempt from such matters? To me, this reads a bit like hypocrisy, so any help would be appreciated.

[YellowKing]

I think there's a line in which you have to ask yourself if you're truly pointing out immmoral behavior, or if you're exaggerating the negativity of a policy that has always been (and always will be) in place. Then you have to ask yourself if the do-goodism of pointing out this behavior at every opportunity outweighs the national security of your country.

Let's face it - if we weren't blaring rap music, there would be some other complaint. Maybe their mattresses are too hard or god forbid they had to drink diet sodas instead of regular. Anything to portray America as a big bully beating up on those poor defenseless little prisoners of war who blew up our troops and are plotting and scheming to kill our civilians - men, women, and children.

And where will our troops be when they're taken prisoner? Not in a cot provided with a prayer mat and food specifically prepared in accordance with their religious beliefs. They'll be sitting in a chair while somebody beats the living shit out of them then cuts their head off.

And in response to the hypocrisy question - when you're the most powerful nation in the world, you can afford to engage in a little hypocrisy. It's the same thing that lets us build nuclear weapons while telling Iran not to do the same. The difference is we don't build nukes on the basis of waging some kind of whacked out holy war. And we're not "torturing" prisoners because we're sadistic fucks who hate an entire culture based on some ancient religious text and have no value for human life because all we know how to do is fight since we live in a backwards ass medieval country..

[The Meal]

What I'm appalled by is that we're supposed to be better than this. How do we win back world opinion, or even the opinion of the Arab World, when we have the International Red Cross calling us on what we're doing in Guantanamo, especially after Abu Gharaib?

Your plea here is going to fall on deaf ears (including, to some extent my own). The rest of the world is not the aribiter of what proper behavior of a government is. Those who live in that republic are the ultimate arbiters as to what is and is not acceptable. Meting out punishment for those who've not been fairly judged is unforgivable in my book.

~Neal

[noxiousdog]

In order to find a country that 1) can control it's own destiny and 2) doesn't engage in underhanded and/or immoral behavior would require leaving this planet for sure.

I agree. Does that mean as a member of the populace of a republic that I shouldn't point out when my government is behaving hypocritically? Should I behave like I appreciate it? Should I decry those who're pointing out that the Emporer is nekkid as leading us to the downfall of this country?

~Neal

There is a difference between what you wrote above and what you wrote before: "Stuff like this makes me question my desire to be associated with America."

Poleaxe asked a legitimate question. It is my opinion that all the good of America occurs because we -don't- always play the game by the 'rules.' Therefore, if you are offering an alternative, it would be worth discussing a model that would could have both. A higher moral authority AND superpower status.

[Dogstar]

Meal-

I understand where you're coming from. My point in arguing about world opinion is that -- it becomes difficult to get countries to agree to other things/policies/peacekeeping missions when their populace is against us. I understand that the citizens of any country have to be responsible for taking steps that may go against world opinion, but preserve national security. All I'm offering is that perhaps a better balance can be struck between the two.

On a basic level, I thought that one of the keys to long-term security and stability was to convince the average citizen of another country that was hostile to you, that the ideas and mores (can't do accent marks) of your country were superior to his own. Thus, he felt that he should strive to obtain such, as opposed to striving to work against yours. Without that motivation, it becomes much easier to lose the PR war and engenders more dangers for us down the road.

Also, the policies at Guantanamo (and involving detainees) haven't always been in place. It would be counter-productive to argue that they have been, as otherwise the Bush administration wouldn't have spent untold hours of time trying to formulate a policy for dealing with detainees. This is born out through numerous memos and legal notes that are available. The debate on such probably began on/after 9-11, but not really before that.

[geezer]

I think there's a line in which you have to ask yourself if you're truly pointing out immmoral behavior, or if you're exaggerating the negativity of a policy that has always been (and always will be) in place. Then you have to ask yourself if the do-goodism of pointing out this behavior at every opportunity outweighs the national security of your country.

