Imagine the international scowls if he now decides to send 40,000 more troops into Afghanistan.
[quote]Sloth wrote:
Bill Roberts wrote:
Which “Bush policy” do you mean, Wreckless?
Torture.[/quote]
Is that what Wreckless meant?
Well then, he is abso-darn-gum-lutely right!
Ending use of a non-injury, non-pain-producing method on a few dozen (or if more, not much more) terrorists at war against the United States is surely worthy of a Nobel Peace Prize!
[quote]Bill Roberts wrote:
Sloth wrote:
Bill Roberts wrote:
Which “Bush policy” do you mean, Wreckless?
Torture.
Is that what Wreckless meant?
Well then, he is abso-darn-gum-lutely right!
Ending use of a non-injury, non-pain-producing method on a few dozen (or if more, not much more) terrorists at war against the United States is surely worthy of a Nobel Peace Prize!
[/quote]
Well usually torturing wins you a jail cell.
[quote]Jeff R wrote:
Dustin wrote:
Jeff R wrote:
Try not to be too hypocritical (more free advice).
Oh, the irony!
Oh, dusty!!!
Please be sure to point out my hypocrisy IF it ever occurs. If valid (opposite of your usual M.O.) I will thank you.
Oh, I have always hoped you really live in Oklahoma. I’d love to hear you open your liberal mouth in OK.
JeffR
[/quote]
C’mon, that’s easy Jeff. Your constant cheerleading for everything President Bush, despite his laundry list of blunders. Obama hasn’t even had the chance to cause the damage the President Bush has and you are ready throw him out of office.
Not sure how you ever got me confused with a liberal.
And yes, I was born and raised in Oklahoma.
[quote]orion wrote:
Bill Roberts wrote:
Sloth wrote:
Bill Roberts wrote:
Which “Bush policy” do you mean, Wreckless?
Torture.
Is that what Wreckless meant?
Well then, he is abso-darn-gum-lutely right!
Ending use of a non-injury, non-pain-producing method on a few dozen (or if more, not much more) terrorists at war against the United States is surely worthy of a Nobel Peace Prize!
Well usually torturing wins you a jail cell.
[/quote]
Did it ever occur to you that just because you think a word has a given meaning, that your ascribing that word to a given act does not necessarily mean that it is an act that merits being treated the same as differing acts that others use that word for?
By your reasoning, we could put you in a jail cell for your endlessly subjecting people to your claims that the blame for WWII falls not on your home nation Austria, the cradle of Hitler, and the German people, but supposedly on America.
It’s torture, man.
Easily as bad as pouring water into someone’s mouth (painlessly and injury-free.)
I think you could win the next Nobel by instead acknowledging that Austria and the German people of that time are to blame for WWII, not the US.
Far more have been tortured by your posts than by waterboarding 
Of course, neither is torture in the sense of being a criminal act whether on a captured combatant or the unfortunate reader.
If I hang out with William Ayers do I get one too???
mmm the sweet taste of conservative tears yumm yumm
As for myself, I’m a libertarian, not a conservative.
And I think I can speak for everyone when I say it’s laughter and incredulity, not tears. This is theater of the absurd at near its best.
FYI, they’re laughing about it in the British press as well. (Perhaps you think they are “conservative,” though.) And probably all around the world.
As a White House staffer was reported to ask (they hadn’t known at the time that Obama had won), “What for?”
[quote]jawara wrote:
If I hang out with William Ayers do I get one too???[/quote]
Maybe that’s the trick. He looks down right peaceful next to the violent criminals that he hangs out with.
Listen!
Bill Ayers has not bombed ANYONE or ANYTHING since Obama started being a good influence on him!
And there you have it.
[quote]Bill Roberts wrote:
orion wrote:
Bill Roberts wrote:
Sloth wrote:
Bill Roberts wrote:
Which “Bush policy” do you mean, Wreckless?
Torture.
Is that what Wreckless meant?
Well then, he is abso-darn-gum-lutely right!
Ending use of a non-injury, non-pain-producing method on a few dozen (or if more, not much more) terrorists at war against the United States is surely worthy of a Nobel Peace Prize!
Well usually torturing wins you a jail cell.
Did it ever occur to you that just because you think a word has a given meaning, that your ascribing that word to a given act does not necessarily mean that it is an act that merits being treated the same as differing acts that others use that word for?
