It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Torture? I went through worse in basic training

page: 8
14
<< 5  6  7    9  10  11 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Apr, 23 2009 @ 01:56 PM
link   

Originally posted by poedxsoldiervet

Originally posted by jd140
reply to post by cautiouslypessimistic
 


Never said anything about soldiers are the only ones working for America.

I simply stated that since you don't like the way we do things that maybe you should lace up your boots and show us how it is done.

You can't lead by example from the rear.


You sure about that? There are pleny of armchair generals aroung here.


You guys are sad. The line of thinking that only soldiers have a right to speak on these subjects is pathetic.

I weep for the state of this country.




posted on Apr, 23 2009 @ 01:56 PM
link   
reply to post by Ben Niceknowinya
 


You are making yourself look silly.

I never said I went to Ft. Campbell for basic. I talked about Air Assault school.

You don't know what you're talking about if you don't know that Ft. Campbell has Air Assault school.

The 101st Airborne Division — the "Screaming Eagles"— is a U.S. Army modular infantry division trained for air assault operations.

en.wikipedia.org...(United_States)

I was at Ft. Lee before that for AIT and I went to Leonard Wood for basic.

I was a 76V then it merged into 92A. This is supply because I'm sure you don't know what this means if you didn't know Ft. Campbell did Air Assault.

Do you even know what Air Assault is?

Do you know the difference between Airborne and Air Assault?

This is what liberals do when they can't debate the issue.



posted on Apr, 23 2009 @ 01:58 PM
link   
 


off-topic post removed to prevent thread-drift


 



posted on Apr, 23 2009 @ 02:00 PM
link   
 


off-topic post removed to prevent thread-drift


 



posted on Apr, 23 2009 @ 02:00 PM
link   

Originally posted by cautiouslypessimistic

Originally posted by jd140
reply to post by cautiouslypessimistic
 


Never said anything about soldiers are the only ones working for America.

I simply stated that since you don't like the way we do things that maybe you should lace up your boots and show us how it is done.

You can't lead by example from the rear.


You are silly man. You said that all I am doing is sitting back and criticising, and that the only way for me to be productive is to lace em up.

The flaw in your logic is that people like me work toward positive action, not violence. I am not a hypocrite, and therefore, could not join the armed services.

There are plenty of ways to take positive action without engaging in violence.


Yuo critisize soldiers stating you can do a better job, but you refuse to do so. The only way to lead a group of soldiers and show them the right way is to lace them up.

So yes, if you think you can do better then you should join up and show us the way.

That is why one of the NCO mantras is follow me. Because you can only lead from the front.

Calling me a silly man is very rude when I am extending you a hand in friendship so that you may show us a differant way.



posted on Apr, 23 2009 @ 02:03 PM
link   
 


off-topic post removed to prevent thread-drift


 



posted on Apr, 23 2009 @ 02:03 PM
link   
Just FYI

The constitution has NOTHING to do with enemy combatants. These guys were NOT in uniform, they had NO insignia , so they are not subject to the Geneva Convention.

Keep in mind that these people were the people that beheaded our soldiers, did much worse torture to anyone they caught, make no mistake there wasnt the threat of death from them .....it was carried out....

Also the memo that was sent out to carry these things out was agreed upon by both DEMS and REP and passed to the president.....


The constitution has NOTHING to do with people who are NOT American......

The geneva convention does NOT include enemy combatants that are NOT wearing uniforms.......

Back in September 2002 the CIA demonstrated waterboarding and other forms of harsh methods, to a bipartisan group of politicians, including current House Speaker Nancy Pelosi...... We didn't see a single one of those lawmakers (or anyone else in Congress) go on the record after 9/11 and say "I don't care if we're vaporized, I am morally opposed to torture and we will not do it under any circumstance."

In fact, some of the most outspoken people on the issue, like John McCain didn't make a peep about waterboarding until 2004 and 2005. Even worse, none of the lawmakers bothered to clarify the torture statute.

But now, because these people were too spineless to define it, they want to go back in time and punish the Bush administration for making agonizing decisions and complex legal interpretations in a time of war?

And, let's not forget that even after deciding that waterboarding was legal, they only did it to three high value suspects,one of whose information actually helped stop a massive airliner attack on the Library Tower.

And thats my 2 cents



posted on Apr, 23 2009 @ 02:05 PM
link   
 


off-topic post removed to prevent thread-drift


 



posted on Apr, 23 2009 @ 02:05 PM
link   

Originally posted by jd140

Originally posted by cautiouslypessimistic

Originally posted by jd140
reply to post by cautiouslypessimistic
 



Yuo critisize soldiers stating you can do a better job, but you refuse to do so. The only way to lead a group of soldiers and show them the right way is to lace them up.

So yes, if you think you can do better then you should join up and show us the way.

That is why one of the NCO mantras is follow me. Because you can only lead from the front.

Calling me a silly man is very rude when I am extending you a hand in friendship so that you may show us a differant way.


Show me where I said I could do better. Even moreso, tell me where I criticized soldiers. Go on, I am waiting. I CRITICIZED TORTURE, yet you all want to take that personally.

You are silly. You are trying to make this personal, you are putting words in my mouthy, and YOU ARE FLAT OUT LYING about what I said. Hardly lending friendship to anything.




posted on Apr, 23 2009 @ 02:06 PM
link   
I have to agree with the op, but not basic training wise. There are some schools in the military you attend that are classified top secret and they make what was done to the detainees look like child's play.

I will just say every thing questioning the op did happen at the place I attended.



posted on Apr, 23 2009 @ 02:06 PM
link   

Originally posted by cautiouslypessimistic

Originally posted by poedxsoldiervet

Originally posted by jd140
reply to post by cautiouslypessimistic
 


Never said anything about soldiers are the only ones working for America.