Let's face it - if we weren't blaring rap music, there would be some other complaint. Maybe their mattresses are too hard or god forbid they had to drink diet sodas instead of regular. Anything to portray America as a big bully beating up on those poor defenseless little prisoners of war who blew up our troops and are plotting and scheming to kill our civilians - men, women, and children.

And where will our troops be when they're taken prisoner? Not in a cot provided with a prayer mat and food specifically prepared in accordance with their religious beliefs. They'll be sitting in a chair while somebody beats the living shit out of them then cuts their head off.

And in response to the hypocrisy question - when you're the most powerful nation in the world, you can afford to engage in a little hypocrisy. It's the same thing that lets us build nuclear weapons while telling Iran not to do the same. The difference is we don't build nukes on the basis of waging some kind of whacked out holy war. And we're not "torturing" prisoners because we're sadistic fucks who hate an entire culture based on some ancient religious text and have no value for human life because all we know how to do is fight since we live in a backwards ass medieval country..

How very simple of you.

[LawBeefaroni]

And we're not "torturing" prisoners because we're sadistic fucks who hate an entire culture based on some ancient religious text and have no value for human life because all we know how to do is fight since we live in a backwards ass medieval country..

Yep. We're different. We live in a techologically advanced country.

[Fireball]

Might does not make right, and if America is to be true to her ideals and be that shining city on the hill, we must strive to be better than the filth we are fighting. This entire detainment process is a terrible black mark on America's character, and we will all pay for it for decades to come.

Torture of prisoners is never acceptable, though I'd tend to be fairly skeptical that a lot of what is listed by the Red Cross qualifies as torture as opposed to extremely-aggressive interrogation techniques. But the fact that these people aren't all necessarily terrorists, that many were scooped up in sweeping raids that made no effort to differentiate from active enemy combatants and others in their vicinity makes this entire situation unconscionable. Believe it or not, and the racists amongst us who see all Arabs as our enemies and all Muslims as our foes will never believe it, but not everyone in Gitmo has committed a crime against the United States. Until we separate the wheat from the chaff through a rational and relatively open process of hearings and trials we have no business torturing what may well be innocent some innocent people.

In this conflict, and going forward, America is worthless if America doesn't stand for being better than our enemies. That means being freer than our enemies, and not curtailing our freedoms in order to win an amorphous, undefinable "war." That means respecting the values of others, even if we do not share them, so long as they do not act against us. That means treating our prisoners of war far better than our enemies treat theirs.

We're entering a hot-and-cold war cycle here in this conflict against terrorism and in doing so it's important to remember how we won the hot-and-cold war cycle we fought against Communism. In the end it was not America's bombers, missiles and tanks that brought down Communism, it was America's character, ideals and example. We won the war of ideas, even amongst our enemy's population by holding ourselves to a higher standard, by being the more accepting and magnanimous (if not necessarily safer) society.

We proved ourselves to be bigger men than the Soviets by being intellectually broader and culturally more open. The only reason America could condemn the Soviet Union as an "evil empire" under Reagan is that we made damn sure that we never willingly sank to the Soviets' level, even when it could be justified, even when our security was at risk. The American flag stood for being better than that, and the world responded to that ideal and rallied around our flag. Even those in the countries we opposed saw this in us, and the contribution that winning that war for mindshare made to the end of the USSR is incalculable.

This current war is as much a war of ideals as it is one of bullets and bombs. And on that battleground, America can win. But only if we hold true to those ideals. Only if we don't stoop to our enemy's level. Torturing prisoners, particularly those who have been given no legal means of proving their own potential innocence, cuts away at our position of moral superiority at a time when we should be doing the opposite -- we should be pushing our ideals of equality and the inherent rights of all people even more prominently, ever more loudly. We should be highlighting and extending the differences between American civilization and terrorist barbarism. Because recasting the war in those terms will win us the mindshare battle, not only amongst our allies, but eventually amongst those who would be our enemies.