By your reasoning, we could put you in a jail cell for your endlessly subjecting people to your claims that the blame for WWII falls not on your home nation Austria, the cradle of Hitler, and the German people, but supposedly on America.
It’s torture, man.
Easily as bad as pouring water into someone’s mouth (painlessly and injury-free.)
I think you could win the next Nobel by instead acknowledging that Austria and the German people of that time are to blame for WWII, not the US.
Far more have been tortured by your posts than by waterboarding
Of course, neither is torture in the sense of being a criminal act whether on a captured combatant or the unfortunate reader.[/quote]
Ever been waterboarded?
Wow!
I am awed.
You have totally disproven my point. (Never mind that many who have been, which includes many US military officers and journalists, say it is not torture.)
Now where is your information proving there is pain or injury?
[quote]Bill Roberts wrote:
Sloth wrote:
Bill Roberts wrote:
Which “Bush policy” do you mean, Wreckless?
Torture.
Is that what Wreckless meant?
Well then, he is abso-darn-gum-lutely right!
Ending use of a non-injury, non-pain-producing method on a few dozen (or if more, not much more) terrorists at war against the United States is surely worthy of a Nobel Peace Prize!
[/quote]
That bothers me a bit. Non-pain-producing? Is the body’s absolute conviction that it is drowning not a form of pain? I watched the Mancow video (I think that’s who it was), and his actions during and demeanor after, definitely resembled that of a man who had just experienced something beyond excruciating. Is it, “well, I was having myself a drink of water, and next thing I know I’m blurting out stuff I didn’t want to say. How’d that happen?”
[quote]Otep wrote:
My first thought after reading the headlines was to make sure I was reading the BBC and not the Onion by accident.
Then it was to go get a cup of coffee, because only addicts dream about coffee, and if there’s one thing I know…
And then I figured whiskey.
Tango.
Foxtrot.[/quote]
LOL. This thread is full of win.
“The Age of Obama has made the Onion superfluous.”
I think “peace” in the context of “Nobel Peace Prize” actually means “war.” Consider the case of Nobel prize-winner Nelson Mandela, who sang songs about killing the blue-eyed babies:
Obama is, of course, escalating the war in Afghanistan. Maybe that’s all it takes.
Yay for barking, republican dogs!
2 minutes of hate anyone?
[quote]taintedaether wrote:
Yay for barking, republican dogs!
2 minutes of hate anyone?[/quote]
It really doesn’t have anything to do with Republicans and Democrats. He just does not deserve an award for anything…at all.
Everyone is so far up Obama’s ass. He was immediately shot down for the Olympics, so we better give him something. How about a Grammy? Those are useful right?
They were supposed to award it to a Chinese person in memory of the Tinnaman Square business, but obviously they shat their pants and gave it to a person who did nothing o.0
I to thought it was a joke !
[quote]Bill Roberts wrote:
Wow!
I am awed.
You have totally disproven my point. (Never mind that many who have been, which includes many US military officers and journalists, say it is not torture.)
Now where is your information proving there is pain or injury?[/quote]
They’re being dishonest. How the hell does a man with any moral honesty watch someone go through that, and NOT say it’s torture? Maybe a rather safe, less messy (no blood and guts), form of torture. Perhaps it’s “safe” track record could even justify it’s use in exposing certain members of our volutary military to the reality of what might happen if captured.
From there, one might make the argument that some forms of torture (where maiming and accidental fatalities are avoided) might be acceptable to save the lives of many others, when we’ve captured the enemy. Fine, we could argue that. But, let’s not start off treating each other like fools. We all know it’s torture.
I have a funny feeling that someone is going to agrue the practice only fools people into believing they’re being tortured. So I’ll head it off with; well, if it effectively fools everyone into feeling like they’re being tortured, to the extent that they must break down and talk (even if only to lie) to make it stop, what the heck is the difference?
I know this has become a sort of hijack. However, regardless of the left-leaning tendency of the Nobel org., I can see how this would’ve happened just with his opposition to waterboarding.
http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2009/10/09/international-media-reactions-obama-peace-prize/
some of these are pretty funny.
[quote]TylerPK4L wrote:
taintedaether wrote:
Yay for barking, republican dogs!
2 minutes of hate anyone?
It really doesn’t have anything to do with Republicans and Democrats. He just does not deserve an award for anything…at all.
Everyone is so far up Obama’s ass. He was immediately shot down for the Olympics, so we better give him something. How about a Grammy? Those are useful right?[/quote]
Better add “International Media Dogs” to the list also.