I simply stated that since you don't like the way we do things that maybe you should lace up your boots and show us how it is done.

You can't lead by example from the rear.


You sure about that? There are pleny of armchair generals aroung here.


You guys are sad. The line of thinking that only soldiers have a right to speak on these subjects is pathetic.

I weep for the state of this country.


No one said that either. I weep because people like you make it harder and harder for a soldier to do his job.

Granted I am 50-50 for torture, I feel under the right circumstances it can be useful. But for the most part it isn't and add the fact it is indeed illegal.

But people like you think you are doing alot of good when in reality you are putting soldiers lives at risk. It may seem good on paper but rarely is in real world situations.

Take it as you will, I'm sure I will get some kind of holier than thou response from you.

Looking forward to it.



posted on Apr, 23 2009 @ 02:06 PM
link   
readability and writeability are two different things. and i make up words for fun!

So, did anyone's view point change? Are the Army guys against torture yet? Are the others who think its bad thinking it's OK yet?

This issue runs deep in people's veins. Those who think we should do whatever necessary to get the info we need, and those who think the rules are most important no matter what.

Either way there isn't a gray area. You are either a big meanie, or a little wussy.

This entire issue really does boil down the law. It is illegal to torture. We shouldn't have joined the geneva convention if we were going to break its laws. Maybe we did to fake everyone out. Who knows?

Seriously though, professionals should be professionals.



posted on Apr, 23 2009 @ 02:08 PM
link   
 


off-topic post removed to prevent thread-drift


 



posted on Apr, 23 2009 @ 02:08 PM
link   

Originally posted by ManBehindTheMask
Just FYI

The constitution has NOTHING to do with enemy combatants. These guys were NOT in uniform, they had NO insignia , so they are not subject to the Geneva Convention.



Read my post earlier. They are not protected under the Geneva Convention, but they are still protected under UDHR and UNCAT. Source

If you don't understand international law, please don't post pretending that you do. You only make yourself look stupid.



posted on Apr, 23 2009 @ 02:09 PM
link   




No sir I am not turning it personal, You said people like you work toward postive outcomes and not use violence. And I said Why don t you run for office if you can truly bring peace to this world, you would have my undying support.

Where did you see personal attack there? The boogyman comment? If you have the way to Peace then get up and do it. If you can truly lead us to everlasting peace I will follow. But trying to say we are wrong in our logic and your is supeior is wrong.



posted on Apr, 23 2009 @ 02:10 PM
link   

Originally posted by drwizardphd

Originally posted by ManBehindTheMask
Just FYI

The constitution has NOTHING to do with enemy combatants. These guys were NOT in uniform, they had NO insignia , so they are not subject to the Geneva Convention.



Read my post earlier. They are not protected under the Geneva Convention, but they are still protected under UDHR and UNCAT. Source

If you don't understand international law, please don't post pretending that you do. You only make yourself look stupid.


International law does not trumph the us laws.



posted on Apr, 23 2009 @ 02:10 PM
link   

Originally posted by mahtoosacks
reply to post by cautiouslypessimistic
 


ithinkilljustwritemessageshowiseefithowabouthat
justusingthegramarcardhasbeenwayyyyoverdoneandbecauseyoupullitdoesntmeanyouarerightinanyway

Just as I was about to comment back into what was about to become a war of words and pointless insults, I proceeded to check if, in fact, you were the person of whom I had first replied to. Upon notice that, in fact, you were not the original person of my reply, I will move to just ignoring everything you say from here on out. Seeing as how you have, somehow miraculously just skipped every sentence except for the ones that have so made your day, I will point out, that if you had actually gotten the word of cessation of the OP's original thought, then he wouldn't be once again REPEATING HIMSELF!!

so not only did you not read what i said and proceeded to insult my grammatical laziness as well as calling me disgusting for even JOKING like that, you just missed the point altogether.

awesome. really....

anyone can believe what they want. Torture included. but dont come crying back when someone tortures you.

1)Once again, I used the grammar card to point out the foolishness of insulting reading conprehension. YOU OPENED THAT CAN, NOT ME, so I find it interesting that you all want to keep going back there. Anything ON TOPIC you'd like to say?

2)Go reread. The OP ADMITTED THAT TORTURE FELL UNDER AMENDMENT 8 OF THE CONSTITUTION. The fact that he is still arguing it shows he is a hypocrite, and a fool.

3)Joking about torture is DISGUSTING. I will continue to call you out on it.



posted on Apr, 23 2009 @ 02:12 PM
link   
 


off-topic post removed to prevent thread-drift


 



posted on Apr, 23 2009 @ 02:12 PM
link   

Originally posted by drwizardphd

Originally posted by ManBehindTheMask
Just FYI

The constitution has NOTHING to do with enemy combatants. These guys were NOT in uniform, they had NO insignia , so they are not subject to the Geneva Convention.



Read my post earlier. They are not protected under the Geneva Convention, but they are still protected under UDHR and UNCAT. Source

If you don't understand international law, please don't post pretending that you do. You only make yourself look stupid.


If you dont understand constitutional law, please dont pretend that YOU do.

It is BLATANTLY OBVIOUS that none of you has read or understands the constitution. [SNIP]

Mod Edit: Please keep it civilised.

[edit on 24-4-2009 by Gemwolf]



posted on Apr, 23 2009 @ 02:15 PM
link   



You did and still are making it personal. You want to make it about me, what I am doing, etc., when all I asked for was any type of a logical retort as to why people are defending unconstitutional acts.


I never claimed to have the way to peace. I did claim, that torture is not it, though. Can you honestly argue that?




top topics



 
14
<< 5  6  7    9  10  11 >>

log in

join