When fighting an enemy whose propaganda paints our nation as Satanic we must at all times put forth those things which make the case for the angelic side of our nature.

We can't kill every potential terrorist, or even every actual terrorist, in the world. But by asserting our worldview and pushing our ideals in the sort of persuasive, active manner that we did in the Cold War, we can over time deplete the supply of anti-American jihadists. Not by acquiescing to what the terrorists demand, but by making the goodness of America's nature so unquestionable that in the end they have to accept that we were right all along.

The difference between a good man and a bad man is a willingness to do the right thing, even at the risk of a terrible cost. I'd rather live in a good and noble country whose security isn't perfect than in the America the neocons seem to envision, where might makes right and America's better nature is cast aside.

[noxiousdog]

Fireball, that's all very noble, but it's factually inaccuarate.

During the Cold War, we financed a failed invasion of Cuba, toppled numerous Latin American countries, abandoned Veitnam, assisted Saddam Hussein, and funded Afghanistan rebels. Those are just off the top of my head.

Superpowers are built on, like it or not, kicking ass. The countries that stopped kicking ass (and the list goes back millenia) have been relegated to second tier powers that rely on others for direction and protection.

[Kadoth Nodens]

Let me start by writing that on the list of Really Bad Ways to Get Tortured, listening to rap music naked with the AC cranking while female guards flirt with me isn't all that bad, but . . .

I think there's a line in which you have to ask yourself if you're truly pointing out immmoral behavior, or if you're exaggerating the negativity of a policy that has always been (and always will be) in place. Then you have to ask yourself if the do-goodism of pointing out this behavior at every opportunity outweighs the national security of your country.

When do you ask yourself if a national security plan that can be undermined by people saying "torture is bad" is actually working? Or is it that the plan works as intended regardless of the criticism, but certain people who support it tend to get "namby-pamby" and want to talk about how their feelings are hurt when someone suggests that not every action taken by a member of the US armed forces is automatically about defending Mom and Apple Pie?

Let's face it - if we weren't blaring rap music, there would be some other complaint. Maybe their mattresses are too hard or god forbid they had to drink diet sodas instead of regular. Anything to portray America as a big bully beating up on those poor defenseless little prisoners of war who blew up our troops and are plotting and scheming to kill our civilians - men, women, and children.

Are they POWs this week or not? I have trouble keeping track. Maybe next week they'll be Involuntary Tourists or Disgruntled Beachcombers.

And where will our troops be when they're taken prisoner? Not in a cot provided with a prayer mat and food specifically prepared in accordance with their religious beliefs. They'll be sitting in a chair while somebody beats the living shit out of them then cuts their head off.

Anyone at Gitmo who has beheaded anybody deserves whatever he gets. Everybody else . . .

And in response to the hypocrisy question - when you're the most powerful nation in the world, you can afford to engage in a little hypocrisy. It's the same thing that lets us build nuclear weapons while telling Iran not to do the same. The difference is we don't build nukes on the basis of waging some kind of whacked out holy war. And we're not "torturing" prisoners because we're sadistic fucks who hate an entire culture based on some ancient religious text and have no value for human life because all we know how to do is fight since we live in a backwards ass medieval country

To badly misquote Gimli the Dwarf, I'm a big fan of old, dead, white man culture. It's been very good to me and I love living in a society that finds its roots there. But to imply we do what we do because we're a superpower is a lode o' bull. We did this crap when we were a bunch of nobodies surrounded by the evil, sadistic, injun savages and we'll keep doing it as long as our fearless leaders think it's in our best interests. We'd do it to Europeans or Canadians in a heartbeat if we were at war with them, so lets not pretend torture is groovy because the POWs haven't achieved TIVO technology or an Everyone Loves Raymond level of cultural awareness yet.

But hey! Blasting ODB at some dude who was captured in Afghanistan years ago may yet yield some totally vital security secret! Like maybe where Cobra Commander hid the weather dominator!

[Fireball]

Yes, we did. But we didn't do those things in the absence of a massive, in effect, public relations campaign that highlighted all that was good about America. We won the Cold War by winning the war of ideas, because even if we stood in line with some bad people we were still seen as good people.

Being caught torturing prisoners repeatedly and without compunction, especially given that some or many of these people may well be totally innocent of any crime, does far worse damage to our national character than any of the bad militarism you listed.

If America loses the war of ideas then we will deserve to lose the stupidly-named war on terrorism.

[noxiousdog]

If America loses the war of ideas then we will deserve to lose the stupidly-named war on terrorism.

I'm sure there were quite a few Romans who said the same thing about the War on Barbarians.

[geezer]

If America loses the war of ideas then we will deserve to lose the stupidly-named war on terrorism.

I'm sure there were quite a few Romans who said the same thing about the War on Barbarians.

And where exactly is the Roman Empire today?

[Poleaxe]

If America loses the war of ideas then we will deserve to lose the stupidly-named war on terrorism.

I'm sure there were quite a few Romans who said the same thing about the War on Barbarians.

And where exactly is the Roman Empire today?

Of course our paltry 230 years has yet to measure up to their run.

[Padre]

I can't believe there's even debate about this. People are being detained and tortured (however mildly) with no right to a hearing or even to know what the charges are against them, and this is jsutice? On what basis do we know these guys are terrorists? Intelligence? Psychological profiling? Funny hairdos?

Even if we knew for certain they were evil murderers, America treats its own homegrown death row mass murderers better than this. Some of the most evil twisted fucks out there are quietly and safely rotting in jail, with no torture applied and their futures clear as crysta; meanwhile, in some island camp somewhere, potentially innocent people are being tortured, brutalised and they might not even know why.

Poleaxe, YK, DD: Doesn't in scare you in the slightest that the government thinks this is an ok way to carry on? Do you really believe that any trrorist is fair game for whatver you want to throw at him, in spite of the very principles on which your nation was founded? Do you believe the same of people who are merely suspected terrorists?

Sheesh.

[godhugh]

Here's a new article from the Washington Post regarding the Abu Ghraib stuff. As John Stewart asked last night, why the hell are the networks covering Julia Roberts and not this stuff?

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/ar ... Nov30.html

[noxiousdog]

Poleaxe, YK, DD: Doesn't in scare you in the slightest that the government thinks this is an ok way to carry on? Do you really believe that any trrorist is fair game for whatver you want to throw at him, in spite of the very principles on which your nation was founded? Do you believe the same of people who are merely suspected terrorists?

Sheesh.

Doesn't it bother you, that because your country (allegedly) stopped doing such things, they became a follower rather than a leader?

[Dirt]

Superpowers are built on, like it or not, kicking ass. The countries that stopped kicking ass (and the list goes back millenia) have been relegated to second tier powers that rely on others for direction and protection.

Some Superpowers fall because they stretch themselves too thin.

[Dirt]

If America loses the war of ideas then we will deserve to lose the stupidly-named war on terrorism.

I'm sure there were quite a few Romans who said the same thing about the War on Barbarians.

There were 2 Great Empires existing simultaneously 2 millenia ago. The Romans and the Han. The Romans fell over a millenia ago, while the Han still exists. I think a study of the 2 cultures would be endlessly fascinating. Why are the Romans no more while the Han still exist and thrive? Generally speaking, I think it's because the Han (even as it's people were conquerored from time to time) always won the war of ideas. Everyone wanted to be the Han and live the life the Han were living. Can we say that about the USA today?

[noxiousdog]

Why are the Romans no more while the Han still exist and thrive? Generally speaking, I think it's because the Han (even as it's people were conquerored from time to time) always won the war of ideas. Everyone wanted to be the Han and live the life the Han were living. Can we say that about the USA today?

The Han still exists and thrives? Wikipedia seems to think their power ended in 220AD.

And if you're calling modern China Han, well, then what's going on in Guantanamo and Abu Graib, can't hold a candle to running over students with tanks.